The two schools both call Iowa home, are both P5 schools in different conferences but they should NOT play each other. What are you afraid off? I have always said, if this game goes away, Iowa fans will miss it more than ISU fans. We will have the upper ground. Iowa is scared to play us, ISU will pick up another home game against a nobody, but a win. And Iowa will continue to play the like of Pitt, Syracuse and others like them along with plenty of MAC teams, we need the money. This is the real reason Iowa did not want the game to resume back in the 70's, they feared losing to ISU and except for the Fry run, they were right. I guess Iowa is the FAKE ID school after all.
as expected...Downing
- Thread starter MitchL
- Start date
The two schools both call Iowa home, are both P5 schools in different conferences but they should NOT play each other. What are you afraid off? I have always said, if this game goes away, Iowa fans will miss it more than ISU fans. We will have the upper ground. Iowa is scared to play us, ISU will pick up another home game against a nobody, but a win. And Iowa will continue to play the like of Pitt, Syracuse and others like them along with plenty of MAC teams, we need the money. This is the real reason Iowa did not want the game to resume back in the 70's, they feared losing to ISU and except for the Fry run, they were right. I guess Iowa is the FAKE ID school after all.
Not saying WVU would get taken over UCONN, you just responded eirlier that stadium attendance was more important than population in the state. I stated ISU would be left out because they are 1 of 2 programs in a low state population and not the flagship institution in the state, not to mention they suck. You said they would be in PAC 12 because of blah blah blah. I said profit comes from network deals, networks care about TV sets not attendance. Nobody watches ISU on TV other than a small pocket of ISU fans-once again because you know, the fact that they are awful.
No, Nebraska record is roughly the same, they were not a power the 8 years before they left the Big 12, and they are not one now. But their win total has stayed about the same.
If I drank coffee I would have spit it out in laughter for this one. You have expounded on the money aspect of this discussion, can you share how the PAC 12 tv deal compares to the Big 10? Your contention that everybody in iowa would add $1 to their cable bill if ISU joins the PAC 12 doesn't stand up.
I agree, Iowa has more fans than Idaho, Kansas, Nevada, New Mexico and the other western states. I used the attendance example talking about comparing ISU to Boise, do not take it out of context.
Wow cards. Thought you were better. My bad on that assumption. Once again, for the 20th time, we win by 40 and drop in the rankings. We give you relevance only because of us. My God, what don't you get buddy? Done with you. Sorry thought you were better and not a typical delusional Clone fan. Yikes.
They were better in the Big12 but that was just because of opponents. The Neb teams in the B1G would kill the Neb Big12 teams. Their records just worsenor similar because they have to play B1G competition.
By adding the states of Iowa, Kansas and Texas the pac 12 would add 32 million in people to their footprint, almost doubling it. They would have the two largest states in terms of population in the conference. The Pac 12 network has been around only 3 years, and just like the Big 10 when it started is having some growing pains. They are on Dish but not on Direct TV, they are on 4 of the RSN's that are on direct. And if you get the sports pack you can watch the games there. For perceptive the LHN was just added to direct 2 years ago. From what I have read the PAC Network is owned by the conference, they are not splitting cost with Fox or ESPN as the other two networks are, which one would think would allow them to charge less money if they want to and still make more in the end. Not splitting money with Fox or ESPN. As for the dollars amount, I have not been able to find it, but BTN and SEC are a basically the same set up, one would think the PAC would follow that model also. Now with cost cutting, everything may change, and then all bets are off. But cost cutting will effect all college sports networks, there was an great article on this in the Register two weeks ago, many Iowa fans ripped it because Randy Peterson wrote it, but I would guess that the amount of money coming from TV is not going to continue to rise in the future, without tapping new markets and that may be necessary to just maintain current levels.
