NDSU this week and UNI in 2018. Then there's no more FCS opponents, right? I want a tough schedule. Start out with a MAC team and then 2 Power 5 teams before the B1G.
Only 2 more FCS teams on the schedule, right?
- Thread starter Don'tReadThis
- Start date
I suspect you are going to be disappointed. I suspect it will be two MAC caliber teams and ISU for the rest of time. The wisdom seems to be that even with a extra $20 million in TV money, we can't afford to give up a home game to do a series with a school on par with ourselves. When you would think TV money would be pushing us to make better match ups that would sell advertising.
Ha! Before I opened this thread I thought you were talking about this year only and figured you meant NDSU and Northwestern.
No more scheduling them. But, ones already on the books can stay
Who else besides Iowa has them after next year. That just means isu can play and maybe beat UNI more often.
Barta had some interesting comments this past weekend about not scheduling Iowa State every year and getting in the mix on the big dogs..
If Iowa sells out or gets close to a sell out, financially, it makes sense, to schedule 2 tomato cans at Kinnick, especially with the 9 conference game schedule.
2017, crossovers are: at Michigan State, Ohio State, and Penn State.
2 non-conference games at home (Wyoming and North Texas) with road game at Ames.
Plus, we'll be breaking in a new QB.
2018, crossovers are: Maryland, at Penn State, at Indiana
3 non-conference games at home (Northern Illinois, Iowa State and Northern Iowa).
2019, crossovers are: at Michigan, Penn State and Rutgers
Miami (OH) at Kinnick and road game at Ames and an OPEN date.
2017, crossovers are: at Michigan State, Ohio State, and Penn State.
2 non-conference games at home (Wyoming and North Texas) with road game at Ames.
Plus, we'll be breaking in a new QB.
2018, crossovers are: Maryland, at Penn State, at Indiana
3 non-conference games at home (Northern Illinois, Iowa State and Northern Iowa).
2019, crossovers are: at Michigan, Penn State and Rutgers
Miami (OH) at Kinnick and road game at Ames and an OPEN date.
? What has you confused? 3 non conference games, 2 will be low level home games of MAC type quality and IA St. is my prognostication for what IA plans to do.
Just wondering if ISU is MAC caliber, higher, or lower.
Iowa did schedule a home and home with Arizona State (and, I think, Arizona) in the early 2000s, but that might have been before Barta arrived.
Now the search begins for the worst FBS teams in the land to schedule! I kid, I kid.
Yeah, but Northwestern is already in our conference ... (I do not kid, I do not kid ;-) )
I don't think everyone understands that if the key is to have 7 home games, Iowa cannot play anyone of any substance because those teams will require a HOME & HOME. Iowa cannot play an away game outside of Iowa State every other year and still hit 7 home games each year (because of the 9 game conference schedule). I had to explain this over and over to a couple of Iowa State and UNI fans last week. So annoying.
Iowa can do it if they get Iowa State at home. While I would love to see a matchup with, say, Clemson or somebody it is risky for Iowa to do that given the cycle of boom or bust with them. I think a MAC team, Iowa State, and a Pitt type team is more realistic. A team that could be ranked, will be a quality opponent, but Iowa should still beat 7 out of 10 times they play.
That or schedule a home and home with a team out west so Iowa can sacrifice one year to go get slaughtered west of the Rockies. Hell, maybe Iowa needs to keep scheduling somebody out there until they can figure out how to fricken win a game out that way.
That or schedule a home and home with a team out west so Iowa can sacrifice one year to go get slaughtered west of the Rockies. Hell, maybe Iowa needs to keep scheduling somebody out there until they can figure out how to fricken win a game out that way.
A lot if folks seem really bad at this math. My question is, with a $20 million bump in revenue, why do we need to be locked into 7 home games. That TV money should be freeing up some ability to produce a better TV product. Nobody really wants to watch Iowa play north Texas of Northern Illinois.
NDSU/UNI are head and shoulders better than those MAC teams. your commission is an idiot
Barta made a reference at not playing ISU every year and said these big time matchups are very enticing. Maybe tipping his cap at what he wants to do down the road!
So because we make an extra $20 million we should immediately get rid of 25% of it? Hahaha you do realize this is a business right? They don't care if nobody wants to watch it, they still generate the same revenue... I seriously don't understand how this doesn't make sense to so many. Its all about:
***MONEY***
In the current business model for the B10 people don't have to actually watch the games to generate revenue. Since cable companies sell bundled channels each person in the demographic pays a small amount if they get the channel.
I don't think that's a complete analysis. Its my understanding they aren't a real business, that they have to spend what they take in. They can't actually run a profit and use the money to fund other university operations. The university leaves a lot of sports money imprudently spent as is, and it will get more so with nearly doubling the TV money we get. So at some point we will be faced with either playing Northern Illinois and spending that money on a new tennis court that no one will ever see or skipping the cupcake and playing a game that the fans and TV will like to watch. At some point one would think the real business in the equation, the TV stations, would insist on better teams to justify what they pay. I'm also not conceding the point that a series with say a Missouri or like team couldn't be parlayed into near equal revenue with that a MAC team gives us.
