Iowa vs. Big 12

[chadm]

I went back the last 20 games Iowa has played against the Big 12 and their record is 8-12.

During that same time frame, ISU has a record of 9-6 against Big Ten teams. (Nebraska was excluded since during this time they were in the Big 12)

I understand the majority is head to head with ISU and Iowa, but bowl and other games are included.

Does this say anything about the conferences?
Does this say anything about ISU being "little brother"?

 

[cole20]

how many of these games were played against Ohio state,Michigan, Wisconsin, and penn state...just curious

 

[chadm]

how many of these games were played against Ohio state,Michigan, Wisconsin, and penn state...just curious

For Iowa's 8-12 record the above schools were not counted since they are not in the Big 12.

 

[Clark]

Why 20 games? Why not 25? or 30? or 50?

going back to 1996 (the year the Big 12 began I think)

vs ISU 8-8

NU 0-2

TT 2-0

Texas 0-1

Mizzou 1-0

KSU 0-1

the avg wins those teams not named ISU is 9.57 (compared to Iowa's 5.29)

conversely for ISU:

Iowa 8-8
Minn 1-1

the avg record of teams not named Iowa was 4.5 (ISU was 4)

So in short, your numbers don't tell a whole lot about the strength of either conference other than to say Iowa has done surprisingly well (3-4) considering the substantial wins difference which is almost entirely due to playing Nebraska in 1999/2000 and KSU in 2000 when both of those teams were really good and Iowa...wasn't. In fact, in only one of those games did Iowa have more wins than the Big 12 team they were facing (1996 against TTech)

ISU has done about what you'd expect given the closeness of the avg wins (1-1).

 

[cole20]

For Iowa's 8-12 record the above schools were not counted since they are not in the Big 12.

I ment for Iowa state

 

[cole20]

For Iowa's 8-12 record the above schools were not counted since they are not in the Big 12.

I ment for Iowa state

 

[Clones85']

Why 20 games? Why not 25? or 30? or 50?

going back to 1996 (the year the Big 12 began I think)

vs ISU 8-8

NU 0-2

TT 2-0

Texas 0-1

Mizzou 1-0

KSU 0-1

the avg wins those teams not named ISU is 9.57 (compared to Iowa's 5.29)

conversely for ISU:

Iowa 8-8
Minn 1-1

the avg record of teams not named Iowa was 4.5 (ISU was 4)

So in short, your numbers don't tell a whole lot about the strength of either conference other than to say Iowa has done surprisingly well (3-4) considering the substantial wins difference which is almost entirely due to playing Nebraska in 1999/2000 and KSU in 2000 when both of those teams were really good and Iowa...wasn't. In fact, in only one of those games did Iowa have more wins than the Big 12 team they were facing (1996 against TTech)

ISU has done about what you'd expect given the closeness of the avg wins (1-1).

B/c 20 games is more relevant. What do games being played in the 80's have to do with now?

I've said it before but ISU would win more games in the Big 10. They've shown this on the football field.

The fact that the Big 10 has been DOMINATED by the Big 12 (even the North) the past 10 years shows it.

 

[hawkeye2121]

B/c 20 games is more relevant. What do games being played in the 80's have to do with now?

I've said it before but ISU would win more games in the Big 10. They've shown this on the football field.

The fact that the Big 10 has been DOMINATED by the Big 12 (even the North) the past 10 years shows it.

Well you can go ahead all day and think that the Big 12 is such an elite conference compared to the Big 10, but at the end of the day, the Big 10 is still going to be here. Unfortunately for you, the Big 12 can't say the same thing.

So go ahead and keep talking up the Big 12, because from the looks of it, you've only got a couple years left of that before it doesn't exist any longer.

 

[Clark]

B/c 20 games is more relevant. What do games being played in the 80's have to do with now?

I've said it before but ISU would win more games in the Big 10. They've shown this on the football field.

The fact that the Big 10 has been DOMINATED by the Big 12 (even the North) the past 10 years shows it.

They've shown this on the field huh. All two times they played a Big 10 team not named Iowa? (3-9 Minn and 6-7 Minn)

And I wasn't talking about the 80's. Why stop at 20 when you could have went back to '96 (a legitimate starting point when talking Big 12) with only a couple of games difference. Oh, I know, because those were wins for Iowa and wouldn't help the cause of ISU..

