Should B1G go to 10 conference game schedule?

[tm3308]

Because I want to play and see more B1G teams. We are a member of the B1G if you have not forgotten. All of my best memories and thrills as a fan come from games against the B1G teams.

If ISU joins the B1G I would be happy to play them because they are a part of the conference but until that time I would much rather play a B1G team.

We are paying a huge price with realignment because of this stupid game against ISU that does nothing for us. Texas no longer plays A&M and Missouri no longer plays Kansas and those were once big rivalry games. A&M and Missouri are doing just fine without those games. I do not hear them pining for the good old days when they played these.

I want to see 2 others from the B1G over a series with ISU any day of the week. Time to move on do what is best for us and what the majority of the fans want.

Those teams play in much stronger conferences than the Big Ten, if you have not forgotten. Playing 10 Big Ten games hurts the SOS for everyone in the B1G, at least in comparison to play 8 conference games and actually putting together a good non-conference slate.

In a hypothetical non-conference schedule that features Pitt, Northern Illinois, ISU and Okie State, ISU is the weakest game. Think about that for a second. Our weakest game in the non-conference would still be against a BCS conference opponent, which also has the added buzz of being a rivalry game for the fans. If you wouldn't take a schedule like that, then it's pretty obvious that you're less interested in seeing Iowa's SOS boosted than you are with just blindly hating ISU to a fault.

 

[eyekwah]

Not sure why folks are so "down" on the ISU series, but I wouldn't mind a 10-game schedule. The more conference games we have, the more likely we fill seats, and more East Division folks that have to make hotel reservations, eat in restaurants, etc.

I don't think most people that are critical of ISU constantly on the schedule are saying never play ISU, just add them to a mix of teams to play. I asks myself would I rather see Penn State /Iowa or ISU/Iowa. I have to admit that PSU vs Iowa is a lot more intriguing. So the 10 game schedule makes it able to happen more often. Does it make it more difficult to schedule ISU? Sure.

Based on the future trends I believe it is doing ISU and Iowa a disfavor to play every year. ISU (also WV) is island of the Big 12. The majority of the teams they play are from Texas and Oklahoma (6 of 9 games). ISU really needs to look at re-establishing series with some old Big 12 members, Missouri and Colorado come to mind. They would get more regional or national exposure than playing Iowa. Eight of ISU's games involve on three states; Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. This year Iowa's conference opponents are from 6 states stretching from Maryland to Nebraska.

If the B1G went to a 10 game schedule it would put other conferences in the position of having 14 fewer dates from the national pool available for scheduling. It would push other conferences into having to play each other.

 

[ShadasRevenge]

Those teams play in much stronger conferences than the Big Ten, if you have not forgotten. Playing 10 Big Ten games hurts the SOS for everyone in the B1G, at least in comparison to play 8 conference games and actually putting together a good non-conference slate.

In a hypothetical non-conference schedule that features Pitt, Northern Illinois, ISU and Okie State, ISU is the weakest game. Think about that for a second. Our weakest game in the non-conference would still be against a BCS conference opponent, which also has the added buzz of being a rivalry game for the fans. If you wouldn't take a schedule like that, then it's pretty obvious that you're less interested in seeing Iowa's SOS boosted than you are with just blindly hating ISU to a fault.

Ok, but it's been that way for the last handful of years, hasn't it? It was certainly the case last year and in 2012, 2010, 2009, and 2008.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

I don't think it's that folks are down on the ISU series, it's that with a 10-game conference schedule and a 12-game regular season, it would leave Iowa with no flexibility for that remaining non-con game. It'd be a body-bag game, like W. Michigan from last year. A glorified scrimmage. If you're looking at it from the standpoint of not wanting to play 11 Power 5/BCS teams every year, I can understand that.

I personally think that if a 10-game league schedule does happen that it'll be accompanied by adding a 13th game to the regular season.

We do not need a 13th game to go to a 10 game conference schedule. It would work right now.

We also do not need to add a 13th game with teams potentially playing a conference championship and 2 more games in the playoff. That is 15 games for some teams already with a 12 game regular season. There is so much concern with player injury risk already why add a 13th game which could end up being another body bag/big pay check opponent anyway for some BCS teams?

I am also not sold that the 4 team playoff is going to stay at 4 very long. If it jumps to 8 that is another game.

Just keep it at 12 and go to 10 in conference. Would work really well and instead expand the playoff down the road. That is the best expansion of the schedule.

 

[HawkWT]

I don't mind 9 conf games. The Iowa State series isn't going anywhere. It's the biggest local sports week in the state every year. Not sure about 10 though, it will eliminate any other conference crossover games. Even though Pitt and Arizona aren't the biggest opponents, the 2nd non conf game every yr will be a cupcake.

