CSNbbs

There is talk from both the ACC and Big 12 to get rid of divisions and go to permanent rival scheduling. Should the Big Ten go to this plan if the "division" rule is adopted and if so what would be your plan (I will assume 3 permanent rivals and rotate 6 teams in and out each year).

Biased Illinois/Penn State version:

Ohio State: Michigan, Penn State, Illinois
Michigan: Ohio State, Michigan State, Minnesota
Penn State: Ohio State, Maryland, Rutgers
Michigan State: Michigan, Indiana, Maryland
Maryland: Penn State, Rutgers, Michigan State
Rutgers: Penn State, Maryland. Purdue
Indiana: Purdue, Illinois, Michigan State
Purdue: Indiana, Northwestern, Rutgers
Illinois: Northwestern, Ohio State, Indiana
Northwestern: Illinois, Nebraska, Purdue
Wisconsin: Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska
Minnesota: Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan
Iowa: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska
Nebraska: Iowa, Wisconsin, Northwestern

(05-12-2022 06:51 AM)schmolik Wrote: [ -> ]There is talk from both the ACC and Big 12 to get rid of divisions and go to permanent rival scheduling. Should the Big Ten go to this plan if the "division" rule is adopted and if so what would be your plan (I will assume 3 permanent rivals and rotate 6 teams in and out each year).

Biased Illinois/Penn State version:

Ohio State: Michigan, Penn State, Illinois
Michigan: Ohio State, Michigan State, Minnesota
Penn State: Ohio State, Maryland, Rutgers
Michigan State: Michigan, Indiana, Maryland
Maryland: Penn State, Rutgers, Michigan State
Rutgers: Penn State, Maryland. Purdue
Indiana: Purdue, Illinois, Michigan State
Purdue: Indiana, Northwestern, Rutgers
Illinois: Northwestern, Ohio State, Indiana
Northwestern: Illinois, Nebraska, Purdue
Wisconsin: Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska
Minnesota: Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan
Iowa: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska
Nebraska: Iowa, Wisconsin, Northwestern

I love this for Ohio State and Michigan - nice East/West #3's!
I feel like Penn State and Michigan State are getting off too easy,
while Maryland's 3 are too tough for them.
Perhaps Penn State and Michigan State need a #3 from the West?

Illinois: Northwestern, Ohio St, Purdue
Indiana: Maryland, Northwestern, Purdue
Iowa: Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Maryland: Indiana, Penn St, Rutgers
Michigan: Michigan St, Minnesota, Ohio St
Michigan St: Michigan, Nebraska, Purdue
Minnesota: Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin
Nebraska: Iowa, Michigan St, Wisconsin
Northwestern: Illinois, Indiana, Rutgers
Ohio St: Illinois, Michigan, Penn St
Penn St: Maryland, Ohio St, Rutgers
Purdue: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan St
Rutgers: Maryland, Northwestern, Penn St
Wisconsin: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska

The 3 games that felt forced above and my rationale:
Indiana/Maryland: basketball schools battling on the gridiron
Michigan St/Nebraska: football-first schools
Northwestern/Rutgers: large market schools

Penn State does get lucky drawing both Maryland and Rutgers but both of them would no doubt want Penn State first and you almost have to let them both have them because it keeps them happy and keeps another Midwestern team from having to travel to them.

BePcr07's plan: Penn State has the same three teams. Illinois is trading Indiana for Purdue which isn't a bad trade to me. Ohio State and Michigan have the same three teams. I don't see many significant differences. I would certainly accept it.

(05-13-2022 01:11 PM)schmolik Wrote: [ -> ]Penn State does get lucky drawing both Maryland and Rutgers but both of them would no doubt want Penn State first and you almost have to let them both have them because it keeps them happy and keeps another Midwestern team from having to travel to them.

BePcr07's plan: Penn State has the same three teams. Illinois is trading Indiana for Purdue which isn't a bad trade to me. Ohio State and Michigan have the same three teams. I don't see many significant differences. I would certainly accept it.

According to Winsipedia, Illinois has played Purdue 26 more times than it has played Indiana so that was my justification.

