Poll: Should Iowa cancel NDSU series immediately despite Barta/Taylor ties?

[GarryO37]

That is, in fact, a good and logical reason for them not doing so.

Why do you think teams don't?

Oh, I don't know, because they already have more than enough exposure?

The reason is simple. We aren't trying hard enough to schedule those teams. The schedule we have now is what KF and Barta want. Do you actually think that Barta has called Alabama? Or any of the schools I have listed?

We are scheduling these teams well in advance. UNI is scheduled for 2018. We have a game scheduled Miami OH and Northern Illinois in 2019 and 2020 respectively.

Don't sit there and tell me that we are trying to schedule better games, when everything they are doing tells us they aren't.

 

[GarryO37]

Even without the "Big Boy" in Sep. 26 slot you have would be an excellent, great, awesome schedule. Even if it were, say, Wake Forest or Kansas.

True. But you can't tell me that if Iowa went into the Sept 26th game 3-0, it wouldn't be a huge game and possibly nationally televised. That scenario is fairly likely to play out more than enough times to make it worth playing that type of schedule if the ship gets righted.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

Oh, I don't know, because they already have more than enough exposure?

The reason is simple. We aren't trying hard enough to schedule those teams. The schedule we have now is what KF and Barta want. Do you actually think that Barta has called Alabama? Or any of the schools I have listed?

We are scheduling these teams well in advance. UNI is scheduled for 2018. We have a game scheduled Miami OH and Northern Illinois in 2019 and 2020 respectively.

Don't sit there and tell me that we are trying to schedule better games, when everything they are doing tells us they aren't.

Going to 9 conf games next year and keeping ISU series it will be a while before Iowa plays another power 5 conf team like Pitt this year. Money talks and having 7 home games matters more than scheduling another big name out of conf team. Because those teams will want a road and home and with 9 conf game and ISU series Iowa is handcuffed and unable to do this. Only way would be sacrificing a home game and that isn't going to happen.

 

[Clifford C. Clavin]

Oh, so what you're saying is that you want only one out of conference big boy on the schedule every year? Then why did you mention our Iowa State problem?

FYI, Pitt isn't exactly a "big boy" either. It sounds as if you want Iowa to schedule easy teams because you are scared of a loss. It's almost like you want Iowa to waltz into a bowl game.

Listen, it's obvious that squeaking out wins against the UNI's and Ball State's of college football world isn't doing Iowa any favors. It actually hurts Iowa. It hasn't prepared them for the BIG schedule. So what's the benefit? Wins?

What's wrong with an OOC schedule looking like this?

Sep. 5 - Colorado/Vanderbilt/Washington St/Virginia
Sep. 12 - at Iowa State
Sep. 19 - Pittsburgh/Kentucky/North Carolina/Cal
Sep. 26 - at Texas/Georgia/Florida/Clemson

If Iowa's out of conference looked like this, it would get noticed by everyone and give Iowa all kinds of exposure.

These types of schedules aren't murderer's row, and would far better prepare Iowa for the BIG schedule. It would also generate more excitement. If you come out of that 2-2 or 3-1, it's respectable and doesn't kill you. 1-3 or 0-4? Then it's going to be a long season, and you probably don't deserve to go to a bowl, but you still could make it.

The financial end of your model doesn't add up. In the current climate, they need 7 home football games. That is a huge reason you see non-power 5 teams on schedules; those other teams don't require return home games.

When the Big Ten goes to 9 games, there will be no other power 5 conference teams if Iowa continues to play ISU for that reason.

 

[GarryO37]

The financial end of your model doesn't add up. In the current climate, they need 7 home football games. That is a huge reason you see non-power 5 teams on schedules; those other teams don't require return home games.

When the Big Ten goes to 9 games, there will be no other power 5 conference teams if Iowa continues to play ISU for that reason.

The financial end adds up just fine. Even in the current climate, no one needs 7 home games, especially the BIG teams. So this is a bogus response.

