briankaldenberg
Well-Known Member
I'm going to go with Missouri. I think more teams out West will help Iowa more, and I think it would further open our recruiting connections in Missouri.
Which team joining the Big 10 helps Iowa out the most.
- Thread starter briankaldenberg
- Start date
jameskalina
Well-Known Member
I agree.
The TV market, a border rivalry and a program that is more like a mid third Big Ten program than an upper third program benefits Iowa.
tweeterhawk
Well-Known Member
Well, here's the third of four Missouri voters so far. I agree with your thoughts.
IowaBanker
Well-Known Member
I voted Notre Dame. Love 'em or hate 'em (and I hate 'em), their addition to the Big 10 helps all current schools more than any other candidate. They have name recognition that no one else in the country has, and that recognition leads to big, big dollars.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
But also drive competition WAY high. I'm all for wanting to beat the best, but you can bet that Texas would be in our division, making it even more difficult than it already is for us to make the Rose Bowl. You've got to look at it from more than just a financial standpoint when we decide who helps Iowa the most.
That's why I voted Nebraska. They would add revenue because of their name value (especially since they are on the rise again, finally), and there's already enough there to forge a serious rivalry, which would help the Big Ten. Notre Dame helps the Big Ten more than Nebraska, but Nebraska helps Iowa more than Notre Dame.
i would say texas am because of the connections down south. most everyone knows that texas is where the recruits are and tx am would give the iowa and the rest of the big ten benefits. plus i think they would fit in the best because of the atmosphere of a game at college station would fit in great in big ten play.
ND, hands down. If we only had one school join, I vote ND. I hate'm also but they make a perfect foil in the western division for Iowa,Wis,Minny,Ill,NW...
I heard an interview on Dan Patrick with Brian Kelly,new fb coach at ND, and he said flat out he does not want to join the Big Ten. Said he liked playing coast to coast and their traditional rivals like Michigan,Purdue,USC,MSU and Army.....really frosted me...I say either they join now, or no Big Ten school can schedule them,period.
His haughtiness is exactly why I would love to have them join and be in our division...they immediately would join Minny,Wisky,OSU,Mich, NW and PSU as team I hate....oops, guess that is most of the league,isnt it? Honestly, right now NW and ND would be at the top of my list...screw'em,but hope they join.
I heard an interview on Dan Patrick with Brian Kelly,new fb coach at ND, and he said flat out he does not want to join the Big Ten. Said he liked playing coast to coast and their traditional rivals like Michigan,Purdue,USC,MSU and Army.....really frosted me...I say either they join now, or no Big Ten school can schedule them,period.
His haughtiness is exactly why I would love to have them join and be in our division...they immediately would join Minny,Wisky,OSU,Mich, NW and PSU as team I hate....oops, guess that is most of the league,isnt it? Honestly, right now NW and ND would be at the top of my list...screw'em,but hope they join.
I think you have to look at it a couple of ways 1) Recruiting - could the Texas schools open up more recruiting avenues into that state? Sure. But, when you consider 2) Competition, it might be hard to have to compete against Texas.
Also would it open avenues into the East? Maybe, but if those teams are not on Iowa's side if the league it might just end up helping the other half of the Big Ten. Also with respect to competition, if Texas does not come over and Iowa ends up in a division that does not include OSU and UM, it might severely limit Iowa's recruiting because their division might look a bit like the Big 12 North. Also, Michigan and Ohio recruiting might dry up. Whose to say more Stanzi's and DJK's don't end up going to Rutgers instead of Poggi's coming to Iowa?
There really can be some unintended consequences that could really end up hurting Iowa.
When I weigh it all out, I think Missouri is the call. Less risk with respect to competition, some gain with respect to recruiting. That being said, what goes on with the rest of the conference might make it a wash.
Also would it open avenues into the East? Maybe, but if those teams are not on Iowa's side if the league it might just end up helping the other half of the Big Ten. Also with respect to competition, if Texas does not come over and Iowa ends up in a division that does not include OSU and UM, it might severely limit Iowa's recruiting because their division might look a bit like the Big 12 North. Also, Michigan and Ohio recruiting might dry up. Whose to say more Stanzi's and DJK's don't end up going to Rutgers instead of Poggi's coming to Iowa?
