The "Inner-Outer" division is a pretty horrible idea. I'm all for the East/West divisions. Thoughts?

dustonj2008 wrote: The "Inner-Outer" division is a pretty horrible idea. I'm all for the East/West divisions. Thoughts?

Nebraska-Iowa-Minnesota-Wisconsin-Penn State-Rutgers-Maryland

Illinois-Northwestern-Purdue-Indiana-Michigan State-Michigan-Ohio State

Yes, this "looks" awkward, but stop and think about rivalries that need to be preserved.  Penn State makes 2 trips west every year (but that's exactly what happened in 2012 with games at Nebraska and Iowa).  The Western teams would travel to the East once-twice per year out of 9 or 10 games - that's nothing!

It looks strange, but this approach absolutely preserves the maximum number of rivalries and allows for competitive balance.

Inner-Outer is better than East-West.

There isn't a good solution, but as long as East-West isn't the division then I am fine with it.

ohio1317 wrote: I understand the travel argument, but think it doesn't close to overcoming the positives. The easiest drives for most the western 4 members are with each other and they are together. The easiest drives for the eastern 3 are with each other and they are together. Most these trips that are being eliminated were trips you'd fly to anyway which means not as much is lost.

More than that, we are talking about 1-2 locked road games on the other side of the conference. Given that the conference has already decided that Penn State and Nebraska are annual foes and that Wisconsin is fine an otherwise eastern division, I don't think travel should have any weight.

I agree with this, the "traditional powers" are split, the competitive balance seems fair with the "inner" being more top heavy and the outter be "deeper" to the bottom. As a PSU fan it ensures one road trip that is very drivable every year. The only negative from my prespective would be not playing OSU every year, even though we may not be rivals it is still a matchup that both fanbases really seem to enjoy.

I voted East / West #1 and Inner / Outer #2. Inner / Outer is an intriguing idea and, as mentioned, preserves the most rivalries. Outer teams may eventually whine about travel though.

Inner-outer is what's been called sandwich elsewhere and is definitely the best in my opinion. It is the only set-up they can use where they won't need to use crossovers to keep all needed rivalries and thus the only set-up where we'll play the other division teams as often as possible. With 8 conference games, we're only going to be playing the other division teams 2 out of 12 years if we have a locked crossover. That goes up to 2 out of 7 if we can get rid of them and inner-outer does that.

1) Inner-Outer (As an OSU fan, this is clearly the best option for Ohio State - I understand why the schools in the "outer" division wouldn't be too thrilled with it, though).

2) East/West.  Even though this might not offer long-term competitive balance (With Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State & Michigan State in the same division, the East would be much stronger), I'm willing to be in a tougher division to preserve the sanctity of 'The Game'.  Plus, we've developed a pretty nice rivalry with Penn State.

3) Keep the same divisions + one.  This would blow.

Inner outer the worst, current plus 1 the best.

The other reason I'm very hesitant on east-west (even though I like it better than the current set-up a little), is that a Big 12 analogy becomes very worrisome. The north was better when the conference started, but 2 of the 3 big names were in the south (and that's not counting A&M who probably had the 2nd highest actual following of fans), the best recruiting grounds were in the south, and most the population was in the south. The result was a lot more media attention on the south and it dominating most years.

Let's look at the Big Ten now with the east-west set-up the BTN has proposed. The vast majority of the population is in the east, 3 of the 4 big names would be in the east. As for recruiting, here is a list of recruits by state who were 3 star or better. www.sbnation.com/college-footb...-2013-tennessee It does not include the number for New Jersey, but based on where it falls on other lists we can expect it to fall toward the top.

1. Ohio (79.3)
2. Maryland (48.3)
3. Pennsylvania (42)
4. Illinois (37.8)
5. Michigan (33)
---New Jersey, based on map on link above falls no lower than here, likely higher
7. Indiana 20.5
8. Iowa 11
9. Wisconsin 9
10. Minnesota 7.8
11. Nebraska 4.3

If we go east-west, 5 of the top 6 states are entirely within the east, and the 7th state is split.

I voted current plus 1... but I told them I favored Illinois moving to the Legends, and Rutgers and Maryland in the Leaders.

I don't think Maryland or Rutgers should have to play Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska, AND possibly not play Penn State or the other one (Maryland or Rutgers).

IMO Big 10 should be East - West:

Maryland, Rutgers, Penn State, Ohio State, Purdue, Indiana...

Northwestern, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Illinois...

BUT, I am OK with overlap involving Michigan, and Michigan State that sends them West, and Wisconsin that sends them East.

In the comments I put "Place Michigan and Ohio State in the same division so Michigan will never make it to a CCG."

I'd rather haven them in different divisions so that TTUN can get beat twice

cwerph wrote: In the comments I put "Place Michigan and Ohio State in the same division so Michigan will never make it to a CCG."

the current setup is the worst option by far.  The Leaders will be much weaker overall compared to the Legends the next 10 years with PSU under probation, and who knows about Wisconsin with a new coach.  Its also ridiculous for Mich & OSU to play the last game of the year with a chance for a rematch the following week.

I like West & East the best, but the inner/outer would be better than the current setup.