Power 5 conference teams are making money hand over fist, even teams like ISU. Power 5 conference teams are paying FCS teams up to 1 million dollars just to play them. Iowa paid UNI 550K last year to play UNI, and Texas paid 875K to play North Texas last year. How much does Iowa pay North Texas this year? $900,000 dollars.

Even if you lose the revenue generated by that home game, you also get rid of the operating expenses that come with having that home game. Teams can afford 6 home games.

 

[Clifford C. Clavin]

The financial end adds up just fine. Even in the current climate, no one needs 7 home games, especially the BIG teams. So this is a bogus response.

Power 5 conference teams are making money hand over fist, even teams like ISU. Power 5 conference teams are paying FCS teams up to 1 million dollars just to play them. Iowa paid UNI 550K last year to play UNI, and Texas paid 875K to play North Texas last year. How much does Iowa pay North Texas this year? $900,000 dollars.

Even if you lose the revenue generated by that home game, you also get rid of the operating expenses that come with having that home game. Teams can afford 6 home games.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I know they would still be losing out on at least a couple million net, even after the operating costs and payout to the other team. I'm guessing that isn't going to go over with the ever-rising costs of running the athletic department.

 

[theIowaHawk]

The reason is simple. We aren't trying hard enough to schedule those teams. .

So if we "tried harder" we would schedule Alabama? Huh?

 

[theIowaHawk]

The financial end adds up just fine. Even in the current climate, no one needs 7 home games, especially the BIG teams. So this is a bogus response.

Power 5 conference teams are making money hand over fist, even teams like ISU. Power 5 conference teams are paying FCS teams up to 1 million dollars just to play them. Iowa paid UNI 550K last year to play UNI, and Texas paid 875K to play North Texas last year. How much does Iowa pay North Texas this year? $900,000 dollars.

Even if you lose the revenue generated by that home game, you also get rid of the operating expenses that come with having that home game. Teams can afford 6 home games.

You bring up ISU, but ignore that they just requested a much higher budget from the Regents. They aren't awash in money, even with the $27M (?) TV payout. Obviously as has been pointed out to you, it takes a few Million $$ hit. Is that a bad thing? Not always, but consistently it probably would be.

We all want a better, more exciting schedule, but ignoring money would be shortsighted. Plus, I, personally, want 7 home games. This is why I said that your model even without the Sep 26th one would be GREAT. We don't need to leap, right now we just need babysteps. For example, next year simply switching NDState for, say, UConn immediately improves the schedule. Make it Duke and even better. Babysteps. Then switching Miami (OH) with, say, Kansas or Kentucky, improves it even more.

Baby steps.

 

[Run&Blade]

The Mac is not much better than top fcs teams.

Iowa will drop ndsu and schedule somebody worse.

 

[GarryO37]

So if we "tried harder" we would schedule Alabama? Huh?

Did I say we should even schedule Alabama?

You were implying that even if we asked, they would say no. I seriously doubt that. A top team like Bama would jump at the chance to pound Iowa for two years.

A power 5, perennial bowl team that would strengthen their schedule? All Barta would have to do is ask.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

Did I say we should even schedule Alabama?

You were implying that even if we asked, they would say no. I seriously doubt that. A top team like Bama would jump at the chance to pound Iowa for two years.

A power 5, perennial bowl team that would strengthen their schedule? All Barta would have to do is ask.

Never going to happen. A power 5 team would want a home and road game. With ISU and 9 conf games Barta will never sacrifice the 7th game to schedule one of these teams. Think Iowa fans wanting to play better non conf team better not get their hopes up and understand the circumstances.

 

[CaliHawkFan]

Did I say we should even schedule Alabama?

You were implying that even if we asked, they would say no. I seriously doubt that. A top team like Bama would jump at the chance to pound Iowa for two years.

A power 5, perennial bowl team that would strengthen their schedule? All Barta would have to do is ask.

I agree with this.... a great model of scheduling is what Stanford has done... they recruit heavily in Chicago/Midwest and Florida... what did they do? Scheduled UCF and Northwestern plus have an ongoing series with Notre Dame.

