Ohio State is USC's 11th most played team, and top non-PAC team outside of Notre Dame, with 24 meetings. Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Penn State are 14-17 overall.
UCLA has as their top most played team outside of the PAC... SDSU at 12, TN at 13. Nebraska at 15, Illinois at 17, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Ohio State at 19-22.

So USC: UCLA, Ohio State, Illinois
UCLA: USC, Nebraska, Illinois

(08-04-2022 12:21 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 08:11 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If 3 permanent rivals is the magic number, I’d be shocked if Ohio St and Michigan weren’t among the 4 existing members to get a rivalry with one of the west coast schools.

I’d bet the house that if we go 3-6-6, then OSU’s protected rivals are Michigan, Penn State, and USC. Anything else is leaving too much money on the table.

Ohio St. is not going to get the other top 3 programs every year. Would put them at too much of a competitive disadvantage. They will get PSU, Michigan and UCLA. USC will get Michigan who gets similar ratings to Ohio St.

Nebraska wants Southern Cal, UCLA, and Penn State as permanent rivals.

(08-04-2022 12:21 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 08:11 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If 3 permanent rivals is the magic number, I’d be shocked if Ohio St and Michigan weren’t among the 4 existing members to get a rivalry with one of the west coast schools.

I’d bet the house that if we go 3-6-6, then OSU’s protected rivals are Michigan, Penn State, and USC. Anything else is leaving too much money on the table.

When I sat down and tried to figure out 3 permanent rivals, this is who I had for OSU as well.

My USC rivals were: UCLA, OSU, Northwestern
UCLA rivals were: USC, Nebraska, Michigan

(08-04-2022 02:13 PM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 12:21 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 08:11 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If 3 permanent rivals is the magic number, I’d be shocked if Ohio St and Michigan weren’t among the 4 existing members to get a rivalry with one of the west coast schools.

I’d bet the house that if we go 3-6-6, then OSU’s protected rivals are Michigan, Penn State, and USC. Anything else is leaving too much money on the table.

When I sat down and tried to figure out 3 permanent rivals, this is who I had for OSU as well.

My USC rivals were: UCLA, OSU, Northwestern
UCLA rivals were: USC, Nebraska, Michigan

Would you mind posting the whole thing? I’m interested!

Round Robin among Nebraska/Iowa/Minnesota/Wisconsin (let’s call them the Big 10 West) makes sense.

Round robin among Northwestern/Illinois/Purdue/Indiana (Big 10 Central) makes sense too.

As one poster suggested, you could put the 4 newest schools together (Big 10 Coastal)

But that leaves Mich/Mich St/Ohio St/Penn St as the pod of death (aka Big 10 East)

What I think will happen is some sort of a mix of those 2 pods together:

Mich: Ohio St, Mich St, USC
Ohio St: Mich, Penn St, UCLA
Penn St: Rutgers, Maryland, Ohio St
Mich St: Mich, USC, Maryland
Rutgers: Maryland, Penn St, UCLA
Maryland: Rutgers, Penn St, Mich St
USC: UCLA, Mich, Mich St
UCLA: USC, Ohio St, Rutgers

I tried to give USC/UCLA 1 of: Rutgers/Maryland and Ohio St/Michigan but then Mich St didn’t have enough protected rivalries.

How about this. 3 protected rivals


USC - UCLA, Wisc, MSU
UCLA - USC, Mich, Neb
NEB- Iowa, Minn, UCLA

Iowa - NEB, Minn, Wisc
Minn - Wisc, NEB, Iowa
Wisc - Minn, Iowa, USC

NW - ILL, Pur, Indy
ILL - NW, Indy, Pur
Pur - Indy, NW, ILL
Indy - Pur, ILL, NW

Mich - OSU, MSU, UCLA
MSU - Mich, USC, MD
OSU - Mich, PSU, Rut

PSU - OSU, MD, Rut
MD - Rut, PSU, MSU
Rut - MD, PSU, OSU

(08-04-2022 09:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 09:30 AM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 08:54 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I think 16 is the maximum number for no divisions or a way (roundabout or not) for conference semi-finals, so I agree 3-6-6 is most likely and am happy for that.

