New Big Ten divisions

Hawkize1

Hawkize1

Well-Known Member
This has probably been done already, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents into the alignments and see what everyone thinks.

Big Ten East:
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Northwestern
Illinois

West:
Nebraska
Iowa
Penn State
Wisconsin
Indiana
Minnesota

This is taking as many rivalry games into account as possible, obviously I coudn't get them all. If 9 conference games are to be played then Indiana and Purdue can keep playing each other.
I have played around this this several times and I think this is the best.

What do you all think?
 
It will be very interesting once this goes down.

I understand the idea experts have said about the 800 win teams being split: Michigan and OSU in the East and PSU and Nebraska in the West.

I just think Iowa and Wisconsin going together with Nebraska and PSU in the West makes it a much much more difficult division while OSU (and eventually Michigan should they turn it around) get a walk through.
 
Hawkize1 said:
This has probably been done already, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents into the alignments and see what everyone thinks.

Big Ten East:
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Northwestern
Illinois

West:
Nebraska
Iowa
Penn State
Wisconsin
Indiana
Minnesota

This is taking as many rivalry games into account as possible, obviously I coudn't get them all. If 9 conference games are to be played then Indiana and Purdue can keep playing each other.
I have played around this this several times and I think this is the best.

What do you all think?
Click to expand...


Delany stated that the divisions will be competively split: Mich,Osu,Neb, and PSU will be split in pairs.

Rivals will be protected:

NW-Ill
MN-Wisc
Ia-Neb
Pur-Indy

now the hard part: do you keep Mich-Msu and Osu-Psu or Mich-Osu and Psu-Msu.


Geography: easy to stick psu in the west with nebraska but what if if they add future east schools?

my pick

west: mich,msu,whisky,minn,ia,neb, and make sure osu and mich game is protected each year
 
You are right several threads on this. But since you are started another here is another take.

Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delaney outlined three principles regarding football divisions; competitive balance, traditions, and geography. It is possible to honor those principles and have the protected rival games during and at the end of the season. A fear expressed is that the conference could see back to back games between Ohio State and Michigan if they are in different divisions. While probable it is not as likely as some fear.

Two divisions were developed with the three principles involved; balance, tradition and geography.

In the Yost division are:
Michigan
Nebraska
Iowa
Northwestern
Minnesota
Michigan State

The Stagg division:
Ohio St
Penn St
Indiana
Purdue
Illinois
Wisconsin

In terms of geography four of the six teams in each division remain in there time zone. The four teams that are moved geographically are for purposes of creating balance between and among members within the division. In this setup each team is given at least one protected rival even if it is in a different division and one static common opponent from the other division. Teams play 9 games, five within the division and 4 across division.

The critical balance principle is that Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio State and Penn State play each other each season (3 games). The remaining eight teams must play three games against these four teams each year, two within their division and one game versus one of the two in the other division. Every two years teams rotate between the two members of that pair. For illustration Iowa would always play MI and NE and rotate between PSU and OSU every 2 years. This means all teams have the same difficulty factor among historic winning programs and all historic winning programs have three challenges.

A second factor to competitive balance is that Wisconsin and Purdue balance Iowa and Michigan State. These are four teams with historic winning records. A division with too many historic powers lumped with those that do not have a winning history is unfair to those not in that division and unfair to the teams within the division that do not have an overall football history.

To maintain traditions and create new ones six season ending games are identified:
Michigan vs Ohio State
Penn State vs Nebraska
Purdue vs Indiana (Old Oaken Bucket)
Illinois vs Northwestern (Land of Lincoln)
Minnesota vs Wisconsin (Paul Bunyan Axe)
Iowa vs Michigan State

Iowa versus Michigan State nor Penn State versus Nebraska are traditional, but four of others are trophy games or historic. The Penn State versus Nebraska would provide a great double header for the conference on the last weekend of regular season play. The outcome of division play on the final weekend could create a lot of suspense.

To retain traditions cross division protected rival games would continue. Already mentioned are Ohio State/Michigan, Illinois/Northwestern, and Minnesota/Wisconsin.
Two protected cross division rivals games not played on the final weekend are:
Iowa vs Wisconsin (Heartland Trophy)
MSU vs Indiana (Brass Spitoon)

The layout of the two divisions supports almost or all trophy games:
Iowa vs Minnesota (Floyd of Rosedale)
Ohio State vs Illinois (IlliBuck)
Michigan vs Michigan State (Paul Bunyon Trophy)
Minnesota vs Michigan (Brown Jug)
Illinois vs Purdue (Purdue Cannon)

There are only two annual trophy games lost Michigan State/Penn State (Land Grant) and Minnesota/Penn State (Governors). It was stated that all trophy games are not the same and these two probably qualify.

Another nuance for balance is the introduction of one static common opponent from the other division. The four aforementioned historic winning programs have two across division static games making it necessary for other teams. The static opponents for the remaining eight teams are:
Iowa vs Indiana
Illinois vs Minnesota
Purdue vs Michigan State
Wisconsin vs Northwestern
These games are meant to add competitive balance by leveling the out the schedule difficulty.