2015 Non-Conf: NW/UCF/ND
Future games between 2016-2020 include San Diego St., Vandy, Rice, BYU, TCU

Then you have Iowa who has ventured only as far as its AD's connections (NDSU- Charlie Taylor, Wyoming- former AD there, North Texas- McCarney

Lets at least try Gary...

 

[GarryO37]

Never going to happen. A power 5 team would want a home and road game. With ISU and 9 conf games Barta will never sacrifice the 7th game to schedule one of these teams. Think Iowa fans wanting to play better non conf team better not get their hopes up and understand the circumstances.

We understand the circumstances very well. The circumstances are that Iowa can very much afford to do it, but they wont. Even with going to nine conference games, you could set up the schedule nicely to have 7 home games every other year and 6 the other years. It wouldn't even be that difficult.

The problem is that some fans don't understand the possible dividends paid to the program by the exposure Iowa would get. Nobody in Texas and Illinois gives a damn about North Texas or Northern Illinois. They don't prepare us for the BIG. Future recruits won't even watch those games. All these games are is likely wins that will help get us in to a bowl game. Win these two games and we only need 4 more to get become bowl eligible.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

We understand the circumstances very well. The circumstances are that Iowa can very much afford to do it, but they wont. Even with going to nine conference games, you could set up the schedule nicely to have 7 home games every other year and 6 the other years. It wouldn't even be that difficult.

The problem is that some fans don't understand the possible dividends paid to the program by the exposure Iowa would get. Nobody in Texas and Illinois gives a damn about North Texas or Northern Illinois. They don't prepare us for the BIG. Future recruits won't even watch those games. All these games are is likely wins that will help get us in to a bowl game. Win these two games and we only need 4 more to get become bowl eligible.

What power 5 conf schools have are willing to sacrifice 7 home games. I can't think of many that have and are willing to do so. Plus even if they did decide to do this you need to find a team willing to play Iowa. We know SEC has zero interest. Just saying it sounds good but lot of hurdles to jump. First and biggest one, Barta.

 

[sober_teacher]

Did I say we should even schedule Alabama?

You were implying that even if we asked, they would say no. I seriously doubt that. A top team like Bama would jump at the chance to pound Iowa for two years.

A power 5, perennial bowl team that would strengthen their schedule? All Barta would have to do is ask.

I'm not even sure how to respond to that. If all it takes is a team willing to pound an Iowa, or other mid-tier Power 5 conference, why don't they line up to schedule the Illinois', Purdues of the world as well? Outside of the creampuff FCS school that SEC teams all like to schedule before their rivalry week games, Bama doesn't do that. they are scheduling upper-tier power 5 conference schools so they can beef up their playoff resume. In no universe would it make any sense for Alabama to schedule Iowa. Heck, outside of the Wisconsin-LSU series this year and last, it is rare for an SEC school to schedule ANY big10 team.

i hate to break it to you, but its not as simple as just picking up the phone and asking.

 

[GarryO37]

What power 5 conf schools have are willing to sacrifice 7 home games. I can't think of many that have and are willing to do so. Plus even if they did decide to do this you need to find a team willing to play Iowa. We know SEC has zero interest. Just saying it sounds good but lot of hurdles to jump. First and biggest one, Barta.

I'm not even sure how to respond to that. If all it takes is a team willing to pound an Iowa, or other mid-tier Power 5 conference, why don't they line up to schedule the Illinois', Purdues of the world as well? Outside of the creampuff FCS school that SEC teams all like to schedule before their rivalry week games, Bama doesn't do that. they are scheduling upper-tier power 5 conference schools so they can beef up their playoff resume. In no universe would it make any sense for Alabama to schedule Iowa. Heck, outside of the Wisconsin-LSU series this year and last, it is rare for an SEC school to schedule ANY big10 team.

i hate to break it to you, but its not as simple as just picking up the phone and asking.

Do you guys have a actual proof that SEC schools aren't willing to schedule BIG schools? I didn't think so.

Just because they haven't historically played each other out of conference, doesn't mean they won't. Recent history is proving that they are willing to play ball. You guys act like BIG teams have been trying to schedule SEC teams and the SEC won't schedule them.

