ISU hurting our SOS + Rhoads comments = Time to abandon ISU

[lonhawk]

During an an On Iowa Podcast with Scott Dochterman and Marc Morehouse, they discussed the 9 B1G game schedule; Scott said if it ever got to 10 conference games (KF has mentioned that he thinks things are heading that way), the first thing to drop is ISU because Iowa would want/need 7 home games EVERY year (5 B1G and 2 nonconference). Besides needing the 7 home games, Scott and Marc brought up a couple other points:

ISU fans bombarded both Scott and Marc all season on Twitter, saying Iowa did not belong in the CFP discussion because of its weak schedule. Scott found that ironic because Iowa's schedule looking weak was because ISU was so bad..

Scott mentioned that Paul Rhoads made a point of stating that Oklahoma was the best team ISU had faced, which was essentially a dig at Iowa.

Bottom line: Iowa does not need ISU. Having ISU on the schedule is a no win situation. Iowa is expected to beat ISU. ISU hurts Iowa's SOS. And ISU has done Iowa no favors when it comes at unnecessary digs by ISU coaches to the media.

Sounds like a lot of sour grapes to me. Weak points all around... Oklahoma is pretty darn good no slight there.
ISU fans are disappointed because of the loss no surprise they stupidly raid Twitter with useless comments.

Iowa needs Iowa St. And vice versa. Makes for a highly anticipated game every year regardless of outcome.

Iowa players seemed pretty darned happy to collect that trophy and being crowned the kings of the state.

The Cy-Hawk game is a nationally recognized tradition, seems a shame to end it.

If I remember correctly that game was still in doubt for a majority of the 4th quarter.

How fickle considering the clones have beaten Iowa several times in the last few years.

Finally the Iowa St. Win was a huge catalyst to propel Iowa to where they are now!

Keep the game! Go Hawks!

 

[bagdropper]

Only the 102,350th thread on this through the years.

It ain't getting eliminated, folks. Not in our lifetimes anyway. If Iowa wound up only getting 1 non-con game down the road, it's going to be ISU, and that's all there is to it.

You don't have to love it, in fact go ahead and hate it with a passion - but you might as well learn to learn to live with it.

 

[5Fan5]

Sounds like a lot of sour grapes to me. Weak points all around... Oklahoma is pretty darn good no slight there.
ISU fans are disappointed because of the loss no surprise they stupidly raid Twitter with useless comments.

Iowa needs Iowa St. And vice versa. Makes for a highly anticipated game every year regardless of outcome.

Iowa players seemed pretty darned happy to collect that trophy and being crowned the kings of the state.

The Cy-Hawk game is a nationally recognized tradition, seems a shame to end it.

If I remember correctly that game was still in doubt for a majority of the 4th quarter.

How fickle considering the clones have beaten Iowa several times in the last few years.

Finally the Iowa St. Win was a huge catalyst to propel Iowa to where they are now!

Keep the game! Go Hawks!

Wow. Either you truly do not believe what you have written and posted here or you are just another troll looking to stir the pot.

Allow me to oblige...

Iowa does not "need" to play isu. If that were the case, Iowa football would have folded somewhere along the way between 1935 and 1976. Did not happen then, just as it would not happen now.

Sure Iowa players were happy to win the game. Point me to a game, any game, where the players and fans are not happy following a win.

Provide me all the evidence you can to support the cy-hawk game being anything other than what it is - a non-conference game between two in-state rivals that generally occurs early in the season. There is minimal coverage, attention and/or recognition devoted to that game by anyone outside of the State of Iowa.

Using your thought process, it could be stated that the game was 'in doubt' following isu's last point production in quarter number two. I don't recall isu being a serious threat to score much anytime after that fact. Most observers, at least those objective enough, witnessed the shift in momentum and had an awareness of how the game was unfolding throughout the second half. Too bad if you missed all that.

What is fickle is believing those three point victories during the Rhoads era of isu football to be anything more than they were. Props to isu on the wins. Iowa won four of the seven against CPR and did so by much more convincing margins than three points.

"One game at a time" has been the rallying cry of the 2015 Hawks. The isu game was important from late on September 5 until mid-day, Sunday, September 13. Then it became time to move on to Pitt game against a more formidable foe. The isu game held no more/less importance than any other game with the exception of having state bragging rights for a year.

Keep the game or not. Others will ultimately determine that. However, there is no hiding the fact that college football going forward for Iowa is not what it was even a year or two ago now. If the CFP is an ultimate goal, then the focus will adjust accordingly and that may or may not include games such as the isu contest each and every year.

 

[theIowaHawk]

I disagree. The isu game is a non-conference matchup featuring two schools from Iowa. Period. It is not Bedlam nor even Clemson versus South Carolina. It is not even Michigan going up against MSU due to the fact that being a conference game with real consequences at stake (and most everyone will agree that the single most important game for UM is not the in-state rival.)

You are right, it isn't any of those, nor is it Bama/Auburn, Florida/Florida State, Mich/OSU. What is your point? I said as much in my post, there are a handful of "important" rivalries, and really Michigan/MSU is not that big of a deal nationally, it is a big deal for the schools, for the state, and obviously within the conference.

Makes one wonder how it is that the State of Pennsylvania survives at all?

I'm not sure what you think this means, let alone proves. PSU played Temple, it was a big deal this year for those schools within that state, but the State of Pennsylvania has more than 3 Universities and has 6x the population of Iowa. They even played it at Temple.

I live in central Iowa and the Iowa-isu game is not a topic of angst/discussion/consideration throughout the year. It is not even of primary importance long into the season. What it is is something that is overly hyped by print and broadcast media for a week or two prior and for less than that afterwards due to the ongoing nature of both institutions continuing to play their respective schedules.
Are you still hearing/reading a tremendous amount of material related to the recent basketball game in Ames? I'm not seeing it.

This is just lies, delusion, whatever. It is big all offseason, it is big all preseason, it is big right up through the game and the weeks right after. Is it as big for the remainder of the season? Of course not, and none of these rivalries really are ... the "big" ones are just later in the season changing when you actually think about them. You move on to your next opponents. I think really the gripe comes from ISU fans "hanging their hat" on it far longer than Iowa fans do. ISU got beat fairly soundly and Iowa fans (undefeated, and continued winning) moved on, and ISU fans basically "shut up" about it. Reverse the outcome and ISU fans would still be singing from the rooftop (see 2002).

It isn't a "media" invented thing, but the media definitely pushes it .... because it is what Iowans want to see/hear/talk about. I guarantee there are more radio call-ins for that game than any other. Is a year like this one an anomaly? Yes, naturally, people (Iowa fans) have been extremely excited since about week 9/10 leading to a lot of non-ISU talk. That doesn't mean it isn't a "big" game in the state.

If you truly are claiming that you live in central Iowa and people don't talk about this game incessantly leading up to the season and through the game, with bragging by the winner afterwards, well, you are full of shit.

This past season was a perfect example of how Iowa is perceived nationally. When Iowa was continuing to win week by week by week and appeared in the rankings, many of the national 'experts' downplayed that other team from the Big Ten. As the winnowing of undefeated teams continued and Iowa was still winning, more and more attention was gained on a national scale (still not saying all were firmly in Iowa's corner because they were not). By week twelve/thirteen of the season, even some of the most staunch doubters of Iowa were taking closer looks, becoming much better informed and adjusting their opinions of Iowa to more favorable status.

