|
Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 7:02 PM
Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
IF Rutgers and Maryland are added to the Big Ten, then here are some different options for football divsions
Option 1 - Keep Leaders and Legends the same and add 1 new team to each division.
Key problem with this setup: With 8 conference games. Each team plays 6 games in division, 1 permament cross-division rival and then plays 1 rotating division rival every 6 years. Teams like Iowa and Wisconsin would never agree to playing once every 6 years. Plus Maryland or Rutgers would not like being the team that plays Penn State once every 6 years.
Option 2 - Add Maryland and Rutgers to Leaders. Move Wisc to Legends
Key problem with this setup: Legends would hypothetically have a competative advantage. Still have the problem where you play only play the rotating division rival every 6 years.
Option 3 - Go to a straight east-west geographic line-up.
Key problem with this setup: There are 8 teams in the east and 6 in the west. Plus, of the Big 4 (Neb, Mich, PSU, OSU), 3 would be in the east. In order to balance the divisions competetively, either PSU, Mich, or OSU would need to be shipped west. Probably OSU.
Option 4 -Pods
Hypothetically split into 3 pods. The 5-team pods will have teams that will always be in the same division every year. The 4-team pod would play each other every year but would rotate between the 2 divisions so that they play in each division 50% of the time.
Option 5 - Non-permanent divisions
Divsions will change every year to set up a rotation where every team gets 3 permanent opponents they play every year (whether they are in your division or not), and they play the other 10 teams once every 2 years.
Option 6 - No divisions but last weekend will be flexible scheduling.
The Big Ten then could schedule a de-facto conference championsip game between the 2 best teams in the conference.
Last edited 11/17/2012 7:14 PM by LittlePig
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 7:14 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
I don't think there is any good option with 14 teams, so I think that we will go to 16 sooner rather than later.
 GO BUCKS!!! |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 7:50 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
Ranking the schools on a highly subjective combination of relatively recent results, potential, and overall program history:
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Nebraska
Wisconsin
Michigan State
Iowa
Illinois
Rutgers
Northwestern
Purdue
Maryland
Minnesota
Indiana.
Given that, and my preference for geographical/historical rivalries, I hope the divisions are
East:
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Rutgers
Purdue
Maryland
Indiana
West:
Nebraska
Wisconsin
Michigan State
Iowa
Illinois
Northwestern
Minnesota
Crossovers:
Ohio State-Illinois
Michigan-Michigan State
Penn State-Nebraska
Rutgers-Wisconsin
Purdue-Iowa
Maryland-Minnesota
Indiana-Northwestern
I hope this happens.
Last edited 11/18/2012 6:55 PM by wapibangi
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 7:55 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
Why anyone would want to sacrifice Rutgers and MD for traditional B1G games is beyond me.
I'm not sure if MD is going take it. There are some I love the ACC chancellors at MD plus the 50M exit fee.
I actually think the ACC wouldn't mind losing MD and taking the money. UConn has actually been the more successful athletic program over the years. And people in Conn actually care a bit about college sports.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 8:37 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
rook119 wrote: Why anyone would want to sacrifice Rutgers and MD for traditional B1G games is beyond me.1
I'm not sure if MD is going take it.2 There are some I love the ACC chancellors at MD plus the 50M exit fee.
I actually think the ACC wouldn't mind losing MD and taking the money. UConn has actually been the more successful athletic program over the years. And people in Conn actually care a bit about college sports. 1. I'm a Penn State fan, so while I'm worried about the recruiting implications, I think this is great for Eastern football. I would also love having close games to drive to. I think the rest of the Big Ten will hate it. 2. They would be crazy not to. The ACC has fantastic academic institutions, but the Big Ten has huge prestigious state schools with immense resources. The benefit Maryland will gain from the non-athletic association will dwarf any benefit they could get from any other league other than the PAC12.
Last edited 11/17/2012 8:38 PM by wapibangi
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 8:39 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
There are no more seats left on the bus. I hate this stuff...... |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 8:53 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
LittlePig wrote:
Option 3 - Go to a straight east-west geographic line-up.
Key problem with this setup: There are 8 teams in the east and 6 in the west. Plus, of the Big 4 (Neb, Mich, PSU, OSU), 3 would be in the east. In order to balance the divisions competetively, either PSU, Mich, or OSU would need to be shipped west. Probably OSU. This would absolutely suck for tOSU. With the exception of Michigan, our every-year games would be against: - Minnesota
- Nebraska
- Iowa
- Wisconsin
- Illinois
- Northwestern
Those are all really long trips. I know, I've driven all of them. GO BUCKS!!!
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:05 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
This sucks. That is all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I bleed Scarlet. I have Gray hair. Coincidence? I think not.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:30 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
Haha.
