Big 10 Divisional Splits - How Is It Going To Work?
by Jon Johnston on Jun 15, 2010 8:38 AM CDT
in Conference Realignment
Email
Print
What we know is that Big 10 Commissioner Jim Delany has already set the guidelines for how the new Big 10 will be set up with regards to divisions:
Delany: Three factors for division alignment: 1. Competitive fairness 2. Rivalries 3. Geography. But competitivness fairness is No. 1.
Now that it's been out there, ideas are starting to pop up around the internets and when you read through them, you realize that this is a pretty complex subject. Mixing in those three issues, well, you're probably going to have to pick two and go from there.
Dr. Saturday gives us his alignment, proposing the following divisional split, clearly based on the idea that having Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State in the same division is too lopsided:
Doug Lesmerises of the Cleveland Plain Dealer joins in the "move Penn State west" crowd, probably because he doesn't want the Buckeyes to have to play Penn State and Michigan every season. Instead, he creates two divisions, one "Black" and one "Blue", and follows the same lines as Dr Saturday.
Dirk Chatelain of the Omaha World-Herald has his ideas, and they include this division make up:
The West division: Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois and Northwestern.
The East division: Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue and Indiana.
At first glance, it looks pretty good for Nebraska - the top three, Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State are on the other side. Whoooeeee! But Chatelain includes some scheduling mix that, to be honest, doesn't really make much sense to me, at least in the way he lays it out, and sounds like it's just a way to placate people who'd complain about a lack of balance.
However, Michigan State site The Only Colors makes the case for keeping the "Big Three" in the same division, pointing out that Michigan hasn't been very good since Lloyd Carr left and may never return to their former prominence (nice shot at the Wolverines there).
Then you get Big 10 Network Gerry DiNardo's take, which is all over the board. The article does include a comment that makes it pretty clear some rivalries will not survive this change:
Delany said most rivalries (i.e., Michigan-Ohio State and Michigan-Michigan State) will be protected, though he admitted on the Big Ten Network "not all rivalries are equal."
In other words, Minnesota is probably going to be screwed somehow because they always are when it comes to Big 10 football. If I had to guess, I'm guessing the new Big 10 will mean the end to a yearly border battle between Minnesota and Wisconsin.
So, which scenario do you like, and why (or does it matter)? And which do you think has the most likelihood of taking place?
(There will be a lot of getting used to the change in media outlets we'll be watching. I'm familiar with our SB Nation sites, and will be asking them to introduce themselves to Husker fans soon. However, if you'd like to comment on which papers and web sites that Husker fans should be aware of, that'd be a great help.)
62 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
That Delaney, he's a smart one
I’m feeling better about our new conference every day, and it’s not just because I’m sure Texas isn’t going to be a part of it. The fact that competitive fairness is the primary criterion for dividing the conference tells me that the eventual split will look a lot (if not exactly) like what Dr. Saturday proposed. This is currently being discussed over on BSD, and I’m wholeheartedly endorsing the plan put forth by PSUJunny05 where each team would have one protected cross-division rival.
"Nothing turns me on like doe estrus." - ReadingRambler
North-South
I’m a big fan, of the North-South split:
North: Michigan, MSU, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska
South: PSU, OSU, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern
Follow the SEC model of one permanent rival across divisions (I think it would be Nebraska/Penn State, OSU/Michigan, Purdue/MSU, Minnesota/Indiana, Wisconsin/Northwestern, Illinois/Iowa) and two rotating games.
We had some other ideas over at The Rivalry, Esq., the Big Ten blog on SBNation, but this was, IMO the best.
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Hawkeye State
That's not bad at all, however I would prefer that Iowa/Penn St be cross division rivals.
That game is usually pretty damned good!
by HawkeyeRecon on Jun 15, 2010 9:09 AM CDT up reply actions
OSU / UM will be in the same division.
It doesn’t matter how many football games the SEC wins. We will always look down on you.
I agree
This is by far the best divisional split I have seen thus far, according to the three guidelines that Commissioner Delaney has set forth.
