Cleveland writer's crack at Big Ten divisions

I think Cleveland's breakdown is more equitable. If you have Iowa, Neb. Penn st., Wisconsin, Northwestern in one division thats too much. Other than Michigan & OSU, no one in Jon's setup has ever been CONSISTENTLY a winner in the other division for some time.
 
I favor having no divisions if that is possible with 12 schools. That way, if JD adds more teams, divisions can be split knowing all the schools that will be in each division.

One person commented on the story, and also proposed no divisions. Here is his take:


How about NO DIVISIONS! Assuming the Big 10 membership stays at 12, I would be OPPOSED to a divisional split. Here's my proposal -- In football, each team has 2 permanent opponents that they play every year. The other 9 teams, you play 6 each year, and rotate the 3 you don't play every year. The top two teams in the final standings meet for the championship game.
Advantages:
1) You play every team in the league at least 2 out of every 3 years, which means once at home. This creates more of an integrated conference.
2) You maintain your rivalry(s). Nebraska having to give up its 70 year old annual rivalry with Oklahoma was one of the reasons Nebraska wasn't loyal to the Big XII as Oklahoma turned their attention south.
3) You don't have to arrange divisions with the concern that "these two teams will never be able to meet in the league championship".
4) If I'm OSU, I'd much rather have Nebraska and Iowa 2 out of every 3 years than 2 out of every 4. Further, there is no value in playing Indiana every year, unless I'm Purdue.
5) You retain an 8-game schedule.
 
Can I sign up for this division right now?! It'd be tough but not as bad as some possibilities...
 
is it just me, or is it too early to speculate on divisions? Until the rest of the Big 12 decides what they are going to do, and whether or not the Big 10 will take on any more clubs it seems very premature to discuss divisions.
 
I keep asking this, and nobody wants to answer: what if PSU doesn't want to be in a West Division, due to travel or whatever? What if they'd prefer to remain in an East Division with OSU and Michigan?
 
Jon in your earlier post on your two divisions the numbers from 1945 to the present supported your proposal and also support this proposal. His numbers are almost identical to those if you use the last 65 years. Switching Wisconsin and Illinois I don't think is a great idea, I am sure every institution will have to give up something.

I went trolling around some websites on this subject earlier today. There wasn't much conjecture, but it was starting. Some suggestions were purely geographic and others more in line with Delaney's criteria. So far yours and this writers are the best ideas I have read.

I think many Wisconsin fans want to play Nebraska every year. The Alvarez connection.

Doug Lesmerises, The Plain Dealer
Big Ten Black
Ohio State, 102-25 (.803) -- 230-74-5 (.752)
Michigan, 81-43 (.653) -- 222-80-5 (.731)
Wisconsin, 86-43 (.667) -- 170-129-4 (.568)* Jon has Illinois
Michigan State, 60-62 (.492) -- 153-141-4 (.520)
Purdue, 67-57 (.540) -- 133-156-4 (.461)
Indiana, 39-78 (.333) -- 118-167-3 (.415)
Totals 435-308 (.585) -- 1026-747-25 (.578)
Big Ten Blue
Nebraska, 84-44 (.656) -- 242-71-1 (.772)
Penn State, 77-46 (.626) --218-86-1 (.716)
Iowa, 80-45 (.640) -- 182-116-5 (.609)
Minnesota, 62-62 (.500) -- 129-162-2 (.444)
Illinois, 45-73 (.381) -- 124-162-5 (.435)*Jon has Wisconsin
Northwestern, 61-61 (.500) -- 116-172-3 (.404)
Totals 409-331 (.553) -- 1011-769-17 (.567)
 
silvanthalas said:
I keep asking this, and nobody wants to answer: what if PSU doesn't want to be in a West Division, due to travel or whatever? What if they'd prefer to remain in an East Division with OSU and Michigan?
Click to expand...

I seem to recall Joe Paterno wanted a 12th team. He got his wish. And it wasn't just anybody. So big concession made by Big Ten for PSU already. This is for football only, not other sports. We are talking 2 or 3 games per year to the west side of the central time zone. How many times has PSU been to Iowa City? So it isn't new to PSU. Maybe you make sure PSU alternates home and away between Iowa and Nebraska. Keep in mind this arrangement maybe not so long term.
 
