Divisionless B1G Setup

SpiderRico

SpiderRico

Well-Known Member
Deace had some interesting thoughts regarding how he would setup the B1G without divisions. While I agree with the premise, I disagree with the approach.

First, he had 8 conference games, with 2 protected rivals and 6 random plays via lottery using some version of how the NFL sets it's schedule. I disagree. The easiest way to do it would be to have each team have 3 protected rivals and then a group of 5 teams home/away for 2 years with the other 5 teams home/away the next two years and then continue to rotate that every two years. This way, every team plays every other team at least twice every four years. In my scenario, the 3 protected rivalries would be as follows:

Nebraska - Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio State
Iowa - Nebraska, Wisconsin, Minnesota
Minnesota - Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan
Wisconsin - Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska
Illinois - Northwestern, Purdue, Rutgers
Northwestern - Illinois, Michigan State, Purdue
Purdue - Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana
Indiana - Rutgers, Purdue, Maryland
Michigan - Ohio State, Michigan State, Minnesota
Michigan State - Michigan, Penn State, Northwestern
Ohio State - Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska
Penn State - Michigan State, Ohio State, Maryland
Rutgers - Maryland, Indiana, Illinois
Maryland - Penn State, Rutgers, Indiana

I do agree, though, in copying the SEC model of scheduling in that I would designate the back half of the year to be "rivalry weeks" and encourage teams to play an FCS team the week before in order to allow starters to rest up for the home stretch. It also backloads really solid matchups when the selection committee is paying attention the most.

I'd love to get away from divisions and make it more of a "complete" conference again, rather than feeling like 2 separate conferences.
 
SpiderRico said:
Deace had some interesting thoughts regarding how he would setup the B1G without divisions. While I agree with the premise, I disagree with the approach.

First, he had 8 conference games....

---I'd love to get away from divisions and make it more of a "complete" conference again, rather than feeling like 2 separate conferences.
Click to expand...

OK, that's not bad. I agree instead of completely random, you'd need a regular rotation to assure that each team plays everyone in conference home and away on a regular basis.
 
You know Illinois has sunk to the depths of hell when Iowa is no longer one of their protected rivals and it has been replaced by.... RUTGERS!
 
Shoot, go to 10 conference games. Protected rivals? Okay. That sounds good. Make it 5 protected rivals to keep regional games so the fans can travel.

Screw the NCAA. Screw the SEC. We are the B1G. We do what we want.
 
Motigerhawk said:
Shoot, go to 10 conference games. Protected rivals? Okay. That sounds good. Make it 5 protected rivals to keep regional games so the fans can travel.

Screw the NCAA. Screw the SEC. We are the B1G. We do what we want.
Click to expand...

Hasn’t worked so well doing it the “B1G way” in regards to the playoffs. So yeah, might be time to switch things up...
 
I like the East/West scheduling setup (playing all division members + 3 opposite division teams) the way it is. The only thing they need to do is restructure the divisions to make them more equal.

I like knowing that there will be 6 games every year that never change other than home-away. Most of the protected rivalries you have listed happen anyway under the current system.
 
Motigerhawk said:
Shoot, go to 10 conference games. Protected rivals? Okay. That sounds good. Make it 5 protected rivals to keep regional games so the fans can travel.

Screw the NCAA. Screw the SEC. We are the B1G. We do what we want.
Click to expand...

I agree with go to 10 conference games because Big 10 games are more important; probably bigger crowds. You have what you hope is a tune up game for the opener and then play ISU if we have to by LAW.

What is sticky about 10 conference games with a 12 game schedule and if all Big teams play 5 at home and 5 on the road is that every other year the hawks would only have 6 home games.

But if increased TV revenue covers the loss of a home game every 2 years then I am for it.

IN CAPS for emphasis not anger, I WOULD SOLVE IT BY DUMPING ISU AND HAVING 2 NON-CONF GAMES AT HOME EACH YEAR. Non-conf teams love to come to Kinnick because they get a big payout and for smaller teams the players get to play in that big stadium with a chance to make a big win.

Otherwise, leave it as is with divisions which basically gives you 6 yearly rivalries. I suppose they could flip flop Illinois or Northwestern to the East and MSU to the West to try to get more balance.
 
My only objection would be in scheduling an OOC games the "SEC way" at the end of the season. I think its a BS argument in terms of the SOS when the SEC plays that card late in the year and think it's an absolute joke. Play meaningless games early in the year, not at the end of the year to essentially give yourself an extra bye week going into your biggest rivalry game.
 
It should be no divisions and 10 games with a couple protected rivalry games and then a random selection process. Top two teams play in a conference championship game. This should cover the loss of any extra home games from the TV revenue and if you offer more High Quality home games your attendance and exposure will be better for it as well.

They should also get rid of Rutgers and Maryland and go after Notre Dame and another team like Pitt, Missouri, etc. Both those teams don't do anything for me and they have not been competitive enough to warrant any "east Coast" exposure that they were supposed to bring in my opinion. If you can add Notre Dame it will eclipse any east coast exposure and surpass it with national exposure.
 
kameltoez102 said:
It should be no divisions and 10 games with a couple protected rivalry games and then a random selection process. Top two teams play in a conference championship game. This should cover the loss of any extra home games from the TV revenue and if you offer more High Quality home games your attendance and exposure will be better for it as well.

