Miller: B1G to 9 Game Slate, Impact on Iowa-ISU

JonDMiller

JonDMiller

Publisher/Founder
As I speculated back on July 25th, the Big Ten has now made it official: Beginning with the 2017 season, the league is moving to a nine-game conference slate.

Iowa, Nebraska, Michigan State, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio State will play five conference home games in 2017 and every odd numbered year going forward (2019, 2021, etc). In even numbered years, those teams will play just four conference home games and five road games. Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Penn State, Purdue and Northwestern will have their five home game seasons in the even numbered years (2018, 2020, 2022, etc).

It stands to reason that when you have one extra conference home game, you stand a better chance of winning more games. Iowa will have that leg up on Michigan in the odd years...but I think Michigan is the 'winner' in the Legends split, as they will have the extra home games in years when Iowa, Nebraska and Michigan State have just four conference home games.

As it relates to the Iowa-Iowa State annual football game, Iowa hosts the Cyclones in even ending years, so this lines up with the years they will host just four Big Ten games. This allows Iowa to host seven football games per year, every year...if Iowa and Iowa State keep their series intact, Iowa would likely host two non-BCS conference teams in the two remaining out of conference games. That gives them four conference and three non-conference home games in even ending years, then five conference and two non-conference home opportunities in odd ending years, with the road game at Iowa State.

It will be interesting to see how many Big Ten teams continue to play BCS caliber competition from other conferences in their out of conference schedule, or how many 'neutral' site games will be played, such as Big Ten teams playing games at Soldier Field.

I suspect they will continue to be on the endangered list.

The Big Ten schedule move also means there will be a two-year gap at most between meetings against teams from the opposite division.
 
DuffMan said:
Biggest win in all of this? We get to see Wisky regularly again.
Click to expand...

How so? I mentioned this in another thread but I read somewhere (I think it may have been Rittenberg's column) that if/when they B1G went to a 9 game conference schedule that they would not be adding a 2nd protected game for each team.

I want the Wisky game back every year as much as anyone though.
 
I would love to play Illinois again too. More B10 games is a good thing....and unfortunately ISU will probably not go away.
 
Section136 said:
How so? I mentioned this in another thread but I read somewhere (I think it may have been Rittenberg's column) that if/when they B1G went to a 9 game conference schedule that they would not be adding a 2nd protected game for each team.

I want the Wisky game back every year as much as anyone though.
Click to expand...

With the proposed 9 game schedule we would have no more than a 2 year break from any school and that would only happen once every six years. Essentially you would be playing them 4 out of six years, that's "regularly" in my book.
 
We need to end the series with ISU and get an out of state home/home against a BCS opponent. I have a strong distaste for the idea that our only BCS OOC game each season will be ISU. I like the game now because we can still schedule an Arizona/Pitt/ASU, however, in the future that won't be possible. I'd like to see the ISU/Iowa game go to an every-other-year type series going forward after 2016.
 
I have a question.

Now that they've done this does that close the door somewhat to future expansion talk? When we added Nebby many of us were under the impression that was only a starting point, and future expansion in a few years was likely.

I don't think they take the time and energy to release this schedule starting in 2017 if that's the case.
 
Just play ISU every 2 out of 4, or 2 out of 6 years. We'll still play them every year in everything else.
 
I don't see why it makes sense to drop them. We have them at home in the years we play 4home 5away in the B10. In those years our schedule would be Directional U, ISU, +4 big ten games. In years we have 5home 4away our home schedule is Directional U x 2 and 5 B10 games. We play 7 at home and 5 away every year which is just like it is now.

Dropping ISU because we move to a 9 game conference schedule makes no sense.
 
DuffMan said:
I have a question.

Now that they've done this does that close the door somewhat to future expansion talk? When we added Nebby many of us were under the impression that was only a starting point, and future expansion in a few years was likely.

I don't think they take the time and energy to release this schedule starting in 2017 if that's the case.
Click to expand...

I think B1G expansion is done. We're not taking Rutgers, Mizzou, Syracuse, Vandy, etc.

Also, it seems like Iowa wants to keep the ISU games, right? They could have set it up so that it wouldn't work, and used that as an excuse.
 
Again financially it makes no sense NOT to keep the ISU series going. It brings in way more money to the school than any other home/home would with a BCS program. It also saves us a TON of money on travel expense because we bus there.
 
So why is a nine game conference season good for anybody? Essentially you're trading the Pitt game for a game against Wisconsin. Isn't the point to win as many games as possible and get to the best bowl game that you can. Indiana, Purdue and Minnesota are screwed right?
 
DuffMan said:
I have a question.

Now that they've done this does that close the door somewhat to future expansion talk? When we added Nebby many of us were under the impression that was only a starting point, and future expansion in a few years was likely.

