2024 Conference Game!

ssckelley

Well-Known Member
I think Hawk fans will travel well to California. Hopefully they alternate UCLA and USC every year.

I'm going to use this opportunity to advocate shit canning non conference games. I don't need to see the Hawkeyes play the Clowns, UNI, or any other mid major in the non conference.
 

dahlhawk

Well-Known Member
I think Hawk fans will travel well to California. Hopefully they alternate UCLA and USC every year.

I'm going to use this opportunity to advocate shit canning non conference games. I don't need to see the Hawkeyes play the Clowns, UNI, or any other mid major in the non conference.
How many name teams will play a home and home with Iowa and want to play in Kinnick? My guess very few.
 

Fryowa

Administrator
I think Hawk fans will travel well to California. Hopefully they alternate UCLA and USC every year.

I'm going to use this opportunity to advocate shit canning non conference games. I don't need to see the Hawkeyes play the Clowns, UNI, or any other mid major in the non conference.
That should never happen. Get rid of ISU, fine, but you can’t get rid of non-cons. You’d be putting yourself at an unbelievable disadvantage to everyone else.
 

ssckelley

Well-Known Member
That should never happen. Get rid of ISU, fine, but you can’t get rid of non-cons. You’d be putting yourself at an unbelievable disadvantage to everyone else.
Who is everyone else? It’s boiling down to the Big Ten and $EC.
 

guffus

Well-Known Member
At 16 teams, the Big Ten can still function well with 9 conference games, but if they add anybody else beyond 16 teams, I think they will have to go to 10 conference games.

At that point, if Iowa still wants The Iowa-ISU game, they will need to switch to 6 home games only at least half it's seasons.

One potential solution to get the 7th home back is to add a 13th game that will be considered an exhibition game. It would not count in the regular season stats. This could be scheduled against the local FCS team like UNI. It could be played in late August or maybe even in the spring.
 
Last edited:

Fryowa

Administrator
Not many will want too but if they move to all conference games then they have no choice
I understand the thought behind what you’re suggesting, but it’ll never happen. Schools like having those easy games up front too much, and there are too many benefits.

Look how much Iowa makes during a Kent State or Northern Illinois game, even after paying them to appear. It’s almost always a guaranteed win and a chance to work out any playbook/personnel issues. Schools aren’t going to go away from that. You think Alabama wants to give up its mid-season game against Upper Gainesville County Welding School it has every year?

As a fan I like them too. They’re fun and it makes it so we have 7 home games every year.
 

MelroseHawkins

Well-Known Member
I think Hawk fans will travel well to California. Hopefully they alternate UCLA and USC every year.

I'm going to use this opportunity to advocate shit canning non conference games. I don't need to see the Hawkeyes play the Clowns, UNI, or any other mid major in the non conference.

Agree.................and ND. I would luv to see the BIG shit can games with ND. Screw them making $$$ off our conference teams.
 

ssckelley

Well-Known Member
I understand the thought behind what you’re suggesting, but it’ll never happen. Schools like having those easy games up front too much, and there are too many benefits.

Look how much Iowa makes during a Kent State or Northern Illinois game, even after paying them to appear. It’s almost always a guaranteed win and a chance to work out any playbook/personnel issues. Schools aren’t going to go away from that. You think Alabama wants to give up its mid-season game against Upper Gainesville County Welding School it has every year?

As a fan I like them too. They’re fun and it makes it so we have 7 home games every year.

Don't say never, a few months ago you and I probably would have both said USC and UCLA to the Big Ten will never happen and here we are.

But I do agree schools won't want to give up the extra home game, so bring it all down to 1 non conference game and a 12 game conference schedule. With divisions going a way I could careless if they do a conference championship game or not but they will do one anyway since it's a money game. With expanded playoffs the bowl games will be toast so going to a 13 game schedule gets everyone an extra game.

Honestly I don't need to go to Kinnick to watch Iowa play Nevada, UNI, or South Dakota State. Hell I might sell my Iowa State tickets.
 

Fryowa

Administrator
Don't say never, a few months ago you and I probably would have both said USC and UCLA to the Big Ten will never happen and here we are.

But I do agree schools won't want to give up the extra home game, so bring it all down to 1 non conference game and a 12 game conference schedule. With divisions going a way I could careless if they do a conference championship game or not but they will do one anyway since it's a money game. With expanded playoffs the bowl games will be toast so going to a 13 game schedule gets everyone an extra game.

Honestly I don't need to go to Kinnick to watch Iowa play Nevada, UNI, or South Dakota State. Hell I might sell my Iowa State tickets.
Teams aren’t going to give up games at home against lower-tier opponents. Whether people hate them or not, they’re needed for schedule padding and working the bugs out. That’s why they exist.
 

JoeyLabasForPresident

Well-Known Member
Teams aren’t going to give up games at home against lower-tier opponents. Whether people hate them or not, they’re needed for schedule padding and working the bugs out. That’s why they exist.
This. There's a reason every P5 school is willing to pay no-namers hundreds of thousands (and sometimes millions) of dollars to get pounded in what typically amounts to an uncompetitive game. If you want to tell me the SEC does away with the awkward late season nonconference game for more money and better ratings in the next five years, I'll buy it. But after two thirds of a year without college football people are more than willing to tune in to boring matchups for the first three weeks of the season.
 
