Should Iowa extend the series with ISU?

[DukeSlater]

I say no . . . unless it's only played once every three or four years. Iowa needs to have schedule flexibility. Playing ISU every year does nothing for Iowa. As a fan, I'd love to see Iowa play some different teams. Playing ISU once every three or four years would keep the series alive but allow fans, and players, to experience some new opponents and new stadiums. After all, Iowa managed quite well without playing ISU at all for about 40 years. So I say stop the annual series and let's see something new.

 

[Iron Doc]

I say no . . . unless it's only played once every three or four years. Iowa needs to have schedule flexibility. Playing ISU every year does nothing for Iowa. As a fan, I'd love to see Iowa play some different teams. Playing ISU once every three or four years would keep the series alive but allow fans, and players, to experience some new opponents and new stadiums. After all, Iowa managed quite well without playing ISU at all for about 40 years. So I say stop the annual series and let's see something new.

I agree.

You ought to make this a Poll.

 

[Ripcord]

I say play it every four years, or maybe even less frequently.

what was once a great rivalry is basically a casualty of the recent transmogrification of college football from five or more power conferences to the "haves" (Big 10 and SEC) and the have nots (everyone else, including ISU).

I do not realistically see how they can compete with us. It will end up being something similar to us beating up UNI every single year if it continues.

if we change it to every four years or so, then we could schedule a decent opponent in the ISU slot.

 

[J.Hawkeye]

make this a Poll.

 

[StuckAsAnon]

I could get on board with playing the every other year...every odd year or something like that. That would allow us to do home-away with them, and in the even years we could schedule someone else for a home-away series. It would allow us some flexibility, allow us to get some new OOC games, but also keep the rivalry in tact to a point. Iowa kids would have 2 games against the instate school during their time.

 

[HMB Trumpet]

If the B1G ever moves to 10 conference games, then there's no way the annual series with ISU would survive. It otherwise remains sustainable. Still, playing every 2-3 years might be better for both schools for variety's sake.

 

[KuwaitHawk]

A10-game leaves 2 ‘open’ dates. ONE of them is a MUST home game. IF the B1G/sec challenge becomes a thing, that is a 7th home game every other year which makes 12 games. The only issue is which 2 B1G teams sit out unless the sec finds 2 more teams.

 

[gojojo]

I would like to continue the series, but I think both teams will take a good, hard look at it once the NCAA moves to a 24 team playoff. At that point, it doesn’t make much sense in playing anyone with a pulse in the non conference.

At that point, it’s do whatever you can to get to 9 regular season wins.

 

[uihawk82]

I say no . . . unless it's only played once every three or four years. Iowa needs to have schedule flexibility. Playing ISU every year does nothing for Iowa. As a fan, I'd love to see Iowa play some different teams. Playing ISU once every three or four years would keep the series alive but allow fans, and players, to experience some new opponents and new stadiums. After all, Iowa managed quite well without playing ISU at all for about 40 years. So I say stop the annual series and let's see something new.

I totally agree and have been saying this for nearly 15-20 years. Looking at the records since the rivalry was restarted Fry was 16-4 and Kirk is 14-12 for a total of 30-16. Commings was 1-1 iirc so about 31-17 so this is a 60-40 rivalry. But another thing sticks out and that is many of the ISU wins are by very close margins while Iowa has most all of the blowout wins. And I would think a lot of hawk fans would say that Kirk has lost too many close games to ISU when Iowa was the better team, 2014 comes to mind as a few others.

I would not mind playing ISU back to back seasons in a 6 to 8 year cycle which gives Iowa a chance to even have 8 home games in some seasons adding to the Athl Dept coffers. And as others say it is a no win type of situation for the hawks as they are more often favored.

 

[uihawk82]

If the B1G ever moves to 10 conference games, then there's no way the annual series with ISU would survive. It otherwise remains sustainable. Still, playing every 2-3 years might be better for both schools for variety's sake.

Yes, I want a 10 game conf schedule because those are the most exciting of the regular season games with rivalries and the standings in mind. But that means 5 home and 5 away conf games each year and Iowa is not going to have a season with only 6 home games so ADIOS clowns

Wouldnt you want to see another Big 10 game each year vs ISU every year?

 

[BunchofAholes]

Iowa declines to renew the series. Clone fans: "SEE, you're afraid of us!"
Iowa decides to renew the series, "SEE, this is just as big a game for you as it is for us. It's your super bowl too!"

 

[ketelmeister]

If Iowa State is going to be as bad as many on here say, then it should be an easy win every year for Iowa. No reason to schedule other "patsies" with Iowa State a money maker not a money drainer.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

I say yes. Game is always a sell out, great for local economies because amount of people who come who don’t even go to the game. even if 10 game conf schedule rather watch Iowa isu than Iowa play a MAC team or FCS. Age where rivalries are games are dying off I say keep it if you can. Because let’s be honest this game goes we replace it where people will be whining why don’t we schedule so and so that’s not realistic and end up playing northern Illinois or UNI instead.