The Gram stain is useful in classifying bacteria because....it gives me another reason to hate biology?
speaking as a Gopher fan
there is no way the Wisconsin and Minnesota game ends. If Minnesota loses a rivalry it is either the Penn State or Michigan game. Ask around and there is no team we like beating more. I don’t even think there is any team they like beating more than us.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 15, 2010 9:06 AM CDT reply actions
We have a rivalry?
Oh yeah… that bell.
It’s still better than the craptastic trophy we let MSU have once in a while.
"Nothing turns me on like doe estrus." - ReadingRambler
by leeharvey418 on Jun 15, 2010 9:09 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm not even sure you can consider it a rivalry
because I can’t remember if the Gophers have ever won and it is still so new. That one is definitely on the choping block. Probably to free up Penn State to play Nebraska
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 15, 2010 10:54 AM CDT up reply actions
Oh, I remember one time
when the Gophers beat us.
"Nothing turns me on like doe estrus." - ReadingRambler
by leeharvey418 on Jun 15, 2010 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions
even a blind pig finds an acorn every once and a while.
or something like that.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 15, 2010 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions
ummm..... We won 4 in a row against PSU and split over the last decade.
You know during the “Force Joe Pa to retire” era. Further having been about eight yards closer to the deciding play than the idiot ref in 2006 I can say the officials handed you that game in overtime. Pass interference my ass.
That said, I respect Penn State above all other opponents in the conference, but would be fine having them in the other division. Under no circumstance should the longest unbroken series in college history be broken by putting Minnesota and Wisconsin on opposite sides.
Go straight geographical. Iowa and Nebraska are far better than Michigan at the moment and the jury is still out on how long they will take Blue to return, if they can.
I believe the Minny-Wisky game is the oldest, most played rivalry in FBS.
by HawkeyeRecon on Jun 15, 2010 9:10 AM CDT up reply actions
that is correct
since like 1890 or something like that.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 15, 2010 10:54 AM CDT up reply actions
heh
figures.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 15, 2010 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions
But those aren’t even protected games now. I realize that the Little Brown Jug goes way back, but it’s not as if the teams have been playing every year under the current scheduling format. Currently, the protected games are:
Illinois-Northwestern
Illinois-Indiana
Indiana-Purdue
Iowa-Minnesota
Iowa-Wisconsin
Michigan-Ohio State
Michigan-Michigan State
Michigan State-Penn State
Minnesota-Wisconsin
Penn State-Michigan State
Purdue-Northwestern
Of those, the least worthy of protection are IU-Illinois, Purdue-Northwestern, and Penn State-Michigan State. The first two were created because every team needed to be a part of two protected games, and the last one was a fabricated trophy game created when Penn State joined. Still, there are trophy games that aren’t protected now: MSU-Indiana, Illinois-Purdue (I think they have some trophy), Minnesota-Michigan. I don’t think any rivalry that didn’t make the current cut is worth considering now.
I think it’s inevitable that at least one “valued” rivalry is going to get chopped up, and I tend to think it’s going to come from the Iowa-Minnesota-Wisconsin “triumvirate of hate” (mgoblog term). If we presume, given Delany’s top criterion of competitive balance, that: 1) Michigan, OSU, and MSU are bound together; 2) Penn State and Nebraska will anchor the other division; 3) Iowa will be with Nebraska, then it seems to me that either Minnesota or Wisconsin is going to end up on the other side. It’s not ideal, but the other options are 1) breaking up Illinois and Northwestern; 2) breaking up Indiana and Purdue; or 3) breaking up Michigan State and Michigan. The problem with those options are that each of those are the rivalry for those schools (Michigan cares more about OSU, but for MSU it’s by far the most meaningful game). My sense has always been that Iowa-Minnesota-Wisconsin all hate each other more or less equally.
The Crimson Quarry, SB Nation's Indiana Hoosiers blog
by John M (The Crimson Quarry) on Jun 16, 2010 7:49 AM CDT up reply actions
mark my words
Iowa, MN and WI fans will scream bloody murder if they don’t play every year. For a fanbase that doesn’t travel well (MN) why would you cut off its two neighboring border rivals? Doesn’t make much financial sense since revenue is shared. Those three are tied together much like UM and OSU are.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 16, 2010 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions
I’m sure they will. But if they adopt a true geographic division (down the Indiana-Illinois state line) the stated top priority of competitive balance will not be honored. I’m beginning to think that the only way to make everyone happy is to follow the SEC model and have a protected cross-division game. I prefer the simplicity of the Big 12 model because it means that every team plays every other team home-and-home in a four year span, but that may not be workable.
