http://www.jconline.com/story/sports/col...101615916/

Quote:Purdue first-year athletic director Mike Bobinski is prepared to tackle the issue of protecting the in-state rivalry to allow the schools to play twice during the Big Ten season instead of relying on the league’s scheduling rotation. Matt Painter has been vocal about the idea and Bobinski is in lockstep with his veteran coach.

It’s one of several topics scheduled to be addressed at next week’s Big Ten Joint Group Meetings at the conference office.

“IU wants it. We want it,” Bobinski said. “It makes perfect sense from your fan perspective. It makes great sense regionally because there’s great interest in those games. Why wouldn’t you play them twice? There’s going to be television interest in those games more often than not.

“To have them happen when they happen in the rotation doesn’t seem like we’re putting our best foot forward as a league. I don’t know if across the league there’s wide spread interest among others that have what they believe is a natural rival. If there are, I would be all for that too.”

I am surprised this is not the setup.

For the four eastern schools, the logical split is Penn State with Rutgers, as they go back to the old Eastern Independents days. They also both stink at Basketball. Ohio State and Maryland are the two left over, but they are comparable programs and would make a good rivalry - heck I'm for it, and I grew up in Columbus (well Worthington).

With 18 games, you host your "natural rival" every year and you host the other 12 schools twice every three years (16 games a year, 48 over three years, or 24 home games, 24 road games against 12 schools). The math works out nicely, and everyone get Indiana (and every other school) in their gym two times every three years.

This should be done yesterday.

I too am surprised this isn't happening yet. I'm 90% sure the ACC has done this from the start of their 14/15 member combo.

And for the record, Penn State doesn't stink at basketball. They are an underachieving dangerous team that is good for a couple upsets during the year and then some head-scratching losses which totally deflates the morale and keeps them from being a NCAA threat.

I don't like the thought of playing team even less (which is what locking teams would do), but I get wanting to play more and I would like to always play Michigan twice.

If they lock teams I think it's about 50/50 whether they lock one or two and think two might actually be more likely as they are going to want to lock at least everyone's first choice natural rival. My guess if two is that Ohio State would end up with Michigan where the other team could be anyone else (my preference would be Wisconsin assuming Indiana already has two locked, but could see it being any of the eastern ones or Michigan State too, depending on what worked out easiest).

If they only locked one, they would give preference in basketball to Michigan/Michigan State, so it would be someone more random. I think they would probably lock Penn State and Ohio State and Maryland and Rutgers (just for proximity and because Ohio State/Penn State is already somewhat a football rivalry that might spill over), but Maryland makes as much sense.

Best guess if only one locked:
Indiana/Purdue
Michigan/Michigan State
Illinois/Northwestern
Iowa/Nebraska
Wisconsin/Minnesota
Ohio State/Penn State
Maryland/Rutgers