They will want to give both USC and UCLA one locked pairing (outside each other) they are happy with and the other might be random to fill out (same is true in smaller degrees throughout conference). The wild card here though is if they want to make the locked opponents somewhat more competitively even. Making this, I wasn't sure if the conference would be OK with locking Ohio State with Michigan, Penn State, and USC or locking Michigan with Ohio State, USC, and Michigan State. I think the conference will very much like the idea of sending one of Ohio State and Michigan to LA every other year, but I also think they can balance the schedules a bit better by sending Nebraska, which gives the traditional Cornhuskers access to some stronger recruiting ground (something they will benefit more than others from) and still give a big name.

I started coming up with samfle outlines for the different possibilities but will have to post later.

If ND doesn't come, then sure, we can stay at 16 playing 3 rivals annually and everyone else every other year. I'm okay with that while we wait on ND, but if ND decides they're willing to join, then we aren't telling them no, we're expanding, but is it 18 or 20 teams? And then is it 9 or 10 conference games?

If 18 and 9, I think you go with 5-4-4-4.
If 18 and 10, I agree with skyhawk about 3-7-7.

If 20 and 9, then it's obviously 4-5-5-5 (4 teams annually and rotate everyone else H&H every 6 years)
If 20 and 10, then it's the same 4 protected rivals, but rotate everyone else H&H every 5 years instead (4-6-6-6-6-6)

Alternatively if 20 and 10, you use 4-5-5-5 and use the 10th conference game for conference semis for the top 4, maybe a game for 5th vs. 6th for a playoff spot or Citrus bowl bid, and allow 5-20 or 7-20 to play missed rivalries if able.

20 and 10 is probably my favorite format if the B1G is going to expand outside of adding ND only and using a 4-6-6 format (17 teams, 10 conference games, and 4 protected rivals annually), but everyone hates odd numbers lol

Right now the Big 10 schools play the other division (except IU/PU who have a fixed rivalry) 6 out of 14 years. With 18 and a 3-6, you still get those other 14 teams six times in 14 years.

Actually, everyone has a protected crossover. We used to play Nebraska annually from 2016-2021, now it's Wisconsin until 2026, but probably sooner now. Here are the rest for 2022-25.

Illinois & Penn State
Indiana & Purdue
Iowa & Rutgers
Maryland & Northwestern
Michigan & Nebraska
Michigan State & Minnesota

So we play 7 opponents annually and rotate the other 6 teams twice every 6 years, but if there were no protected crossovers, you'd be correct about 3 times every 7 years. Before USC/UCLA, we were expecting playing 3 rivals annually and rotate the other 10 to play them 3 times every 5 years, now with 16 it's 3 annual and everyone else twice every 4 years.

(08-04-2022 12:21 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 08:11 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If 3 permanent rivals is the magic number, I’d be shocked if Ohio St and Michigan weren’t among the 4 existing members to get a rivalry with one of the west coast schools.

I’d bet the house that if we go 3-6-6, then OSU’s protected rivals are Michigan, Penn State, and USC. Anything else is leaving too much money on the table.

I'm all for that!

I love have "regional" opponents for PSU...but I'd rather have a SoCal school, OSU, and Michigan on our yearly schedule. (Even Michigan State...our forced rival...if Michigan wouldn't be available)

For those of you talking pods...that's not the 3-6-6 idea. It's 3 protected teams...but no pods. You play the other 12 teams in the Big Ten twice every four years. Home-away with 6 (2 years) and then Home-away with the other 6 (2 years).

I think the "go big" idea makes sense for TV money. And with the 3-6-6 model, teams are playing each other quite frequently anyway...so having the Big Ten "powers" playing each other yearly isn't quite the murderers row that it may have been in the old "divisioned" Big Ten. (I.e. if PSU had to play Wisconsin and Iowa every year...in addition to the fixed 6 in the East [OSU, UM, MSU included])

UCLA--USC, Nebraska, Michigan
USC--UCLA, OSU, PSU

3+6 makes no sense for USC and UCLA, only a 1+8 does. Frankly for Ohio State only a 1+8 makes sense as well. But Michigan, Iowa and Minnesota probably require at least a 3+6.

Maybe 3-6 for everyone except the SoCal schools who go on a 1+8 format to grand tour the 14 schools, so that over 7 years they host each twice and visit each twice; that's four trips to LA every 7 years for the entire B1G. Of course if Notre Dame and Stanford come on board in '26 then a 3-6 works for the newbies (UCLA would add Stanford, as would USC and ND, plus you'd have ND and Stanford playing USC; UCLA and ND would have a random 3rd opponent).

