I don't understand

[okeefe4prez]

If you set up a schedule with 5 permanent rivals it could look something like this

Team - 5 rivals
Neb - Iowa, Minn, Wisc, NW, PSU
Iowa - Neb, Minn, Wisc, NW, ILL
Minn - Neb, Iowa, Wisc, Mich, Indy
Wisc - Neb, Iowa, Minn, NW, MSU
NW - ILL, Neb, Iowa, Wisc, Pur
ILL - NW, Indy, Pur, Iowa, OSU
Pur - Indy, NW, ILL, Mich, Rut

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

HATE IT. It throws away our rivalry with Purdue that dates all the way back to the Leaders and Legends division days. You can't just piss on a tradition like that.

 

[hawkdrummer1]

It’s not the same as the Big 10 days of my youth. When you missed only 1 team a year, everyone in conference was your rival. Expansion put an end to those days.

True. But there's still years of history with programs like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan. That doesn't just disappear.

Welcoming and embracing the new, doesn't mean tossing away and forgetting the old. A wise man understands the significance of both.

Was a day when people respected history and grasped it's importance...hungry for the knowledge of past events, even as they strove to move forward. Now we have a disposable society...not only in terms of goods. History is not only ignored, but many are being taught to actively disassemble it as if it never occurred...or perhaps shouldn't have occurred.

New rivals are great. (though it takes more than a contrived trophy to be a "rival").Doesn't mean the old ones are gone.

 

[westender]

Just hoping there is still football in 20 years. Otherwise I have to pick a hockey team and get to understanding the rules.

 

[AreWeThereYet]

There may also be some pressure from underneath in the Eastern Division to get relief from the yearly pounding the lesser teams get. It's hard for Indiana, Maryland, and Rutgers to even get bowl eligible, even if they improve. They may be looking for some other arrangement down the line.

 

[vork22]

The main reason this idea of getting rid of divisions appeals to me is it creates a way to play all the teams in the Big Ten more often. If you do the math, you could still set up schedules where each team could get 5 permanent rivals they play every year, and 8 teams they play 50% of the time. This type of schedule appeals to me more than divisional schedules.

But if the Big Ten must have divisions, I like the east-west setup.

You want Iowa to only win 5-6 games a year? The divisional structure is the only thing that gives Iowa a chance every year.

 

[Northside Hawk]

You want Iowa to only win 5-6 games a year? The divisional structure is the only thing that gives Iowa a chance every year.

There's some dogs over there too. We have yet to play Rutgers in Iowa City. Indiana seems stuck in neutral, Maryland is a mystery.

As for the others? Get two of them in Iowa City every year and I bet we would go 2-2 more often than not. Kirk has a way of uglying those games up.

 

[Ree4]

Let's get real, this is all about OSU not getting in the cfp.
So because the west is getting stronger and beating the top teams from the East, all the sudden maybe it's not such a good idea?
This is nothing more than "entitlement" "blue blood" bullshit.
Curb stomp a few of the "best" the "blue bloods" and suddenly they want to change the rules.

Sounds like gerrymandering!

 

[bitmap]

HATE IT. It throws away our rivalry with Purdue that dates all the way back to the Leaders and Legends division days. You can't just piss on a tradition like that.

Funny. Our dreaded rival Purdue. What also is funny is that I hated the L&L idea when it was announced. I really thought it should have been an East/West alignment. Now I look back at it and think the only thing I didn't like was not having Wisconsin on the schedule every year. I would have swapped the kitties for the badgers but could see why they set it up the way they did.

 

[homes]

It's moronic to do away with the divisions. The divisions and soft title game aren't the reason OSU missed the playoffs the last two years. Getting their asses kicked by Iowa and Purdue is the sole reason they did not get in. Maybe they could re-allign the divisions again, but the problem is Michigan has 2 protected games (MSU and OSU) that have to be played every year. That's the driver in the whole thing. Plus, when you add Rutgers and Maryland, you add more teams that makes it harder to keep protected rivalries alive. Jim had a choice between money and retaining the goodwill and tradition of the conference and he took the money.

So, this year, OSU boot-stomps Michigan and the next week they play Michigan again? Thrilling. And suppose OSU would have beaten Michigan again. Guess what, OSU still isn't in the 4 team playoff because they got whipped by Purdue and should have lost to Maryland. Same with last year for OSU, it had nothing to do with the Divisions, and everything to do with the Hawkeyes.

If there's some burning desire to have the 2 "best" teams play each other in a championship game, then do away with Divisions, and have the top 2 teams in the conference play each other. But then, what happens in the year that a team goes undefeated for the entire season, plays a one or two loss team in the championship game, and gets beat? That undefeated team would have been a shoe-in for the playoffs, but now with a loss, it might not be. In that year, wouldn't it be better to call that school the champion, call off the championship game and guarantee its place in the playoffs, and not risk the school losing in a "championship" game? (of course, they'd never give up the revenue so that's not going to happen).

There are too many variables and matters that he has no control over (such as every other school not in the Big Ten). They can never tweak it to perfection. I like the Divisions. Leave it as it is.

Expand the playoffs to 8, guarantee every Power 5 conference winner is in and call it - "as good as it can be".

 

[oldhawk12]

https://www.si.com/college-football/2018/12/06/jim-delany-big-ten-divisions-realignment-playoff

If that's not the objective, then why do away with the divisions?
Determining the two best teams is doable, but as the cfp has shown, it must be done correctly or it becomes more subjective and thus more fallible.

If kf can’t continue to hide in the west, he’ll be doomed as even he can’t schedule 8 non con wins