In fact, you could just as easily come to the conclusion that BIG teams refuse to schedule SEC teams. That's what SEC fans believe.

The only thing that is true is that this idea that the BIG won't schedule SEC teams and the SEC won't schedule BIG teams was fabricated on message boards just like this one.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Do you guys have a actual proof that SEC schools aren't willing to schedule BIG schools? I didn't think so.

Just because they haven't historically played each other out of conference, doesn't mean they won't. Recent history is proving that they are willing to play ball. You guys act like BIG teams have been trying to schedule SEC teams and the SEC won't schedule them.

In fact, you could just as easily come to the conclusion that BIG teams refuse to schedule SEC teams. That's what SEC fans believe.

The only thing that is true is that this idea that the BIG won't schedule SEC teams and the SEC won't schedule BIG teams was fabricated on message boards just like this one.

A lot of words and I'm not sure of your point. Care to clarify?

 

[EpenesaEpenesa]

I'm not even sure how to respond to that. If all it takes is a team willing to pound an Iowa, or other mid-tier Power 5 conference, why don't they line up to schedule the Illinois', Purdues of the world as well? Outside of the creampuff FCS school that SEC teams all like to schedule before their rivalry week games, Bama doesn't do that. they are scheduling upper-tier power 5 conference schools so they can beef up their playoff resume. In no universe would it make any sense for Alabama to schedule Iowa. Heck, outside of the Wisconsin-LSU series this year and last, it is rare for an SEC school to schedule ANY big10 team.

i hate to break it to you, but its not as simple as just picking up the phone and asking.

Go back to Arrowhead and play KState to kick off the year. Play Mizzou at Arrowhead, etc........it doesnt have to be Alabama.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Go back to Arrowhead and play KState to kick off the year. Play Mizzou at Arrowhead, etc........it doesnt have to be Alabama.

You want to have a neutral-site game against a neighboring State school?

 

[EpenesaEpenesa]

You want to have a neutral-site game against a neighboring State school?

I realize all you like to do on here is pick fights and argue with people, I get that. Realizing Iowa has already done this twice with NIU, last time I checked Illinois was a border state, so I dont think Iowa would mind doing it again in Arrowhead(which they have already done once), against KState, Mizzou, Ok State, etc................

 

[theIowaHawk]

If you see it as picking fights fine, and I probably could have worded it differently. Just seems like if you are going to go Neutral Site you wouldn't pick out a bordering school. I presume the Northern Illinois was more of a function of overall scheduling, being a Home and Neutral agreement. And maybe that is what it would take, but I doubt Mizzu/KState would do a Kinnick + Arrowhead combo.

But, I've talked about baby steps, and maybe that is the baby step we need. I would just think that starting with Neutral we would seek somewhere that we have more recruiting need, say Florida/Miami/UCF/SouthFlorida/FSU, or Texas/A&M/Tech/TCU/Houston/Baylor/SMU.

 

[GarryO37]

If you see it as picking fights fine, and I probably could have worded it differently. Just seems like if you are going to go Neutral Site you wouldn't pick out a bordering school. I presume the Northern Illinois was more of a function of overall scheduling, being a Home and Neutral agreement. And maybe that is what it would take, but I doubt Mizzu/KState would do a Kinnick + Arrowhead combo.

But, I've talked about baby steps, and maybe that is the baby step we need. I would just think that starting with Neutral we would seek somewhere that we have more recruiting need, say Florida/Miami/UCF/SouthFlorida/FSU, or Texas/A&M/Tech/TCU/Houston/Baylor/SMU.

Look, we get it. You think the program is putting it's best foot forward when scheduling out of conference games. That is where we will have to agree to disagree. But you need to put the kool-aid down and go into a detox.

You called Iowa's out of conference a "meh" and on par with the rest of the BIG. That just isn't true.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Jesus H. Willery Christ. At no point is that what I said.

I posted every teams OOC schedule in the Michigan OOC thread, Iowas is on par.

Iowa has 1 FCS, 2 P5, and a midmajor.