I'll be curious how they do that.

If the Big Ten added ND and Stanford, I am guessing they would go to 10 conference games and a 3-7-7 schedule.

Notre Dame would probably want USC, Purdue and MSU as protected rivals.

Between playing USC every year and playing UCLA and Stanford 50% of the time, that pretty much guarantees 1 trip to California every year.

(08-04-2022 05:32 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  3+6 makes no sense for USC and UCLA, only a 1+8 does. Frankly for Ohio State only a 1+8 makes sense as well. But Michigan, Iowa and Minnesota probably require at least a 3+6.

Maybe 3-6 for everyone except the SoCal schools who go on a 1+8 format to grand tour the 14 schools, so that over 7 years they host each twice and visit each twice; that's four trips to LA every 7 years for the entire B1G. Of course if Notre Dame and Stanford come on board in '26 then a 3-6 works for the newbies (UCLA would add Stanford, as would USC and ND, plus you'd have ND and Stanford playing USC; UCLA and ND would have a random 3rd opponent).

I'll be curious how they do that.

Your math is a bit off. UCLA and USC aren't doing a 3-game Big Ten schedule. It won't take 7 years to play the whole Big Ten.

In the 3-6-6 model, this is hypothetically what USC's schedule would look like (assuming my UCLA-Ohio State-Penn State fixed rival status for USC).

Years 1 and 2 (home and away)
UCLA
OSU
PSU

Iowa
Minnesota
NW
Purdue
Michigan
Rutgers

Years 3 and 4 (home and away)
UCLA
OSU
PSU

Nebraska
Wisconsin
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan State
Maryland

You play everyone twice in 4 years. You play your rivals every year (four times total).

FWIW, I'm not crazy about USC/UCLA as the "West Coast Islands" of the league...but I do selfishly like the variety as a PSU fan. I don't need to play Indiana or Michigan State every year. I'd rather have more variety in the schedule (especially with new additions of LA schools)

(08-04-2022 12:44 AM)micahandme Wrote:  I was convinced that the Big Ten was supersizing with 20...but signs are pointing to staying at 16 for at least 6 more years (if not 10-11...until the ACC GOR ends).

I've heard mention of 3-6-6 scheduling for the league now...no divisions...three fixed rivals. Play everybody else in the league home-away every four years.

It's kind of easy to look around the current 14 teams and see 3 fixed rivals...but what will the league do with UCLA and USC?

Who would they want to match up with them on a yearly basis?
--Nebraska would LOVE to get a yearly game with UCLA...as they did once have a SoCal pipeline. And Nebraska is not a "traditional" Big Ten team.
--For the other UCLA opponent though? And for USC's other two?

Of course, TV would love USC/Ohio State every year...or UCLA/Michigan. But does that really match "tradition." There are plenty of teams who have played Ohio State every year for many, many decades...and now they see them only 2 of 4 years?

And how about "fairness" when it comes to divisionless league championship games? (Rutgers gets, let's say, Indiana and Maryland ever year...while OSU gets Michigan and USC ever year?)

Interested in everyone's thoughts...

Dynamic scheduling:

(1) Power matchups: #1 vs. #2, #3 vs. #4, etc. (e.g. Ohio State-Michigan, Wisconsin-Michigan State, Penn State-Iowa, Minnesota-Purdue, Nebraska-UCLA, Illinois-Maryland, USC-Indiana, Northwestern-Rutgers)

(2) Instant replay. Close games from previous season (overtime, last lead change or tie-broken, closest score). Computer determines optimal set so everyone gets one game. (e.g. Maryland-Indiana+3, Michigan-MSU+4, Purdue-Nebraska+5, Iowa-Northwestern+5, Rutgers-Illinois+6, Ohio State-Penn State+9, Minnesota-Wisconsin+10, UCLA-USC+29

(3,4,5,6) Long time no see. This will introduce the west coast schools to the Midwest schools, and generally make sure that other schools play at least every 3 years. Michigan and Iowa played 10 B1G schools due to their meeting in the CCG. They are given a game against a West Coast school: Michigan-UCLA (2000), Iowa-UCLA (1986)

For USC the opponents would be Maryland (never), Rutgers (never), Michigan State (1990), and Northwestern (1996). Since USC-Indiana is a power matchup we skip USC-Indiana (1982)

For UCLA the other opponents would be Indiana (never), and Penn State (1968) - we avoid giving Maryland and Rutgers since they will play USC.