 

[IowaFarmBoy2]

KF will need to take this game seriously for the next 20 years.

 

[Mustang_hawk]

I say yes. Game is always a sell out, great for local economies because amount of people who come who don’t even go to the game. even if 10 game conf schedule rather watch Iowa isu than Iowa play a MAC team or FCS. Age where rivalries are games are dying off I say keep it if you can. Because let’s be honest this game goes we replace it where people will be whining why don’t we schedule so and so that’s not realistic and end up playing northern Illinois or UNI instead.

Wouldn't the ISU game be replaced by a conference game? Assuming the conference goes to a 10 game schedule.

 

[Driftless_Hawk]

Playing ISU does nothing for Iowa. We're expected to win every year, a win is just expected and a loss is terrible for resume.

Agree with original poster that we should play maybe every 4 years. Go and schedule and SEC team the viewership would be higher.

We also have all of the leverage in that game. We have other rivals, ISU does not.

 

[FanInBlack]

I dont see what it gains Iowa to have it annually and I had this opinion long before conference expansion. I have no idea if it gains ISU anything and dont really care. The 7 home standard limits what a team can do scheduling other P4 teams, so I hate having it be the same team every damn year.

The "rivalry" doesnt take precedence over the interest in playing other P4 teams... for me. just my 2 cents.

 

[bagdropper]

Keep playing it until you can, you know, crush them every season. Something that hasn't happened in decades.

Then we can actually make the claim that it provides no real benefits. Besides, we all know if the game went away, all we'd do is schedule a MAC cupcake or something similar almost every season. Unless you can find a neutral site game, all bigger conference programs are going to want to do is play them at their place in a one and done.

 

[rchawk]

Keep playing it until you can, you know, crush them every season. Something that hasn't happened in decades.

Then we can actually make the claim that it provides no real benefits. Besides, we all know if the game went away, all we'd do is schedule a MAC cupcake or something similar almost every season. Unless you can find a neutral site game, all bigger conference programs are going to want to do is play them at their place in a one and done.

Some people seem to have difficulty with reading comprehension. REPLACE ISU WITH ANOTHER BIG TEN TEAM or SEC TEAM.

Keep two games against lesser competition to get to seven home games. Unless the clones agree to play all games in Iowa City...

 

[BunchofAholes]

I say yes. Game is always a sell out, great for local economies because amount of people who come who don’t even go to the game. even if 10 game conf schedule rather watch Iowa isu than Iowa play a MAC team or FCS. Age where rivalries are games are dying off I say keep it if you can. Because let’s be honest this game goes we replace it where people will be whining why don’t we schedule so and so that’s not realistic and end up playing northern Illinois or UNI instead.

I always get a kick out of this angle. It's not some black friday-like event. A home game generates biz no matter who the opponent is. Is the Iowa/ISU game a little busier for the host? Sure, but it's not some game-changer.

BTW One team loses a home game every other year so it's not a "win" for that town.

 

[rchawk]

A home game generates biz no matter who the opponent is. Is the Iowa/ISU game a little busier for the host? Sure, but it's not some game-changer.

There are Big Ten teams Iowa doesn't play this year, like Penn State and Indiana, who would bring plenty of fans to stay in hotels and spread money around from Friday to Sunday. Same with an SEC school. Not drive up the morning of the game, watch the game, and drive home.

 

[MeetTheFerentzes]

Thank goodness there's another thread on this. I was afraid that the subject wouldn't ever come up again....

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

I say no . . . unless it's only played once every three or four years. Iowa needs to have schedule flexibility. Playing ISU every year does nothing for Iowa. As a fan, I'd love to see Iowa play some different teams. Playing ISU once every three or four years would keep the series alive but allow fans, and players, to experience some new opponents and new stadiums. After all, Iowa managed quite well without playing ISU at all for about 40 years. So I say stop the annual series and let's see something new.

It's always a "fun" subject for Iowa fans to broach every year. Should we get rid of the ISU? Will it even be up to us or ISU? Etc etc etc..........

Iowa dropping Iowa State from the schedule is 100% factually less likely than Iowa winning a CFP national championship. And how likely that is to you, just depends on how likely you believe Iowa will win a national championship in your lifetime.

Hopefully that helps Iowa fans cope with having Iowa State on the schedule.

 

[bagdropper]

Some people seem to have difficulty with reading comprehension. REPLACE ISU WITH ANOTHER BIG TEN TEAM or SEC TEAM.