Actually last post on this. Iowa has more top 10 finishes this century than all but 8 teams. ISU has 2 top 25 finishes ever, 25 and 19 in 120 years. Out of all Power 5 teams ISU is in last by like 20 years for a first round draft pick. ISU is one of the worst programs ever. Iowa wins by 39 points and drops in the rankings. ISU sells out 1 game every 2 years, Iowa. ISU fans only care about 1 game, Iowa. The Register (Randy) only care about Iowa with their 1 game. CF has more posts on Iowa football recruiting than ISU football and basketball recruiting combined. I could go on, but ISU and their fans better pray Okie doesn't leave or they will be in the MAC or MWC. Now Cards go back to CF. And keep believing USC, UCLA, Oregon, etc. will want ISU in their conference (leave aside little brother in a small state with no football or basketball tradition) and come play games in Ames in November that kick 9 am on a Saturday Pacific time. Wow.
Not worth responding too, but I will, If you think a program with little or no reference in the big picture gets all of it from Iowa you are being the delusional one. No one out there in America is sitting at home thinking what are the Hawkeyes doing? I listen to College Sports today each morning on my way to work, you know what they talk about, Alabama, Ohio St, USC, Florida State, Clemson, Oklahoma and Texas. Iowa nor ISU is basically never mentioned. So much for relevance of either program.
I do not post on CF, ok, Peterson is the guy assigned to ISU by the Register, I expect that person to be pro ISU. Just like I would expect the person assigned to Iowa, and there one to be PRO Iowa. How come you never bitch about that guy? Hard to have a level head discussion with anyone that drops the lines Little Brother, joining the MAC, ect. hate is hard to overcome, and man you hate ISU. Look Iowa is what they are, a decent but not great football program. Getting rid of ISU will not help them to become elite, how about we just enjoy the game between the two schools, talk smack when your side wins and stop attacking the other side, with this they should not even be on the field with the mighty Hawkeyes crap. I will be at the game in Ames this fall, and win or lose that game I will attend the rest of the home games. Man, it just a game, not life and death, and a win or loss does not effect me at all.
Again I listed the teams ranked and only 1 time Kansas was ranked in last 10 seasons at the end of the year. As for first 4 years your argument for how strong big 12 north was just as strong as big 10 divisions Nebraska has been in for last 6 years been in which even you referenced back 10 years. So as for first 4 years that's irrelevant to your original argument. As for Texas Oklahoma I can't be more clear. Yes you are right they played Texas for 2 season then OU for next 2 but as I stated both teams were only played by teams from the north 2 out of 4 years, no. As for Iowa I never brought up Iowa and it's just a nice deflection since your arguement has many holes poked into it. it was you saying Nebraska playing big 12 last 6-10 season was just as difficult as their time in big 10 so far doesn't look like that. Only 2 teams in their division last 8 season finished in top 10 in nation both in 2007. Last 2 seasons big 10 west had not only team ranked top 10 but multi teams ranked.
Roughly 73 million people live in the Big 10, and roughly 66 million live in the PAC 12. Big ten has two more teams to draw from, before adding NJ and Maryland roughly 15 million people, the Pac 12 had more people in it.
Pardon me? The only team ranked at the end of the season from the Big 10 West was Wisconsin at 9th. No other big ten west team was ranked in the final AP poll. Like Iowa fans love to point out, it where you finish that counts. 4 top ten finishes, remember.
How many subscribers do the respective networks have? Read that it was 12 million for the PAC 12
Here is the best information I could find.http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/10/21/pac-12-networks-new-dish-deal-brings-more-subs-and-more-cash/
Here is a more up to date link, the Pac 12 is still buying back Tier 3 rates.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/...ts-network-income-comps-with-secb1g-and-more/
Last edited:
7.6 million per school vs 1.26 million per school, not sure the PAC 12 has the leverage or the deal that the Big 10 does, ISU joining the PAC won't bring the cash to make them attractive.
ISU itself no, but still more money than any state west of Iowa not currently in the conference. The windfall will be from the State of Texas. Iowa and Kansas will be just the icing on the cake.
I suppose you could make the argument that they could just take a school from Texas and then schools closer to the footprint, but would the pac 12 want one school sitting out in the middle of no where, when they could take ISU and K State and form a eastern pod for the conference. Colorado would the fourth team in the pod.