The Crimson Quarry, SB Nation's Indiana Hoosiers blog
by John M (The Crimson Quarry) on Jun 16, 2010 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Since you're in with us now, I'll let you in on a secret right away:
Doug Lesmerises is a crappy journalist and the biggest Ohio State homer on Earth. He predicted that Penn State would have a losing record in 2008 and that Joe Paterno would be forced out.
You poor saps will probably have to put up with crap from him eventually too.
"Now we can no longer hold back. It will be a terrible war." - Emperor Jim Delany I
Are you thinking
Woody Paige-ish, or T.J. Simers-ish?
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
Wow, I forgot about the Woody-ectomy Nebraskans just got
It’s like we lost 200 pounds of ugly, shrill fat.
by Albino Tornado on Jun 16, 2010 7:23 AM CDT up reply actions
However, if you’d like to comment on which papers and web sites that Husker fans should be aware of, that’d be a great help.)
Off the top of my head, PennLive is the website for Harrisburg’s Patriot News, probably the biggest PSU newspaper in Central PA. There are also some Pittsburgh papers that cover PSU and the Big Ten, but their writers are usually Pittsburgh homers or just full of crap. Mgoblog is the biggest site on the internet for Michigan sports.
"Now we can no longer hold back. It will be a terrible war." - Emperor Jim Delany I
Lake the Posts is the definitive Northwestern blog. Smart and well written. Northwestern may not always have the best sports teams, but they do have some solid journalists.
by CornWildcatHusker on Jun 16, 2010 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions
As good as Missouri's!?!
I wonder why another conference hasn’t tried poaching them…
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Jun 16, 2010 7:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Divisions
South-ish: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue
North-ish: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Penn State, Wisconsin
This preserves every current protected game in the Big Ten except PSU-MSU (which nobody cares about), OSU-PSU (not a real rivalry either), Purdue-Northwestern (also not a real rivalry) and Illinois-Northwestern (which is unfortunate, but not really that big a deal). And in the mean time, we get great competitive balance (the South-ish division is slightly more top heavy than the North-ish, but not dramatically so) and Nebraska can have ready-made rivals in Iowa, Wisconsin, and/or Penn State.
Even Northwestern and Illinois don't care about their rivalry, but that North would be tough.
Unfortunate to lose the NU/Illinois game, but neither side would care that much. Problem with these divisions is that the North is a far better division at present and for the near term future.
Iowa and Wisconsin are both very solid programs and Northwestern is on the rise. Over the last ten years here are the win pct:
1. Ohio State (0.803)
2. Wisconsin (0.667)
3. Nebraska (0.656)
4. Michigan (0.653)
5. Iowa (0.640)
6. Penn State (0.626)
7. Purdue (0.540)
8. Northwestern (0.500)
9. Minnesota (0.500)
10. Michigan State (0.496)
11. Illinois (0.381)
12. Indiana (0.333)
You’d be looking at North’s win pct of .598 vs south win pct of .534 And the South’s win pct is propped up by Michigan before Lloyd Carr’s departure.
by CornWildcatHusker on Jun 16, 2010 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions
PSU-OSU
game has determined the BCS automatic bid the last 5 years. It may not be “The Game” group hug between Michigan-OSU, but it is intense. However the divisions/protected games work out, give me OSU and UNL vs PSU every single year and I’m happy.
UW-Minny is Going Nowhere.
When Delaney said not all rivalries were created equal, he was referring to PSU-MSU, maybe Minnesota-Michigan. Not Wisconsin-Minnesota, and as an outsider coming in, its understandable that you didnt know that. This rivarly is the oldest (or most played) in college football. Playing for Paul Bunyan’s axe of late seems to be Minnesota’s most important game, and a very important one for the Badgers. It will certainly be a protected rivarly and is in the Top 3 in terms of rivalries in the big ten.
I also am pretty sure that Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota will all be in the same division.