That national perception won't change with nearly anybody Iowa schedules, to believe otherwise is delusion. Scheduling Virginia or Vanderbilt, Washington, Arizona (see, we went down that road and with ASU), Arkansas, or anyone else is not changing this "national perception" so many people pretend a) exists and b) makes a difference or c) can be changed.

Will scheduling Alabama "improve" things, duh, of course. That really isn't the debate here.

Yes, Iowa is a small populated state unlike most of the others in the Big Ten footprint. But, Iowa is not so unlike teams from Wisconsin, Michigan, even Nebraska that they cannot gain recognition and acknowledgement on a wider scope. 2015 is evidence of that. To deny that is just not being realistic.

 

[lonhawk]

Wow. Either you truly do not believe what you have written and posted here or you are just another troll looking to stir the pot.

Allow me to oblige...

Iowa does not "need" to play isu. If that were the case, Iowa football would have folded somewhere along the way between 1935 and 1976. Did not happen then, just as it would not happen now.

Sure Iowa players were happy to win the game. Point me to a game, any game, where the players and fans are not happy following a win.

Provide me all the evidence you can to support the cy-hawk game being anything other than what it is - a non-conference game between two in-state rivals that generally occurs early in the season. There is minimal coverage, attention and/or recognition devoted to that game by anyone outside of the State of Iowa.

Using your thought process, it could be stated that the game was 'in doubt' following isu's last point production in quarter number two. I don't recall isu being a serious threat to score much anytime after that fact. Most observers, at least those objective enough, witnessed the shift in momentum and had an awareness of how the game was unfolding throughout the second half. Too bad if you missed all that.

What is fickle is believing those three point victories during the Rhoads era of isu football to be anything more than they were. Props to isu on the wins. Iowa won four of the seven against CPR and did so by much more convincing margins than three points.

"One game at a time" has been the rallying cry of the 2015 Hawks. The isu game was important from late on September 5 until mid-day, Sunday, September 13. Then it became time to move on to Pitt game against a more formidable foe. The isu game held no more/less importance than any other game with the exception of having state bragging rights for a year.

Keep the game or not. Others will ultimately determine that. However, there is no hiding the fact that college football going forward for Iowa is not what it was even a year or two ago now. If the CFP is an ultimate goal, then the focus will adjust accordingly and that may or may not include games such as the isu contest each and every year.

http://www.hawkeyesports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/090915aah.html

Lol troll...

Allow me to oblige...

Coach says this an exciting rivalry between teams with players both from the state of Iowa. I believe him.

If Iowa wins all their games in a season they have a chance to go to the CFP as evidenced this year.

Taking Iowa St. out of the schedule will not change that.

Your fervor is delusional. Go Hawks!

 

[theIowaHawk]

For the sake of this discussion, there are many teams that Iowa could have faced in week two this season. The examples are given of Wisconsin and Michigan State playing higher quality teams; Iowa could have done the same. Or, with slight adjustments, Iowa could have matched up in week two versus Pitt. This year that game was in Kinnick, but in other years it has been a road game. There are plenty of possibilities out there.

Yes, in theory. Wisconsin was ranked (?) and beat Auburn in the Outback bowl. Michigan State went 11-2 and beat Baylor. Yes, maybe a 13-1 Iowa will be able to schedule a "big" game with that result. To just pretend that Alabama is ready and rearing to head up to Iowa City is without any rational support.

If you think about it, the reasons offered for Iowa absolutely needing to play isu every year just are not there. It is and has been for quite some time, a game of convenience that may offer some slight perks for the State of Iowa for a very limited period of time - and that is pretty much it. The landscape of college football has changed and Iowa must consider what maximizes the potential benefits most. Playing isu every year with a nine-game Big Ten schedule and trying to achieve the CFP is not serving that purpose.

Again, this isn't about NEED it is about want, about what is good, better, best. "Maximizes the potential". What potential? They played a borderline top 25 in Pitt and people complained about it preseason and have complained about it since. A good school with a good history with a good coach and a good football team. Jesus H, they complained about Arizona and they will complain about the next one that isn't OMG Oregon! or Bama.

Our schedule wasn't down because of ISU, it was down because our Big Ten schedule simply was mediocre THIS YEAR. Had OSU or MSU been on our schedule the perception would have been different. Had Minnesota and Nebraska not seemingly shit the bed, the perception would have been different.

 

[5Fan5]

You are right, it isn't any of those, nor is it Bama/Auburn, Florida/Florida State, Mich/OSU. What is your point? I said as much in my post, there are a handful of "important" rivalries, and really Michigan/MSU is not that big of a deal nationally, it is a big deal for the schools, for the state, and obviously within the conference.



I'm not sure what you think this means, let alone proves. PSU played Temple, it was a big deal this year for those schools within that state, but the State of Pennsylvania has more than 3 Universities and has 6x the population of Iowa. They even played it at Temple.



This is just lies, delusion, whatever. It is big all offseason, it is big all preseason, it is big right up through the game and the weeks right after. Is it as big for the remainder of the season? Of course not, and none of these rivalries really are ... the "big" ones are just later in the season changing when you actually think about them. You move on to your next opponents. I think really the gripe comes from ISU fans "hanging their hat" on it far longer than Iowa fans do. ISU got beat fairly soundly and Iowa fans (undefeated, and continued winning) moved on, and ISU fans basically "shut up" about it. Reverse the outcome and ISU fans would still be singing from the rooftop (see 2002).

It isn't a "media" invented thing, but the media definitely pushes it .... because it is what Iowans want to see/hear/talk about. I guarantee there are more radio call-ins for that game than any other. Is a year like this one an anomaly? Yes, naturally, people (Iowa fans) have been extremely excited since about week 9/10 leading to a lot of non-ISU talk. That doesn't mean it isn't a "big" game in the state.

If you truly are claiming that you live in central Iowa and people don't talk about this game incessantly leading up to the season and through the game, with bragging by the winner afterwards, well, you are full of shit.



That national perception won't change with nearly anybody Iowa schedules, to believe otherwise is delusion. Scheduling Virginia or Vanderbilt, Washington, Arizona (see, we went down that road and with ASU), Arkansas, or anyone else is not changing this "national perception" so many people pretend a) exists and b) makes a difference or c) can be changed.

Will scheduling Alabama "improve" things, duh, of course. That really isn't the debate here.

In order: You said several things in your post... most of it was completely overshadowed by this attempt to dramatize the hyperbole with opinionated words/phrases. The Iowa-isu football game is not that big of a deal. It is a non-conference game that occurs usually early/mid September and has very little relevance to what goes on the rest of the season. Maybe you can show me where the Des Moines Register was still discussing the game of September 12th as the season progressed for Iowa this fall; I did not see it.

Yes, Penn State played at Temple. Does that occur every year? Every other year? Once in awhile? Please, if you wish to be taken seriously, then do not resort to pulling stuff out of the air. Although the Nittany Lions have faced Temple more recently that before, it does not mean they will continue to do so in the future. PSU has also played a team named Alabama home and away in the same time frame. The direction of football is fluid and changing and continuing to do what has been the rule prior is no guarantee that teams will reassess and schedule accordingly.

