If we end up going to a system where the Big 10 gets 4 autobids:

Big 10 Coastal: Wash, Ore, USC, UCLA, Rutgers, Maryland

Big 10 East: Penn St, Ohio St, Mich, Mich St, Indiana, Purdue

Big 10 West: Illinois, NW, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska

Each division winner and a wild card (best record for a non-champ) get the 4 bids.

Definitely a fan of divisions if we go to multiple AQs. I think 4 divisions makes scheduling easier and allows teams in the same division to have more-similar schedules.

I know 18 is not exactly divisible by 4; there could be some aspect where team #17 and #18 rove between divisions.

Hmm, maybe we bring back Legends and Leaders and have every team cycle through both? Top 2 in each division get the AQs.

My presumption is that there still be at least 3 nationwide at larges so strong teams in stacked divisions still have a path to the National Championship.

Keep current annual rivalries. Divisions are not always round-robin.

East Division (5 teams)
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Rutgers, Maryland

West Division (4 teams)
USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington

North Division (4 teams)
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

Central Division (4 teams)
Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Northwestern

Teams will ONLY play 3 teams within their division, even if in a division of 5. Penn State will cycle through the 4-team divisions each year, alternatively making them 5-team divisions. A 5-team and 4-team division will be paired each year and play full round-robins between the two (increasing similitude in schedules). The two 5-team divisions (the East and the Penn State division) will play 2 games between the two. The 4-team divisions will only play 1 game between them.

This totals 9 games for all teams and games between teams at least every third year (as now). Penn State’s games against the East Division will ebb and flow depending on the total number of permanent rivalries in their current division.

The thing with divisions is teams want to play each other as frequent as reasonably possible so for the OP, I doubt B1G teams want to play each other once every 3 years unless further expansion forces their hand. Another thing is I don't think any teams want to take 2 trip out west in a season let alone annually. Crayton has a solid attempt and I like the creativity with Penn St. bouncing around, but I doubt they want the 2 trips west in a season. We seen OSU drop the Washington H&H to avoid this when they presumably found out they'd play a west coast opponent in 2024 + @ Washington (originally had @ UCLA, but was changed to @ Oregon).

1-8/8 solves a lot of issues with only having 1 trip a year out west and it's more consistent financially as you don't have 1 year with 2 trips out west and none for 2 years (yes, it's a little more travel for consistency), but creates others as teams as some teams won't stand for only 1 annual rival so you'd need to modify it to keep the current flex protect rivalries. UM, ILL, and PUR can see Minn, Iowa, and Wis 2x in 6 years compared to 3x in 6 years to compensate 2 annual rivals with PSU ("rivalless") picking up an additional 3 extra opponents from Iowa for their 3rd annual rival. With playing most everyone H&H in 4 years, it allows schedules to be more balanced. You can use the division structure from the OP to determine opponents based on record against power opponents the last several years so that one team shouldn't have a loaded schedule, but it's of course never a guarantee in the cases of Indiana and Vandy.

This reintroduces Leaders and Legends where the division winners play for the CCG and your 2nd place teams host your 3rd place teams (likely cross division matchups). A drawback, however, from this is not knowing who is in what division as teams would change divisions annually or bi-annually to ensure teams play frequently. We had people struggling when it was just 12 teams with divisions where you didn't flip divisions when it was first introduced (not sure if it was the same case for fans of the ACC). At that point, you're better off going without divisions while sneakily playing a divisional schedule, but then this comes back around to why not keep the current schedule where you play everyone 2x in 5 years, which is supposedly a balance of reduced travel while playing everyone as frequent as possible and competitive schedule balance.

(10-20-2025 02:13 PM)Crayton Wrote:  Keep current annual rivalries. Divisions are not always round-robin.

