That does make a difference but it still wouldn't close the gap between Iowa's and ISU's SOS every year. That's pretty bad that Fran would let players drive a moped drunk and then get arrested again for driving it without a license and not suspend them for any games but if they were driving a car they'd have to miss games. That's teaching some life lessons there
Big 12 expansion
- Thread starter grosie#2
- Start date
That does make a difference but it still wouldn't close the gap between Iowa's and ISU's SOS every year. That's pretty bad that Fran would let players drive a moped drunk and then get arrested again for driving it without a license and not suspend them for any games but if they were driving a car they'd have to miss games. That's teaching some life lessons there
A lot to be discussed from this...
To the first comment, isu is hardly the perennial worst team year in and year out. Currently, Kansas football has a pretty strong grip on that award. What should be evident now is how the entire big xii is much more like so many other conferences than recent polls/rankings would have anyone believe. Ten teams total. We know from discussions here on HR just from the past few days that isu and KU are just not good at the present time. We also see that KSU, while having some very good moments or even entire seasons, is a rather pedestrian team when it comes to defining what is 'good' and what is not. Throw in Texas Tech and even West Virginia and that accounts for half the teams from the conference that too many have equated with by far the best over some past preseasons.
Baylor has caught a shinning star recently, but was not very good in the days of the original big xii and looks to be certain to return to that category with the latest turn of events. TCU also found its stride of late, but who knows how long that will last. Oklahoma State has been decent, but not great by any stretch of the imagination. So that leaves the traditional powers in OU and Texas and for whatever reason, Texas is floundering presently. This is hardly the picture of some super-strong conference.
And therein lies the segue toward your last comments about SOS. One of the major flaws with any metric of this sort is the incorrect assumptions of initially imputed data. In this example, it might be that Conference 'X' is so much better/stronger than any other. With so few OOC games being played (even more so now with conferences playing nine league games each), SOS becomes little more than a self-fulfilling prophesy with Team 1 from uber conference playing Team 2, 3, 4... from the same conference. The teams that win are deemed better than thought because the preconceived notion was that the conference was so superior and the teams that lose are afforded the benefit of the doubt for the very same reason. At the conclusion, you have SOS metrics indicating that supposed better than all Conference 'X' has teams with all or the vast majority having played the toughest schedules. It is more a conclusion of what the algorithm hopes will happen instead of the reality of what is actually playing out in the games.
The big xii has not been heads and shoulders better than any other conference lately. But, saying that they are sells magazines/internet web site subscriptions and provides talking points for all of the 'experts' on whatever media source you care to note.
And just when I tell myself that one person cannot possibly outdo themselves in the ultimate stupidity department, along comes CyCity to prove me wrong!
isu had a higher SOS than:
OU
TCU
Ohio State
Clemson
Stanford
Michigan State
Ole Miss
and many others. Would they have have won more games had they played those schedules? Nope but that never stops isu grads from pimping SOS.
Until SOS consistently translates to higher ranked teams winning more Bowl Games it is a meaningless metric.
OU
TCU
Ohio State
Clemson
Stanford
Michigan State
Ole Miss
and many others. Would they have have won more games had they played those schedules? Nope but that never stops isu grads from pimping SOS.
Until SOS consistently translates to higher ranked teams winning more Bowl Games it is a meaningless metric.
Last edited:
I don't agree with everything you say, but there's a lot of truth in this post.
isu's way to teach life lessons is to allow convicted felons back on the team with zero game suspensions. Can you say Albert Gary and Jason Berryman? Sure ya can.
The disconnect with ISU fans and SOS is that they believe it has a giant impact on their record. They seem to think their 3-9 would flip to 9-3 with Iowa's schedule. That is simply not the case.
The most maddening thing about it is that ISU is a good engineering school, but their fan base shows little numeracy, and cherry picks numbers to back their claims.
Look at this thread. CyCity has said more than once that a two-team B12 expansion could turn a 6-7 win season into 8-9. Those were his numbers.