For Midwestern schools:

Illinois: Indiana (2017), Ohio State (2017), Michigan (2019), MSU (2019)
Indiana: Nebraska (2019), Northwestern (2019)
Iowa: Ohio State (2017), Rutgers (2019), MSU (2020)
Maryland: Wisconsin (2017), Nebraska (2019), Purdue (2019)
Michigan: Purdue (2017), Minnesota (2020)
MSU: Minnesota (2017)
Minnesota: Penn State (2019), Rutgers (2019)
Nebraska: Rutgers (2020)
Northwestern: Penn State (2017), Ohio State (2020)
Ohio State: Wisconsin (2019)
Penn State: Purdue (2019)
Purdue:
Rutgers:
Wisconsin:

Wisconsin needs two more games, and Nebraska and Purdue one each so they are matched up.

(7) TV pick. TV networks would choose a game that they might be interested in televising. One game per school. This would not be a commitment to actually broadcast, but would give them a chance to build the inventory.

For example, FOX might choose Michigan-USC, which is the most frequent Rose Bowl matchup. They have played 10 times, eight in the Rose Bowl. The only regular season games were in 1957 and 1958.

Then Ohio State-UCLA might be chosen to give

Available choices:

Indiana: Iowa, Michigan, MSU, Minnesota, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Wisconsin

Illinois: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Penn State, Purdue, UCLA, USC, Wisconsin

Iowa: Indiana, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Purdue, USC, Wisconsin

Maryland: Iowa, Michigan, MSU, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, UCLA

Michigan: Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Nebraska, Northwestern, Penn State, Rutgers, USC, Wisconsin

MSU: Indiana, Maryland, Nebraska, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, UCLA

Minnesota: Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Nebraska, Northwestern, Ohio State, UCLA, USC

Nebraska: Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, MSU, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, USC

Northwestern: Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, MSU, Minnesota, Nebraska, Purdue, UCLA, Wisconsin

Ohio State: Indiana, Maryland, MSU, Minnesota, Nebraska, Purdue, Rutgers, UCLA, USC

Penn State: Indiana, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, MSU, Nebraska, Rutgers, USC, Wisconsin

Purdue: Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, MSU, Northwestern, Ohio State, Rutgers, UCLA, USC

Rutgers: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, MSU, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, UCLA, Wisconsin

UCLA: Illinois, Maryland, MSU, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers, Wisconsin

USC: Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Wisconsin

Wisconsin: Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, MSU, Minnesota, Northwestern, Penn State, Rutgers

(8,9) Stakeholder picks: Students, Alumni, Booster Club, Former Players, Current Players

If any rivalry games remain they would likely be picked (e.g. Wisconsin-Minnesota). But there is no reason to contrive these games.

The unveiling of the games could be televised with remotes from each school with the bands, cheerleaders, coaches, fans, etc.

As the Power match-ups are introduced go to a split screen remote of the two schools with the bands playing the school fight songs and there could be a brief review of the previous season at least for those that were moderately successful.

During the instant replay matchups show film clips of the key plays at the ends of the games. The Long Time No See could also have old clips. For example, the last game between USC and Northwestern was at the January 1, 1996 Rose Bowl.

As the TV networks made their picks, they would be on the clock like during the draft and analysts could give their thoughts. Meanwhile fans in the crowd could vote with a phone app for who they wanted to play. As each TV pick was made, the paired teams would be removed. For example if USC-Michigan and Ohio State-UCLA were taken, Indiana's list would reflect that:

Indiana: Iowa, Michigan,, MSU, Minnesota, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Wisconsin.

The same thing would happen when the fan picks were made.

(08-04-2022 05:32 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Frankly for Ohio State only a 1+8 makes sense as well.

No it doesn't. Ohio St wants to play Michigan and Penn St every year.

(08-04-2022 05:45 PM)goofus Wrote:  If the Big Ten added ND and Stanford, I am guessing they would go to 10 conference games and a 3-7-7 schedule.

Notre Dame would probably want USC, Purdue and MSU as protected rivals.

Between playing USC every year and playing UCLA and Stanford 50% of the time, that pretty much guarantees 1 trip to California every year.

ND would still want to end every season in California for recruiting purposes, like it has for almost 34 years straight.

So, two of the three would be Southern Cal and Stanford.

