eyekwah
Well-Known Member
The counter argument for ISU is that for recruiting and exposure purposes, ISU really needs to continue regularly playing different BCS teams from around the country, and the possibilty of having to spend half of the non-conference BCS slots on one in state rival would have to be seen as a negative versus getting an additional series or two a decade with a TCU, Arizona, or other school in an area in which ISU and the BXII could use the exposure.
After substituting some changes does this argument make logical sense? I think it does. I would think ISU would be best served by setting up more Big East games in the future. When conference realignment was a hot topic the Big East had immediate interest in event the Big XII folded.
ISU has a series with Connecticut that will finish this year, but after this year they have a series with Tulsa and then a series with Toledo. They play UNI, NDSU, and W ILL in games to start the season. It is not an attractive non-conference schedule if you ask me, even with Iowa as the third opponent. In two of the next 4 years they won't leave Ames Iowa in the non-conference, they play once in N Ohio and once in C Oklahoma. Not a picture of regional or national exposure.