There is an article on the Purdue SN blog, Hammer and Rails, which delineates that if the NCAA eliminates the requirement that a conference needs divisions to have a conference championship game, the B1G might go to a 3 permanent rivals and revert to a 8 game conference schedule with an alternating 5 other conference games. By doing this, fans would be able to see every other conference team at home at least once every 4 years. However, I am not sure Fox wants to reduce the intraconference game inventory.

(05-16-2022 01:00 AM)RutgersMike Wrote: [ -> ]There is an article on the Purdue SN blog, Hammer and Rails, which delineates that if the NCAA eliminates the requirement that a conference needs divisions to have a conference championship game, the B1G might go to a 3 permanent rivals and revert to a 8 game conference schedule with an alternating 5 other conference games. By doing this, fans would be able to see every other conference team at home at least once every 4 years. However, I am not sure Fox wants to reduce the intraconference game inventory.

Is there an incentive to go to 8 games? I would think most teams would rather play a random B1G team than a random ACC team.

This new rule almost certainly has 0 impact on the #of conference games, which likely has already been cemented in the current negotiation process.

Divisions need to go away. It's ridiculous to have a 14 team conference divided and not playing one another more often. Have 3 permanent rivals and rotate the rest with 9 conference games. I like playing conference teams more than any other. Ohio State and, hopefully, Nebraska will always play an additional top ooc game to shut the mouths of doubters.

(05-18-2022 07:47 AM)cubucks Wrote: [ -> ]Divisions need to go away. It's ridiculous to have a 14 team conference divided and not playing one another more often. Have 3 permanent rivals and rotate the rest with 9 conference games. I like playing conference teams more than any other. Ohio State and, hopefully, Nebraska will always play an additional top ooc game to shut the mouths of doubters.

How much have those OOC games helped Ohio State and the Big 10? That Oregon game help Ohio State last year? The Oklahoma game help Ohio State in 2017? Meanwhile the schools in that other conference keep playing G5's and FCS teams and get at large bids. If strength of schedule really means anything, a good loss would be just as good as a pathetic win but we know the CFP Committee doesn't think that. If Ohio State goes 12-0, no one is going to care who they play OOC. And if Ohio State loses twice, it wouldn't matter if the two losses are an undefeated Alabama and an undefeated Penn State (wishful thinking, I know), they'd be out.

(05-18-2022 11:48 AM)schmolik Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-18-2022 07:47 AM)cubucks Wrote: [ -> ]Divisions need to go away. It's ridiculous to have a 14 team conference divided and not playing one another more often. Have 3 permanent rivals and rotate the rest with 9 conference games. I like playing conference teams more than any other. Ohio State and, hopefully, Nebraska will always play an additional top ooc game to shut the mouths of doubters.

How much have those OOC games helped Ohio State and the Big 10? That Oregon game help Ohio State last year? The Oklahoma game help Ohio State in 2017? Meanwhile the schools in that other conference keep playing G5's and FCS teams and get at large bids. If strength of schedule really means anything, a good loss would be just as good as a pathetic win but we know the CFP Committee doesn't think that. If Ohio State goes 12-0, no one is going to care who they play OOC. And if Ohio State loses twice, it wouldn't matter if the two losses are an undefeated Alabama and an undefeated Penn State (wishful thinking, I know), they'd be out.

All fair points, schmolik!

(05-17-2022 04:39 PM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-16-2022 01:00 AM)RutgersMike Wrote: [ -> ]There is an article on the Purdue SN blog, Hammer and Rails, which delineates that if the NCAA eliminates the requirement that a conference needs divisions to have a conference championship game, the B1G might go to a 3 permanent rivals and revert to a 8 game conference schedule with an alternating 5 other conference games. By doing this, fans would be able to see every other conference team at home at least once every 4 years. However, I am not sure Fox wants to reduce the intraconference game inventory.

Is there an incentive to go to 8 games? I would think most teams would rather play a random B1G team than a random ACC team.

This new rule almost certainly has 0 impact on the #of conference games, which likely has already been cemented in the current negotiation process.

To make the math work, the Big Ten could have each team have up to 5 permanent rivals and rotate the other eight teams in two groups of four every two years, home and away.

