Gundy (update: and ADs) say 1 to 2 years left of OSU/OU Bedlam

[CapnCy]

I thought the Iowa legislature played a role in getting the Iowa/ISU series resumed so looked this up.

The Great ISU-Iowa Football Rivalry

This Saturday, the Iowa State Cyclone football team will meet up with their in-state rivals from Iowa City in the 65th meeting between the two teams. In a rivalry that dates back to 1894, the Cyclo…

isuspecialcollections.wordpress.com

Sounds like there was threats/demands by the legislature and governor but doesn't say how much force there was behind John Murray's resolution. It's missing recent game history (written in 2017) but pretty good article from ISU perspective.

I just think now the amount of contractual obligations by "who pays your bills" (i.e. ESPN, etc) will dictate schedules far more than legislators. Sure, I could see IF there was one non-con opening for each they could "suggest" it work out...but my guess is at that point Barta/Jamie will do what's best for the individual programs.

 

[CascadeClone]

I have this fantasy that Iowa will collapse once Kirk is gone. it would be somewhat a shame if the series ended only for Iowa to become a doormat in the big ten for years to come.

That is exactly what I expect to happen.

 

[theshadow]

I thought the Iowa legislature played a role in getting the Iowa/ISU series resumed so looked this up.
Sounds like there was threats/demands by the legislature and governor but doesn't say how much force there was behind John Murray's resolution.

None. A resolution isn't binding, and doesn't really mean anything in the grand scheme.

Reichardt (former SUI player) had a resolution passed by the Iowa House and Senate in 1965. Nothing happened. SUI responded by doubling down on their "we won't play ISU/UNI in any sport" policy.

The state legislature passed resolutions in 1970 urging games be scheduled for '71 and '72. Nothing happened. SUI scheduled Ohio State for '71/'72 instead.

One bill was introduced (Van Drie) in '71 that would mandate annual games. It died in committee; never made it to the floor.

 

[Gorm]

Until they get paid to not want the game.

So people are going to pay off legislators so they vote to not play a football game?


LMAO

 

[Urbandale2013]

I just think now the amount of contractual obligations by "who pays your bills" (i.e. ESPN, etc) will dictate schedules far more than legislators. Sure, I could see IF there was one non-con opening for each they could "suggest" it work out...but my guess is at that point Barta/Jamie will do what's best for the individual programs.

If the legislature wants to force the issue they will absolutely win every time. The issue is it appears the legislatures don’t care enough anymore to actually throw their weight around.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

If the legislature wants to force the issue they will absolutely win every time. The issue is it appears the legislatures don’t care enough anymore to actually throw their weight around.

The legislature shouldn't have any influence on whether or not Iowa and Iowa State play a football game...

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

That is exactly what I expect to happen.

They had lightning strike twice with Fry and Ferentz... they aren't getting that a third time.

 

[JM4CY]

The legislature shouldn't have any influence on whether or not Iowa and Iowa State play a football game...

The third word there is key.

 

[ISU_Guy]

I hope OU and texas end up like Mizzou, A&M, CU and Nebby. Ftards.

as for ISU...I don't anticipate playing Iowa anymore either and I would like that to be honest. as long as someone from the "erections conferences" will play us that is.

 

[NetflixAndClone]

They had lightning strike twice with Fry and Ferentz... they aren't getting that a third time.

fingers crossed that Brian Ferentz gets the nod.

 

[iowastatefan1929]

The Big10 money isn't all its cracked up to be, check out Northwestern message board, they sound like they have thrown in the towel, they are going to crushed by NIL, they will never surpass the big dogs in the league, might as well throw the extra money at academics. At least ISU is in a league with teams it has a shot to compete with, ISU has a better chance at the college football playoff than Northwestern. Iowa better be careful what they wish for, just an afterthought if Nebraska gets good again, and Wisconsin gets good again, all the money in the world and no hope.

 

[NetflixAndClone]

I hope OU and texas end up like Mizzou, A&M, CU and Nebby. Ftards.

as for ISU...I don't anticipate playing Iowa anymore either and I would like that to be honest. as long as someone from the "erections conferences" will play us that is.