 

[chadm]

Well you can go ahead all day and think that the Big 12 is such an elite conference compared to the Big 10, but at the end of the day, the Big 10 is still going to be here. Unfortunately for you, the Big 12 can't say the same thing.

So go ahead and keep talking up the Big 12, because from the looks of it, you've only got a couple years left of that before it doesn't exist any longer.

What a great debate this is. The conference is breaking up..........the other facts mean nothing. :SLEEP:

 

[1100011CS]

Well you can go ahead all day and think that the Big 12 is such an elite conference compared to the Big 10, but at the end of the day, the Big 10 is still going to be here. Unfortunately for you, the Big 12 can't say the same thing.

So go ahead and keep talking up the Big 12, because from the looks of it, you've only got a couple years left of that before it doesn't exist any longer.

Maybe, but the teams that made up the Big 12 will still be beating up on the Little 10.

 

[hawkeye2121]

What a great debate this is. The conference is breaking up..........the other facts mean nothing. :SLEEP:

Well if you read and are smart enough to comprehend what I wrote, you would realize that I wasn't debating you at all. I was simply saying, enjoy your time to gloat and talk up the Big 12. Because in a matter of a few years, you won't be able to do that.

 

[chadm]

Well if you read and are smart enough to comprehend what I wrote, you would realize that I wasn't debating you at all. I was simply saying, enjoy your time to gloat and talk up the Big 12. Because in a matter of a few years, you won't be able to do that.

Facts do not change.

 

[Clark]

Well you can go ahead all day and think that the Big 12 is such an elite conference compared to the Big 10, but at the end of the day, the Big 10 is still going to be here. Unfortunately for you, the Big 12 can't say the same thing.

So go ahead and keep talking up the Big 12, because from the looks of it, you've only got a couple years left of that before it doesn't exist any longer.

Well if you read and are smart enough to comprehend what I wrote, you would realize that I wasn't debating you at all. I was simply saying, enjoy your time to gloat and talk up the Big 12. Because in a matter of a few years, you won't be able to do that.

Hey ******* I'm doing fine by myself. I don't need your "help." Stop derailing the thread and post your nonsense in the re-alignment thread (for as long was you are still allowed to post here, which won't be long)

 

[SplitIdentity]

Srsly.

Who cares?

ISU could have a slightly better record vs. the Big Ten due to the fact that there are more bad teams (typically NU, IU, Minny, and Purdue), while the Big 12 has had Baylor (not now), KU, and recently CU, and KSU.

In the end though, does it really matter? I don't know why Hawk fans get so bent out of shape about this argument. The Big Ten will always be considered a strong conference, but will never be the SEC (for many reasons, some good some bad). All I care about is Iowa making it to bowls, pulling in solid recruits, and winning the bowl games they play in. I don't give a **** what the rest of the Big Ten does in their bowl games, although I would rather see them win.

 

[Hawkeye11en1]

B/c 20 games is more relevant. What do games being played in the 80's have to do with now?

I've said it before but ISU would win more games in the Big 10. They've shown this on the football field.

The fact that the Big 10 has been DOMINATED by the Big 12 (even the North) the past 10 years shows it.

Please tell me how a game in 2001 has any more relevance than a game in 1980.

 

[Madclone1]

Please tell me how a game in 2001 has any more relevance than a game in 1980.

IT's called the "modern era" . . . versus "last century."

 

[Hawkeye11en1]

IT's called the "modern era" . . . versus "last century."

Oh, so the players are the same in the "modern era" versus "last century"? I wasn't aware scholarships had gotten lengthened, is this a new phenomenon?

 

[chadm]

Please tell me how a game in 2001 has any more relevance than a game in 1980.

Since you mentioned 1980. I checked the records for 1970-1980

Iowa 2-5 against Big 12 teams
ISU 2-2 against Big 10 teams

 

[Hawkeye11en1]

Since you mentioned 1980. I checked the records for 1970-1980

Iowa 2-5 against Big 12 teams
ISU 2-2 against Big 10 teams

I said "a" game. My point was that those games don't matter. Looking into the past is ridiculous and pointless. Minnesota was a powerhouse at one point. Who gives a crap.