If the big 10 goes big

B

beachhawk

New Member
If I were in charge of the big ten and decided to go more then 12. I would go for 20 schools. I would have 4 divisions of 5. Each Division would round robin (4 games) which would leave plenty of games to maintain rivalries and have cross divisional games. The winners of each division would be placed in the conference playoff. The last week of the regular season is left open with flex schedules. The logistics though daunting could be managed. After the playoff is set the remaining teams are matched up by the big ten to create interesting match-ups.

The New conferences is Named the "Big Tens".

Big Tens Structure:

Eastern 10

Mid-Atlantic Division:
Maryland
Ohio State
Penn State
Rutgers
Syracuse

Lake Division:
Indiana
Northwestern
Purdue
Michigan
Michigan State

Western 10
Heartland Division:
Illinois
Iowa
Minnesota
Missouri
Wisconsin

Plains Division:
Kansas
Nebraska
Oklahoma
Texas
Texas A&M

Oklahoma isn't an AAU member and I have heard that Kansas and Kansas St. may have to be a package deal. They could be replace with Colorado and say Rice (both AAU Schools) but as written all the states are contiguous. This scenario adds 8 states to the Big Ten Network.
 
Last edited:
The Western 10 would be comprised of the Plains and Heartland divisions. The Eastern 10 would be the Lakes and Mid-Atlantic division. The two make the Big Tens. It is really just a way to justify retaining the Big Ten name. But in practice the champion from the west would meet the champion from the east to determine the conference Champion. And would create the first playoff in NCAA Bowl Division History.
 
I personally would rather not expand all then add anyone other then Notre Dame. It is my opinion that if we go over 12 then all nostalgia is lost.

So that makes my thinking turn to how do we get paid enough to make sure that our teams have a competitive advantage over all other leagues. The goal here is to add the state of Texas and the Northeast to the Big Ten Networks footprint. While preserving regional match-ups for natural rivalries.

It also prevents the Pac 10 or SEC from snatching Texas.
 
1. We still have no championship game since there are 4 divisions.

2. You aren't getting OU without OK State.
 
1.)Look at the attached image. The 2 western champs and 2 eastern meet in a semi. Then the winners meet for a the conference championship. Flex scheduling would be in place for the last game of the regular season. Like I said the logistics would be tough but manageable.

2.) I don't have an answer for that maybe its colorado. Colorado is in the AAU and The Denver Market would be an even better addition. But Oklahoma is the bridge state, so they are key. I don't care OU so much as Oklahoma the state. Maybe thats where this version falls apart.
 
Last edited:
The flex scheduling would require a seemingly unlikely change to NCAA rules. Doubt it would be all that popular among coaches and schools, either. I'm not hot on it.

There's a kernel of a good idea here in that you're thinking about conference expansion to essentially build a D1A playoff from the conferences up.

If we leave it just to each conference's self-interest, we'll still end up with a mess and a new imbalance of power that is only bound to produce new Boise States. Not to dis the Broncos, just saying they're a team that the current BCS cannot handle.

We need a system where the likes of Boise and Utah and TCU and Cincinnati actually have a shot at the title without us having to go all in and put 'em in a championship game, when we'd really like to see how they'd do against Nebraska first. I'm not sure I can go with your solution, but I think you're asking the right questions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top