Texas is bound to recover imo. that school is too big in football to suck forever. OU on the other hand i think will wind up like Arkansas. They had it good in the Big 8/12. they were the big fish in a small pond. In the SEC there are as large fish as them and arguable even larger fish. They went from the top 1-2 job in the big 12 to now sliding back behind other SEC jobs. I think Bama, Florida, Georgia, LSU, and Texas are better jobs. Plus those schools have stronger in state talent.

In a few years when OU is getting 7-9 wins on average they are going to regret their move. They could've been a yearly playoff team with a 12 team playoff with the big 12. Now they got to fight equally as good teams in the SEC for a spot even if the SEC gets 4 spots.

 

[CascadeClone]

fingers crossed that Brian Ferentz gets the nod.

After Kirk goes 6-6 this year and 5-7 next year:
"you can fire me and pay my buyout, or you can hire Brian and just pay him what you are paying me"

I mean, that wouldn't even be on Barta's Top10 of dumb things he has done.

 

[JM4CY]

 

[VeloClone]

As these conferences explode in size I can see all non-conference games going away. It would keep all of the money inside of the conference. Not to mention all the games would mean more as it would be going against their conference record.

Then there will be absolutely no argument against the "SEC is top to bottom the best conference in the land every year and it isn't even close." drivel that is put out there. There will be zero data points to compare conferences.

 

[VeloClone]

I get that OSU has agreements in place for the next few years on non-con games. But that only means bedlam needs to go on a haitus. If they truly wanted it to continue it could be a non-con game going forward after that. But Gundy refuses to go there and those media members are too scared of him to say it even when he asks them to give him one thing that OSU did in all this. When you say we are mad and we aren't going to explore scheduling you down the road when we both have open dates you have indeed killed it once and for all. It is on both schools at this point.

 

[KidSilverhair]

The state legislature passed resolutions in 1970 urging games be scheduled for '71 and '72. Nothing happened. SUI scheduled Ohio State for '71/'72 instead.

Just history-wise, this is wild. Conference games were all over the map in the 1970s. In 1969/70 (I didn’t got back further than that) everybody in the Big 10 played seven conference games. From 1971 to 1976 everybody played eight conference games … except for Iowa and Northwestern, who met in an extra ninth game in both 1971 and 1972. So was it Ohio State who got “added” those years, or Northwestern?

It‘s weird, because Ohio State/Iowa opened the season in both 1971/72, but back then the Big 10 usually had conference games the first week and then conference games the next couple of weeks before getting into the full conference slate.

(In 1977/78 everybody in the conference played eight games except an extra ninth game for Wisconsin and Northwestern, then in 79/80 it was Illinois and Northwestern with extra conference games. Man, the Big Ten scheduler must have been on drugs or something. It was the 70s, after all … Either that or Northwestern just couldn’t get any nonconference games lined up, which is odd because they were terrible back then.)

 

[theshadow]

Just history-wise, this is wild. Conference games were all over the map in the 1970s. In 1969/70 (I didn’t got back further than that) everybody in the Big 10 played seven conference games. From 1971 to 1976 everybody played eight conference games … except for Iowa and Northwestern, who met in an extra ninth game in both 1971 and 1972. So was it Ohio State who got “added” those years, or Northwestern?

It‘s weird, because Ohio State/Iowa opened the season in both 1971/72, but back then the Big 10 usually had conference games the first week and then conference games the next couple of weeks before getting into the full conference slate.

(In 1977/78 everybody in the conference played eight games except an extra ninth game for Wisconsin and Northwestern, then in 79/80 it was Illinois and Northwestern with extra conference games. Man, the Big Ten scheduler must have been on drugs or something. It was the 70s, after all … Either that or Northwestern just couldn’t get any nonconference games lined up, which is odd because they were terrible back then.)

The early 70s was the time where the NCAA first allowed an 11-game schedule. So, teams were adding games to already-established slates.

Iowa's season-opening games with Ohio State were SUI's "11th game", whereas ISU "11th game" for the first few years was the season-ending trip out to San Diego State.

Notably, Iowa played AT Ohio State both of those years, presumably because the take (1/2 of the gate revenue from an 86K seat stadium) was bigger than what they'd have made playing a home-and-home.

