If texas is losing recruits to other schools, get better coaches. No conference change is going to makes Texas better. Cant wait to boo the **** out of them this fall in Ames
Where Will ISU End Up if the Big 12 Implodes?
- Thread starter Gunnerclone
- Start date
I will hold my tongue. Can't talk politics here.
Nothing else important at this time anyway. It's ISU or bust. We will get thru this.
?
Yeah AAC meh. Not to be negative to them, but we are used to P5 for so long now and just starting to blossom.
When I first read this I thought you were talking ACC, and I went, Oh really, hadn't heard that yet.
Big 10, particularly PSU, OSU and UM, have largely owned NJ for years. Hell, Fry used pull a lot of guys from NJ. At best the difference is every couple of years Purdue or Wisconsin will get a guy from there, and it certainly helps Rutgers as long as Schiano is there.
And go look at 2021 recruits from Iowa vs NY. Iowa absolutely blows NY away. NY has two guys above an 86. Iowa has 15. The top two recruits in NY would be tied for 8th in Iowa per 247. It’s much closer in 2022 but Iowa is still better.
Texas would have an easier road improving their on field performance in the Big 12. But maybe getting curb stomped by SEC teams for a decade will finally cause Texas to clean out the cultural deadwood that has been holding them back.
+ Cael might have some influence @ Penn State for the Old School.
At this point I do think we are a "likely" for the Big Ten.
Not a sure shot, but there's enough smoke like the nbc chicago news report about us and Kansas on a call with big ten people.
If you want to add a good midwest brand to the big ten with lots of fans, quality football, usually good basketball, we check a lot of boxes. Population footprint is not an issue this time around, it's about the brand following.
that list has been expanded substantially, Pretty much none of the Big 12 or most other conferences would work for them Including Iowa, Kansas, and Oklahoma.
PROHIBITION ON STATE-FUNDED AND STATE-SPONSORED TRAVEL TO STATES WITH DISCRIMINATORY LAWS (ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 1887) [NO LONGER IN EFFECT]
Per Senate Bill 447 (2023), Assembly Bill 1887 (2016) is no longer in effect, and the State of California's restriction on state-funded travel has been eliminated.
Nope the list has been expanded to include Iowa. Meaning those Cali schools cant take us, nor can they join the SEC or the B1G because of this law.
Two other things that help a KU-ISU combo:
It's a GREAT rivalry in Men's Basketball. Two biggest basketball arenas / attendance and two most passionate fan bases in Big Xii Hoops.
They put a really good pincer movement on the Kansas City Market.
**** that. Loyal sons forever true, regardless of the conference.
that article is almost 5 years old the list has been expanded substantially see my above post. Iowa is on the ban list now too.
They don’t use state funds to travel to these sites. You think no college team from a state university in California has been to any of those states in several years?
Yep my need to watch ISU religously would wane tremendously.
Right On!
FWIW, I sat through the 0-10-1 1994 season watching Iowa State lose to UNI (FCS), Western Michigan (MAC) ad Rice (SWC) in person! THAT was HARD!
As for the AAC, it's not so bad. The Champion is usually in the NY6 hunt and will be more than likely make the 12 Team Playoff when it starts.
That being said, I am on Team B1G First, Team Pac Second, but I am not going to stop being a game day fan if they end up in the AAC. Will actually give Iowa State the opportunity to open up some quality OOC scheduling.
Last edited:
Just curious if there has been any insider info on the premium boards related to this that hasn't been on the public boards? You don't have to tell me what it is, but just curious if there currently is anything to gain by signing up.
NBC Chicago was just referring to that same tweet about Kansas. Who knows how accurate it is, but you have to be careful when you think something corroborates something and its just referring to the same thing.
Yeah I suppose you are right, as long as you are using "in-house" money it is ok, even though you are state sanctioned and sponsored, if the money comes technically from athletic income it would be ok.
Kind of takes the point of this law away except for symbolism.