There really can be some unintended consequences that could really end up hurting Iowa.
When I weigh it all out, I think Missouri is the call. Less risk with respect to competition, some gain with respect to recruiting. That being said, what goes on with the rest of the conference might make it a wash.
Last edited:
eyekwah
Well-Known Member
Put me in the Missouri column. Missouri adds two major TV markets, even though Kansas City has a Kansas tilt. Columbia is 250 miles from Iowa City making it a relatively short trip for those that travel to away games. It is an AAU member university so it fits in academically. It provides Illinois with a rival so they can obsess with beating Missouri rather than Iowa.
I like the idea of a division with Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri. The Big Ten would have to add one other team to this division in a 12 team scenario I know, but Iowa would be in the geographic center of the division.
I like the idea of a division with Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri. The Big Ten would have to add one other team to this division in a 12 team scenario I know, but Iowa would be in the geographic center of the division.
No way the Big Ten only goes to 12 teams, unless the 12th team is ND. But, I don't see ND doing that just to be a 12th team in the Big Ten.
tweeterhawk
Well-Known Member
It wouldn't at all. ISU is always an enjoyable out of conference victory.
Because they realize that if the Big Twelve dissolves, they will end up in Conference USA, (probably take Memphis' spot, when the Big East becomes a basketball conference) or a really watered down version of the MWC.
Can't really blame them. They see the last remnants of their major college sports identity circling the drain.
rodg12
Well-Known Member
Very short-sighted. The additional $$ money from getting Texas would help the U of I in way more ways than maybe being less competitive would hurt. Especially since the B10 divides up the BCS bowl money evenly among the teams. I'm not afraid of Texas. Those boys would have some rude awakenings rolling into IC for a night game in October/November, not to mention Wisc, Minn, etc. Most of those Texas guys go their entire college careers without playing in the cold. It would be a pretty healthy home field advantage for us...
ETA: Great breakdown of just how much money Texas would add...
http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2...-expansion-candidates-to-the-big-ten-network/
Last edited:
tm3308
Well-Known Member
So you're willing to trade going to the Rose Bowl for more money? You should get a job with the BCS, that kind of mentality would fit right in.
loesshillshawk
Well-Known Member
Notre Dame....money talks and Notre Dame would bring a boat load of cash!
rodg12
Well-Known Member
Let's be real here. We haven't even made it to the Rose Bowl since the 1990 season. It's not like we're a perennial Rose Bowl team that will now get bumped with Texas in the fold. So we're not even close to 'trading going to the Rose Bowl for more money.' C'mon now.
Also, like I said, I'm not afraid of Texas. I'd be willing to wager that a healthy Iowa team handles Texas last year and in 2002. There's our two BCS bids right there that we'd still be able to get. I'd take our chances against Texas this year as well. We should have taken them out at our bowl game in '06 if not for a TERRIBLE drop by Brodell. Our good teams can play with Texas and anybody else in the country.
Adding Texas gives us more money than anybody else, more exposure than anybody else, more access to better recruits than anybody else and a great academic school that fits right in with what the Big 10 values. They're a great basketball school and would add a legitimate baseball talent to the Big 10. They're the best option for Big 10 expansion for Iowa or any other team...
tm3308
Well-Known Member
My point is that it's hard enough to make the Rose Bowl for us the way it is now. Adding Texas only lessens our chances further. And as we appear to be elevating the program, we could be fairly regular Rose Bowl contenders in the years to come. Adding Texas considerably lowers those prospects. Because what happens when we have to play Michigan (once they bounce back), Texas, and Penn State during the regular season, then if we make it through that gauntlet have to play OSU for the conference title? The odds of making it through that kind of schedule would be VERY long, even for our best teams. I don't much like the idea of needing to beat Texas and OSU to win the Big Ten, plus PSU, Michigan, and Wisconsin. That'd be a little too much to ask, IMO.