 

[KidSilverhair]

I get that OSU has agreements in place for the next few years on non-con games. But that only means bedlam needs to go on a haitus. If they truly wanted it to continue it could be a non-con game going forward after that. But Gundy refuses to go there and those media members are too scared of him to say it even when he asks them to give him one thing that OSU did in all this. When you say we are mad and we aren't going to explore scheduling you down the road when we both have open dates you have indeed killed it once and for all. It is on both schools at this point.

I heard them talking about this on ESPNU Radio the other day, and Rick Neuheisel tried to compare this Bedlam situation to Texas/TAMU. He said after TAMU left for the SEC, Texas was begging to continue their series, but it was TAMU that refused. For the current situation, he was putting OSU in Texas’ situation, saying it was a no-brainer that the “lesser” program should want to continue such a rivalry series, instead of letting their “pride“ get in the way.

I thought this was odd for a couple of reasons. First, Neuheisel was just flat-out saying the SEC is streets ahead of the rest of college football, that the mere fact TAMU joined that conference put them ahead of Texas. That is, frankly, debatable and not an established fact at all. Also, there are reasons why TAMU could be seen as having a grudge against Texas, given Texas’ longstanding reputation for throwing its weight around and upsetting conference unity (Texas and Nebraska were probably the two biggest instigators for TAMU/Mizzou/Colorado leaving in the first place). In comparing OSU to Texas’ situation then, Neuheisel has it exactly backwards.

Secondly, it ignores the emotions around the realignment that’s been happening for years now. Sure, at the time the departure of TAMU, Nebraska, Mizzou, and Colorado looked like it might destroy the Big XII, but guess what? Texas would have been thrilled for that to happen. They had landing spots all over, heck, they would have thought TAMU did them a favor if the conference collapsed then. This is not the current case - OU and Texas set up a secret departure with the clear intent of destroying the Big XII and relegating the Hateful 8 to the AAC, while they reaped the financial benefits of SEC membership. It shouldn’t be a surprise that OSU is going to hold a grudge against OU. For Neuheisel to say OSU needs to swallow their pride and give in to OU to put another Power 2 non-con on their schedule - after OU flew two giant middle fingers to OSU and the rest of the Big XII on their way to a conference that only plays 8 conference games and allows you to put Delaware State on your schedule in October - completely ignores the truth of the situation.

 

[VeloClone]

I heard them talking about this on ESPNU Radio the other day, and Rick Neuheisel tried to compare this Bedlam situation to Texas/TAMU. He said after TAMU left for the SEC, Texas was begging to continue their series, but it was TAMU that refused. For the current situation, he was putting OSU in Texas’ situation, saying it was a no-brainer that the “lesser” program should want to continue such a rivalry series, instead of letting their “pride“ get in the way.

I thought this was odd for a couple of reasons. First, Neuheisel was just flat-out saying the SEC is streets ahead of the rest of college football, that the mere fact TAMU joined that conference put them ahead of Texas. That is, frankly, debatable and not an established fact at all.

Secondly, it ignores the emotions around the realignment that’s been happening for years now. Sure, at the time the departure of TAMU, Nebraska, Mizzou, and Colorado looked like it might destroy the Big XII, but guess what? Texas would have been thrilled for that to happen. They had landing spots all over, heck, they would have thought TAMU did them a favor if the conference collapsed then. This is not the current case - OU and Texas set up a secret departure with the clear intent of destroying the Big XII and relegating the Hateful 8 to the AAC, while they reaped the financial benefits of SEC membership. It shouldn’t be a surprise that OSU is going to hold a grudge against OU. For Neuheisel to say OSU needs to swallow their pride and give in to OU to put another Power 2 non-con on their schedule - after OU flew two giant middle fingers to OSU and the rest of the Big XII on their way to a conference that only plays 8 conference games and allows you to put Delaware State on your schedule in October - completely ignores the truth of the situation.

All very good points. But if you aren't agreeing to play the game because you are mad that they appeared to actively work toward the demise of your program, say that instead of ignoring the fact that there is a way for the series to continue. People can respect that but you aren't fooling anyone (or many, I guess to be more accurate) when you say that OU ended it by joining the SEC and there is nothing OSU could do.

I wouldn't want to play them either if I was in their shoes. I didn't want to have anything to do with Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado and A&M after their defections. I have relented somewhat on most of those, but I still don't want to do anything to help that hell hole in Lincoln.