At one time, schools like Iowa and Penn State played teams from FCS. That will change per the Big Ten Commissioner. Nine game conference schedules will now be the norm. Schools will be much more critical and careful about scheduling OOC games as the CFP continues to unfold over the next several years.

Why would I or anyone else need to lie here? That is asinine. I am acquainted with many isu fans and I can assure you that we do not spend every waking moment either talking about nor in anticipation of this single game. I will admit to not being totally fair here when I say you remind me of some fans I choose to otherwise not interact with because of the hyper-sensitiveness of your reactions and response. It truly is just one game. Nothing more. You appear to contradict yourself in the latter part of this, but it is abundantly clear that you place much more emphasis on this one game that the typical fan does.

To a rather large degree, it is a "media" invented thing. Do you think the cy-hawk series and trophy to be a legitimate outgrowth of the competition between the two schools? It is a means for certain corporate entities to try to capitalize on something local and the "media", by and large, is the avenue which propels that exposure. Where else do you find personalities from a local network television station traveling around the state in a RV the week prior to the game? Fun? Sure. Meaningful in the larger scope of things here? No, not really.

Yes, I make that claim having lived in central Iowa for the majority of my life. I witnessed so much more once Big Ten season was upon us. The game in Madison, Wisconsin was so much more exciting that it did not even compare. Northwestern, Minnesota, Nebraska, even Illinois brings as much anticipation and discussion as the isu game with the people I know to be fans of Iowa.

It is a shame that the true worth of the season is lost on you with the worry, concern, hype you obviously possess from one single game.

 

[5Fan5]

Yes, in theory. Wisconsin was ranked (?) and beat Auburn in the Outback bowl. Michigan State went 11-2 and beat Baylor. Yes, maybe a 13-1 Iowa will be able to schedule a "big" game with that result. To just pretend that Alabama is ready and rearing to head up to Iowa City is without any rational support.



Again, this isn't about NEED it is about want, about what is good, better, best. "Maximizes the potential". What potential? They played a borderline top 25 in Pitt and people complained about it preseason and have complained about it since. A good school with a good history with a good coach and a good football team. Jesus H, they complained about Arizona and they will complain about the next one that isn't OMG Oregon! or Bama.

Our schedule wasn't down because of ISU, it was down because our Big Ten schedule simply was mediocre THIS YEAR. Had OSU or MSU been on our schedule the perception would have been different. Had Minnesota and Nebraska not seemingly shit the bed, the perception would have been different.

You seem to want to discredit teams such as Pitt and to a lesser degree Wisconsin and Michigan State while at the same time trying to justify the worth of isu. That, I find odd.

Let's turn this table for the time being. If isu is of such quality and worth as an opponent, why is it that teams from the other Power 5 groupings are not scheduling games with the clones? Take a look at how long it has been since isu has scheduled a game with a Big Ten foe not named Iowa. Why is that? Iowa managed to occasionally find the way to schedule Kansas State and Nebraska when they were a member of the big8/big xii. What prevents isu from hosting/visiting other teams from a conference that shares borders with them? Who/when is the last time isu played someone from the Pac 12 during the regular season? How about the SEC?

Sooner, hopefully, rather than later, you will realize that indeed Iowa's schedule can be improved over having isu as perhaps the lone Power 5 opponent every year. You want to swallow hook, line and sinker that the schedule Iowa faced this season was mediocre. I assure that Iowa did not reach the heights they did this fall by taking anything close to that mentality or approach toward any of those opponents.

 

[5Fan5]

http://www.hawkeyesports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/090915aah.html

Lol troll...

Allow me to oblige...

Coach says this an exciting rivalry between teams with players both from the state of Iowa. I believe him.

If Iowa wins all their games in a season they have a chance to go to the CFP as evidenced this year.

Taking Iowa St. out of the schedule will not change that.

Your fervor is delusional. Go Hawks!

Again, I am not at all surprised by your response .... even as foolish as it is.

Can you identify which team it was where 'coach' (any coach will suffice) said anything contrary to an upcoming opponent being "exciting" and of good quality and so on and so forth. Pressers are for the fans mostly, not something coaches demand and they answer the redundant questions the best they can. Coach Ferentz, being one of the most diplomatic and tactful person I have seen in that role does a tremendous job of always promoting the University of Iowa. He also, without any question, extends the greatest amount of praise toward the next opponent. Nothing unusual about what you cite as some supposed testament toward this particular game.

The precedent for the CFP was set last year not in 2015 season as it relates to teams winning/losing. Ohio State lost to Virginia Tech yet still played well enough to qualify/be selected to participate in the 2014 CFP. Would Ohio State have been given the same consideration had that single loss been to isu? No one can say for sure, but I think most people will be able to discern the difference.

See above. Not having isu on the schedule each and every year could certainly have bearing on how Iowa is perceived in the eyes of those deciding the fate of teams for the CFP. Iowa loses to isu this past fall, I do not believe that they are even in the discussion come Novermber/December. Iowa losing to a much higher quality team may or may not impact that.

 

[5Fan5]

Oh, I almost forgot.... show me how Iowa "needs" isu on its football schedule.

 

[lonhawk]

Again, I am not at all surprised by your response .... even as foolish as it is.

Can you identify which team it was where 'coach' (any coach will suffice) said anything contrary to an upcoming opponent being "exciting" and of good quality and so on and so forth. Pressers are for the fans mostly, not something coaches demand and they answer the redundant questions the best they can. Coach Ferentz, being one of the most diplomatic and tactful person I have seen in that role does a tremendous job of always promoting the University of Iowa. He also, without any question, extends the greatest amount of praise toward the next opponent. Nothing unusual about what you cite as some supposed testament toward this particular game.

The precedent for the CFP was set last year not in 2015 season as it relates to teams winning/losing. Ohio State lost to Virginia Tech yet still played well enough to qualify/be selected to participate in the 2014 CFP. Would Ohio State have been given the same consideration had that single loss been to isu? No one can say for sure, but I think most people will be able to discern the difference.

See above. Not having isu on the schedule each and every year could certainly have bearing on how Iowa is perceived in the eyes of those deciding the fate of teams for the CFP. Iowa loses to isu this past fall, I do not believe that they are even in the discussion come Novermber/December. Iowa losing to a much higher quality team may or may not impact that.

I'm not surprised by your foolishness as well.

It's about performance not perception.

The importance of the game has been stated numerous times.

NNTR

Good Day!

Go Hawks!

 

[5Fan5]

I'm not surprised by your foolishness as well.

It's about performance not perception.

The importance of the game has been stated numerous times.

NNTR

Good Day!

Go Hawks!

In other words, you've got nothing.

Thanks for confirming that.

 

[theIowaHawk]

You seem to want to discredit teams such as Pitt and to a lesser degree Wisconsin and Michigan State while at the same time trying to justify the worth of isu. That, I find odd.