I don't think they take the time and energy to release this schedule starting in 2017 if that's the case.
Click to expand...

Why would this close the door on it? You add more schools and you add half of them to each group. This is just to help our current teams get their OOC scheduling done as far in the future as they want.
 
As a ISU alum, Iowa-ISU needs to stay on the schedule at least for economic reasons. Ames needs the game, think of the children.
 
JonDMiller said:
As I speculated back on July 25th, the Big Ten has now made it official: Beginning with the 2017 season, the league is moving to a nine-game conference slate.

Iowa, Nebraska, Michigan State, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio State will play five conference home games in 2017 and every odd numbered year going forward (2019, 2021, etc). In even numbered years, those teams will play just four conference home games and five road games. Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Penn State, Purdue and Northwestern will have their five home game seasons in the even numbered years (2018, 2020, 2022, etc).

It stands to reason that when you have one extra conference home game, you stand a better chance of winning more games. Iowa will have that leg up on Michigan in the odd years...but I think Michigan is the 'winner' in the Legends split, as they will have the extra home games in years when Iowa, Nebraska and Michigan State have just four conference home games.

As it relates to the Iowa-Iowa State annual football game, Iowa hosts the Cyclones in even ending years, so this lines up with the years they will host just four Big Ten games. This allows Iowa to host seven football games per year, every year...if Iowa and Iowa State keep their series intact, Iowa would likely host two non-BCS conference teams in the two remaining out of conference games. That gives them four conference and three non-conference home games in even ending years, then five conference and two non-conference home opportunities in odd ending years, with the road game at Iowa State.

It will be interesting to see how many Big Ten teams continue to play BCS caliber competition from other conferences in their out of conference schedule, or how many 'neutral' site games will be played, such as Big Ten teams playing games at Soldier Field.

I suspect they will continue to be on the endangered list.

The Big Ten schedule move also means there will be a two-year gap at most between meetings against teams from the opposite division.
Click to expand...

I agree with this and the same goes for Ohio State on the other side. Seems like every other year, those two schools got a leg-up to make it to the conference championship game. I understand that they still have to win the games, but it looks like another advantage for those two teams. How long is this set in stone?
 
JonDMiller said:
As I speculated back on July 25th, the Big Ten has now made it official: Beginning with the 2017 season, the league is moving to a nine-game conference slate.

Iowa, Nebraska, Michigan State, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio State will play five conference home games in 2017 and every odd numbered year going forward (2019, 2021, etc). In even numbered years, those teams will play just four conference home games and five road games. Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Penn State, Purdue and Northwestern will have their five home game seasons in the even numbered years (2018, 2020, 2022, etc).

It stands to reason that when you have one extra conference home game, you stand a better chance of winning more games. Iowa will have that leg up on Michigan in the odd years...but I think Michigan is the 'winner' in the Legends split, as they will have the extra home games in years when Iowa, Nebraska and Michigan State have just four conference home games.

As it relates to the Iowa-Iowa State annual football game, Iowa hosts the Cyclones in even ending years, so this lines up with the years they will host just four Big Ten games. This allows Iowa to host seven football games per year, every year...if Iowa and Iowa State keep their series intact, Iowa would likely host two non-BCS conference teams in the two remaining out of conference games. That gives them four conference and three non-conference home games in even ending years, then five conference and two non-conference home opportunities in odd ending years, with the road game at Iowa State.

It will be interesting to see how many Big Ten teams continue to play BCS caliber competition from other conferences in their out of conference schedule, or how many 'neutral' site games will be played, such as Big Ten teams playing games at Soldier Field.

I suspect they will continue to be on the endangered list.

The Big Ten schedule move also means there will be a two-year gap at most between meetings against teams from the opposite division.
Click to expand...
While I agree for the most part, I think you have to factor-in the cost to get cupcakes to come to Kinnick, especially if the rest of the BCS schools are headed this way. If it is about money, it may be more profitable to schedule 1-2 non-conference BCS schools. If it is about wins, you go 0-1 non-conference BCS schools.
 
Once this happens, can we just opt-out of the whole protected "rival" thing and rotate among the other teams in the Leaders divison and play Wisconsin every year? Getting Wisconsin back on the schedule every year should be a top priority once we add another conference game. I don't know how it would work or the competitive equity of it all, just make it happen Barta!

Playing Purdon't every year and not Wisconsin hurts the competitive equity (or whatever Delany said).
 
I like the idea of playing ISU less often so we can play other random BCS teams. The schedule is going to get really repetitive in a hurry.
 
I wonder what kind of effect this will have on Notre Dame since the addition of an extra conference game may make it harder for them to schedule MSU, Michigan and Purdue on a yearly basis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top