I don't think that the third protected opponent would matter all that much if ND got those two.

It could be Michigan State, Purdue or Penn State or ?.

USC: UCLA
UCLA: USC

3 Ohio State: Michigan, Illinois (T), Purdue
4 Michigan: Ohio State, Michigan State (T), Northwestern (T), Minnesota (T)
3 Michigan State: Michigan (T), Penn State (T), Indiana (T)
2 Indiana: Purdue (T), Michigan State (T)
3 Purdue: Indiana (T), Illinois (T), Ohio State
2 Northwestern: Illinois (T), Michigan (T)
3 Illinois: Northwestern (T), Ohio State (T), Purdue (T)
3 Iowa: Minnesota (T), Nebraska, Wisconsin (T)
3 Nebraska: Iowa, Wisconsin (T), Minnesota (T)
5 Minnesota: Iowa (T), Wisconsin (T), Nebraska (T), Penn State (T), Michigan (T)
3 Wisconsin: Minnesota (T), Nebraska (T), Iowa (T)
3 Penn State: Maryland, Michigan State (T). Minnesota (T)
1 Maryland: Penn State
0 Rutgers:

1) Of the Trophy games Minnesota vs Penn State appears the weakest. Probably that one falls away.
2) Rutgers has no rivals. I'd suggest Maryland who only has Penn State and is tied to them on entry to the B1G, Penn State (freed from Minnesota), and Indiana due to how heavily they recruit NJ and NY for students.
3) I'd probably throw Northwestern against Maryland to balance.
4) Minnesota vs Michigan is an extra rivalry for both, and one has to go into the less frequent pile to get everyone a 3rd game.

UCLA and USC I'd just rotate through the other 14 schools with only themselves . It'd take seven (56 games on a 1-8 setup) years, but they'd cycle through everyone four times, twice hosting and twice visiting.

They are not getting rid of Ohio St-Penn St for Ohio St-Purdue and Penn St-Minnesota.

(08-06-2022 08:04 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 05:32 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Frankly for Ohio State only a 1+8 makes sense as well.

No it doesn't. Ohio St wants to play Michigan and Penn St every year.

You are looking at it from a network TV perspective. I was looking at it from a historical rival standpoint. Also as a Buckeye fan since early childhood, I can tell you that Penn State and Notre Dame are important because they are national powers, much like Alabama, Clemson or Oklahoma. So the Buckeyes want to beat them. But it's not anything traditional. If Penn State slumps and Minnesota becomes a great power then the mindset shifts, and the network demands shift. For a decade or so Wisconsin was our nemesis, the big boy we had to beat (and often didn't) like Penn State today.

Also as a Buckeye fan for life, Michigan is the one and only game that is above the others. Everyone one else in the B1G is a "regular" to us, including Penn State. That's not a negative, as B1G games are far more important, just we don't really see any as must play this year, every year. Buckeye fans would be happy with a 1-8, even though Purdue and Illinois have us as great rivals. (I remember as a child Illinois was often the 2nd one we cared about, but bad Illinois teams saw that fade.) I put them on simply because they are important to them, not so much to us.

The games I listed are the rivalries. Minnesota and Michigan have too many. Ohio State has a couple that are "one way." Rutgers has none. All I did was adjust them the minimum to get everyone 3. Demoting the Michigan-Minnesota game is not desirable at all, but I had to get those two down to three without disrupting other schools rivalries.

(08-07-2022 06:06 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 05:45 PM)goofus Wrote:  If the Big Ten added ND and Stanford, I am guessing they would go to 10 conference games and a 3-7-7 schedule.

Notre Dame would probably want USC, Purdue and MSU as protected rivals.

Between playing USC every year and playing UCLA and Stanford 50% of the time, that pretty much guarantees 1 trip to California every year.

ND would still want to end every season in California for recruiting purposes, like it has for almost 34 years straight.

So, two of the three would be Southern Cal and Stanford.

I don't think that the third protected opponent would matter all that much if ND got those two.

It could be Michigan State, Purdue or Penn State or ?.

ND wouldn't have to have 2 of the 3 to be California schools, you get USC annually over 4 years, then 2 years UCLA and 2 years Stanford. I'm sure the schedule can be arranged to give ND a Cali game to finish the season. Then ND would still have 2 protected rivals for Michigan, Michigan St., or Purdue, maybe Northwestern.