With only 8 games, you pretty much can only do 1 crossover rival. The SEC started with 2 and found it didn't work. So they went to 1, as did the ACC and both found it worked okay.
If they had a 9 game schedule, then 2 rivals would work great.
Big Ten to a Nine game schedule
- Thread starter Jimbo
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 186
- Views 13K
If they had a 9 game schedule, then 2 rivals would work great.
http://content.usatoday.com/communi...-makes-announcement-for-division-alignments/1
Here's the divisional alignment showing the teams across from their cross-divisional partner.
Division 1 ____ Division 2
Michigan ______ Ohio State
Nebraska _____ Penn State
Minnesota _____ Wisconsin
Iowa _________ Purdue
MSU __________ Indiana
Northwestern __ Illinois
2011-2012 Conference Schedule
http://i.usatoday.net/sports/college/football/bigten/2011-12-big-ten-schedule.pdf
Here's the divisional alignment showing the teams across from their cross-divisional partner.
Division 1 ____ Division 2
Michigan ______ Ohio State
Nebraska _____ Penn State
Minnesota _____ Wisconsin
Iowa _________ Purdue
MSU __________ Indiana
Northwestern __ Illinois
2011-2012 Conference Schedule
http://i.usatoday.net/sports/college/football/bigten/2011-12-big-ten-schedule.pdf
Last edited:
Now, if they put a week between the last game and the Championship game, it would give you plenty of time .... some are concerned about playing the same team two weeks in a row.
Time isn't the issue. It's that most of the teams don't want to lose that 4th OOC game (NCAA rules caps them at 12 games). Since a majority of the schools don't want a 9-game schedule, it remains at 8.
mn/wi different divisions the oldest rivalry in the history of college football and will be in different divisions
i think its oftly stupid to have osu/um in different divisions
that way osu/um wont play eachother every year enabling either to have fast track to conference championship
mn/wi should be in same division
i think its oftly stupid to have osu/um in different divisions
that way osu/um wont play eachother every year enabling either to have fast track to conference championship
mn/wi should be in same division
If you look at my post above, you'll see that they'll still play each other every year, same with osu/um.
and ironically many Big Ten people complained a few years back when they couldn't play back to back
That is what Commissioner Jim Delaney just stated. The Big Ten followed the SEC format. They are better suited to finish the regular season the week of Thanksgiving and then the Championship the first week of December like the SEC, ACC and Big Twelve do now. Most SEC Schools in Football play an rival out of the conference(ie UGA VS GT and UF VS FSU) that game before the Championship game.
Now what I think is stupid is not having all sports set up like Football for Division. Hopefully they do not do that but Jim Delaney indicated they might.
and ironically many Big Ten people complained a few years back when they couldn't play back to back
But back then it wasn't really back to back ....
It was November and January.
Depends. Football pretty much has to be split, since everyone can't play everyone.
Other sports don't need to be, as they aren't dictated by a 12 game schedule. Even with 11 teams, the Big Ten was fine not using divisions in those sports.
Basketball is the only one that comes close. Big Ten was okay with 11, and the ACC is fine with 12 and not splitting into divisions (they both use a rotational partner system instead).
Last edited:
So if Michigan and OSU win their divisions, they then play two weeks in a row, making the first meeting irrelevant? What a debacle.
Don’t understand why splitting OSU/UM was necessary. They should be in the same division, thus keeping the importance of the final regular season rivalry game in tact.
Don’t understand why splitting OSU/UM was necessary. They should be in the same division, thus keeping the importance of the final regular season rivalry game in tact.
And another thing. As it stands right now, Ohio State's division is the tougher of the two.
• Michigan, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan State, Northwestern and Minnesota = Cream Puff Division
• Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana and Illinois = Tough as Nails Division
What the hell is the rhyme or reason for these divisions anyways? You can’t even call it East and West.
• Michigan, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan State, Northwestern and Minnesota = Cream Puff Division
• Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana and Illinois = Tough as Nails Division
What the hell is the rhyme or reason for these divisions anyways? You can’t even call it East and West.
I would much rather play M for the Championship vs making the GAME just another game.
What difference does it make if you play them the second to last game vs the last game ?
It just presents a opportunity to get knocked off the next weekend by a team you may be over looking.
As I mentioned before, if they put a week off in between the season and the Championship game, that would be a good thing and also move them to a weekend farther into December.
I have not heard them discussing this at all, but I HOPE they do.
In most years you would have Iowa , Nebraska and M as tough teams on one side.
On the other side you have Ohio State, Penn State and Wisconsin, looks pretty even to me.
It doesn't make a difference and that's what I'm trying to say. Now with the potential of playing them TWICE, it diminishes both games importance. In the past and if UM was in the same division as tOSU, we'd only play once. They hype and importance of 1 game is greater than playing someone more than once. Whether it's two games in a row or not.
Whether they insert a week in between makes no difference to me.
The theory behind putting OSU and Michigan in separate divisons was to create a potentially epic conference title game. Then, they remove the chance for that game to be epic, by having OSU and Michigan play the last week of the regular season. It’s hard to build up hype when the teams just played the week before.
The Big Ten should've had OSU/Michigan in the same division, playing the last week of the regular season (my preference). Most often times, this game would decide the division, much like it has for the last decade. Now the importance of the Rivalry Game has been lessened.
The Big Ten really botched this in my opinion.
Another thing I don't agree with is the site of the Big-10 Championship.
Why the indoor stadium? We're a mid-west, blue collar division. This was our opportunity to stick out from all the other conference championships by NOT having it in a vanilla, climate controlled environment.
Can you imagine having the Big-10 Championship at the frozen tundra of Lambeau Field or even Soldier Field?! Now that would be EPIC!
Why the indoor stadium? We're a mid-west, blue collar division. This was our opportunity to stick out from all the other conference championships by NOT having it in a vanilla, climate controlled environment.
Can you imagine having the Big-10 Championship at the frozen tundra of Lambeau Field or even Soldier Field?! Now that would be EPIC!
and ironically many Big Ten people complained a few years back when they couldn't play back to back
Yet if they did allow it to happen and Ohio State and Michigan DID meet-up again in the 2007 BCS National Championship and Michigan won? It would've lessened the importance of the regular season game and both teams/schools would be left clueless as to who is the better team.
One more thing, the end of the year regular season game in 2007 wouldn't be dubbed "The Game of the Century". It would lose the luster a few weeks later when they would (hypothetically) meet again. I don't want a scenario that would NOT give me the possibility of a regular season game being dubbed "The Game of the Century".