Couppee said:
I favor having no divisions if that is possible with 12 schools. That way, if JD adds more teams, divisions can be split knowing all the schools that will be in each division.

One person commented on the story, and also proposed no divisions. Here is his take:


How about NO DIVISIONS! Assuming the Big 10 membership stays at 12, I would be OPPOSED to a divisional split. Here's my proposal -- In football, each team has 2 permanent opponents that they play every year. The other 9 teams, you play 6 each year, and rotate the 3 you don't play every year. The top two teams in the final standings meet for the championship game.
Advantages:
1) You play every team in the league at least 2 out of every 3 years, which means once at home. This creates more of an integrated conference.
2) You maintain your rivalry(s). Nebraska having to give up its 70 year old annual rivalry with Oklahoma was one of the reasons Nebraska wasn't loyal to the Big XII as Oklahoma turned their attention south.
3) You don't have to arrange divisions with the concern that "these two teams will never be able to meet in the league championship".
4) If I'm OSU, I'd much rather have Nebraska and Iowa 2 out of every 3 years than 2 out of every 4. Further, there is no value in playing Indiana every year, unless I'm Purdue.
5) You retain an 8-game schedule.
Click to expand...


I really like this idea with the list of protected rivalries below. The only real draw back would be the possibility of a three way or four way tie for first in which we would have to use tie breakers to find the two top teams for the B10 championship game. I think it would keep a more cohesive B10 as compared to having divisions.

Iowa – Minnesota, Nebraska
Michigan – Ohio St, Michigan St
Ohio State – Michigan, Penn State
Nebraska- Iowa, Penn State
Penn State – Nebraska, Ohio State
Wisconsin- Minnesota, Illinois
Illinois - Northwestern, Wisconsin
Minnesota- Iowa, Wisconsin
Purdue – Indiana, Michigan State
Indiana – Purdue, Northwestern
Northwestern – Illinois, Indiana
Michigan State – Michigan, Purdue
 
I know there won't be divisions in basketball, but if we were to adopt the Big 12 method playing everyone in your football division twice. We really make out like a bandit in both jon's and this guys divisions. We get NW,Neb,PSU,Minny, and ILL/Wis twice. And only draw MSU, Indy, Mich, OSU, Pur, ILL/Wic once. Sign me up for that method. But then again we play 18 game schedule, so we'd have to play some of those teams twice. Still be sweet for Iowa BBAll.
 
If we are going to 2 divisions, I favor pure geography (or cartography?)
that is Iowa, Neb, Minn, Wisc, NW, & Illannoy
short of that, I like this Clevelander's idea best
 
eyekwah said:
Jon in your earlier post on your two divisions the numbers from 1945 to the present supported your proposal and also support this proposal. His numbers are almost identical to those if you use the last 65 years. Switching Wisconsin and Illinois I don't think is a great idea, I am sure every institution will have to give up something.

I went trolling around some websites on this subject earlier today. There wasn't much conjecture, but it was starting. Some suggestions were purely geographic and others more in line with Delaney's criteria. So far yours and this writers are the best ideas I have read.

I think many Wisconsin fans want to play Nebraska every year. The Alvarez connection.

Doug Lesmerises, The Plain Dealer
Big Ten Black
Ohio State, 102-25 (.803) -- 230-74-5 (.752)
Michigan, 81-43 (.653) -- 222-80-5 (.731)
Wisconsin, 86-43 (.667) -- 170-129-4 (.568)* Jon has Illinois
Michigan State, 60-62 (.492) -- 153-141-4 (.520)
Purdue, 67-57 (.540) -- 133-156-4 (.461)
Indiana, 39-78 (.333) -- 118-167-3 (.415)
Totals 435-308 (.585) -- 1026-747-25 (.578)
Big Ten Blue
Nebraska, 84-44 (.656) -- 242-71-1 (.772)
Penn State, 77-46 (.626) --218-86-1 (.716)
Iowa, 80-45 (.640) -- 182-116-5 (.609)
Minnesota, 62-62 (.500) -- 129-162-2 (.444)
Illinois, 45-73 (.381) -- 124-162-5 (.435)*Jon has Wisconsin
Northwestern, 61-61 (.500) -- 116-172-3 (.404)
Totals 409-331 (.553) -- 1011-769-17 (.567)
Click to expand...

Early you wanted my suggestion this is it. Swaping Illinois and Wisky. Times are a lot different than they were in 1945.
 