There are two teams left off each teams schedule each year. Every two years those two teams left off would rotate on and two would rotate off. See below:
IA - OSU/PSU and Ill/PU
MN - OSU/PSU and IU/PU
PU - MI/NE and IA/MN
IL - MI/NE and IA/MSU
IU - MI/NE and NW/MN
WI - MI/NE and NW/MSU
MSU - OSU/PSU and ILL/WI
NW - OSU/PSU and IU/PU
MI - WI/PU and IL/IU
NE - WI/PU and IL/IU
OSU - IA/MSU and MN/NW
PSU - IA/MSU and MN/NW

Under this scheduling system it is possible to get a championship game with two teams that played a week earlier, but how likely given the competitive balance features? It is a risk regardless of the assignment of historic winning programs. There is the possibility of a tie within the division. Selecting a team from the tied division for the championship requires tie breaker criteria. One of the criteria could be that a losing team during the final week that ties for the division title moves behind the team they tied with.

To make this work the football schedule requires a minimum ten weeks of conference play and eliminates one out of conference game. It means the possibility that some conference games could occur in the second and third week of the season because of rivalry games with opponents like Notre Dame; Purdue, Michigan and Michigan State all have games with Notre Dame.
 
eyekwah said:
In the Yost division are:
Michigan
Nebraska
Iowa
Northwestern
Minnesota
Michigan State

The Stagg division:
Ohio St
Penn St
Indiana
Purdue
Illinois
Wisconsin
Click to expand...

That was a helluva post, and thanks for promoting the same division names that I suggested (if they don't just go E/W). But it does not preserve rivalries to the same degree as E/W. Remember, rivalries are not just who cares about a game nationally, it's LOCAL. When your neighbor is rooting for the other team it's a much more interesting game. And having two static games in the other division both defeats the definition of the word division and would mean you would play the other four teams across the aisle even less. Not buying that set up, but great effort. EAST/WEST IS BEST
 
Last edited:
bwsmoney said:
That was a helluva post, and thanks for promoting the same division names that I suggested (if they don't just go E/W). But it does not preserve rivalries to the same degree as E/W. Remember, rivalries are not just who cares about a game nationally, it's LOCAL. When your neighbor is rooting for the other team it's a much more interesting game. And having two static games in the other division both defeats the definition of the word division and would mean you would play the other four teams across the aisle even less. Not buying that set up, but great effort. EAST/WEST IS BEST
Click to expand...

Could you identify which rivalries that I missed? I thought I pretty much saved them all.
 
Excellent breakdown...with the key being Michigan and OSU as cross division rivals.

In the Yost division are:
Michigan
Nebraska
Iowa
Northwestern
Minnesota
Michigan State

The Stagg division:
Ohio St
Penn St
Indiana
Purdue
Illinois
Wisconsin
 
eyekwah said:
You are right several threads on this. But since you are started another here is another take.

Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delaney outlined three principles regarding football divisions; competitive balance, traditions, and geography. It is possible to honor those principles and have the protected rival games during and at the end of the season. A fear expressed is that the conference could see back to back games between Ohio State and Michigan if they are in different divisions. While probable it is not as likely as some fear.

Two divisions were developed with the three principles involved; balance, tradition and geography.

In the Yost division are:
Michigan
Nebraska
Iowa
Northwestern
Minnesota
Michigan State

The Stagg division:
Ohio St
Penn St
Indiana
Purdue
Illinois
Wisconsin

In terms of geography four of the six teams in each division remain in there time zone. The four teams that are moved geographically are for purposes of creating balance between and among members within the division. In this setup each team is given at least one protected rival even if it is in a different division and one static common opponent from the other division. Teams play 9 games, five within the division and 4 across division.

The critical balance principle is that Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio State and Penn State play each other each season (3 games). The remaining eight teams must play three games against these four teams each year, two within their division and one game versus one of the two in the other division. Every two years teams rotate between the two members of that pair. For illustration Iowa would always play MI and NE and rotate between PSU and OSU every 2 years. This means all teams have the same difficulty factor among historic winning programs and all historic winning programs have three challenges.

A second factor to competitive balance is that Wisconsin and Purdue balance Iowa and Michigan State. These are four teams with historic winning records. A division with too many historic powers lumped with those that do not have a winning history is unfair to those not in that division and unfair to the teams within the division that do not have an overall football history.

To maintain traditions and create new ones six season ending games are identified:
Michigan vs Ohio State
Penn State vs Nebraska
Purdue vs Indiana (Old Oaken Bucket)
Illinois vs Northwestern (Land of Lincoln)
Minnesota vs Wisconsin (Paul Bunyan Axe)
Iowa vs Michigan State

Iowa versus Michigan State nor Penn State versus Nebraska are traditional, but four of others are trophy games or historic. The Penn State versus Nebraska would provide a great double header for the conference on the last weekend of regular season play. The outcome of division play on the final weekend could create a lot of suspense.