I can't speak for all Iowa fans...
but the one with whom I live says that between Wisconsin and Minnesota, the rivalry with the Badgers is much more meaningful.
"Nothing turns me on like doe estrus." - ReadingRambler
by leeharvey418 on Jun 15, 2010 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions
Its because Minnesota hasnt been good
Though Iowa has had the Badgers number the last couple years, Wisconsin is much more competitive. Minnesota just isnt. They are usually struggling to make a bowl game, while the Badgers have struggled to make a BCS Bowl. If things were reversed, maybe people would say the Minnesota one is much more meaningful.
Really,
East vs. West is the best. As for the “loaded” East, well, did the loaded SEC west really hurt Bama? Keep it East-West, most of the main rivals still have each other, and use the SEC model of one permanent inter-divisional game. For me, that would be PSU. Some history there, good difference between the two schools, should good to me. But Iowa may not like that.
The SEC was always fairly balanced
Haves:
Bama / Auburn / LSU vs. Florida / Tennesse / UGa
Have Nots:
Ole Miss / Miss. St vs. Vandy / Kentucky
Crapshoot:
Arkansas vs USC
And if I had my way, a Nebraska / Penn State and Meechicken / anOSU doubleheader on Thanksgiving weekend would be huge.
by Albino Tornado on Jun 15, 2010 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions
Penn State v Nebraska
should absolutely be a Thanksgiving weekend game — and a trophy game as well. This is a once in a lifetime chance to right a great wrong. Am I talking about disputed championships? No, I am talking about the Land Grant Trophy. Smash it beyond recognition, never to be awarded again. The “rivalry” is contrived; the trophy is an aesthetic disaster. I’d rather play Nebraska every November for a rusted out old Lincoln Highway sign (work with me — I’m searching for a common thread).
"Never mistake motion for action." - Ernest Hemingway
End of an era.
So when you play michigan state this year, does the winning team get to smash the land grant trophy?
I still like the idea of a PSU-UNL playing for the “1994 National Championship Trophy” every year.
UNL can play Wisconsin for the right to wear the red jersey at next years game (even if you are the road team). The Big Reds.
The farmers in the state of the losing team between UNL and Iowa can only grow soybeans next year. Monsanto will love that.
by Aaron Musfeldt on Jun 15, 2010 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions
I like the idea
of the winners getting the privilege of smashing the trophy. Each side could choose their method before the game.
"Never mistake motion for action." - Ernest Hemingway
Great plan
If we call it the 1982/1994 National Championship Trophy, and whoever wins the game gets to count both titles.
Hell, Bama and Meechicken get to count whatever titles they feel like. Why shouldn’t we?
by Albino Tornado on Jun 16, 2010 7:29 AM CDT up reply actions
But they haven't ALWAYS been fairly balanced.
Through most of the 90’s the West was either Alabama and/or Auburn (although Miss. St. inexplicably had a few great years) and a bunch of crap. Yes, before St. Nick arrived at LSU the Bayou Bengals were less than fierce. Meanwhile the East featured Florida and Tennessee at their height plus an awfully competitive Georgia program. Now the whole competitive balance has flipped. Florida is still great and Georgia is more than competitive, the East hardly strikes fear in anyone’s heart. To point, as good as PSU and OSU are now, Michigan is in the tank. Not long before that happened, Penn State spent 5 years being decidedly average or worse. And before the Buckeyes’ Rose Bowl win over Arizona State after the ’96 season they had never been much more than the 2nd best team in the league for nearly two decades.
Stick to a simple geographic split down the Illinois/Indiana border; program’s successes are cyclical whereas rivalries are not.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Jun 16, 2010 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Here's a fun idea
I have a new spin on competitive balance: promotion and relegation (too much soccer on my mind, I guess).
The top six teams go into the Big Ten Division I, and the bottom six go into Division II. Every year, the top two teams in Division I play for the conference championship. In the same weekend as the conference championship, the sixth place team in Division I plays the first place team in Division II for a spot in next year’s Division I. The fifth place Division I team plays for its spot against the second place Division II team.