Changing two teams on the schedule doesn't turn two guaranteed losses into two guaranteed wins. Lets pretend to remove Texas/Oklahoma from ISU's schedule and replace with BYU/Cincy. ISU's expected win total for UT/OU in the average year is something like 0.5. For BYU/Cincy, I will be super duper nice and say it is 1.2. That is a gain of 0.7 wins. It is not a huge 2 win jump. Even in an extreme year, it would raise their expected win total by one game.
Last year, they kept crying that Iowa was terrible and were beneficiaries of a weak schedule, attempting to argue that Iowa had a MAC-level schedule. Well, look at computer rankings. And, by computer rankings, I don't mean that you should find one single computer ranking that suits your argument, you should use a wide range of rankings, or, even better, and index of computer rankings.
Well, masseyratings.com compiles over 100 different computer rankings. The final compilation from last year had 117. The final ranking, which included the MSU and Stanford losses, ranked Iowa 13th in the country. Not 40th, like ISU fans claim, but 13th.
http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm
The final regular season ranking had Iowa 7th. This was 120 computer rankings, which handle SOS a lot better than any human who looks at a schedule and snorts.
http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/arch/compare2015-13.htm
ISU finished 81st. Sure, they had a lot of good teams on their schedule, but they don't beat middle-of-the-road teams either. They beat #48 Texas, #83 UNI, and #165 Kansas.
They lost to #36 WVU, #63 KSU, #45 TTU, and #33 Toledo. Those are the types of wins that ISU fans would give Iowa zero credit for.
I don't know why I wasted my time typing this.
The most maddening thing about it is that ISU is a good engineering school, but their fan base shows little numeracy, and cherry picks numbers to back their claims.
Look at this thread. CyCity has said more than once that a two-team B12 expansion could turn a 6-7 win season into 8-9. Those were his numbers.
Changing two teams on the schedule doesn't turn two guaranteed losses into two guaranteed wins. Lets pretend to remove Texas/Oklahoma from ISU's schedule and replace with BYU/Cincy. ISU's expected win total for UT/OU in the average year is something like 0.5. For BYU/Cincy, I will be super duper nice and say it is 1.2. That is a gain of 0.7 wins. It is not a huge 2 win jump. Even in an extreme year, it would raise their expected win total by one game.
Last year, they kept crying that Iowa was terrible and were beneficiaries of a weak schedule, attempting to argue that Iowa had a MAC-level schedule. Well, look at computer rankings. And, by computer rankings, I don't mean that you should find one single computer ranking that suits your argument, you should use a wide range of rankings, or, even better, and index of computer rankings.
Well, masseyratings.com compiles over 100 different computer rankings. The final compilation from last year had 117. The final ranking, which included the MSU and Stanford losses, ranked Iowa 13th in the country. Not 40th, like ISU fans claim, but 13th.
http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm
The final regular season ranking had Iowa 7th. This was 120 computer rankings, which handle SOS a lot better than any human who looks at a schedule and snorts.
http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/arch/compare2015-13.htm
ISU finished 81st. Sure, they had a lot of good teams on their schedule, but they don't beat middle-of-the-road teams either. They beat #48 Texas, #83 UNI, and #165 Kansas.
They lost to #36 WVU, #63 KSU, #45 TTU, and #33 Toledo. Those are the types of wins that ISU fans would give Iowa zero credit for.
I don't know why I wasted my time typing this.
Nobody said that. All I said was if ISU caught a fortunate break on their schedule a 6-7 win season could go to 8-9 wins. I don't think that's unreasonable at all and I'm surprised someone disagreed with it to be honest.
Also going off your final regular season Massey ratings, ISU played 4 top 15 teams on there in the regular season, Iowa's best opponent in the regular season was #22 Northwestern but yeah, SOS is just something ISU fans make up and all schedules are created equal
You will be in the MAC Soon so you will have your chance at a much easier schedule.Nobody said that. All I said was if ISU caught a fortunate break on their schedule a 6-7 win season could go to 8-9 wins. I don't think that's unreasonable at all and I'm surprised someone disagreed with it to be honest.