 

[JHHawk]

This needs to happen. As was laid out...many pros for this, vs only a few cons.

Playing ten league games makes the conference matter more.
Play one warmup game, then either ISU or another BCS school, then ten league games.

Work the ISU series as playing every other year, tops, with 2 at Iowa, 1 at ISU basis.
Then add a home and away series with other BCS schools around the ISU series, so that Iowa has 7 home games at least 3 of 5 years....we can live with 6 home games with the huge money coming from the new tv deals.

I want KF to be able to tell recruits from Md and NJ that they will play in their home state at least once in 4 years, which means that they will play everyone in the league at least twice in 4 years....perfect.

Also love the idea of copying the SEC with early league games. Play a league game in the second week...then ISU or Pitt or whoever in week three.

 

[eyekwah]

Not sure why folks are so "down" on the ISU series, but I wouldn't mind a 10-game schedule. The more conference games we have, the more likely we fill seats, and more East Division folks that have to make hotel reservations, eat in restaurants, etc.

I don't think most people that are critical of ISU constantly on the schedule are saying never play ISU, just add them to a mix of teams to play. I asks myself would I rather see Penn State /Iowa or ISU/Iowa. I have to admit that PSU vs Iowa is a lot more intriguing. So the 10 game schedule makes it able to happen more often. Does it make it more difficult to schedule ISU? Sure.

Based on the future trends I believe it is doing ISU and Iowa a disfavor to play every year. ISU (also WV) is island of the Big 12. The majority of the teams they play are from Texas and Oklahoma (6 of 9 games). ISU really needs to look at re-establishing series with some old Big 12 members, Missouri and Colorado come to mind. They would get more regional or national exposure than playing Iowa. Eight of ISU's games involve on three states; Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. This year Iowa's conference opponents are from 6 states stretching from Maryland to Nebraska.

If the B1G went to a 10 game schedule it would put other conferences in the position of having 14 fewer dates from the national pool available for scheduling. It would push other conferences into having to play each other.

 

[ShadasRevenge]

This needs to happen. As was laid out...many pros for this, vs only a few cons.

Playing ten league games makes the conference matter more.
Play one warmup game, then either ISU or another BCS school, then ten league games.

Work the ISU series as playing every other year, tops, with 2 at Iowa, 1 at ISU basis.
Then add a home and away series with other BCS schools around the ISU series, so that Iowa has 7 home games at least 3 of 5 years....we can live with 6 home games with the huge money coming from the new tv deals.

I want KF to be able to tell recruits from Md and NJ that they will play in their home state at least once in 4 years, which means that they will play everyone in the league at least twice in 4 years....perfect.

Also love the idea of copying the SEC with early league games. Play a league game in the second week...then ISU or Pitt or whoever in week three.

This will never happen. It's a pipe dream. Second, you can kiss the ISU series goodbye if/when the league goes to a 10-game conference schedule. The league is already going to nine games in two years to keep pace with the B12 and Pac12, while the SEC is staying at 8. Iowa isn't (and shouldn't) be playing 11 Power 5/BCS teams while the mighty SEC is playing 8.

 

[ShadasRevenge]

We do not need a 13th game to go to a 10 game conference schedule. It would work right now.

We also do not need to add a 13th game with teams potentially playing a conference championship and 2 more games in the playoff. That is 15 games for some teams already with a 12 game regular season. There is so much concern with player injury risk already why add a 13th game which could end up being another body bag/big pay check opponent anyway for some BCS teams?

I am also not sold that the 4 team playoff is going to stay at 4 very long. If it jumps to 8 that is another game.

Just keep it at 12 and go to 10 in conference. Would work really well and instead expand the playoff down the road. That is the best expansion of the schedule.

I'm looking at it from the standpoint of scheduling in the non-con. With the ISU series in place, adding another league game would only leave you with one slot, and you can damn well guarantee that'll be a **** matchup that nobody wants to see.

As far as the injury risk goes, it wasn't that long ago that the season went from 11 to 12, and the same arguments were made back then.

 

[JHHawk]

If ISU wants to play Iowa they should bend...if not, fine, we will find another school willing to bend.

 

[bitmap]

For me, a perfect world would involve 14 B1G teams and 14 PAC teams in a system where there are 2 conferences of 2 7 team divisions.
...

Your telling me you wouldn't choose a schedule like this every year?

This would be fantastic but would need buy in from the PAC who have already balked at a 1 & 1 series with the B!G.

Times are changing so maybe they would see the light when approached again.