If I were a school in the "inner" region, and completely blind to the advantages that would create for the inner schools, I would be all for it.  However, if you are an "outer" school - or if you have a conscience - you would have to admit that setup would create all sorts of problems.  Besides the obvious problems with travel - both for schools' travel budgets and for those schools' fans - recruiting advantages would be more destructive to the overall health of the conf.  Plus, all the newest members would be in the same division.  Not a good idea.

If you were an "inner" school you could recruit to a kid (and his parents) from a neighboring state, boasting the relative ease of travel to all division games.  Negative recruiting would get worse, with coaches of inner schools saying "why would you want to go to Neb, Rutgers, PSU, etc?  Many of your games would be thousands of miles away, against schools you know nothing about.  Different regions of the country, less local coverage in papers/news, etc."

The fairest setup IMHO is a true randomized approach.  Some schools mixed in to each division from all geographical areas of the conference.  Preserve the big rivalries by keeping some schools in the same division, but mix it up with some of the newbies in both divisions.  If we were recruiting a kid from Ohio, and could say that a few more of our games would be in Ohio, or Indiana, or somewhere close to his home EVERY year, it may make the kid and his family more interested in a school out of the region.  If we played only in the outlying states, and once every 4 years at schools of the "inner" region, it would be like recruiting a kid out of Ohio to play in a different conference altogether.

Granted, my stance is biased as we would be at a disadvantage - we are already the furthest outlying school as it is.  As a Husker fan, anything that tilts the recruiting advantages even further away from us (did you see the number of 3* recruits from Neb?) is a HUGE red flag.  Reminds me of what happened in the Big 12.  We don't want to relive that mess.

And by the way, merry Christmas Buckeyes!  Hope you enjoy the time with your families!  Go Big Red!

HuskerDoc wrote: If I were a school in the "inner" region, and completely blind to the advantages that would create for the inner schools, I would be all for it.  However, if you are an "outer" school - or if you have a conscience - you would have to admit that setup would create all sorts of problems.  Besides the obvious problems with travel - both for schools' travel budgets and for those schools' fans - recruiting advantages would be more destructive to the overall health of the conf.  Plus, all the newest members would be in the same division.  Not a good idea.

If you were an "inner" school you could recruit to a kid (and his parents) from a neighboring state, boasting the relative ease of travel to all division games.  Negative recruiting would get worse, with coaches of inner schools saying "why would you want to go to Neb, Rutgers, PSU, etc?  Many of your games would be thousands of miles away, against schools you know nothing about.  Different regions of the country, less local coverage in papers/news, etc."

The fairest setup IMHO is a true randomized approach.  Some schools mixed in to each division from all geographical areas of the conference.  Preserve the big rivalries by keeping some schools in the same division, but mix it up with some of the newbies in both divisions.  If we were recruiting a kid from Ohio, and could say that a few more of our games would be in Ohio, or Indiana, or somewhere close to his home EVERY year, it may make the kid and his family more interested in a school out of the region.  If we played only in the outlying states, and once every 4 years at schools of the "inner" region, it would be like recruiting a kid out of Ohio to play in a different conference altogether.

Granted, my stance is biased as we would be at a disadvantage - we are already the furthest outlying school as it is.  As a Husker fan, anything that tilts the recruiting advantages even further away from us (did you see the number of 3* recruits from Neb?) is a HUGE red flag.  Reminds me of what happened in the Big 12.  We don't want to relive that mess.

And by the way, merry Christmas Buckeyes!  Hope you enjoy the time with your families!  Go Big Red!

1. This entire thread revolves around expansion which is driven by $$$ - you don't think the travel costs of flying the Husker team to (Penn, NJ, and Rutgers) 1.5 times per year are going to be outweighed??  I anticipate at least two more schools from the East Coast/Southeast to be added.  Nebraska's administration applied for admission to the Big Ten because of increased revenue and stability - not because they were hoping Creighton and ISU would soon be added as well to minimize travel budgets.

2. It is not the objective of the Big Ten to ensure each football program has equal access to a kid from Ohio.  Maintaining rivalries and competitive balance have been objectives.

3.  Nebraska was the further outlier in the Big 8/Big XII as well - this is not new.

4.  Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to Hsuker fans as well!

Why not chuck geography and put teams into divisions based on balance and schedules. Call them American and National division like MLB (where geography doesn't matter either).

Bifocal2013 wrote: Why not chuck geography and put teams into divisions based on balance and schedules. Call them American and National division like MLB (where geography doesn't matter either).

Competitive balance changes. Geography is a much better way of doing it.

SOBuck wrote:

Bifocal2013 wrote: Why not chuck geography and put teams into divisions based on balance and schedules. Call them American and National division like MLB (where geography doesn't matter either).

Competitive balance changes. Geography is a much better way of doing it.

This! Look at the SEC. For years the east was better now it the west.

No divisions.  

10 Conference Games.

1-2 Protected Rivalry Games

The true #1 vs #2 face off in the conference championship with tiebreakers (Head to Head, Overall Record, Last time they've been to the CCG, average ranking in the coaches/AP pool)


Or when we go to 16 schools, 4 divisions with a 4 team playoff at the end of the season to determine the conference champion (with 3 other super conferences to follow, and we end up with a quasi 16 school playoff).

Not sure why everyone is insisting that TTUN be in our division when there's clearly more intrigue having them as a protected rival in the other division.