
Iowa State's 2012 poster was placed in the Hayden Fry football complex before the team's rivalry game in September.
IOWA CITY — A 10-game Big Ten football schedule has the potential to disrupt the annual Iowa-Iowa State football series.
Iowa, like most high-major football programs, prefers to play seven home games each year to help fund the athletics department. Iowa earns about $2.8 million per home date. A 10-game Big Ten schedule would prevent Iowa from hosting seven games annually and playing at Iowa State every-other year.
“One of the things I like about Iowa-Iowa State is that it’s a competitive college rivalry,” Iowa Athletics Director Gary Barta told The Gazette on Wednesday. “It’s good for the state, and it’s good for college football. Hopefully we’ll be able to continue that. That’s high on the list in terms of goals for me. At this point, nothing that I’ve heard is forcing a conversation otherwise.”
Big Ten officials and school administrators met Sunday and Monday at league headquarters and discussed boosting the league schedule from eight games to either nine or 10 in the future. While the final number won’t be set until later this spring or early summer, Barta said “it’s pretty likely, if not a foregone conclusion, that we’re not going to be playing eight conference games.”

The temporary traveling Cy-Hawk Trophy used for the 2011 Iowa-Iowa State football game.
“One of the challenges of going to 10 would be if you’re ever in a scenario where you didn’t have seven home games,” Barta said. “How would we deal with that? That’s a significant amount of money to each of our bottom lines, having a seventh home game. It also has a big impact economically on the local economies. So, again, I don’t know exactly where we’ll end up, but we had a lot of discussion about the advantages and disadvantages of having nine or 10.
“Having seven (home) games is high on my list in terms of importance. I’m not going to spend too much time or angst thinking about nine or 10 specifically to my schedule until I know one way or the other which way we’re going.”
Iowa and Iowa State have a football contract through 2017 and both schools have an opt-out clause should either league expand its schedule. The Big 12 added a ninth game in 2011, but Iowa State was able to sync its league schedule to maintain its regular dates with Iowa.
In August 2011, the Big Ten announced it also would go to nine league games beginning in 2017. Like the Big 12, the Big Ten gave Iowa a preferential sync to keep its schedule with Iowa State but the Big Ten dropped that proposal in December 2011.
Iowa and Iowa State have played annually since 1977, and the series is sponsored by Iowa Corn.
“I like playing the Iowa-Iowa State series and everything indicates I’d want to continue that,” Barta said.
The Big Ten’s realignment discussions should help Iowa reignite border rivalries with Wisconsin and Illinois on a regular basis. Geography is a primary tenet in the 2014 divisional setup when Maryland and Rutgers join the Big Ten. Iowa and Illinois have not played since 2008. The Hawkeyes had faced Wisconsin 72 times over a 74-year time period from 1937 through 2010 until the league split into the Legends and Leaders divisions in 2011. The schools had not played the last two years.

Iowa Athletics Director Gary Barta (left) talks with Wisconsin Athletics Director Barry Alvarez before the Iowa-Wisconsin game at Kinnick Stadium on Saturday, Oct. 23, 2010, in Iowa City. (Jim Slosiarek/SourceMedia Group News)
“If it’s possible, we’d like to have a stronger connection to our geography,” Barta said. “Let’s use Wisconsin as an example. (Wisconsin Athletics Director) Barry (Alvarez) and I both had each other on our preferred list in the last go-around. In order to make things work, that series on an annual basis wasn’t able to happen.
“We think with the addition of Rutgers and Maryland we can come close if not get there in terms of accomplishing (geography and competitiveness), including dividing East to West. So it definitely feels like we’re a long way toward accomplishing that. In terms of breaking down which schools might end up where, again, nothing was finalized.”
Alvarez told listeners Tuesday on his monthly radio show that Michigan State officials were making a push to join a western division consisting of Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern and Illinois. Geographically, Purdue is the next most-western school. Barta declined to reveal which schools were discussed for each division.
Barta added that the schools have weighed several options regarding cross-divisional match-ups, ranging from a each school protecting an annual game to not designating any rivalries. There’s also the possibility of just protecting just one cross-divisional rivalry, like Michigan-Michigan State or Indiana-Purdue, and rotating the others.
“It was certainly talked about, whether we would have any crossovers, some crossovers or just go completely round-robin as long as it took to play all teams,” Barta said.
I really don’t see how Iowa can give up a home game every other year when it goes to 10 games. If it does.
Which is a shame. I know alot of Iowa fans don’t necessarily like the ISU game, they see it as a lose-lose (and in 1997 I would’ve agreed) but that’s obviously not the case anymore.
I’ve never bought into the argument that Iowa and Iowa State can’t be strong at the same time. I think that’s nonsense. In state rivalries are among the things college football is all about.
But money talks.
Mike, nationally these two Iowa teams are not seen as competitive, even in years when they prove otherwise. Just compare preseason polls to final polls. More often than not, Iowa exceeds expectations. Playing in the B1G requires either winning the conference or sweeping your non-conference games to get a BCS. Losing to Iowa State will never get Iowa a favorable standing for post-season play. Winning against Iowa State will not boost that rating. Look at 2002. It kept the Hawks from a National Title game. I would love to see the “rivalry” stay, but prefer the Hawks have a National standing and B1G prominence. This should start by ridding the FCS game, and then adding a BCS Conference game (other than ISU).
I don’t necessarily disagree but honestly, Iowa is in the national picture once every 4-5 years. Playing Iowa State doesn’t hurt or hinder Iowa’s ability to go to a bowl game like the Capital One or Outback or wherever their sending the teams.
I really would like to see it continue but will I cry if it goes away? No. I don’t even live in Iowa anymore (and haven’t for some time) so it doesn’t mean as much to me as it did when I was there in the middle of it. I live in Chicago where you rarely see an Iowa State fan. I know there are some but I can count on one hand how many Cyclone flags, stickers, shirts etc I see here in a year. So, to me, it’s not that big of a deal anymore.
Yet my family back in Iowa is pretty half and half. It’s a big deal.
And I do like the fact that it’s in-state. It’s two BCS conferences (you don’t see that too often) and it’s fun. Remember that? The College football experience is supposed to be fun.
UI fans will tap dance all around, expounding on the virtues of this proposal.
How about this,….now I State can go out and get a high profile non-con opponent! No more B16 bottom feeder forced onto the schedule.
Is it really necessary for Iowa and Iowa State to play every year? Why not just a home and away series with a few years break in between? This is more of a problem for Iowa State than Iowa. The Iowa game is significant revenue for Iowa State. They’ve already lost the Nebraska game. Those were typically the only two games they filled the stadium at a premium ticket price. If ISU brings in two weak teams to replace Iowa and Nebraska, they lose significant revenue and they don’t have the richest program to begin with. Iowa, on the other hand, is pretty flush.
While that may have been the case in the past, and I even would of thought you were right too. But the last 2 years ISU has packed the Jack for every game. This was the first year without a Nebraska or Iowa home game and it didn’t seem to matter.
As a ISU fan I would like to see the game stay, but I won’t be heart broken if it goes either. In the end the game really doesn’t do much for us.
Jay fits the typical ISU Fan which I expected. ISU Fans can say what they want, but in reality this is really a lose lose situation for Iowa. Iowa has significant downside if they lose this game and zero upside if they win. No matter how you slice it, this is the case. I applaud ISU for being competitive over the last years (5-7) but this is really a one side affair (39-21) over the years and again, Iowa gains zero when beating the Clowns.
Say what you want, but I would much rather watch Wisky, Purdon’t, NW or others besides ISU. Not trying to be arrogant, but this is really reality of the situation.