This type of schedule would push games played for the two teams involved in a true championship to 16 so the bigger question that needs to be asked is if a real playoff system is inevitable. If so then plan accordingly.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

Those teams play in much stronger conferences than the Big Ten, if you have not forgotten. Playing 10 Big Ten games hurts the SOS for everyone in the B1G, at least in comparison to play 8 conference games and actually putting together a good non-conference slate.

In a hypothetical non-conference schedule that features Pitt, Northern Illinois, ISU and Okie State, ISU is the weakest game. Think about that for a second. Our weakest game in the non-conference would still be against a BCS conference opponent, which also has the added buzz of being a rivalry game for the fans. If you wouldn't take a schedule like that, then it's pretty obvious that you're less interested in seeing Iowa's SOS boosted than you are with just blindly hating ISU to a fault.

If you want to be a Big 12 fan by no means no one is stopping you. Do not let the door hit you on the way out.

I cannot state this anymore clearly that I want to see more B1G teams on our schedule as my very first priority over ISU any day of the week. The 10 game schedule for 12 regular season games does this and several other things. It would be as good as we can get it. We would get 5 home, 5 away every year. We only have 2 schedule 2 duds each year which is no different than now. We will have 4 games against border rivals and some mix of OSU, UM, PSU and MSU every year. I am also interested in seeing our new members Maryland and Rutgers. That would be a fantastic schedule. OR we can have this year's schedule with ISU. That is a yo!!! I cannot believe you are even advocating for this.

Your argument is the playoff which we have a super remote chance of making the majority of seasons as it stands at 4. Keep in mind the SEC is going to lobby beyond hard to get 2 in every year so the reality is 2 spots for the other power 4 plus Notre Dame. Ok buddy let's throw away a great regular season schedule because we are worried about conference SOS!

 

[tm3308]

Ok, but it's been that way for the last handful of years, hasn't it? It was certainly the case last year and in 2012, 2010, 2009, and 2008.

Missouri State and Western Michigan were both worse than ISU last year (we beat WMU by 56 points, for crying out loud). We lost to ISU in 2012, whether they were the weakest team or not (which is debatable; Cent. Michigan and ISU both won 6 games in 2012). UL Monroe and Tenn Tech were both worse in 2011. Ball State was worse in 2010. Arkansas State won 4 games in 2009 (the fact that we played down to their level and let them hang around doesn't mean they weren't horrible). And Maine and FIU were both worse than ISU in 2008.

Iowa State has consistently been the second or third best team on our non-conference schedule. I'm proposing we start making them worst or second worst team on it every year and stepping up the competition in the other three OOC games (which would also be better than playing a couple more Big Ten teams in most years).

 

[tm3308]

If you want to be a Big 12 fan by no means no one is stopping you. Do not let the door hit you on the way out.

I cannot state this anymore clearly that I want to see more B1G teams on our schedule as my very first priority over ISU any day of the week. The 10 game schedule for 12 regular season games does this and several other things. It would be as good as we can get it. We would get 5 home, 5 away every year. We only have 2 schedule 2 duds each year which is no different than now. We will have 4 games against border rivals and some mix of OSU, UM, PSU and MSU every year. I am also interested in seeing our new members Maryland and Rutgers. That would be a fantastic schedule. OR we can have this year's schedule with ISU. That is a yo!!! I cannot believe you are even advocating for this.

Your argument is the playoff which we have a super remote chance of making the majority of seasons as it stands at 4. Keep in mind the SEC is going to lobby beyond hard to get 2 in every year so the reality is 2 spots for the other power 4 plus Notre Dame. Ok buddy let's throw away a great regular season schedule because we are worried about conference SOS!

Maybe you're not worried about SOS, but you don't think Ohio State, Michigan, MSU and Wisconsin will be? They aren't going to agree to a massive circle jerk of a schedule when the conference is as weak as it's been for the last decade. The SEC, Big 12 and Pac-12 will all consistently have a great chance of getting a team into the final four. If the SEC only gets one, then it'll be a tossup between the ACC and B1G for the last spot. The top teams in the conference are going to need to get out and play people in the OOC, which won't happen in a 10-game conference schedule (unless a 13th game is added to the regular season).

And for the record, calling the Big 12 stronger than the Big Ten in football hardly means I'd rather be a Big 12 fan. It means I'm calling a spade a spade.

 

[ShadasRevenge]

Maybe you're not worried about SOS, but you don't think Ohio State, Michigan, MSU and Wisconsin will be? They aren't going to agree to a massive circle jerk of a schedule when the conference is as weak as it's been for the last decade. The SEC, Big 12 and Pac-12 will all consistently have a great chance of getting a team into the final four. If the SEC only gets one, then it'll be a tossup between the ACC and B1G for the last spot. The top teams in the conference are going to need to get out and play people in the OOC, which won't happen in a 10-game conference schedule (unless a 13th game is added to the regular season).

