Over at the Chicago Tribune, there's this article on the Big Ten having to restructure it's schedule because the Pac-12 teams decided that they didn't want to have schedules where they play 11 "Tough Games".
"But the Pac-12 pulled out Friday because several of its schools do not want to play 11 tough games – nine Pac-12 opponents, a Big Ten foe and, in some cases, Notre Dame or Texas A&M."
Wow. If you think Notre Dame is "tough" then maybe you shouldn't play them. Perhaps you could play a team that actually belonged to a conference? If the Pac-12 teams would agree not to play Notre Dame until they joined a conference, along with all of the other major football conferences (SEC, Big Ten, Big Twelve, ACC), then let's see how well that whole "Independent" status works out for Notre Dame. Have fun playing Temple.
Can you really consider Arizona, Colorado, Washington State and Oregon State "tough games"? Sure, they're conference games, but overall, how many teams in the Pac-12 have had multiple year tough schedules compared to the schedules Iowa State has had the past three years?
Okay, so I didn't do a lot of analysis here, consider this a clay pidgeon you can shoot down. I guess it just makes me ill that our school that is never considered one of the better teams in its conference always has one of the toughest schedules in the nation. Is this a tough schedule based on the level of talent within our school's team, or would any team with our schedule be considered as having a "tough" schedule?
Come on, Pac-12, I expect better from you.