[ColoradoTree]

[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=14252.msg155585#msg155585 date=1454609029]
No, I'd settle for Iowa forfeiting every game they ever played against us ...

Well, that part wouldn't be so helpful, as the only game we ever played against them was a 29 point victory for us.
[/quote]

And honestly, do we expect to ever play them in football, unless it's in a bowl game or the playoff?  For the most part, our recent non-conference scheduling seems to be done to either maximize exposure (ND) or to get reasonable exposure with a recruiting element (BYU for our Utah pipeline, UCF for kids in the SE, Duke/WF for Middle Atlantic kids, TCU/Rice for our Texas pipeline, Northwestern for Big Ten Country).  If possible, it sure seems like we prefer schools with good academic profiles, too (e.g., Rice, Duke, Northwestern).  If we're going to play a Midwestern team, I would think we'd go back to the well with Northwestern, especially now that there's a little bit of history to that game and how frustrating it was this year.  We can expect the Midwestern kids we recruit to also have some interest in Northwestern a lot more often than we can expect them to have serious interest in Iowa (unless they're from Iowa, of course).  Usually when a non-conference opponent is announced, I think, "sure, I can see the logic behind that."  I just don't see the benefit in scheduling Iowa in football.

Considering that recent history, Kansas State seems out of place.  Not a recruiting hotbed, and not a similar academic profile.  I wonder whether it was simply the best option we had for those dates.  That said, there might not be a better matchup of classy head coaches all season long.  (San Diego State is another questionable choice.) 

[ColoradoTree]

[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=14252.msg155585#msg155585 date=1454609029]
No, I'd settle for Iowa forfeiting every game they ever played against us ...

Well, that part wouldn't be so helpful, as the only game we ever played against them was a 29 point victory for us.
[/quote]

And honestly, do we expect to ever play them in football, unless it's in a bowl game or the playoff?  For the most part, our recent non-conference scheduling seems to be done to either maximize exposure (ND) or to get reasonable exposure with a recruiting element (BYU for our Utah pipeline, UCF for kids in the SE, Duke/WF for Middle Atlantic kids, TCU/Rice for our Texas pipeline, Northwestern for Big Ten Country).  If possible, it sure seems like we prefer schools with good academic profiles, too (e.g., Rice, Duke, Northwestern).  If we're going to play a Midwestern team, I would think we'd go back to the well with Northwestern, especially now that there's a little bit of history to that game and how frustrating it was this year.  We can expect the Midwestern kids we recruit to also have some interest in Northwestern a lot more often than we can expect them to have serious interest in Iowa (unless they're from Iowa, of course).  Usually when a non-conference opponent is announced, I think, "sure, I can see the logic behind that."  I just don't see the benefit in scheduling Iowa in football.

Considering that recent history, Kansas State seems out of place.  Not a recruiting hotbed, and not a similar academic profile.  I wonder whether it was simply the best option we had for those dates.  That said, there might not be a better matchup of classy head coaches all season long.  (San Diego State is another questionable choice.)