The SEC has chosen to keep its 'rival' game, 1 rotating team from the other division with the 8-game conference schedule. I don't like this, as I think the whole setup is catering to the Bama/Tenn and UGA/AU rivalries, as none of the other matchups are actual rivalries.
Being as you Big Tenners are all hot and bothered for tradition, I'm afraid you'll mimic the SEC way, at least initially.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:34 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
rook119 wrote: Why anyone would want to sacrifice Rutgers and MD for traditional B1G games is beyond me.
I think it's called "progress." The powers that be of the Big Ten are using foresight and intelligence. No, Maryland and Rutgers aren't sexy, but it's better than being stagnant and losing influence. If you hadn't added Penn State and Nebraska, the Big Ten would be heading towards becoming a modern-day Ivy League, in terms of athletics. Appreciate the proactive ideas of your conference, it may just keep it alive. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:35 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
--------------------------------------------- --- OrangeAfroMan wrote: rook119 wrote: Why anyone would want to sacrifice Rutgers and MD for traditional B1G games is beyond me.
I think it's called "progress." The powers that be of the Big Ten are using foresight and intelligence. No, Maryland and Rutgers aren't sexy, but it's better than being stagnant and losing influence. If you hadn't added Penn State and Nebraska, the Big Ten would be heading towards becoming a modern-day Ivy League, in terms of athletics. Appreciate the proactive ideas of your conference, it may just keep it alive. --------------------------------------------- There's about ten pounds of stupid in this post. Congrats.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I bleed Scarlet. I have Gray hair. Coincidence? I think not.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:37 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
Legends:
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Northwestern
Illinois
Indiana
Leaders:
Nebraska
Penn State
Wisconsin
Iowa
Maryland
Minnesota
Rutgers
No crossovers.
"Here's how I think of my money -- as soldiers -- I send them out to war everyday. I want them to take prisoners and come home, so there's more of them." - Kevin O'Leary
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:42 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
draftnik12 wrote: Legends:
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Northwestern
Illinois
Indiana
GT
Leaders:
Nebraska
Penn State
Wisconsin
Iowa
Maryland
Minnesota
Rutgers
UNC
No crossovers. What do you say to that?
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:43 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
No thank you.
"Here's how I think of my money -- as soldiers -- I send them out to war everyday. I want them to take prisoners and come home, so there's more of them." - Kevin O'Leary
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
- ohio1317
- All-Conference
- 1872 posts this site
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:44 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
draftnik12, you had exactly the list I made out. If we go to 14 and have a locked crossover, that means 2 games in 12 years vs. the other division. That should be unacceptable so they have to find a way to get rid of the crossovers. I think that set-up is the only thing that would work. It would sadly not allow the Little Brown Jug to be annual, but that's no worse than what they already accept with Wisconsin and Iowa being separated.
Traditional (Regular Season) Big Ten football champs 2011: Michigan State 7-1 (outright)
2012: Ohio State 8-0 (outright)
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:45 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
draftnik12 wrote: No thank you. Hmmm....you may be very disappointed then.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
- ohio1317
- All-Conference
- 1872 posts this site
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:49 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
Definitely don't see North Carolina in. Them and North Carolina State have the same board controlling them and I couldn't see the Tar Heels getting permission to leave and leave North Carolina State is a weakened ACC.
Traditional (Regular Season) Big Ten football champs 2011: Michigan State 7-1 (outright)
2012: Ohio State 8-0 (outright)
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:50 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
I say go to 16...and then have the "Big Ten" break off and form their own league.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:52 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
draftnik12 wrote: Legends:
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Northwestern
Illinois
Indiana
Leaders:
Nebraska
Penn State
Wisconsin
Iowa
Maryland
Minnesota
Rutgers
No crossovers. This would seem to be a HUGE financial advantage for your "Legends" division. Your "Leaders" division is made up of the four westernmost schools and the three easternmost schools. Your "Leaders" division is the seven schools in the middle. I would think this would really suck for Rutgers, Maryland, and PSU. GO BUCKS!!!