Let's turn this table for the time being. If isu is of such quality and worth as an opponent, why is it that teams from the other Power 5 groupings are not scheduling games with the clones? Take a look at how long it has been since isu has scheduled a game with a Big Ten foe not named Iowa. Why is that? Iowa managed to occasionally find the way to schedule Kansas State and Nebraska when they were a member of the big8/big xii. What prevents isu from hosting/visiting other teams from a conference that shares borders with them? Who/when is the last time isu played someone from the Pac 12 during the regular season? How about the SEC?

Sooner, hopefully, rather than later, you will realize that indeed Iowa's schedule can be improved over having isu as perhaps the lone Power 5 opponent every year. You want to swallow hook, line and sinker that the schedule Iowa faced this season was mediocre. I assure that Iowa did not reach the heights they did this fall by taking anything close to that mentality or approach toward any of those opponents.

I'm not discrediting anyone. I felt that Pitt was always a very good opponent to schedule. I think Wisconsin and MSU are great opponents.

Do you know who was discrediting Pitt? The fans/posters in threads just like this complaining about Pitt, just as they complained about Arizona. Another good matchup, imo. Just like ISU is.

This isn't difficult. If I was, say, Pitt, would I want to schedule ISU? No, of course not, just like, as Iowa, I don't want to schedule, say, Wake Forest. But we aren't Pitt, we aren't 750 miles away, we are in Iowa with our rival Iowa State.

I don't know why you went through that litany of irrelevant questions, I'm not sure your purpose.

Improved for who? For "national perception"? Seriously, pinpoint, specifically, what "national perception" is and how it would be changed by scheduling Kansas or Wazzu or Vanderbilt.

The schedule Iowa played this year WAS mediocre, I'm not sure how that can be argued otherwise. The two teams that should have been "good+" in Nebraska and Minnesota shit the bed. In contrast Northwestern stepped up. Illinois State is FCS. Pittsburgh just outside the top 25. That is a mediocre schedule, especially considering Iowa is in the conference with, potentially, 5 top ten final standings teams.

Anyone who claims "national perception" is why they want ISU off the schedule is either:

A) Full of shit and lying to themselves, or
B) Doesn't and hasn't lived in Iowa for a while now.

But, please, feel free to answer my question: Specifically how would "national perception" be positively changed via the schedule?

 

[theIowaHawk]

Oh, I almost forgot.... show me how Iowa "needs" isu on its football schedule.

Did I miss this? Did somebody claim this?

If so, it is laughable, neither team "needs" the other. This isn't about "need".

 

[theIowaHawk]

Ohio State lost to Virginia Tech yet still played well enough to qualify/be selected to participate in the 2014 CFP. Would Ohio State have been given the same consideration had that single loss been to isu? No one can say for sure, but I think most people will be able to discern the difference.

Wait, what? You are claiming that OSU losing to ISU would have kept them out? Jesus H. Sure ol' Beamer's teams have been great over the BCS era and his name and his team name carry status, but not last year, not any more than ISU, not enough to have kept OSU out.

Plus, even if you believe that hogwash (by ignoring that OSU went 13-0 from there on out, scoring 40+ 11 times, 50+ 6 times and pasting Wisconsin 59-0), it ignores the fact that had OSU lost to ISU, it may have simply meant they weren't very good nor deserving of that spot. You don't simply get to say, "hey what if this really really good team actually lost to this really really bad team that was worse, statistically, than this other not-so-good team", that is absurd.

 

[theIowaHawk]

The Iowa-isu football game is not that big of a deal.

Yes, it is, in the state of f****** Iowa. You are absolutely delusional and lying to yourself if you live in central Iowa and say otherwise. I'm sure there is a facebook, or twitter, metric that can spit out the most "talked about" games during any given time, and I guarantee it is Iowa/ISU in Iowa. What matchup was bigger? Iowa/MSU? Well by golly, be careful on that limb...

A "media invented thing", what absolute malarkey. It is talked about at every job, ever employer, every grocery store, every doctor's office, everywhere in the state of Iowa. More people wave flags of their school, more people wear their colors, attach their stuff to their cars, than for any other game the entire year.

And this shouldn't even be debatable, because it is entirely logical. Both school's fanbases want to proudly support their team so they try to outdo each other ... something they don't need to do in any other game (except, maybe, ISU/UNI). You couldn't walk through a mall in the state leading up to/after that game without seeing more school colors than any other time of year. It seems to be the one acceptable time to fully wear your colors in church the week of the game.

Are you really pretending I'm wrong? Your absurdness is stark: "Where else do you find personalities from a local network television station traveling around the state in a RV the week prior to the game? Fun? Sure." Why do you think they do this? BECAUSE IT IS A BIG DEAL TO THE PEOPLE IN THE STATE. You know, the reason it is economical and logical for them to drive to various places in a f****** RV. Media invented? Jesus H.

 

[5Fan5]

I'm not discrediting anyone. I felt that Pitt was always a very good opponent to schedule. I think Wisconsin and MSU are great opponents.

Do you know who was discrediting Pitt? The fans/posters in threads just like this complaining about Pitt, just as they complained about Arizona. Another good matchup, imo. Just like ISU is.

This isn't difficult. If I was, say, Pitt, would I want to schedule ISU? No, of course not, just like, as Iowa, I don't want to schedule, say, Wake Forest. But we aren't Pitt, we aren't 750 miles away, we are in Iowa with our rival Iowa State.

I don't know why you went through that litany of irrelevant questions, I'm not sure your purpose.

Improved for who? For "national perception"? Seriously, pinpoint, specifically, what "national perception" is and how it would be changed by scheduling Kansas or Wazzu or Vanderbilt.

The schedule Iowa played this year WAS mediocre, I'm not sure how that can be argued otherwise. The two teams that should have been "good+" in Nebraska and Minnesota shit the bed. In contrast Northwestern stepped up. Illinois State is FCS. Pittsburgh just outside the top 25. That is a mediocre schedule, especially considering Iowa is in the conference with, potentially, 5 top ten final standings teams.

Anyone who claims "national perception" is why they want ISU off the schedule is either:

A) Full of shit and lying to themselves, or
B) Doesn't and hasn't lived in Iowa for a while now.

But, please, feel free to answer my question: Specifically how would "national perception" be positively changed via the schedule?

We will agree to disagree. Period.

What is heard is that the Iowa-isu football game is good for all of these largely esoteric reasons. What is known is that isu football is one of the worst Power 5 teams in the land. Almost any other team from a major conference you can name is better for Iowa due to the method now utilized to determine the four teams deemed worthy to play in the national championship.

The questions are there for two purposes. First, it temporarily removes Iowa from the equation giving you a chance to look at it from a fresh perspective. Secondly, it substantiates the condition of the isu football program, past, present and perhaps even future. Either isu has elected not to play teams from other major conferences over long periods of time or they are not able to schedule those teams because they offer too great of a risk and not enough of a reward to merit consideration. Why should Iowa hold itself to a standard that seemingly is employed by nearly any other Power 5 school/team when scheduling opponents?

Why does Iowa have to be limited to scheduling the one, two or three teams you name? It has already been shown that Iowa has scheduled Kansas State and Nebraska from the big xii. Arizona and ASU from the Pac 12 were recent home/away opponents. Pitt and Syracuse are teams from the eastern United States that have been on Iowa's schedule. This is not Iowa's shortcoming. Iowa is able to attract teams from other Power 5 conferences.