Obviously this has a lot of downsides in terms of geography and rivalry (among others), but it would be fun to watch, no? I guess they’d have to play this year to figure out the initial alignment, and Nebraska would probably have to start in the lower division.
by Trey Hillman's Chin on Jun 15, 2010 10:50 AM CDT reply actions
Relegation is not feasible nor fair in college athletics
Schools like to know who they’re playing more than a year in advance, so relegation would be a highly undesirable feature from a scheduling standpoint.
Also, turnover in college athletics is very high and a relegation system would unfairly reward or punish a lot of teams for the play of players who graduate.
Regardless of its feasability
Several schools in the Texas 9 were looking it square in the face this year.
by Albino Tornado on Jun 15, 2010 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh, right.
I forgot that this is all about student athletes and academics.
by Trey Hillman's Chin on Jun 15, 2010 6:01 PM CDT up reply actions
I went the complicated way over at mgo
I may have to switch the Little Brown Jug from Michigan’s protected rivalry. I inadvertently overlooked Wisconsin/Minnesota. I was trying to look too homer-ish in giving Michigan a Nebraska protected rivalry, as that makes no sense.
The basic principle is 4 pods that rotate. There’s a 9-game conference season, and your “division” changes yearly. I think it provides the best competitive balance of divisions (maybe not pods as Penn State gets off easy, but that’s just 2 games out of 9) and is geographically compatible. It also protects all existing rivalries (outside of the aforementioned Minnesota/Wisconsin).
by formerlyanonymous on Jun 15, 2010 11:52 AM CDT reply actions
The other issue is non-revenue sports.
I figure it could use a blander 2 division set up. Have that based on basketball or something, which doesn’t really divide well either.
by formerlyanonymous on Jun 15, 2010 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm for the East/West format
Over the long term, the East might be a bit stronger, but I think the people playing it up as ridiculously unbalanced with Nebraska in the West standing up against the three titans in the East.
First, I can’t remember the last time that Penn St. Michigan, and OSU were ALL BCS caliber teams. CFB is cyclical, and it makes it very unlikely that all three of those teams are gonna be super good and throw the conference balance out of whack. Second, Iowa and Wisconsin are not traditional pushovers. They have largely been in the past, and I believe will continue to be in the future, solid football programs, certainly head and shoulders above the bottom three in the East.
Am I saying the East wouldn’t be a little stronger? No, but I think that it would be overdoing it considerably to say that the East/West disparity would be anywhere close to as bad as the Big 12 North/South disparity. Ultimately, whenever you work out divisions, there’s always some risk. Nebraska, Kansas State, and Colorado all had pretty strong programs when the Big 12 formed. Recent history has shown us that no program is immune to a slump.
With all of these complicating factors in mind, I really think the East/West format is the best. Geographically it makes sense (#3) it preserves the great majority of the Big 10’s rivalries (#2) and I really don’t think it will be a disaster in terms of competitive balance.
"My hardest job is to convince the people of Nebraska that 10-1 is not a losing season." - Tom Osborne
All I know is...
If Penn State ends up in the “west” just so Michigan and Ohio State can cuddle…well let’s just say I will not be pleased.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by For The Glory 1855 on Jun 15, 2010 12:38 PM CDT reply actions
Can someone please explain
why geography should play such a big part in division decisions? We already travel all around the Big 10 for games now and it doesn’t seem to be such a problem. If we disregard geography, we should be able to find a way to keep all rivalries and keep both divisions relatively competitive. Sure the drive for fans from Penn St. to Nebraska would suck, especially if they have to drive through Iowa and Nebraska, but, other than that… Am I completely wrong in this thinking? Please, be gentle when disagreeing with me.
There is nothing worse than a sports fan with zero sense of humor.
Actually
I think it makes more sense when using geography. Getting people to the games they want to see should be a top priority. makes sense financially and from the fans perspective. I’m much more likely to drive from Des Moines to Wisc. than all the way to Happy Valley.
Plus, like JD was saying…every few years things could be different in terms of who is on top of their game. So that should be a factor, but not more than geography. There has to be a balance. I don’t think it’ll ever be possible to make it perfect.
"Not the victory but the action; Not the goal but the game;
In the deed the glory"
GO BIG RED!
by Brian Speers on Jun 15, 2010 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Divisions
I’m stoked about playing Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa. I’m intregued to play Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State. I’m indifferent on playing Purdue, Indiana, Northwestern, Illinois, and Michigan State.