And for the record, calling the Big 12 stronger than the Big Ten in football hardly means I'd rather be a Big 12 fan. It means I'm calling a spade a spade.

I don't know that the B12 is that much better than the B1G. Outside of Oklahoma and Baylor, B12 football isn't anything spectacular. The bottom of that league is garbage, just like the bottom of B1G is garbage.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

Maybe you're not worried about SOS, but you don't think Ohio State, Michigan, MSU and Wisconsin will be? They aren't going to agree to a massive circle jerk of a schedule when the conference is as weak as it's been for the last decade. The SEC, Big 12 and Pac-12 will all consistently have a great chance of getting a team into the final four. If the SEC only gets one, then it'll be a tossup between the ACC and B1G for the last spot. The top teams in the conference are going to need to get out and play people in the OOC, which won't happen in a 10-game conference schedule (unless a 13th game is added to the regular season).

And for the record, calling the Big 12 stronger than the Big Ten in football hardly means I'd rather be a Big 12 fan. It means I'm calling a spade a spade.

No your just typical of today's shills who cannot think on their own. Constantly site their opinions from what others say and take them as gospel. Look at the facts that the SEC won 6 or 7 in a row. The B1G was only involved in one of those games so where was the vaunted Big 12? If there ever has been a more over-hyped league I would like to know about it. Yes, their one true champion Baylor was beat by the mighty Central Florida last year in their bowl matchup. How could that happen with such superiority?

So lay it on me with your stats that will convincingly prove the Big 12 is better than the B1G. The SEC is the standard but do not kid yourself that all of these other leagues and Notre Dame are getting it done.

What you fail to realize is since the creation of the BTN and ESPN's partnership with the SEC they have a vested interest to promote everything SEC all the time and rip the B1G whenever possible because it is the one league that can stand on its own. But go ahead and be a pundit.

 

[tm3308]

No your just a typical of today's shills who cannot think on their own. Constantly site their opinions from what others say and take them as gospel. Look at the facts that the SEC won 6 or 7 in a row. The B1G was only involved in one of those games so where was the vaunted Big 12? If there ever has been a more over-hyped league I would like to know about it. Yes, their one true champion Baylor was beat by the mighty Central Florida last year in their bowl matchup. How could that happen with such superiority?

So lay it on me with your stats that will convincingly prove the Big 12 is better than the B1G. The SEC is the standard but do not kid yourself that all of these other leagues and Notre Dame are getting it done.

What you fail to realize is since the creation of the BTN and ESPN's partnership with the SEC they have a vested interest to promote everything SEC all the time and rip the B1G whenever possible because it is the one league that can stand on its own. But go ahead and be a pundit.

ESPN exaggerates how bad the Big Ten is, but this conference isn't strong. And getting out to play teams that are more respected in the polls looks better for us. Because until the B1G starts getting out and beating the better Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC teams, the broken record is going to keep on spinning. And that holds back recruiting for most of the conference, too. For a recruiting visit, I'd much rather bring kids in to see Iowa beat Okie State/UCLA/Clemson than have them watch a snoozer like Ball State or Western Michigan (or replacing those crap games with Indiana, Maryland, or Rutgers). At least the ISU game creates a great stadium atmosphere, even if the game itself isn't great.

 

[thejumper5]

Without having read the entire thread, the biggest issue I see with a 10-game conference schedule would be the lack of non-conference road games. In today's college football environment, major conference schools see 7 home games per year as a non-negotiable. Moving to 10 conference games means that 5 of them would be on the road, which in turn means that both non-conference games would be home games. I just can't see the conference moving to a system in which the teams play very few (if any) non-conference road games.

 

[tm3308]

Looking at last year's final rankings, the B1G and Big 12 both had three teams in the final BCS standings, and both conference's average ranking was 10. But looking at the coaches' poll, 6 Big 12 teams at least received votes, while only four B1G teams did so. The Pac-12 6 teams in the final AP top 25 and 5 in the coaches (Washington was 25th and 26th in the two polls).

Whether you believe those schools are better or not, they get pumped up, and recruits see that. You can't change the culture if you don't even bother to fight it.

 

[thejumper5]

No your just typical of today's shills who cannot think on their own. Constantly site their opinions from what others say and take them as gospel. Look at the facts that the SEC won 6 or 7 in a row. The B1G was only involved in one of those games so where was the vaunted Big 12?

The SEC won 7 in a row. 2 vs. Big Ten, 2 vs. Big XII, 1 vs. Pac-10, 1 intra-conference game, and 1 vs. Notre Dame.