Iowa played the schedule it had. Simple or as complex as that. The two teams that most detracted from Iowa's schedule were not from the Big Ten. What makes it such that Minnesota and Nebraska should always be "good" - and particularly in your opinion? The fact is that both Minnesota and Nebraska are better programs with much better histories and resumes than a certain school in Ames, Iowa. In all, Iowa will have faced eight teams that will participate in bowls this season and Illinois State, a team that featured multiple D1 transfers at key positions and was the national runner up at the FCS level in 2014.

Three teams Iowa played are not practicing for bowl games presently. Any of those three teams could potentially one day end Iowa's opportunity to compete for a national title.

Precisely because Iowa is in the Big Ten with " potentially, 5 top ten final teams..." is why you cannot say that Iowa played a mediocre schedule. Those teams you want to somehow lessen (I say discredit) for the sake of this discussion are quality teams. It was no fluke that Minnesota gave TCU one of its stiffest challenges this fall. Nebraska competing, but not winning several close games is something that will happen in football. That does not mean Nebraska is a worthless team.

No one is fos, so get over that. I do live in central Iowa and I do follow football and have for some time. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but there is nothing you have stated that convinces me that isu deserves to be on the Iowa schedule each and every year going forward. Nine conference games and the objective of having seven home games each season will be the standard of practice for Iowa. Limiting Iowa to any single Power 5 team in the OOC portion into perpetuity is foolish.

Playing higher quality opposition should always put Iowa or any other team in better stead with the committee choosing which four teams vie for the championship. If the ultimate goal of Iowa football is to be a part of that equation, then care has to be made in which teams are on the schedule.

 

[herecomethehawkeyes]

This Jesus H. fellow that theIowaHawk keeps bringing up seems like an interesting individual

 

[theIowaHawk]

Almost any other team from a major conference you can name is better for Iowa due to the method now utilized to determine the four teams deemed worthy to play in the national championship.

...Illinois State, a team that featured multiple D1 transfers at key positions and was the national runner up at the FCS level in 2014.

You know you are rationalizing as hard as you can when you put both of these things in the same post.

 

[5Fan5]

Yes, it is, in the state of f****** Iowa. You are absolutely delusional and lying to yourself if you live in central Iowa and say otherwise. I'm sure there is a facebook, or twitter, metric that can spit out the most "talked about" games during any given time, and I guarantee it is Iowa/ISU in Iowa. What matchup was bigger? Iowa/MSU? Well by golly, be careful on that limb...

A "media invented thing", what absolute malarkey. It is talked about at every job, ever employer, every grocery store, every doctor's office, everywhere in the state of Iowa. More people wave flags of their school, more people wear their colors, attach their stuff to their cars, than for any other game the entire year.

And this shouldn't even be debatable, because it is entirely logical. Both school's fanbases want to proudly support their team so they try to outdo each other ... something they don't need to do in any other game (except, maybe, ISU/UNI). You couldn't walk through a mall in the state leading up to/after that game without seeing more school colors than any other time of year. It seems to be the one acceptable time to fully wear your colors in church the week of the game.

Are you really pretending I'm wrong? Your absurdness is stark: "Where else do you find personalities from a local network television station traveling around the state in a RV the week prior to the game? Fun? Sure." Why do you think they do this? BECAUSE IT IS A BIG DEAL TO THE PEOPLE IN THE STATE. You know, the reason it is economical and logical for them to drive to various places in a f****** RV. Media invented? Jesus H.

Look. You can stop with all of the hyperbole. No one, particularly myself is impressed.

Go ahead and produce all of the rhetoric you want. It will not change that fact that a single game played in Iowa in early/mid September is so critical that Iowa just has to keep playing it.

(For the record, any and every Big Ten game is 'bigger'. By definition, the conference was created to promote competition between the member institutions. Score is kept. Standings are recorded and since, 2014, there is a playoff system to determine the champion. It follows fairly logical order; win in conference, play in the conference championship game and potentially be one of the final four teams playing for the ultimate prize. The out of conference games, while still important are lesser in nature to any conference game.)

Evidence exists of periods when these two schools did not play football. Both survived. The Iowa fan base has proven over time to support Iowa against many teams not named isu. the absurdity here belongs solely to you to think that Iowa just has to keep playing isu or the world as we now know it will cease to be.

I don't have to pretend anything. Others will agree/disagree, but that does not make someone right. Are you so insecure in this that you have to resort to such childish manner? Some of the crap you spew here does not deserve a reply. I do live in central Iowa, I am a staunch Iowa fan and no, I do not think it to be in the best interest of Iowa football to always agree to play isu each and every year.

 

[theIowaHawk]

I don't pretend to have all the answers, but there is nothing you have stated that convinces me that isu deserves to be on the Iowa schedule each and every year going forward. .

This is the invented thesis that you are trying to make the argument. It isn't about whether ISU "deserves" or "needs", or Iowa "deserves" or "needs", it simply isn't about that. We have the game, you are trying to argue for getting rid of it ... presumably based on:

Playing higher quality opposition should always put Iowa or any other team in better stead with the committee choosing which four teams vie for the championship. If the ultimate goal of Iowa football is to be a part of that equation, then care has to be made in which teams are on the schedule.

You have no idea of that, you have no way of determining that, and history has shown this to be bullshit. Iowa was in this year ... even though they played ISU. Iowa was "in" in 2002 even though they lost to ISU. You simply refuse to acknowledge, or maybe just ignore, the fact that Iowa losing to Iowa usually, likely, means that Iowa shouldn't be "in" in the first place.

Iowa and ISU are rivals. Are you claiming they aren't? I, for one, think it is better to play rivals than, say, Kansas State (you brought up), just for the ol' shits and giggles. Playing them isn't moving the needle on Iowa in the playoffs.

What really works against you is your incessant (and nonsensical) claim that this isn't a big deal to Iowans and that it is "media driven." If you can't even acknowledge that, it shows your bias.

 

[5Fan5]

You know you are rationalizing as hard as you can when you put both of these things in the same post.

Yes, I did put them in the same post. So what?

Illinois State, in my opinion, is a team at least as good as isu was in 2015. We will never know for certain, but Tre Roberson and company could have given isu a very good test had they played.

But, to the real point here... go ahead and list all of the teams from Power 5 conferences that are inferior to isu. Not speaking just in 2015 mind you because things change from year to year, season to season (like Nebraska and Minnesota being so, so bad according to one source here). Name those teams and I will do my best to show you how wrong you can be.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Go ahead and produce all of the rhetoric you want. It will not change that fact that a single game played in Iowa in early/mid September is so critical that Iowa just has to keep playing it.

NO ONE IS SAYING OTHERWISE.

NO ONE HAS SAID THAT THE IOWA STATE GAME IS MORE IMPORTANT TO THE SEASON THAN A CONFERENCE GAME.

Stop moving your ridiculous goal posts. It is a BIG DEAL to the citizens of the state of Iowa, they talk about it more than any other game, they represent the schools more than any other game. Seriously, do you not acknowledge that? You can still beg to remove ISU while acknowledging that obvious fact.

Every conference is game is more important, that has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with this. We aren't replacing it with a conference game, just stop with that nonsense.