Keep two games against lesser competition to get to seven home games. Unless the clones agree to play all games in Iowa City...

SEC won't happen because of greed. B10? Maybe.

I'd believe the only chance of either occuring would be if a merger of sorts occurs between the 2 conferences.

Money, as always, will make the decisions on any/all of this.

 

[rchawk]

SEC won't happen because of greed.

Please explain.

 

[Iron Doc]

Don't need STATE.

 

[Titanhawk]

Yes, I want a 10 game conf schedule because those are the most exciting of the regular season games with rivalries and the standings in mind. But that means 5 home and 5 away conf games each year and Iowa is not going to have a season with only 6 home games so ADIOS clowns

Wouldnt you want to see another Big 10 game each year vs ISU every year?

Oh yeah, live for the Maryland and Rutgers games

 

[bagdropper]

Please explain.

I remember a radio interview with Bowlsby I believe before he left, and Dolph asked him about scheduling and getting better opponents. He replied that he had talks with just about everybody P5 (whatever you want to call it back then) and it always boiled down to programs need home games, period - from a revenue standpoint because you never get as much money playing on the road as you do at home.

A school like Iowa (and pretty much all major schools), losing home games hurts the pocketbook.

If you're an SEC team, would you be willing to give up a home game? To play up at Iowa? Hell no. And TV $ isn't going to make that money up even if you do a neutral site. They'd LOVE to see Iowa travel down south, but them coming back up to Iowa? Nope, not happening.

I mean...you can also sit there and state today's overall TV money makes up for the loss...but why not have the TV money AND home game revenue?


I believe a 10th B10 conference game is much more likely - if the money is there to make it great for all schools. As for any other major conference, only some sort of contractual agreement between say the SEC and B10 that guarantees "scheduling fairness" as well as being 100% revenue fair for all schools would something like that be possible. I just don't see that happening unless say an Amazon throws out obscenely huge money - not impossible, but highly improbable. Do I want to see Iowa get some big names on the schedule? Sure. But again, if it were (snaps fingers) that easy, we'd have seen it by now.

Money is the issue - always has been, always will be. EVERY program wants more. And in today's financial climate, if you want to compete, you need simply "more".

 

[Stoopsbrother]

 

[paednoch23]

I always get a kick out of this angle. It's not some black friday-like event. A home game generates biz no matter who the opponent is. Is the Iowa/ISU game a little busier for the host? Sure, but it's not some game-changer.

BTW One team loses a home game every other year so it's not a "win" for that town.

The economy slant is BS. When ISU is Home on the same weekend Iowa is home there are twice as many hotel rooms being filled than when Iowa plays ISu. It’s fills the bars etc. that’s BS too. The bars are full on cfb Saturday anyway.

 

[rchawk]

Oh yeah, live for the Maryland and Rutgers games

All Big Ten teams including Iowa play nine of 17 conference opponents. That's eight teams you don't play, league schedules can be very favorable or very difficult. A tenth conference game would make things just a little more fair.

It's not just Maryland and Rutgers Iowa misses. Traditional foes Michigan State and Indiana, and Penn State are missing as well. So are USC and Oregon and UCLA. A tenth Big Ten game would be a step toward crowning a regular season champ who has proven they deserve it.

 

[nu2u]

ISU is on the inevitable path to the Mountain West Conference. Drop them. Iowa can throw them a bone and rotate them in with fellow conference members NDSU or NIU to play at Kinnick every 3-4 years.

 

[WeBeHerkin]

Iowa's cut at 75% for all games or always in Kinnick

 

[WeBeHerkin]

ISU is on the inevitable path to the Mountain West Conference. Drop them. Iowa can throw them a bone and rotate them in with fellow conference members NDSU or NIU to play at Kinnick every 3-4 years.

Conference USA? We go to 24 team CFP minor conferences could get a team in.

 

[BunchofAholes]

The economy slant is BS. When ISU is Home on the same weekend Iowa is home there are twice as many hotel rooms being filled than when Iowa plays ISu. It’s fills the bars etc. that’s BS too. The bars are full on cfb Saturday anyway.

100%. The people that lean into this are mostly the non-fan who doesn't understand what a football Saturday looks like. They act as if Iowa v ISMoo is some unique one-off event.

The irony of that claim is that it quite possibly generates LESS money in aggregate for the reasons you point out. Neither town gets any out-of-state visitors. It's the people who would have gone to their respective stadium or favorite sports bar anyway. You're just smashing a lot of them into one town instead of two. The ONLY possible gain is the casual fan that ignores football the rest of the year unless it's the Iowa/ISU game. I'd argue they are few and far between and don't represent much if any incremental revenue. A few more busy hours one day for a mediocre sports bar isn't a game-changer.