Adam Rittenbergs Big Ten Divisions

That would be awful. Minny/Wiscy must be preserved, with Illannoy preferable. None are there. This is exactly what people don't like about expansion, it can ruin age old traditions.
NW, INDY, Purdue have the least fan attendance. They are games I get least excited about.
 
Yeah, I don't like that. I don't think that fits at all. Makes extra unnecessary travel and pits Iowa against only one of their longtime rivals. It's a fine suggestion, but I'd be very surprised if it looks anything like that.
 
I'm not a big fan of non-geographical divisions, for many of the same reasons you have all mentioned. Another thing I don't like about the "competitive balance" idea is that the balance shifts from year to year. Everyone makes a big deal about the how bad (other than Nebraska) the Big 12 North was this past year, but it wasn't that many years ago (2007 season) when #3 Missouri played #2 Kansas to decide who would represent the North in the Championship game.

If you don't split it geographically, I get scared of how the division is going to get split and who's agenda is going to be satisfied. There is a chance, almost a certainty, that schools are going to try to lobby to gain some kind of edge in the divisional split. Behind every argument each school makes there will be some hidden reason that makes it a little sweeter for them.

Splitting it by geography takes most of that away, makes it pretty cut and dry. Plus, with Nebraska, Iowa, and Wisconsin you could argue that we're getting the shaft cause our division is a lot better than the East. Those three teams are probably #2, #3, #4 in the B10 this coming fall (of course I'm biased and think that Iowa is #1, but just going by national media)
 
I like it. Iowa gets out of shadows and starts "new rivalries which is what the new conference alignments will be about and what the national media will crave. Gaining the national media's attention helps Iowa in voting and recruiting.
 
Looks like a good break out not sure how it will work for right balance for all. Never going too be perfect.
 
At first I hated his proposal, and I still would make changes, but I am starting to think moving Wisconsin in with Ohio State and Michigan makes sense. If you take Jon's divisions, then the East is decidedly one sided and Ohio State would run to a East division title every year. Move Wisconsin over there and put NW in the West (or Illinois, I can't remember exactly how Jon split that up) and it would be much more balanced competitively.
 
tdhawkeye said:
I'm not a big fan of non-geographical divisions, for many of the same reasons you have all mentioned. Another thing I don't like about the "competitive balance" idea is that the balance shifts from year to year. Everyone makes a big deal about the how bad (other than Nebraska) the Big 12 North was this past year, but it wasn't that many years ago (2007 season) when #3 Missouri played #2 Kansas to decide who would represent the North in the Championship game.

Yeah, I remember. Missouri won that game and then got flattened by number 9 Oklahoma. Oops Missouri was then out of the BCS. Kansas got the at-large BCS Bid to play Va Tech.

You want to know Kansas' schedule that year?
Central Michigan
Southeastern Louisiana
Toledo
Florida International
Kansas State 5-7
Baylor 3-9
Colorado 6-7
Texas A&M 7-6
Nebraska 5-7
OSU 7-6
ISU 3-9
Missouri - Loss
Va Tech

Notice anything about that schedule. Um, yeah, they lost to the only good team they played. Well, if you don't count the ACC's annual Orange Bowl loser. Well, I guess that isn't fair in 2009 they did beat ... Cincinatti? WTF! Hope they kill that Big East autobid sometime soon. Kind of sick watching Cincy get their tails beat.

Really, you want to use Kansas and Missouri 2009 as examples of balance in the Big Twelve. I think they are pretty much perfect illustrations of the lack of competitive balance.

YOU NEED TO BALANCE THE DIVISIONS BY RECRUITING POPULATION. Period.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I stopped reading as soon as I saw Iowa in a division without Minnesota and Wisconsin. Any scenario where that happens is a non-starter.
 
ShadasRevenge said:
I stopped reading as soon as I saw Iowa in a division without Minnesota and Wisconsin. Any scenario where that happens is a non-starter.
Click to expand...

+1 Geography is going to have to play some part in this. I would prefer either a strict geographic split ie.

East West
PSU Wisky
OSU Illinois
UM Iowa
PU Minny
IU NWU
MSU NU

or

East West
OSU PSU
UM Wisky
MSU Illinois
PU Iowa
IU Minny
NWU NU
 
O hoping for a west/east breakup. If you study this it keeps natural rivials. and I think they are fairly balanced on both sides. East maybe a little tougher but thats good for iowa. Its a pretty decent divison on both sides
East
Indiana
Michigan
Michigan St
Ohio St
Penn St
Purdue
West
Illinios
Iowa
Minnesota
Nebraska
Northwestern
Wisconsin
 
This is what it will be

West
Nebraska
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Michigan State
Michigan

East
Ohio State
Penn State
Purdue
Northwestern
Illinois
Indiana

Guaranteed cross divisional games:
Michigan v OSU
Minnesota v Indiana
Iowa v Illinois
Nebraska v Penn State
Michigan State v Northwestern
Wisconsin v Purdue

This breaks up the quad of Michigan-OSU-Penn State-Nebraska into a two-n-two split. It maintains regional integrity. It keeps key rivalries like Michigan vs OSU...but still allows the chance such rivals will meet in the championship game. It is always VERY balanced in competitive terms. It also guarantee some marquee cross divisional rivalries like PSU vs NU, Iowa vs Illinois, and MU vs OSU.
 
Last edited:
Mesaclone said:
This is what it will be

West
Nebraska
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Michigan State
Michigan

East
Ohio State
Penn State
Purdue
Northwestern
Illinois
Indiana

Guaranteed cross divisional games:
Michigan v OSU
Minnesota v Indiana
Iowa v Illinois
Nebraska v Penn State
Michigan State v Northwestern
Wisconsin v Purdue

This breaks up the quad of Michigan-OSU-Penn State-Nebraska into a two-n-two split. It maintains regional integrity. It keeps key rivalries like Michigan vs OSU...but still allows the chance such rivals will meet in the championship game. It is always VERY balanced in competitive terms.
Click to expand...

There is no scenario whatsoever that will split up Michigan and Ohio State. Try again. It's not balanced, either - if anything your scenario leans heavily towards the west.
 
Mesaclone, OSU and Michigan don't want to be in opposite divisions since it will cheapen the rivalry. They will never give up having the game at the end of the regular season which means it is very likely some years that these teams would go into that game guaranteed or at least very probable to meet in the Big Ten Championship game. What would be the motivation for the teams to play their hardest unless the national championship game is truly on the line? Do fans of these teams as well as fans of other teams want to see the same teams meet a week or two later? Wouldn't this game possibly become like the Colts v Jets and Bengals v Jets games at the end of last year's NFL regular season?

If they are in the same division this game could often act like a semifinal to get to the Big Ten Championship game. Now you could maintain the excitement and the tradition of the game.
 
In terms of "National spotlight" as he was mentioning in the article, He is right. the Big Ten rivals are great but who Nationaly really cares? the only rivals that the rest of the college football world really tunes into is the OSU/Mich game..they only really tune into the others if it has an impact on the BCS and or Big Ten standings at the top. I do like his model though, I have no problem with this. I like the 8 game in-conference schedule better
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top