5 teams have an FCS. 3 of those have only one P5.
Penn St plays all midmajors
Ohio State plays 3 midmajors and VTech
3 teams play one excellent Top 5 team, but then 3 midmajors (Wiscy, Mich St, Minny)
Indiana plays the worst SEC team and 3 midmajors

I'm not saying Iowa's is the best, it is just not near as bad as you, and others, keep claiming it is. If just the one FCS got switched to a midmajor, it would immediately be better than 7-8 of the schedules. That is the babystep I keep asking for, rid the FCS and make it any P5 (or even high midmajor).

Obviously we still have the FCS, but even with that it is comparable to 8-10 teams....putting it right on par.

 

[doughudd]

Oh, so what you're saying is that you want only one out of conference big boy on the schedule every year? Then why did you mention our Iowa State problem?

FYI, Pitt isn't exactly a "big boy" either. It sounds as if you want Iowa to schedule easy teams because you are scared of a loss. It's almost like you want Iowa to waltz into a bowl game.

Listen, it's obvious that squeaking out wins against the UNI's and Ball State's of college football world isn't doing Iowa any favors. It actually hurts Iowa. It hasn't prepared them for the BIG schedule. So what's the benefit? Wins?

What's wrong with an OOC schedule looking like this?

Sep. 5 - Colorado/Vanderbilt/Washington St/Virginia
Sep. 12 - at Iowa State
Sep. 19 - Pittsburgh/Kentucky/North Carolina/Cal
Sep. 26 - at Texas/Georgia/Florida/Clemson

If Iowa's out of conference looked like this, it would get noticed by everyone and give Iowa all kinds of exposure.

These types of schedules aren't murderer's row, and would far better prepare Iowa for the BIG schedule. It would also generate more excitement. If you come out of that 2-2 or 3-1, it's respectable and doesn't kill you. 1-3 or 0-4? Then it's going to be a long season, and you probably don't deserve to go to a bowl, but you still could make it.

Don't put words in my mouth. You make that up. THis is what I'm saying. Let's see you get three home games out of that schedule for two years with each team agreeing to a home and home schedule.



Sep. 5 - Colorado/Vanderbilt/Washington St/Virginia
Sep. 12 - at Iowa State
Sep. 19 - Pittsburgh/Kentucky/North Carolina/Cal
Sep. 26 - at Texas/Georgia/Florida/Clemson

 

[doughudd]

The financial end adds up just fine. Even in the current climate, no one needs 7 home games, especially the BIG teams. So this is a bogus response.

Power 5 conference teams are making money hand over fist, even teams like ISU. Power 5 conference teams are paying FCS teams up to 1 million dollars just to play them. Iowa paid UNI 550K last year to play UNI, and Texas paid 875K to play North Texas last year. How much does Iowa pay North Texas this year? $900,000 dollars.

Even if you lose the revenue generated by that home game, you also get rid of the operating expenses that come with having that home game. Teams can afford 6 home games.

Congrats Jr. AD. you just lost $5M from the budget for the lost home game. Probably another half million to the locals that would have been spent. And the fan base wants you fired for losing a home game.

But because you say it it must be true.

 

[GarryO37]

Congrats Jr. AD. you just lost $5M from the budget for the lost home game. Probably another half million to the locals that would have been spent. And the fan base wants you fired for losing a home game.

But because you say it it must be true.

You sure about that 5 million? Your math is pretty bad.

 

[GarryO37]

Don't put words in my mouth. You make that up. THis is what I'm saying. Let's see you get three home games out of that schedule for two years with each team agreeing to a home and home schedule.



Sep. 5 - Colorado/Vanderbilt/Washington St/Virginia
Sep. 12 - at Iowa State
Sep. 19 - Pittsburgh/Kentucky/North Carolina/Cal
Sep. 26 - at Texas/Georgia/Florida/Clemson

Your pretty bad at reading, huh? My entire argument was that Iowa doesn't need 7 home games. Nice try!

 

[theIowaHawk]

You sure about that 5 million? Your math is pretty bad.

A full Kinnick brings in $5M on average, at least that is what I remember from the newspapers ~6 years ago. Another million to the city. Even at 85% capacity it is multiple Millions.

Care to show your math?