East Division (5 teams)
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Rutgers, Maryland

West Division (4 teams)
USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington

North Division (4 teams)
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

Central Division (4 teams)
Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Northwestern

Teams will ONLY play 3 teams within their division, even if in a division of 5. Penn State will cycle through the 4-team divisions each year, alternatively making them 5-team divisions. A 5-team and 4-team division will be paired each year and play full round-robins between the two (increasing similitude in schedules). The two 5-team divisions (the East and the Penn State division) will play 2 games between the two. The 4-team divisions will only play 1 game between them.

This totals 9 games for all teams and games between teams at least every third year (as now). Penn State’s games against the East Division will ebb and flow depending on the total number of permanent rivalries in their current division.

I like this idea generally, except I loathe the concept of one school cycling or floating between divisions. So what I'd propose is that Penn State just be kept in the East, move Michigan State to the Central, and just create a protected rivalry game between MSU and Michigan for each season.

But either way, my remaining questions:

• Is the idea here that each division automatically gets one autobid allocated to them by the conference? Would that run the risk of, say, a weak division getting an autobid while a better team that was second in their division missing out on the playoff?
• How would the Big Ten Conference Champion be determined? Would it be a four team playoff or the two best division winners (based off ranking or conference record) get to play one game?
  

The whole point of autobids is to enable wildcard games. Divisions aren't coming back.

(10-23-2025 11:08 PM)The Beaver Wrote:  The whole point of autobids is to enable wildcard games. Divisions aren't coming back.

100% that WCGs are the primary objective and autobids are the means to that end. There is a chance AQs go through with no WCGs, but I don’t think you can have divisions with so few bids then.

What divisions can do is generate more direct competition for those spots. Indiana and Illinois are not just competing for a top 6 finish (likely to be determined more by schedule than performance) but directly for their division crown. I’d still seed the teams by conference-wide tie-breakers, but the winner of a weak division can steal the 6th spot.

One of the disadvantages of these mega-conferences is that historic winners are now pooled together such that more become losers. Adding divisions allows a team like my Gators a chance at becoming the “champion” of something if we (one day) have a decent season and finally beat Georgia.

(10-22-2025 11:17 AM)MaroonState Wrote:  

(10-20-2025 02:13 PM)Crayton Wrote:  Keep current annual rivalries. Divisions are not always round-robin.

East Division (5 teams)
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Rutgers, Maryland

West Division (4 teams)
USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington

North Division (4 teams)
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

Central Division (4 teams)
Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Northwestern

Teams will ONLY play 3 teams within their division, even if in a division of 5. Penn State will cycle through the 4-team divisions each year, alternatively making them 5-team divisions. A 5-team and 4-team division will be paired each year and play full round-robins between the two (increasing similitude in schedules). The two 5-team divisions (the East and the Penn State division) will play 2 games between the two. The 4-team divisions will only play 1 game between them.

This totals 9 games for all teams and games between teams at least every third year (as now). Penn State’s games against the East Division will ebb and flow depending on the total number of permanent rivalries in their current division.

I like this idea generally, except I loathe the concept of one school cycling or floating between divisions. So what I'd propose is that Penn State just be kept in the East, move Michigan State to the Central, and just create a protected rivalry game between MSU and Michigan for each season.

But either way, my remaining questions:

• Is the idea here that each division automatically gets one autobid allocated to them by the conference? Would that run the risk of, say, a weak division getting an autobid while a better team that was second in their division missing out on the playoff?
• How would the Big Ten Conference Champion be determined? Would it be a four team playoff or the two best division winners (based off ranking or conference record) get to play one game?
  

The 2 best non-champions would play for playoff spots. As The Beaver notes, Wild Card Games are a likely feature of any format. The top two overall teams would still play in the Championship Game, even if from the same division. The other four teams would play in WCGs.

After GoBuckeyes’ response, I think your suggestion for moving PSU and MSU would work. After all, these divisions are not round-robin. The note about teams flying to the Pacific coast twice in the same year (rather than spread evenly once a year) would still be an issue though.