I’d like to be in the same division as Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa. Throw in whoever else you want. Bring em on. Toss in any combination of Michigan, Ohio State or Penn State. What a fun schedule that would be!
Why do we need Divisions?
My thought is that each team would have i) four protected rivalries that you play each year, ii) four “second-tier” rivalries where you play three-out-of-the four each year and change the team that you don’t play every two years, and iii) have three teams that you switch each year.
The conference champion would be the best team according to current Big10 rules versus the second-best team, with preference given to whomever hasn’t already played the leader during the regular season.
I think this is the best way to preserve important rivalries while still making sure that you see everybody in the league once every three years. It also makes sure that the championship is a legitimate game between the two best teams.
you don't if you don't want a CCG
apparently the NCAA has a rule about it. Something about needing divisions to have a CCG. Personally, the rivalry sectors and then rotating between the others makes much more sense from a fan perspective.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 15, 2010 10:44 PM CDT up reply actions
My modest proposal
Geography matters, but it’s not determinative. Seems to me the easiest thing to do is identify the top rivalries then split them into separate divisions and ensure one designated cross-division rival every season. Viz:
Division A: Mich., Indiana, Illinois, Minny, Iowa, tOSU
Division B: MSU, Purdue, NW, Wisc., Neb., PSU
Protected rivalries: Indiana-Purdue, Illinois-NW, Minny-Wisc., Iowa-Neb, tOSU-PSU, UM-MSU. Obviously, I place high value on intra-state rivalries.
You play everyone in your division, your protected rival, and two rotating cross-division opponents one of whom rotates off every year.
Sample Nebraska schedule
MSU
@Purdue
NW
@Wisc.
PSU
@Indiana
Mich
@Iowa
The following year, Michigan rotates off and is replaced by a road-trip to Illinois, and Indiana visits Lincoln (there’s no logic to this rotation, I just made it up).
Whatever happens, the only definite no-no I see is putting three of Neb, PSU, tOSU, and Michigan in the same division. You’ve got to split them up.
Can you hear this, Denver, or shall I turn it up for you?
As for fan opinions on Big 10 rivalries
Let the fans decide.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/specials/fansurvey/2009/big10.html
That's fascinating
And shows evidence that the PSU-MSU “rivalry” is unimportant, as more PSU fans consider Michigan a rival than MSU.
Light a man a fire, he'll stay warm for a day.
Light a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
interesting stat
no school considers either Michigan State or Penn State to be it’s primary rival. Hell, even Northwestern got 24% of the vote by Illini fans.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 16, 2010 11:48 AM CDT reply actions
Using the SportsIllustrated
poll, there are four disctinct blocks.
Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State and Ohio State
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa
Norwestern, Illinois*
Purdue, Indiana
*Illinois’s “hate” is spread pretty evenly. They also really dislike Iowa, Indiana and Michigan. Everyone elses main dislikes are accounted for in the groupings.
This leads me to the following conferences:
Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, Ohio State, Purdue, Indiana
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Norwestern, Illinois, Nebraska
The bolded teams are the ones that are traditionally pretty strong, while the others all have their moments. I think the Geography is pretty solid and it maintains the main rivals to boot, plus being fairly even. The East is slightly harder, but moving someone like Penn State over would mess up rivalries and geography.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 16, 2010 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions
with michigan being down right now
it makes it pretty even. Basketball is another matter. I don’t even know if they will keep divisions for Basketball since it isn’t necessary, but will likely rotate schedules. This would solve the alignment issue for that and other sports.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 16, 2010 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions
Conference results excluding Nebraska
are 74-70 for the first group and 58-62 for the second. This is an eight game swing betweent the two groups over three years. I would like to think that Nebraska could chip away at that gap. Plus with the interdivisional play it should even out the schedule even more.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 16, 2010 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions
I Like
Dr. Saturdays’ split with the division. It would keep both sides pretty even and would help us develop a rival with Penn State. I still think Ohio State will be our biggest rival in the Big 10 though, mostly just cuz of my hatred for Ohio State I guess I will always just see them in my mind as our biggest rival in the Big 10 whether it happens or not lol.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE CORN NATION STORE
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
