Once basketball ends, it's a long, quiet slog through summer waiting for football to spin up. Some fans, who are more serious than us at CSJ, can fill their spare moments with the endless horse race that is recruiting. We've just never had the heart for it, unless the player in question is a high-profile local kid, and even then it's tough.
We'll do our best to fill the summer with interesting things to keep you checking in.
Take today's tidbit:
In a long article that originated in the ISU Daily, and made the UWire, are two interesting nuggets. First, the NCAA may change the "K-State Rule" and allow wins against I-AA schools to count towards bowl eligibility, and it may take effect this fall, making ISU's bowl chances better. The game against Illinois State could go on as scheduled.
For us, the more interesting bit was buried at the bottom: who ISU tried to get a game with this fall, but could only get interest if they went on the road. It's a tough list: Troy, Houston, Minnesota, Southern California and Louisiana State. Only Houston failed to get to a bowl game, LSU lost to Iowa on a miracle finish, and USC won the National Championship. Playing on the road, ISU could beat 3 of the 5, but I wouldn't like the odds of it.
Which brings us to an interesting point: Is it more important for the football program to pay the bills, or get to bowls? Any home game is worth $700K minimum, even if it doesn't get you closer to being bowl eligible. Going on the road and losing doesn't get you any closer either, and you won't come away with much cash to boot. So home you stay.
The "K-State Rule" was implemented for two reasons: Preventing teams like KSU from playing 2 or 3 I-AA teams to pad their win total, and forcing more interesting I-A matchups. All that has happened is teams load up on mid-majors like Akron instead of Alabama. Everyone needs 6 home games, and will write the check to ensure it. No reason to create a penalty for those with smaller wallets that can't even get Akron.
Bring on the Redbirds!