 

[iahawkeyes17]

A full Kinnick brings in $5M on average, at least that is what I remember from the newspapers ~6 years ago. Another million to the city. Even at 85% capacity it is multiple Millions.

Care to show your math?

Think you hit the nail on the head. Could Iowa play 6 and be fine financially for athletic department, sure. However Barta and the city knows how much revenue each home game brings to the Iowa city community. Sure there is pressure from powerful and influential members of Iowa city area to make sure they don't lose a football weekend and all the cash that comes from it.

 

[GarryO37]

A full Kinnick brings in $5M on average, at least that is what I remember from the newspapers ~6 years ago. Another million to the city. Even at 85% capacity it is multiple Millions.

Care to show your math?

No. It doesn't average that. You're full of it.

I'm not going to go in to detail, but...

Just last year an Iowa football game generated, on average, generated roughly $3,000,000 million in revenue (don't confuse revenue with profit). After taking out coaching salaries, and travel expenses for away games from their overall expenses last year, you are left with operating expenses. It probably costs in the neighborhood 1-1.25 million per game in operating expenses.

If you wanted to, you could even add in $570,000 in coaching salaries per game. But that wouldn't be fair to your argument because the coaches would get paid that regardless of whether or not it was a home game.

So your looking at Iowa losing out on 2 mill or less by not having an extra home game. This doesn't even take in to account that games against North Texas and Illinois State don't generate as much revenue as our higher profiled games.

All the university would care about is the athletic department remaining self sufficient.

 

[GarryO37]

Think you hit the nail on the head. Could Iowa play 6 and be fine financially for athletic department, sure. However Barta and the city knows how much revenue each home game brings to the Iowa city community. Sure there is pressure from powerful and influential members of Iowa city area to make sure they don't lose a football weekend and all the cash that comes from it.

The next excuse on why Iowa doesn't schedule better out of conference opponents! Pressure from the city!

Nice job planting the seed.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

The next excuse on why Iowa doesn't schedule better out of conference opponents! Pressure from the city!

Nice job planting the seed.

You can cry about Iowa not playing better non conf but it's a business. If you don't think the politics and community aspect don't play any part then just keep your head in the sand. It makes more sense to have a 7th game plus ISU and 9 game schedule eliminates another top tier team. Plus would the university rather make more $ and give the fans an extra home game or play 6 road games. What would extra road game accomplish? Exposure? Unless it plays a top tier team maybe but it's easy to whine about playing big 12, ACC or PAC 12 teams. But doesn't meaning people are knocking down iowas door to play them because what do they get out of it. Plus you consider these games are made years in advance so no telling how good Iowa or other team will be.

More pros than cons to playing 7 over 6 home games. If that's not the case then name 5 power schools let alone 2 that aren't playing a 7th home game? Why cause more benefits to having an extra home game.

 

[GarryO37]

You can cry about Iowa not playing better non conf but it's a business. If you don't think the politics and community aspect don't play any part then just keep your head in the sand. It makes more sense to have a 7th game plus ISU and 9 game schedule eliminates another top tier team. Plus would the university rather make more $ and give the fans an extra home game or play 6 road games. What would extra road game accomplish? Exposure? Unless it plays a top tier team maybe but it's easy to whine about playing big 12, ACC or PAC 12 teams. But doesn't meaning people are knocking down iowas door to play them because what do they get out of it. Plus you consider these games are made years in advance so no telling how good Iowa or other team will be.

More pros than cons to playing 7 over 6 home games. If that's not the case then name 5 power schools let alone 2 that aren't playing a 7th home game? Why cause more benefits to having an extra home game.

Yep, you're right, playing an away game people would actually watch in your recruiting territory is a bad thing! Keep telling yourselves that.

 

[clickhere 01]

No. It doesn't average that. You're full of it.

I'm not going to go in to detail, but...

Just last year an Iowa football game generated, on average, generated roughly $3,000,000 million in revenue (don't confuse revenue with profit). After taking out coaching salaries, and travel expenses for away games from their overall expenses last year, you are left with operating expenses. It probably costs in the neighborhood 1-1.25 million per game in operating expenses.