Last edited:

ssckelley

Well-Known Member
Teams aren’t going to give up games at home against lower-tier opponents. Whether people hate them or not, they’re needed for schedule padding and working the bugs out. That’s why they exist.

Which makes teams more money, a Big Ten matchup or a game against a creampuff? I'm guessing a Big Ten game, the gate is likely better and the games generate more TV revenue.
 

JoeyLabasForPresident

Well-Known Member
Which makes teams more money, a Big Ten matchup or a game against a creampuff? I'm guessing a Big Ten game, the gate is likely better and the games generate more TV revenue.
This gets to my post. I doubt that, on average, they make much difference at all. Yeah, the big matchups will get more eyes, but those eyes would have been watching the creampuffs anyway. I don't see a net benefit for the TV networks. A quarter of the people watching Alabama vs. UTSA on the SEC Network might switch to Notre Dame vs Penn State on NBC at 3:00 the second week of the season, but is there actually an overall increase in viewership? If there is, is that increase enough to overcome the programs A. wanting to start the season against creampuffs, and B. losing 1.5-2 home games on average each year each year? You will get more spending at the stadium, but that's fairly negligible in comparison to the TV revenue.
 

Fryowa

Administrator
Which makes teams more money, a Big Ten matchup or a game against a creampuff? I'm guessing a Big Ten game, the gate is likely better and the games generate more TV revenue.
In order to get rid of low tier non-cons, you’d have to get every school to agree to it. It’s just not going to happen. Take Iowa for example. We get two games every year where the Hawks are (almost) guaranteed a win for their record. Home games. These are also games that almost always happen before conference play starts, so the staff can see any weaknesses that need to be worked out before games actually count. How are you going to get coaches to get agree to that? Force them? Make it a directive at the conference level? That ain’t gonna happen.

Conference decisions aren’t made from just a couple guys in Chicago, those decisions are influenced by a whole lot of ADs and presidents. And even if a particular school wanted it to happen, you’d have to get everyone to do it, and good luck getting consensus on that.
 

ssckelley

Well-Known Member
In order to get rid of low tier non-cons, you’d have to get every school to agree to it. It’s just not going to happen. Take Iowa for example. We get two games every year where the Hawks are (almost) guaranteed a win for their record. Home games. These are also games that almost always happen before conference play starts, so the staff can see any weaknesses that need to be worked out before games actually count. How are you going to get coaches to get agree to that? Force them? Make it a directive at the conference level? That ain’t gonna happen.

Conference decisions aren’t made from just a couple guys in Chicago, those decisions are influenced by a whole lot of ADs and presidents. And even if a particular school wanted it to happen, you’d have to get everyone to do it, and good luck getting consensus on that.

Remember, I'm talking about a world where bowl games don't exist any longer. If they were out of the picture and all you're playing for is a playoff bid then you don't need to load up on cream puffs anymore.

I'm not saying this is going to happen, my original post was to advocate for it. As a season ticket holder I would LOVE this.
 

ssckelley

Well-Known Member
This gets to my post. I doubt that, on average, they make much difference at all. Yeah, the big matchups will get more eyes, but those eyes would have been watching the creampuffs anyway. I don't see a net benefit for the TV networks. A quarter of the people watching Alabama vs. UTSA on the SEC Network might switch to Notre Dame vs Penn State on NBC at 3:00 the second week of the season, but is there actually an overall increase in viewership? If there is, is that increase enough to overcome the programs A. wanting to start the season against creampuffs, and B. losing 1.5-2 home games on average each year each year? You will get more spending at the stadium, but that's fairly negligible in comparison to the TV revenue.

You can't be serious? The more good conference matchups then the more likely these games get picked up by Fox, ESPN, or another network. Conference games draw more viewers than non conference and make everyone more money. If I am tuning into a SEC game I'm tuning in to a Alabama vs Georgia than I am a Alabama vs CreamPuffU
 

JoeyLabasForPresident

Well-Known Member
You can't be serious? The more good conference matchups then the more likely these games get picked up by Fox, ESPN, or another network. Conference games draw more viewers than non conference and make everyone more money. If I am tuning into a SEC game I'm tuning in to a Alabama vs Georgia than I am a Alabama vs CreamPuffU
No, I am serious. Every game involving a game in a real conference is already televised. I am not convinced that you are going to net more total viewers on the first three Saturdays of the year with better matchups. Football fans are deprived and will watch regardless of who the teams are. You are just talking about rebalancing what particular channel viewers are already tuned to.

Some qualitative data for you:

The first three weeks already have some of the highest viewership of the season.
 
Last edited:

ssckelley

Well-Known Member
No, I am serious. Every game involving a game in a real conference is already televised. I am not convinced that you are going to net more total viewers on the first three Saturdays of the year with better matchups. Football fans are deprived and will watch regardless of who the teams are. You are just talking about rebalancing what particular channel viewers are already tuned to.

Some qualitative data for you:

The first three weeks already have some of the highest viewership of the season.

Iowa vs Colorado St - 513K
Iowa vs Maryland - 1.381M

Iowa vs Maryland.....MARYLAND...got almost 3 times the views as Iowa vs CSU. Come on man! Nobody except Iowa or CSU fans want to see those matchups. If the Big Ten offered more good matchups they get a larger slice of the pie. More games that are on ESPN, Fox, or ABC the more money for the conference the shitty matchups go on the BTN.
 

Latest posts

Top