"The Iowa fan base has proven over time to support Iowa against many teams not named isu. the absurdity here belongs solely to you to think that Iowa just has to keep playing isu or the world as we now know it will cease to be."

I HAVEN'T SAID THIS, NO ONE HAS SAID THIS. It is amazing that you type that drivel in the SAME POST where you call out hyperbole.

"I do not think it to be in the best interest of Iowa football to always agree to play isu each and every year."

Fine! Support that position. So far you just throw out things like "national perception" and then nonsensical stuff about the rivalry not being a big deal to Iowans and that it is media driven. You are trying to create this magical scenario where it isn't widely celebrated throughout Iowa to make your point....you don't need to, just use facts, statistics, opinions, whatever to show why you think it isn't in Iowa's best interest. You simply haven't done so, you just repeat lines like the one I bolded above.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Yes, I did put them in the same post. So what?

.

This really doesn't surprise me. In multiple posts you claim that ISU is actually detrimental to Iowa's chances of playoff .... and then you further defend why an FCS team somehow isn't detrimental, and is actually better.

 

[5Fan5]

This is the invented thesis that you are trying to make the argument. It isn't about whether ISU "deserves" or "needs", or Iowa "deserves" or "needs", it simply isn't about that. We have the game, you are trying to argue for getting rid of it ... presumably based on:



You have no idea of that, you have no way of determining that, and history has shown this to be bullshit. Iowa was in this year ... even though they played ISU. Iowa was "in" in 2002 even though they lost to ISU. You simply refuse to acknowledge, or maybe just ignore, the fact that Iowa losing to Iowa usually, likely, means that Iowa shouldn't be "in" in the first place.

Iowa and ISU are rivals. Are you claiming they aren't? I, for one, think it is better to play rivals than, say, Kansas State (you brought up), just for the ol' shits and giggles. Playing them isn't moving the needle on Iowa in the playoffs.

What really works against you is your incessant (and nonsensical) claim that this isn't a big deal to Iowans and that it is "media driven." If you can't even acknowledge that, it shows your bias.

I answered your straw man argument in another post, but it bears repeating just for you.

The precedent for a one-loss team to participate was cast by the committee following the 2014 season when Ohio State was selected as one of the four teams to participate. You will recall that the Buckeyes lost to Virginia Tech early in that season. The question is, do you think Ohio State is given that same amount of leniency/consideration if say they lost to say, Kansas last year?

If you say yes, then it is you that is not truthful and full of vinegar. If you say no, Ohio State is not selected in 2014, well then I will rest my case because you are proving my point in spades.

 

[5Fan5]

This really doesn't surprise me. In multiple posts you claim that ISU is actually detrimental to Iowa's chances of playoff .... and then you further defend why an FCS team somehow isn't detrimental, and is actually better.

Just as I and about anyone else with a lick of common sense can determine that FCS team have had a rather high degree of success against the team in question (isu) lately. That is the point.

Nearly every team in the country plays some form of an FCS level opponent often. That has not held a team from the CFP because a) if they lose to the lesser opponent, they are out of contention and b) they are playing other teams, but not isu for whatever reason, and thus are not likely to be scrutinized should they not look good in that game.

It is in Iowa's best interest to schedule the best team they can given the parameters of nine conference games and seven home games. isu may or may not fit that bill occasionally, but certainly does not presently and likely will not anytime soon.

 

[5Fan5]

NO ONE IS SAYING OTHERWISE.

NO ONE HAS SAID THAT THE IOWA STATE GAME IS MORE IMPORTANT TO THE SEASON THAN A CONFERENCE GAME.

Stop moving your ridiculous goal posts. It is a BIG DEAL to the citizens of the state of Iowa, they talk about it more than any other game, they represent the schools more than any other game. Seriously, do you not acknowledge that? You can still beg to remove ISU while acknowledging that obvious fact.

Every conference is game is more important, that has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with this. We aren't replacing it with a conference game, just stop with that nonsense.

"The Iowa fan base has proven over time to support Iowa against many teams not named isu. the absurdity here belongs solely to you to think that Iowa just has to keep playing isu or the world as we now know it will cease to be."

I HAVEN'T SAID THIS, NO ONE HAS SAID THIS. It is amazing that you type that drivel in the SAME POST where you call out hyperbole.

"I do not think it to be in the best interest of Iowa football to always agree to play isu each and every year."

Fine! Support that position. So far you just throw out things like "national perception" and then nonsensical stuff about the rivalry not being a big deal to Iowans and that it is media driven. You are trying to create this magical scenario where it isn't widely celebrated throughout Iowa to make your point....you don't need to, just use facts, statistics, opinions, whatever to show why you think it isn't in Iowa's best interest. You simply haven't done so, you just repeat lines like the one I bolded above.

Sure you have... you just are being too pigheaded now to admit that. The banter is always the same. It is 'good for the State....' (it is and can be, what it is not is necessary), 'it helps the State... (still waiting on a valid comparison on that one from someone, anyone) - the list goes on and on.

Facts are, Iowa and isu did NOT play from 1935 until 1976 and no one died because of that. Would it be nice if the game could be continued? I suppose. Is it a must. No.

You are wrong on how everyone views this game (substituting you own bias for what others just have to believe.) I follow football and have for an extended period of time. I watch many games and attend as many as time and resources will allow. Additionally, I talk to many different people and the topic of college football frequently comes up in those conversations. I can tell you unequivocally that the Iowa-isu game is not the most discussed game of the season when it comes to visiting about Iowa football. In fact, it has been my observation of late, that people are often so polarized on the issue, that they go out of their way at times to avoid talking about that very game.

I have supported my point. In return, someone has resorted to profanity, name calling and all other things one might expect from a preschool age child. Congrats on that.

 

[gablefan73]

I'm not discrediting anyone. I felt that Pitt was always a very good opponent to schedule. I think Wisconsin and MSU are great opponents.

Do you know who was discrediting Pitt? The fans/posters in threads just like this complaining about Pitt, just as they complained about Arizona. Another good matchup, imo. Just like ISU is.

Specifically how would "national perception" be positively changed via the schedule?

There weren't posters complaining about Pitt. In fact, it was overwhelmingly thought of as the best game on our home schedule. Only a clown would defend keeping the Iowa State series.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Facts are, Iowa and isu did NOT play from 1935 until 1976 and no one died because of that.

Again, a guy complaining about hyperbole made this post.

 

[theIowaHawk]

I can tell you unequivocally that the Iowa-isu game is not the most discussed game of the season when it comes to visiting about Iowa football.

Ok, you go with that.

 

[theIowaHawk]

The precedent for a one-loss team to participate was cast by the committee following the 2014 season when Ohio State was selected as one of the four teams to participate. You will recall that the Buckeyes lost to Virginia Tech early in that season. The question is, do you think Ohio State is given that same amount of leniency/consideration if say they lost to say, Kansas last year?

.

This is why your contentions are so absurd. Virginia Tech was 7-6. Kansas was 3-9, Iowa State was 2-10. It isn't their brand recognition that would have kept OSU out (if it had even kept them out), it would be the sheer understanding that losing to ISU (as Iowa did) means THEY AREN'T A GOOD TEAM.