They should also get rid of Rutgers and Maryland and go after Notre Dame and another team like Pitt, Missouri, etc. Both those teams don't do anything for me and they have not been competitive enough to warrant any "east Coast" exposure that they were supposed to bring in my opinion. If you can add Notre Dame it will eclipse any east coast exposure and surpass it with national exposure.
Click to expand...

ND had their chance and wanted to remain independent. As far as I'm concerned they can remain independent I don't want them. Not that Rutgers and Maryland are a prize, but they wanted to be where they are now. I just don't think ND is the desired product they once were; I can think of other programs I'd rather see join than ND.
 
kameltoez102 said:
It should be no divisions and 10 games with a couple protected rivalry games and then a random selection process. Top two teams play in a conference championship game. This should cover the loss of any extra home games from the TV revenue and if you offer more High Quality home games your attendance and exposure will be better for it as well.

They should also get rid of Rutgers and Maryland and go after Notre Dame and another team like Pitt, Missouri, etc. Both those teams don't do anything for me and they have not been competitive enough to warrant any "east Coast" exposure that they were supposed to bring in my opinion. If you can add Notre Dame it will eclipse any east coast exposure and surpass it with national exposure.
Click to expand...
It's not about east coast "exposure" it's about adding schools in regions with tons of people that pay cable/sat subscriptions. I can't tell you about a single time where I'd heard a fan say that they were happy about adding Maryland and Rutgers, so that's nothing new.

In the 5 years from before the two were added in 2013 to 2018, revenue doubled from $26 million to $52 million. This is a good thing for the conference, as much as we hate the teams. Notre Dame would be good but they make too much money on their own to join the B10.

Link

But, of course, the Big Ten and its other 12 schools did this for money.
The thrust of the Big Ten’s reasoning for adding Maryland and Rutgers was that it wanted a greater presence in the Washington and New York television markets. (Maryland’s squarely in the D.C. market, while Rutgers is on the outskirts of the New York market.)


The conference wanted more cable providers in those areas to carry the Big Ten Network and make people pay for it. It wanted its game broadcast package to be more attractive to ESPN and Fox, its longtime television partners. Assessing exactly how much Maryland and Rutgers contributed is impossible, but it sure seems like they helped.

In 2013, the Big Ten’s per-team revenue distributions were $26 million.

In 2017, the conference struck up a new six-year football TV contract with ESPN and Fox that pays the conference $2.64 billion, or $31.4 million per school per year just for that.

In 2018, a school’s full share of Big Ten revenue was $52 million, an all-time, all-conference record. Maryland and Rutgers don’t get full shares until the 2020-21 athletic year.

It could be that more people moving away from cable dries up some TV money later on. That might make being in these markets less valuable, and the Big Ten winds up with a diluted product. The downstream effect is hard to predict, however.
 
No divisions. Go to random schedule. Have a show on BTN for the selection. Draw numbers like the lotto. Give each team one match up such as Ohio State/Michigan. Pick the rest via lotto. Let the teams pick their 3 out of conference contests. (loosely applied here)
 
10 conference games. Get rid of Maryland and Rutgers and Penn State. Leaves 11 teams. We play every one, every year, + Iowa State (this is just going to happen every year; get over it) and one patsy. This has always been, and always should be, a midwestern conference. Yeah. Yeah. I am old and stuck in my ways. But, in the end, I am also right. Thank your for your support.
 
10 conference games. Get rid of Maryland and Rutgers and Penn State. Leaves 11 teams. We play every one, every year, + Iowa State (this is just going to happen every year; get over it) and one patsy. This has always been, and always should be, a midwestern conference. Yeah. Yeah. I am old and stuck in my ways. But, in the end, I am also right. Thank your for your support.
 
10 conference games. Get rid of Maryland and Rutgers and Penn State. Leaves 11 teams. We play every one, every year, + Iowa State (this is just going to happen every year; get over it) and one patsy. This has always been, and always should be, a midwestern conference. Yeah. Yeah. I am old and stuck in my ways. But, in the end, I am also right. Thank your for your support.
 
Stick with 9 conference games.
5 permanent rivals you play every year
Play everybody else once every 2 years. Play 2 P5 teams OOC and 1 MAC level team each year. 6 home games 1 year, 7 home games the other year.

5 permanent rivals

Iowa - Neb, Minn, Wisc, NW, ILL
Neb - Iowa, Minn, Wisc, NW, PSU
Minn - Iowa, Neb, Wisc, Mich, Pur
Wisc - Iowa, Neb, Minn, NW, MSU

NW - ILL, Pur, Iowa, Neb, Wisc
ILL - NW, Indy, Pur, Iowa, OSU
Pur - Indy, NW, ILL, Mich, Minn
Indy - Pur, ILL, MSU, Rut, MD

Mich - OSU, MSU, Minn, Pur, MD
MSU - Mich, Wisc, Indy, PSU, Rut
OSU - Mich, PSU, Rut, MD, ILL

PSU - OSU, MSU, MD, Rut, Neb
MD - PSU, Rut, OSU, Mich, Indy
Rut - PSU, MD, OSU, MSU, Indy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top