If you wanted to, you could even add in $570,000 in coaching salaries per game. But that wouldn't be fair to your argument because the coaches would get paid that regardless of whether or not it was a home game.

So your looking at Iowa losing out on 2 mill or less by not having an extra home game. This doesn't even take in to account that games against North Texas and Illinois State don't generate as much revenue as our higher profiled games.

All the university would care about is the athletic department remaining self sufficient.

What's interesting about the Big 10 not scheduling FCS schools anymore is they cost P5 school about half of what a MAC level team does. By not playing the FCS they will create even more demand for those G5 teams. If other leagues quit playing FCS also, those guarantee costs will skyrocket.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

Yep, you're right, playing an away game people would actually watch in your recruiting territory is a bad thing! Keep telling yourselves that.

You think one game in a potential recruiting area is more of a reason than to play an extra home game. Good thing you aren't iowas AD. You think if Iowa plays Georgia or Texas it will equal more recruits from those states? Let alone finding a team from area Iowa wants to recruits from that isn't in the big 10 landscape already. Or the fact with all the TV contracts games are on all over the country. With expansion of big 10 Iowa gets a game in Maryland and east coast with Rutgers and penn st.

Again if that's the case why aren't other power 5 schools playing 6 home games so the can get more recruits watching them. That one benefit doesn't out weigh all the positives to having 7th home game. Cause if we go by your logic of playing games in other areas to have recruits watch no one would want to do a road and home with Iowa (which Barta and Iowa would want) because they wouldn't see any benefits from recruits In Iowa watching them.

 

[ichawk24]

You are just shrugging off $2M profit as if it is nothing. That is a lot of money that basically covers an entire team or two.

Losing that $2M means you need to cut $2M elsewhere in the budget.

 

[theIowaHawk]

No. It doesn't average that. You're full of it.

I'm not going to go in to detail, but...

Just last year an Iowa football game generated, on average, generated roughly $3,000,000 million in revenue (don't confuse revenue with profit). After taking out coaching salaries, and travel expenses for away games from their overall expenses last year, you are left with operating expenses. It probably costs in the neighborhood 1-1.25 million per game in operating expenses.

If you wanted to, you could even add in $570,000 in coaching salaries per game. But that wouldn't be fair to your argument because the coaches would get paid that regardless of whether or not it was a home game.

So your looking at Iowa losing out on 2 mill or less by not having an extra home game. This doesn't even take in to account that games against North Texas and Illinois State don't generate as much revenue as our higher profiled games.

All the university would care about is the athletic department remaining self sufficient.

Feel free to use whatever math you want, but some of what you chose is confusing. Where do you get the $3M? Tickets alone bring in $4M even without a sellout. Then you talk about things that would be paid out regardless. You think it costs $1M to host a game, fine, but adding concessions to that keeps it well above what you claim.

Then, it makes the area/biz what, another Mil per game?

 

[littleton tiger]

I understand not wanting to play 1-AA schools but the money those schools get from playing power 5 teams is, in many cases, what keeps their programs going. I wish LSU wasn't playing Mc Neese this season but I'm glad mc neese is getting a big check for their program. Perhaps down the road a 4 game home and home between Iowa and LSU can be arranged with 1game in each home stadium, 1 in the Superdome and one in Arrowhead Stadium.

 

[theIowaHawk]

I understand not wanting to play 1-AA schools but the money those schools get from playing power 5 teams is, in many cases, what keeps their programs going. I wish LSU wasn't playing Mc Neese this season but I'm glad mc neese is getting a big check for their program. Perhaps down the road a 4 game home and home between Iowa and LSU can be arranged with 1game in each home stadium, 1 in the Superdome and one in Arrowhead Stadium.

See, now that is a good plan.

 

[HuskerPower10]

Given Delaney's comments, should Iowa kill this series now and play a lower tier FBS school in 2016 (assuming this is still possible)? We're aware of the ties to NDSU with Barta and Gene Taylor, but should it matter? Should we honor the contract or bail on it now?

best cancel. NDSU will kick your ass.