I am sorry, I was misunderstanding. I thought you had been making the point that ISU was attractive on its own rather than being the tag along with Texas and K State etc.
ISU, K State and Texas Tech would be the three from the Big 12. I had Texas to the ACC, the Oklahoma schools to the SEC, and TCU and Kansas in the Big 10. My plan leaves one spot open in the Pac 12 for another team.
My bad I forgot one dropped out. Still ignore the point that the Big 10 divisions were stronger than the pathetic Big 12 North with Big west having back to back years with a team finish in the top 10. Plus your claim Big 10 west winner was 4th best in conference was also wrong. I like your schitck steer the conversation another direction when proven wrong. Speaking of rankings when was the last time ISU was even in the top 25? We know 2000 last time you even finished ranked, barely at 25th.
The only Power 5 non-conference opponent Iowa State has played in the regular season for the last 15 years has been Iowa. That is Stunning. It looks like in the last 25 years ISU has only played Iowa, Florida State, Minnesota, and Wisconsin as non conference Power 5 Opponents. When ISU played Baylor and TCU way back they were not members of a Power 5 conference.
So you do not count on the field performance then. Wisconsin lost to Ohio State and Michigan during the regular season and then too Penn. State in the championship game. They were 0-3 vs the best teams in the East. So yes, the wests best team was the 4th best team in the conference. ISU has sucked at football basically every year except for small blips every now and then. Does not change what I said, as have others. The new pillow fight is the Big 10 West.
Cards - your buddies on CF have supposedly now claimed the PAC 10 and Big 12 (which is weird since the PAC added teams and the Big 12 lost teams) should do a merger. Now that is delusional. I am sure USC wants to go to Waco, Oregon to Ames and UCLA to Manhattan. Buddy, if it implodes ISU is done. Jesus even Williams said they would be "hopeful" for a landing spot. Your have gone off the tracks.
JFC - ISU is in the the MAC or MWC when the Big 12 implodes. Like Barry Switzer said, what he missed most when going to the NFL was not getting to play ISU every year. Keep giving numbers but there is no way ever that Stanford or Washington are agreeing to ISU. Leave aside USC, UCLA or Oregon. The conference cannot justify taking a top 10 worst football program from a small state when they are little brother. No way ever. I spoke with lawyer friends on the left coast about this and they laughed when I said ISU to the PAC 12. They said Larry Scott is about done but his legacy won't be agreeing to add ISU to the PAC 10.
Never happen, Oklahoma will never go along with it, they can have their pick of conferences, and everything I have seen and read, says they want to get away from Texas. I could see Texas maybe doing it, them along with TT, and then two others added in. My view of Texas is they are always looking out for what is best for Texas, they are a blue blood, and can get the best deal. ESPN will not allow them to go to the big 10, just can not see them sucking up like a dog with its tail between its legs and going to the SEC. They think they are too good for the SEC and Texas AM. I believe what I said before, they will cut a deal with the ACC much like Notre Dame has and become a part time member for football and park the rest of their sports in the ACC. Still get to keep the LHN, and they would not have problems filling out the other 6 games in their schedule. I am sure Houston, SMU, Rice and others would jump at the chance to play Texas, even if most of the games are in Austin.
I don't disagree with some of that. But there is no way the PAC 10 will ever, ever take ISU. Ever.
So they will take N. Colorado and Boise St. is what you are saying, and leave a pile of money sitting on the table. ISU would not be a stand alone school, they will also take 3 to 4 other members of the Big 12. I have read a lot about the PAC 12 reluctance to take religious schools, like TCU, Baylor, SMU and BYU. Remember the last time they expanded the took U of Utah over BYU, even though, BYU had a much better history and attendance. So maybe there is something to the idea that the Liberal West Coast schools do not want small church schools. Look outside of BYU, the rest of the schools are very small schools compared to ISU. Baylor has less than 12,00 students, SMU and TCU less than 11, 000 students ISU has over 36,000 students. Have you ever been to a game at TCU or Baylor, I have when both were ranked in the top 10, they could not sell out their stadiums that seat around 45,000. They are averaging 10,000 less than ISU, and that is when they are winning. Look at their crowds for BB, in Baylor the woman outdraw the men, and the men were ranked in the top 15 to 20 all year and reached number 1. No one cares about these schools, no matter how many football games they have won. If they did, they would go to the games.