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 9:54 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
ohio1317 wrote: Definitely don't see North Carolina in. Them and North Carolina State have the same board controlling them and I couldn't see the Tar Heels getting permission to leave and leave North Carolina State is a weakened ACC. I agree. UNC is a speculation, but GT isn't. The B1G is looking to expand even further, I believe. GT was in the rumor mill last time, and there may be smoke on the horizon. I also see the ACC dramatically changing once this announcement is made. With 2 more BE schools coming in, a charter school like Maryland leaving, you honestly have a true BB conference brewing. FSU reportedly is talking as well. If they leave, dominoes will fall.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 10:00 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
Wish we would have grabbed WVU rather than not. If we're going down this road.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I bleed Scarlet. I have Gray hair. Coincidence? I think not.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 10:09 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
mcwterps1 wrote:
draftnik12 wrote: No thank you. Hmmm....you may be very disappointed then. I say no thank you also, but for a different reason. As previously stated, my major objection to 'super-conferences' is that when your divisions grow past six teams I think you effectively cease to have a 'conference' relationship with the teams in the other division. Therefore, if the expansion to 14 is a done deal (which at this point I assume it is), then I hope we do go to 16 (and UNC/GT would be great, but I think UNC/UVA would be better and more likely). Once we got to 16 teams I would like to use the 'pod' scheduling model with these pods: Pod A: PSU MD UVA UNC POD B: Rutgers tOSU M MSU POD C: IU Purdue NU ILL POD D: UW Iowa MN UNL The pods would essentially be used to create rotating divisions. For two years one division would be Pod-A and Pod-B while the other would be Pod-C and Pod-D. The next two years one division would be Pod-A and Pod-C while the other would be Pod-B and Pod-D. The next two years one division would be Pod-A and Pod-D while the other would be Pod-B and Pod-C. That way you would play every team in the conference at least twice every six years. GO BUCKS!!!
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 10:17 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
bamabuckeye144 wrote:
---------------------------------------------
--- OrangeAfroMan wrote:
rook119 wrote: Why anyone would want to sacrifice Rutgers and MD for traditional B1G games is beyond me.
I think it's called "progress." The powers that be of the Big Ten are using foresight and intelligence. No, Maryland and Rutgers aren't sexy, but it's better than being stagnant and losing influence.
If you hadn't added Penn State and Nebraska, the Big Ten would be heading towards becoming a modern-day Ivy League, in terms of athletics. Appreciate the proactive ideas of your conference, it may just keep it alive.
---------------------------------------------
There's about ten pounds of stupid in this post. Congrats. My stupidity rivaled only by your predictability. Truth is truth, whether you agree with it or not. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 10:18 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
LittlePig wrote: IF Rutgers and Maryland are added to the Big Ten, then here are some different options for football divsions
Option 1 - Keep Leaders and Legends the same and add 1 new team to each division.
Key problem with this setup: With 8 conference games. Each team plays 6 games in division, 1 permament cross-division rival and then plays 1 rotating division rival every 6 years. Teams like Iowa and Wisconsin would never agree to playing once every 6 years. Plus Maryland or Rutgers would not like being the team that plays Penn State once every 6 years.
Option 2 - Add Maryland and Rutgers to Leaders. Move Wisc to Legends
Key problem with this setup: Legends would hypothetically have a competative advantage. Still have the problem where you play only play the rotating division rival every 6 years.
No -- Legends has Iowa.
Option 3 - Go to a straight east-west geographic line-up.
Key problem with this setup: There are 8 teams in the east and 6 in the west. Plus, of the Big 4 (Neb, Mich, PSU, OSU), 3 would be in the east. In order to balance the divisions competetively, either PSU, Mich, or OSU would need to be shipped west. Probably OSU.
Option 4 -Pods
Hypothetically split into 3 pods. The 5-team pods will have teams that will always be in the same division every year. The 4-team pod would play each other every year but would rotate between the 2 divisions so that they play in each division 50% of the time.
Option 5 - Non-permanent divisions
Divsions will change every year to set up a rotation where every team gets 3 permanent opponents they play every year (whether they are in your division or not), and they play the other 10 teams once every 2 years.
Option 6 - No divisions but last weekend will be flexible scheduling.
The Big Ten then could schedule a de-facto conference championsip game between the 2 best teams in the conference.  Sousaphone bandstrut.
Last edited 11/17/2012 10:18 PM by Hawkinole
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 10:24 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
--------------------------------------------- --- OrangeAfroMan wrote: bamabuckeye144 wrote:
---------------------------------------------
--- OrangeAfroMan wrote:
rook119 wrote: Why anyone would want to sacrifice Rutgers and MD for traditional B1G games is beyond me.
I think it's called "progress." The powers that be of the Big Ten are using foresight and intelligence. No, Maryland and Rutgers aren't sexy, but it's better than being stagnant and losing influence.
If you hadn't added Penn State and Nebraska, the Big Ten would be heading towards becoming a modern-day Ivy League, in terms of athletics. Appreciate the proactive ideas of your conference, it may just keep it alive.