Barta may not have to do the dirty work. Iowa State is well on its way to being an FCS team after Texklahoma leave.
Again I think this is only a partial analysis, but I do understand your short term point. What those cable sports stations are paying the BIG is predicated on what our games will draw. If our ( and other BIG teams) non-conference schedule is a dog, that is not maximizing what the conference can demand from those contracts. If skipping the MAC for a P5 match-up nets us more on the contract, we would be wise to call that a double win and make the fans and TV happy while raising the profile of the program as I see it. We aren't Iowa State. We don't have to win 3 cupcakes in the non-conference to go to a bowl. I think some of the old analysis about needing the ~$5 million a MAC home game generates may be outmoded given our new position in the market place. That said, I don't claim to be an expert with cold facts to back up my opinion.
Because it is still smart financially to do 7 home games. If you look at the Power 5 schools it is rare to find many who only do the 6 home games and sure won't see the elite/top 25 programs doing less than 7 games. Heck even Michigan has 8 home games this year. As stated many times ISU is the the ugly ketchup and mustard elephant in the room. Besides Iowa PSU is only other Big 10 school with a rival who is a power 5 team not in the big 10. If Pitt and PSU continue their rivalry you won't see PSU play any other power 5 school besides them so they get their 7 home games. Pitt on the other hand has the luxury to play another power 5 since ACC along with SEC still at 8 conf games.
I as many other fans want to play another power 5 team in non conf but I also understand why it isn't done as long as ISU game is on the books.
Exactly.
This is a business and the product is entertainment.
Playing isu fails on the business front, as a guaranteed home game with even a lower level mac team EVERY year is superior to having to play in ames every other year.
To ensure 7 home games yearly, they pay for mac type opponents to come to Kinnick.
To improve the product schedule a series with upper division power 5 teams, possibly alternating with a neutral site match up with a marquee opponent.
What needs to give is the isu game which does not satisfy either the goal of improving the product or improving the revenue.
We all know this, this has been the logic for years. This was the logic before we got a $20 million bump to produce entertaining TV. We might be wise to a produce better TV and get TV to pay us for it. Its not a given that producing better TV is a financial loser. My guess is there is money on the table for an Iowa v Missouri game that isn't there for an Iowa v Northern Illinois game. There are reasons to revisit this affordability argument.
MAC teams fail on this front too. If you truly think this is a business and the product is entertainment, you need to support my position of producing more entertaining games even if their are less home games.
Do you have the inside numbers?
The ISU game was a sellout, with single game tickets at $80 a piece. The Miami(OH) game managed to get to 68k thanks to $55 tickets, and $25 youth tickets. The ISU game also helps drive season ticket sales, while the MAC games surely do not.
The ISU game is a big financial success.
The isu game is in Kinnick every OTHER year.
That is the point.
If Iowa played isu EVERY YEAR in Kinnick, and paid them like a mac team to come there, then great! Keep the series forever.
Playing a mac type team every season in Kinnick is better than going to ames every other year(to play a mac level team there).
Ticket face value isn't double the cost for the isu game in Kinnick, concessions don't sell twice as much stuff, the Iowa City area doesn't get twice as much revenue in sales for the weekend they play in Kinnick to make up for the loss of all those things when they play in ames the next year.
That is the point.
If Iowa played isu EVERY YEAR in Kinnick, and paid them like a mac team to come there, then great! Keep the series forever.
Playing a mac type team every season in Kinnick is better than going to ames every other year(to play a mac level team there).
Ticket face value isn't double the cost for the isu game in Kinnick, concessions don't sell twice as much stuff, the Iowa City area doesn't get twice as much revenue in sales for the weekend they play in Kinnick to make up for the loss of all those things when they play in ames the next year.
This TV money, as it is today, is not going to last. It does come almost solely from pennies out of what cable subscribers pay. But the number of cable subs is going down and I can see the landscape being different when these contracts expire. So the money is coming in today, but we're talking about schedules more than 5 years from now. They can't do anything about their schedules for the next 5 years or so. The only exceptions would be something along the lines of what Wisconsin has done the last couple years - single game, neutral site games. I imagine the network paid a premium for those as well.
I can envision a future where the money comes from apps or other sources beyond cable. Its hard for me to imagine a future where the money actually dries up.
Ah, so you are admitting you have no real idea what the numbers are.
Iowa also has to pay Miami $1M to show up each year. $2M payout really changes the numbers.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
* * * OFFICIAL * * * ONE WEEK UNTIL 2024 HAWKEYE FOOTBALL OPENER
- Latest: WaterlooChazz
-