Seeing your dream of ISU to the MAC go up in flames. I understand, a lot of Iowa fans have the same delusions. There is no way that the PAC 12 will not take ISU an AAU school if its available, unless Oklahoma and Texas say they both will go to the PAC 12. Hell, I would think you would be happy with ISU in the Pac 12, instead of say the Big 10.
Nobody cares about ISU either outside of Iowa. ISU will not be chosen by any P5 conference. They will be scraps for some conference whether P5 or not. ISU would not bring enough athletic money to the table and there's nothing you can say that will change our opinion on that so why waste your breath.
You keep saying NO ONE CARES ABOUT ISU, that is what Iowa fans say. If the fans of Boise St, N. Colorado, TCU, SMU, Houston, Baylor care so much about their teams, how is it that ISU outdraws all of them by at least 10,000 people per game? You and other are always quick to throw out the Switzer comment or others, but it does not matter, that was then, this is now. I grew up when Iowa was setting the national record for most consecutive losing seasons by a P5 school, a record they still hold. You know what. it does not matter, its the past. You are going to believe what you want to believe and so will I. But at least I am not being led by hate here, just money and common sense. And while we on the topic of ISU, please stop making comments about how Lazard has sucked and not lived up to expectations. The man was 2nd team all conference as a sophomore, first team all conferences as a junior and it listed on the preseason first team of his senior year. If that is a bust, then Iowa has a whole lot of kids that would take that in a New York Minute.
That is a reason why I would like to see the Iowa/ISU game go away. Both teams could add variety from year to year.
The very fact that you keep saying N Col tells me you know nothing about CFB. Absolutely nothing. That and I guess every other post that I've read from you.
1. Not every fan who attends an ISU home game is an ISU fan. How many Iowa fans attend, UNI fans, KSU fans?
2. I've never mentioned Switzer or anyone else you're referring to.
3. I've never said anything bad about Lazard and nothing at all lately. Most say it sucks for him that he's on a perennial losing team like ISU. But his comments speak for themselves.
Bull shit, you may not have said it, but many Iowa fans have been ripping on Larzard on this board. Its easy to say, "I have not done it," while plenty have and others have agreed to it. As to fans, would that not be the same for the teams I mentioned. Does the opponents fans not go to Boise or Fort Collins or where ever. Yes, N. Iowa and Iowa bring a lot of fans to Ames. Guess what, ISU returns the favor when they play in Iowa City. As to Big 12 teams, only Oklahoma, Texas and Kansas State, brings more than a couple of hundred fans to Ames. We joke if TT, TCU, or others will have a hundred of their fans at the game. ISU travels very well, generally a one to two thousand attend most away games has been my experience when I have attend away games. Does ISU have the same fan base as the blue bloods, no, that is silly, but for a team that you keep saying sucks, they have a lot of fans willing to spend money and go to the games. And no the tickets are not .50 cents a game. My tickets are $250 apiece in the lower bowl of the south endzone.
You are cracking me up. Should call you Waffle House... doesn't matter who goes to games, it's tvs, wait ISU has better attendance.... ISU is attractive on its own, wait they are part of a package. Like I said, your approach is funny
Here is the list that matter the most.
1. Traditional blue blood program Texas and Oklahoma. Everyone wants these teams.
2. How much money will this team bring into the conference. Population of the state.
3. Academics matters to some leagues not so much in others.
4. Size of fan base or how many people attend the game.
5. Winning record. or past football success. Like I said before the Pac 12 passed on BYU and took Utah, why if football was the only think that everything is based on. The big 10 added Rutgers and Maryland, neither is known for its football teams.
My list, lets see yours.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Missouri State Transfer WR Raylen Sharpe Visiting Iowa on Tuesday- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
-