Also going off your final regular season Massey ratings, ISU played 4 top 15 teams on there in the regular season, Iowa's best opponent in the regular season was #22 Northwestern but yeah, SOS is just something ISU fans make up and all schedules are created equal
Do Hawk fans really want this? It's going to be bad enough losing to a bottom feeder Big 12 team but you'd want to lose to a MAC team every other year?
It is not a question of want, it is inevitable. The game hopefully is no more well before that point.
Common sense, do you have your head in sand or what? The B12 is teetering on extinction.
I thought they were adding teams but in my defense I haven't been paying much attention. ISU will always be in a power conference though as much as that hurts Hawkeye fans to hear for some reason
I wouldn't be so sure about that. Baylor disaster just further weakens the league, you think OU and Texas want to keep hanging around these misfits?
You said adding two teams to the B12 would make it more likely that a 6-7 win team wins 8-9. Basically that expansion could raise your win total by two entire wins. That is not how it works.
Also going off your final regular season Massey ratings, ISU played 4 top 15 teams on there in the regular season, Iowa's best opponent in the regular season was #22 Northwestern but yeah, SOS is just something ISU fans make up and all schedules are created equal
Did you even read what I said? I never said all schedules are equal and ISU fans made up SOS.
I specifically said that ISU fans think SOS have a giant impact on record. It doesn't. It makes some difference at the margins.
Why am I engaging? Ignore coming. Enjoy another 3 wins under your 10 time national champion coach.
There it is again. Only in very selective time frames has isu won every other year. More like once every three years or less since 1977.
I know, must ignore.
Maybe if ISU goes to the MAC after the Big 12 folds, Iowa could finally stop playing them. Iowa could then put a team on their schedule that would be actually worth playing. A team that when u beat them it would matter and if u loose it wouldn't be called a bad loss.
Maybe Iowa should just win all the time and then they don't have to worry about a bad loss.
Massey Ratings show that Toledo would have been the third best team on Iowa's regular season schedule last year
Yes, that is what Iowa faces playing such a joke program in ISU. Must win and even if you win its not a good win. You lower Iowa's SOS.
So then just win. I never hear Iowa fans complaining about playing Purdue. If it's such a bad loss you shouldn't lose in the first place
Conference games always matter, there is no benefit in playing ISU as Iowa. ZERO, NONE.
Free wins are always beneficial in college football today. Run the table in a major conference and you're in the playoffs
ISU doesn't do squat to hold up their end of the bargain in the rivalry. It would matter if you weren't the top 10 worst programs of all time. 3-4 wins yearly, there is no benefit in Iowa playing. Your resume is damaged with a win and destroyed with a loss.
If you go undefeated you will be in the CFP. Getting to play a cupcake like Iowa State is actually beneficial if that's Iowa's season goal.
I'm positive that even you do not fully understand what you post. It is entirely possible to lose OOC and still win the national championship (Ohio State, 2014). While not totally impossible, it is less likely to loss in conference and still make it to the NC playoffs.
isu is no different in this vein to Miami (Ohio) and North Dakota State.
If you lose to a team as bad as Iowa State that's on you. You're given a free OOC win and complaining about it, it makes no sense
It is quite simple really. Risk/Reward for this crappy game is not in Iowa's favor, not even remotely close. Hoping they add another BIG regular season game and this crapfest can be done. You want to play Iowa it will be in Kinnick when you're in the MAC.
There's very little risk though so I don't get the complaining. I'll probably never understand the thought process so I'll just drop it
What? How is there not risk, your program is trash. Be viable, decent consistent team the game would mean a lot for both teams. Right now its a 1 way street.
There is very little risk because you should never lose to a trash program. You get to play one of the worst college football programs in the country every year. You're getting a pretty much guaranteed win and complaining about it. That's crazy to me
Keep being condescending about this, good freaking Lord. Being a fan of said dump program you will never understand. It is like Iowa trying to rationalize being a rival with Alabama.
I'm not sure the divide between Iowa and ISU is quite as great as the divide between Iowa and Alabama.
Agree, Iowa is closer to Bama than ISU is to Iowa.
Similar threads