You keep trying to funnel the argument towards a few redundantly simplistic and illogical conclusions: Dropping ISU won't kill the program; ISU somehow inhibits Iowa from reaching their goals.

You can't simply substitute a good/average/mediocre team for a terrible one in order to prove your incorrect point.

Would the ISU loss have kept Iowa out of the playoff last year? Yes, because Iowa wasn't very good.

 

[herecomethehawkeyes]

if it comes down to the fact that Iowa will only schedule 1 power five conference team in the out of conference slate as a result of a 9 conference schedule, I would rather that game not be locked in with Iowa State. Not because of the fear of Iowa State winning, but I would like to see Iowa matchup against a variety of teams in the power 5 conferences. I don't necessarily think they need to go out and schedule teams that are in the national title hunt more often than not, but it would be nice seeing them go head to head against many other teams.

 

[Nicretzlaff]

Jesus, many of you are so damned pathetic and in denial.

I don't know who you are or where you live (in Iowa), it is always the biggest and most discussed game of the year. It IS a big deal, to claim otherwise is just bullshit bravado.

If you don't live in Iowa and aren't around many Iowans? Well, shit, who'da think you wouldn't care as much, as no one is talking about it, but that applies to basically every school and rivalry outside the biggest.

If you truly think that the "national media" or people around the US "care" about any Iowa/P5 matchup to the point where it would increase exposure by scheduling other teams...you've deluded yourself. Hell, that's the majority of what I read in this thread: delusion.

Totally disagree with you and I'm amazed at your level of butt hurt. Scheduling Iowa state does nothing for Iowa besides become a highly talked about game because DUH it's an instate game that every reporter and player can speak to. However, Iowa state is terrible and doesn't help the Hawks SOS so why should they play? Just cause they are in state? That's a really dumb reason... We should play UNI then each year.

And if you want to talk about how to delude yourself (your words not mine and I think it makes virtually no sense) , you thinking that Iowa scheduling other P5 schools doesn't help our national exposure makes ZERO sense. Explain to me how it doesn't? But playing Iowa state does?

You've got some deep down fetish with this game and it doesn't make much sense given all of the criteria to further Iowas SOS and credibility nationally, why do you think there are so may threads on dumping this game if it didn't make very good business sense? Iowa State will always be mediocre and Iowa has incredible upside that we don't need to squander on Iowa State. I understand it's a rivalry but if argue that the Iowa Nebraska game is already 10x more exciting sad meaningful and its 4 years old.

Iowa need to get out and play some better teams, bottom line. Playing teams you should beat just because they are in state is a very poor reason to play that game

 

[theIowaHawk]

Totally disagree with you and I'm amazed at your level of butt hurt. Scheduling Iowa state does nothing for Iowa besides become a highly talked about game because DUH it's an instate game that every reporter and player can speak to. However, Iowa state is terrible and doesn't help the Hawks SOS so why should they play? Just cause they are in state? That's a really dumb reason... We should play UNI then each year.

1. Why is SOS the ultimate goal? Iowa was basically in the quarterfinals this year, but lost. Win and in. If they had 1 loss, well, same situation, if they had two they would have likely been out of the playoff, but still potentially playing in the CCG. Guess what, ISU had nothing to do with that. Lose to ISU, especially when they are terrible, and it is just evidence that Iowa isn't very good (see last few years). This isn't basketball, Iowa doesn't need to improve an RPI. Win the Big West, win the CCG and they are likely in. Do you dispute this? If not, why is SOS somehow the golden goose? Also, who would be replacing them? Many on here were discussing a 2-1 or no return with a MAC team, is this who you are claiming will raise the SOS?

2. If Iowa is going to play FCS teams like Illinois State (they aren't) then yes, they should in fact be playing UNI. It is cheaper and more popular with the fans.

And if you want to talk about how to delude yourself (your words not mine and I think it makes virtually no sense) , you thinking that Iowa scheduling other P5 schools doesn't help our national exposure makes ZERO sense. Explain to me how it doesn't? But playing Iowa state does?

Because "national exposure" does not care about Iowa and nonconference opponents. How can you possibly believe it does. Do you mean if Iowa plays Alabama, like Wisconsin did? Well, shit, no duh. Is that your proposal? Switch ISU for Alabama or another perennial playoff contender AT their home? Yes, THAT would raise the national exposure. Basically no other teams do. In fact, because of the rivalry, Iowa/ISU does usually get more publicity than other noncon games.

I get it, you have a theory, a theory that if only Iowa played Syracuse or Pitt or Arizona or Arizona State the national perception will change! Oh wait .... it didn't. Maybe if they were just replaced with Wazzou or Kentucky or Vanderbilt or Texas Tech! Quick! Who did any of those teams play in the noncon this year? We both know you can't name it, because you, as part of the "national exposure" don't care. There are very few teams that are "cared about" nationally. Iowa.isn't.one.

You've got some deep down fetish with this game

I really don't. The people who start these threads do. I waited and read the same tired responses and pilings on as always get posted in these threads. I'm here defending against the absurd - the claims that no one cares about Iowa/ISU and it is meaningless and blah blah blah. It isn't, anybody who claims it is is delusional, as I said. As I've now said repeatedly: You can admit these things while still praying for the game to be removed, at least that would be honest.

...and it doesn't make much sense given all of the criteria to further Iowas SOS and credibility nationally, why do you think there are so may threads on dumping this game if it didn't make very good business sense? Iowa State will always be mediocre and Iowa has incredible upside that we don't need to squander on Iowa State. I understand it's a rivalry but if argue that the Iowa Nebraska game is already 10x more exciting sad meaningful and its 4 years old.

Iowa need to get out and play some better teams, bottom line. Playing teams you should beat just because they are in state is a very poor reason to play that game

There are "so many threads" on dumping this game because the same people post the same tired things redundantly, and then they feed off each other like a cast on Fox News until they (you) are whipped in to a frenzy. There was a poll, not even that long back, on here about this subject ... guess what, you didn't have the support you seem to believe you do.

You said one good thing in this thread: Iowa has incredible upside. Great, glad you are on board ... I'll bet you weren't four months ago.

 

[theIowaHawk]

if it comes down to the fact that Iowa will only schedule 1 power five conference team in the out of conference slate as a result of a 9 conference schedule, I would rather that game not be locked in with Iowa State. Not because of the fear of Iowa State winning, but I would like to see Iowa matchup against a variety of teams in the power 5 conferences. I don't necessarily think they need to go out and schedule teams that are in the national title hunt more often than not, but it would be nice seeing them go head to head against many other teams.

See, now this is a reasonable and well-stated opinion. ... it didn't have to resort to pretending the game doesn't mean anything or carry any significance.

 

[Hans81]

5fan5 wins this "argument" as they say "hook, line, and sinker". I have LONG been an advocate for eliminating or reducing the iswho series to let's say 2 out of 4 years. Heck, if the cyclowns want to play Iowa so bad, then let them always come to Kinnick. Anything that hurts isu, helps Iowa.

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

Three teams Iowa played are not practicing for bowl games presently. Any of those three teams could potentially one day end Iowa's opportunity to compete for a national title.