Using mine, adding many of BePcr07's:

Ohio State: Michigan, Penn State, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana
Michigan: Ohio State, Michigan State, Minnesota, Penn State, Rutgers
Penn State: Ohio State, Maryland, Rutgers, Michigan, Nebraska
Michigan State: Michigan, Indiana, Maryland, Purdue, Iowa
Maryland: Penn State, Rutgers, Michigan State, Indiana, Minnesota
Rutgers: Penn State, Maryland. Purdue, Northwestern, Michigan
Indiana: Purdue, Illinois, Michigan State, Maryland, Ohio State
Purdue: Indiana, Northwestern, Rutgers, Illinois, Michigan State
Illinois: Northwestern, Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue, Wisconsin
Northwestern: Illinois, Nebraska, Purdue, Rutgers, Iowa
Wisconsin: Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Ohio State, Illinois
Minnesota: Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, Maryland
Iowa: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Michigan State
Nebraska: Iowa, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Penn State, Minnesota

Only ones I couldn't do were Indiana-Northwestern and Michigan State-Nebraska. If Indiana has to play Northwestern, I guess they can drop Maryland, Northwestern can drop Purdue, and Maryland can play Purdue. I doubt Michigan State has any desire to have Nebraska as a permanent rival and vice versa.

I changed a few and wrote a FanPost on SB Nation's Big Ten blog:
https://www.offtackleempire.com/2022/5/2...-divisions

Ohio State: Michigan, Penn State, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana
Michigan: Ohio State, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Maryland
Penn State: Ohio State, Maryland, Rutgers, Michigan State, Nebraska
Michigan State: Michigan, Indiana, Penn State, Purdue, Iowa
Maryland: Penn State, Rutgers, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota
Rutgers: Penn State, Maryland. Purdue, Northwestern, Iowa
Indiana: Purdue, Illinois, Michigan State, Maryland, Ohio State
Purdue: Indiana, Northwestern, Illinois, Michigan State, Rutgers
Illinois: Northwestern, Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue, Wisconsin
Northwestern: Illinois, Purdue, Michigan, Rutgers, Nebraska
Wisconsin: Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Ohio State, Illinois
Minnesota: Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, Maryland
Iowa: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska, Michigan State, Rutgers
Nebraska: Iowa, Wisconsin, Penn State, Northwestern, Minnesota

With the ACC divisionless schedule coming out, is there a timeline for the B1G? Do we have any idea if it will be 5-4/4 or 3-5/5?

The unexpected school for the ACC was Louisville. I had them pegged as getting leftovers with something like Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Virginia Tech. Instead, they got Georgia Tech, Miami, and Virginia. Which school would get an unexpected set of rivals in the B1G or would there be one?

We might want to put everything on hold now:)

A change is definitely coming with future additions of UCLA & USC

At 16, 5/5-5 works. But I’m not convinced the B1G is done.

B10 definitely isn't done. If it doesn't get ND on the road to 20 then it certainly will on the road to 24.

(06-30-2022 01:15 PM)schmolik Wrote: [ -> ]We might want to put everything on hold now:)

Why?

(06-30-2022 03:36 PM)BePcr07 Wrote: [ -> ]At 16, 5/5-5 works. But I’m not convinced the B1G is done.

The Big 10 going to a 10 game conference schedule certainly would be unprecedented (outside of the COVID-19 year). I would say assuming no more additions, 3-6-6 is more likely.

Now if the Big 10 goes beyond 16 teams, it would then run into the issues the SEC has now. If the SEC wants to have every team play an average of every other year and remain at an 8 game conference football schedule, each team can only play 1 team annually. That is certainly not acceptable as two teams would be fighting for the same opponent (example: both Auburn and Tennessee would want to play Alabama annually). So the alternatives would be to go to 9 conference games or teams would not be able to play an average of every other year.

In the Big Ten, "1 permanent rival" would likely be as unacceptable as it is in the SEC (Michigan State would fight it like mad). Would the Big 10 go to 10 conference games to allow for it? Assuming an 18 team conference, then it becomes 3-7-7. Assuming the two Bay Area teams are the other two new teams, then the four California teams would easily be each others permanent partners and the 14 current Big 10 teams can divide amongst each other.

Assuming no additions and the format is 3-6-6, will UCLA and USC be teams the current 14 teams want to have as "permanent" rivals or not want? Would Nebraska and/or Iowa make sense for them because they are the closest geographically? How about Northwestern vs. USC (two private schools)?