---------------------------------------------
There's about ten pounds of stupid in this post. Congrats. My stupidity rivaled only by your predictability. Truth is truth, whether you agree with it or not. --------------------------------------------- Saying something is truth doesn't make it truth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I bleed Scarlet. I have Gray hair. Coincidence? I think not.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 10:34 PM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
Alternative and probably better balanced pods (with protected rivalry games/and secondary rivalry games for years when the primary rivalry is within the temporary division):
Pod A:
PSU - (UNL / tOSU)
Maryland - (UW / Purdue)
UNC - (Iowa / Rutgers)
UVA - (MN / IU) Pod B:
tOSU - (M / PSU)
Purdue - (MSU / Maryland)
Rutgers - (NU / UNC)
IU - (ILL / UVA)
Pod C:
M - (tOSU / UNL)
MSU - (Purdue / UW)
NU - (Rutgers / Iowa)
ILL - (IU / MN)
Pod D:
UNL - (PSU / M)
UW - (Maryland / MSU)
Iowa - (UNC / NU)
MN - (UVA / ILL)
In a six year cycle you would play your pod-mates and your primary rival six times each. You would play your secondary rival four times, and you would play the other 10 teams twice each. (checking math 4*6+4+10*2=48). GO BUCKS!!!
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
- ohio1317
- All-Conference
- 1872 posts this site
|
Posted: 11/17/2012 10:47 PM
RE: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
medinabuckeye1 wrote:
draftnik12 wrote: Legends:
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Northwestern
Illinois
Indiana
Leaders:
Nebraska
Penn State
Wisconsin
Iowa
Maryland
Minnesota
Rutgers
No crossovers. This would seem to be a HUGE financial advantage for your "Legends" division.
Your "Leaders" division is made up of the four westernmost schools and the three easternmost schools. Your "Leaders" division is the seven schools in the middle.
I would think this would really suck for Rutgers, Maryland, and PSU. I think it would actually be pretty good. These are only football divisions so travel isn't a huge issue. More important is keeping the rivalries and maximizing play against the other division. This would allow the eastern teams to play annually, allow the western teams to play annually, allow the Indiana/Illinois schools to play annually, and get the Ohio/Michigan schools annually. This is pretty much the only set-up which accomplishes that and doesn't require crossovers.
Traditional (Regular Season) Big Ten football champs 2011: Michigan State 7-1 (outright)
2012: Ohio State 8-0 (outright)
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2012 12:13 AM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
bamabuckeye144 wrote:
---------------------------------------------
--- OrangeAfroMan wrote:
bamabuckeye144 wrote:
---------------------------------------------
--- OrangeAfroMan wrote:
rook119 wrote: Why anyone would want to sacrifice Rutgers and MD for traditional B1G games is beyond me.
I think it's called "progress." The powers that be of the Big Ten are using foresight and intelligence. No, Maryland and Rutgers aren't sexy, but it's better than being stagnant and losing influence.
If you hadn't added Penn State and Nebraska, the Big Ten would be heading towards becoming a modern-day Ivy League, in terms of athletics. Appreciate the proactive ideas of your conference, it may just keep it alive.
---------------------------------------------
There's about ten pounds of stupid in this post. Congrats. My stupidity rivaled only by your predictability. Truth is truth, whether you agree with it or not.
---------------------------------------------
Saying something is truth doesn't make it truth. Is it not progress? Is it not unwise to stand pat while the rest of the landscape changes around you, without you? Is it wise to blindly grasp onto tradition, no matter the cost? |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2012 12:48 AM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
bamabuckeye144 wrote:
---------------------------------------------
--- OrangeAfroMan wrote:
rook119 wrote: Why anyone would want to sacrifice Rutgers and MD for traditional B1G games is beyond me.
I think it's called "progress." The powers that be of the Big Ten are using foresight and intelligence. No, Maryland and Rutgers aren't sexy, but it's better than being stagnant and losing influence.
If you hadn't added Penn State and Nebraska, the Big Ten would be heading towards becoming a modern-day Ivy League, in terms of athletics. Appreciate the proactive ideas of your conference, it may just keep it alive.
---------------------------------------------
There's about ten pounds of stupid in this post. Congrats. If its about money, why split the pot between 2 extra teams? I don't really see the Big 10 network getting a tier 1 slot in MD/DC either. No one cares about MD football, even when they were good. Baltimore has the Ravens and considers MD to almost be a DC team. DC doesn't care about MD football because most of them aren't from there/are UVA/VT fans. MD grads don't have any connection to their alma mater because its in the suburbs, the campus looks like the suburbs (with the bonus of all the crime of a major city!) and they live in the suburbs (IMO its the worst placed large state university in the nation). Taking an RV to college park is the equivalent of tailgating at your local mall. Its never going to be a big draw. Rutgers I don't think is a bad draw, and Rutgers deserves to be in the BCS based on their size. However for ratings/interest they'll have to win and win some more for a period of years to get NJ behind them and I just can't see that. If you want the DC market, uh UVA? Better academically and better supported athletics. VT wouldn't care (as long as the rivalry continues) if they go given that the ACC is rather stable. UConn, Syracuse, UVA and even Pitt would be better choices IMO than MD.
Last edited 11/18/2012 1:02 AM by rook119
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2012 1:01 AM
Re: Divisions with Rutgers & Maryland
+1
-------------------------------------------------------
Colts and Boilermakers fan to the core
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