What's hilarious is the assumption that Iowa competes for a national title every year, when in fact they don't. And to that end, I don't see how beating any of those "three teams" stymied Iowa's ability to land in the Rose Bowl. Hell, most national analyst were shocked they got there over OSU.

All the "it's not a rivalry," posts on this board make me laugh. Seems to happen once a week or so. Funny how even during the most successful season in Iowa's history, these ISU post prove to be the most popular. It's kind of like that little girl who chases the boy around the playground, then claims she wants nothing to do with him.

LOL.

 

[Hans81]

STICKS - get over yourself, after the various B10 rivalries (Minny, Wisky, Nebraska, and Illinois), then I guess iswho is a "rivalry" in the sense that they are in the same state. No more so than if the Hawks played UNI.

 

[Nicretzlaff]

1. I wasn't even on this site prior to the season starting and I'm a HUGE Hawks fan living in Denver. I am an optimist by nature and while there were a few things to be down on, I was actually very excited about his season because we would get to see a lot of fresh faces (no more Weisman, Rudock,or KMM) just to name a couple - I wouldn't have predicted 12-0 but I sure saw 10-2 at best and 8-4 at worst. .

2. I never said the game was "meaningless" as in state rivalry games are just that. Nor did I say that no one cared about the game... IOWA and ISU grads and fans do, 100%. My point didn't say anything about that, I just said the game is FAR more meaningful for ISU than Iowa because of the difference in quality of the two programs, why should Iowa want to continue this series when 99% of he time they will be the ranked team or the team with more to lose, on the flip side, of ISU was constantly good or got ranked beside once every 15 years. Throughout the entire history of the ISU program they have been ranked in the preseason AP top 25 1 time, they have finished the season ranked in the AP top 25 a whopping 2 times (1975 and 2000 so 15 years ago for the most recent), and have spent a grand total of 40 weeks in the AP top 25 during the season. AGAIN THIS IS DURING THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THEIR PEOGRAM WHICH STARTED IN 1892!!!

My other argument for dropping them is that ISU is terrible and I don't see their future getting any brighter (see statistics above). ISU will NEVER be Iowa so let's challenge ourselves and schedule opponents that will provide a major boost in competition. And the only exposure that this game gets is in the state of Iowa, let's be real. No one outside of the state boarders could give a shit. We don't need the in state publicity we have that already, what we need is coverage from media outlets (I could care less what their opinion of Iowa is) but ists the publicity not areas we don't normally get it that we do need. Iowa needs to make a point to schedule games that get publicity outside of our state. We will generally get he top recruits anyways so what does all of this IOWA vs ISU publicity do for us??? Again, I could give a shit that Iowa isn't a national darling, what in are about is showing a different audience who we are and what we're about.

3. That's where the SOS comes in. Yes we didn't really need it this year but every year is different and let's say next year we have one loss and the team right in front or behind us has one loss also, wouldn't we want our SOS to be as strong as possible to help our resume? Switch ISU out with any number of teams and it helps us most undoubtedly, I'm not asking for Alabama but a legit P5 school isn't much to ask for.

4. I am in no way suggesting we play MAC or other smaller conferences unless we play THE BEST TEAM in that conference which is hard to predict from year to year. But no I would not want to go the MAC rout. When speaking to national exposure that wasn't for the talkin heads at ESPN or Fox Sports or anywhere else, it's to get more people outside of the Midwest exposed to the Iowa brand. Great coaches, stability, top notch facilities, ethical program, we have 32 players on NFL rosters putting us at 23rd behind your typical powerhouses, yet we get 1/20 of the top notch recruits they do, great conference, and our play style is changing. Why would've we want that touted when Iowa is playing a nationally televised game against some team (either home or away) that is out of our region or we would otherwise never play drawing a totally different fan base to watch the game? That's free advertising and all I meant by national exposure.

5. Your rant on "I get it, you have a theory, a theory that if only Iowa played Syracuse or Pitt or Arizona or Arizona State the national perception will change! Oh wait .... it didn't. Maybe if they were just replaced with Wazzou or Kentucky or Vanderbilt or Texas Tech! Quick! Who did any of those teams play in the noncon this year? We both know you can't name it, because you, as part of the "national exposure" don't care.
doesn't make a ton of sense to me because 1 game doesn't change anything but over time national exposure will start to change if Iowa can perform well. I can name the non conference schedules of these teams and if Iowa had one as good as the first team you mentioned we might have gotten love much earlier-- Syracuse played Rhode Island (FCS), wake forest, Central Michigan and LSU at home. Iowas non conference was at ISU, North Texas (one of the worst teams in all D-1), Pitt, and Illinois State (FCS). Arizonans was crap and ASU's was middle road but they played at Texas A&M. Recruits watch games they care about and getting broader exposed is the ultimate goal along with increasing your SOS and overall resume. I don't care what P5 schools we play (necessarily) but we need to schedule games that are going to help the team get better and boost our resume. Your assuming I don't know a lot of things but im a huge CFB fan and follow the season closely. No I can't rattle off a teams schedule or non conference schedule but that has nothing to do with my point. Teams with a poor non conference schedule get punished should they be in the playoff picture (see North Carolina) and we don't need exposure in Iowa so let's go elsewhere or being in other teams that will help get the brand out. Again what people think of Iowa doesn't bother me- living in Denver you have no clue how many people think Iowa is Idaho, or, have no clue where it is. So that's their problem. Recruits and people connected to the college football circuit know where Iowa is and generally what we're about but you can't oversell yourself. Shit Oregon is nationally known almost solely because of their uniforms... They could be terrible every year but people would still talk about them because of the uniforms.

6. I don't know what the poll is your referring to about dropping the game so I can't comment there but I'm sure it was a poll taken in Iowa which would probably say exactly what you did above. Whether people care about the game or not isn't the issue. The culture of college football changing and the way metrics are analyzed, the way schedules are analyzed, the way opponents are analyzed and how all that fits together when determining rankings, seeding, etc. Iowa needs to do everything that it reasonably can to ensure that it sits in a position that is favorable to them. One example of this is that Big Ten schools are no longer going to play FCS apartments which I think is great. Having said that I was State lost to North Dakota State just two years ago so that shows the kind of disparity in our two programs. If Iowa lost to an FCS school no matter who it is it's quite possible that the state of Iowa would literally implode and never recover.

In closing I think that you and I were looking at this from different perspectives yours being that the game matters and is important to fans and people were as my arguments and information we're strictly tied to finding a way for I want to better position themselves and better their resume in years to come. As I said above I am an optimist and would like to think that I will continue to be very competitive in the Big Ten and if that's the case we need to make sure that are out of conference schedule reflects the kind of quality competition that the playoff committee and other individuals are looking for.

 

[Blackleaf40]

I would miss this game as a true Hawkeye. We played ISU and won and we are in the Rose bowl. I can't fathom NOT waking up at 600 am in Sept getting pumped for this game and trading barbs with my brothers in red. A victory against the clones and a Jan bowl game is an epic season. That's how it's earned. Cancelling is turning tail from being tested IMHO. This game is tradition. It's the lifeblood of WHO we all are as fans of the game. Sheesh, give me a clone no longer talking smack Monday at the office than some distant SEC fan on a message board making excuses after a Hawkeye win.