Big Ten Black
Penn State, 77-46 (.626) --218-86-1 (.716)
Michigan, 81-43 (.653) -- 222-80-5 (.731)
Michigan State, 60-62 (.492) -- 153-141-4 (.520)
Purdue, 67-57 (.540) -- 133-156-4 (.461)
Indiana, 39-78 (.333) -- 118-167-3 (.415)
Northwestern, 61-61 (.500) -- 116-172-3 (.404)

Big Ten Blue
Nebraska, 84-44 (.656) -- 242-71-1 (.772)
Ohio State, 102-25 (.803) -- 230-74-5 (.752)
Minnesota, 62-62 (.500) -- 129-162-2 (.444)
Illinois, 45-73 (.381) -- 124-162-5 (.435)
Wisconsin, 86-43 (.667) -- 170-129-4 (.568)
Iowa, 80-45 (.640) -- 182-116-5 (.609)

I think this breakdown works better regionally. Give each team one cross divisional rivalry game that's played every year. Then rotate the other 5 cross divison matchups which means not playing two teams each year.

So the following games get played cross divisionally every year: Ohio State vs Michigan. Iowa vs Purdue. Nebraska vs Penn State. Wisconsin vs Indiana. Minnesota vs Michigan. And Illinois vs Northwestern.

However it pans out its going to be a lot of fun and there will be some great football played.
 
Last edited:
I am firmly in the geographical divisions camp. Many commentators accept as an article of faith that any alignment that puts OSU, PSU, and UM in the same division is doomed to be as lop-sided as the Big 12 was. I think these assumptions are based more on perception and history than on objective analysis of the current balance of power.

My main point: since joining the Big Ten, Penn State has been just another good team, and not a great power on a par with OSU and UM. I think a lot of folks would be shocked to learn that since PSU joined the Big Ten, they have exactly the same number of shared (3) and outright (1) Big Ten Championships as Wisconsin and Northwestern. Meanwhile, PSU has only the 4th best conference record in the last decade, leading Wisconsin by the slimmest of margins. Here are each team's conference winning percentages from 2000-2009, according to Stassen:

Ohio State 0.800 64-16
Michigan 0.662 53-27
Iowa 0.613 49-31
Penn State 0.562 45-35
Wisconsin 0.550 44-36
Purdue 0.512 41-39
Northwestern 0.475 38-42
Michigan State 0.400 32-48
Minnesota 0.375 30-50
Illinois 0.325 26-54
Indiana 0.225 18-62

I think a geographical Big Ten West will be very deep and competitive and will measure up quite well against a Big Ten East. Furthermore, it protects every single significant rivalry in the conference except for Mich/Minn and OSU/ILL. Neither of those two "East/West" rivalries is protected under the current system. Both, of course, have become extremely lopsided and generate little interest. I think overruling simple geography with convoluted division schemes based on guesswork about where the power lies in the Big Ten is a case of being "too clever by half."
 
Geographically makes the most sense to me as well. OSU/PSU/UM is not nearly the juggernaut scenario that the Big XII South had. There's enough in the west with Iowa, Neb, and Wisc to balance that out. The Big XII did not have revenue sharing as the Big 10 has, so no worries about money either. TV deals will still be even, too.
Geographically also keeps almost every single rivalry intact, and creates new ones with Neb-Iowa and Neb-Wisc and maybe Neb-Minn. East/West is a natural fit, and will create one GREAT Big 10 conference!
 
I love playing Penn State, we got a nice little rivalry going on with them, let's keep it going.
 
I think the reason the Bigten will at least 2 divisions for football is so the conference can have a championship game = $$$.

Both Jon's and the Black/Blue divisional alignments look great for Iowa. I personally prefer the Black/Blue.
 
JonDMiller said:
Big Ten expansion details: How to split the divisions | cleveland.com

Same rationale I went through and similar results, with a few exceptions...the division Iowa would be in under his alignment is 'easier' for Iowa.
Click to expand...

I would want to keep Wisconsin in the same division as Iowa, but other than that I wouldn't have any quibbles with that list.

On a side note, Jon, when would expect the conference to announce who will be playing in what division? I'm guessing that the folks in the conference offices who do scheduling and whatnot have all ready been working on this, but what do you think - during the season, between seasons end and the bowl games, around spring ball?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top