To retain traditions cross division protected rival games would continue. Already mentioned are Ohio State/Michigan, Illinois/Northwestern, and Minnesota/Wisconsin.
Two protected cross division rivals games not played on the final weekend are:
Iowa vs Wisconsin (Heartland Trophy)
MSU vs Indiana (Brass Spitoon)

The layout of the two divisions supports almost or all trophy games:
Iowa vs Minnesota (Floyd of Rosedale)
Ohio State vs Illinois (IlliBuck)
Michigan vs Michigan State (Paul Bunyon Trophy)
Minnesota vs Michigan (Brown Jug)
Illinois vs Purdue (Purdue Cannon)

There are only two annual trophy games lost Michigan State/Penn State (Land Grant) and Minnesota/Penn State (Governors). It was stated that all trophy games are not the same and these two probably qualify.

Another nuance for balance is the introduction of one static common opponent from the other division. The four aforementioned historic winning programs have two across division static games making it necessary for other teams. The static opponents for the remaining eight teams are:
Iowa vs Indiana
Illinois vs Minnesota
Purdue vs Michigan State
Wisconsin vs Northwestern
These games are meant to add competitive balance by leveling the out the schedule difficulty.

There are two teams left off each teams schedule each year. Every two years those two teams left off would rotate on and two would rotate off. See below:
IA - OSU/PSU and Ill/PU
MN - OSU/PSU and IU/PU
PU - MI/NE and IA/MN
IL - MI/NE and IA/MSU
IU - MI/NE and NW/MN
WI - MI/NE and NW/MSU
MSU - OSU/PSU and ILL/WI
NW - OSU/PSU and IU/PU
MI - WI/PU and IL/IU
NE - WI/PU and IL/IU
OSU - IA/MSU and MN/NW
PSU - IA/MSU and MN/NW

Under this scheduling system it is possible to get a championship game with two teams that played a week earlier, but how likely given the competitive balance features? It is a risk regardless of the assignment of historic winning programs. There is the possibility of a tie within the division. Selecting a team from the tied division for the championship requires tie breaker criteria. One of the criteria could be that a losing team during the final week that ties for the division title moves behind the team they tied with.

To make this work the football schedule requires a minimum ten weeks of conference play and eliminates one out of conference game. It means the possibility that some conference games could occur in the second and third week of the season because of rivalry games with opponents like Notre Dame; Purdue, Michigan and Michigan State all have games with Notre Dame.
Click to expand...

Man.....after reading that my head hurts. :eek:
 
Ave. Conf wins since 93. Nebby played 8 conference games/yr in the Big 12, so they were counted the same. Nebby went 7-0 in 93-95 in the old Big Eight and so I gave them credit for 8 wins to weight those seasons the same.

These scenarios kept Mich, MSU, OSU - Ind, Purdue - Iowa, Minny, Wisky in the same divisions.

Scenario #1
East Ave wins/yr Div ave wins 4.39
OSU 6.26
Michigan 5.53
PSU 5.06
Purdue 3.79
MSU 3.74
Indiana 1.94
TOTAL 26.32
West Div ave. wins 3.92
Nebraska 5.82
Wisc 4.74
Iowa 4.21
NW 3.47
Illinois 2.68
Minnesota 2.59
TOTAL 23.5

Scenario #2
Ave wins/yr Div ave wins 3.99
OSU 6.26
Michigan 5.53
Illinois 2.68
Purdue 3.79
MSU 3.74
Indiana 1.94
TOTAL 23.94

Nebraska 5.82 Div Ave Wins 4.32
Iowa 4.21
Wisc 4.74
NW 3.47
PSU 5.06
Minnesota 2.59
TOTAL 25.89

Scenario #3
Ave wins/yr Div ave wins 4.12
OSU 6.26
Michigan 5.53
NW 3.47
Purdue 3.79
MSU 3.74
Indiana 1.94
TOTAL 24.73

Nebraska 5.82 Div Ave wins 4.18
Iowa 4.21
Wisc 4.74
Illinois 2.68
PSU 5.06
Minnesota 2.59
TOTAL 25.1
 
Last edited:
Now...rework thatlooking only at the last 10 years and you'll get a more realistic and relevant data set. Going back to the previous century tells you nothing about the strength of the programs this century.
 
Hawkize1 said:
This has probably been done already, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents into the alignments and see what everyone thinks.

Big Ten East:
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Northwestern
Illinois

West:
Nebraska
Iowa
Penn State
Wisconsin
Indiana
Minnesota

This is taking as many rivalry games into account as possible, obviously I coudn't get them all. If 9 conference games are to be played then Indiana and Purdue can keep playing each other.
I have played around this this several times and I think this is the best.

What do you all think?
Click to expand...


That looks good. Looks pretty balanced to me. The West would be the stronger of the two right now, but over time I think that'd work pretty well.
 
No way will Michigan and OSU be divided up. Big10 will not risk them playing in back to back games (end of year rival game and then again in Big10 title game) and risk "cheapening" the Big10 title game. This will never happen. Like it was said yesterday on the BTN - there could be an argument made for PSU, OSU and Michigan all being in the East.
 
Mesaclone said:
Now...rework thatlooking only at the last 10 years and you'll get a more realistic and relevant data set. Going back to the previous century tells you nothing about the strength of the programs this century.
Click to expand...


He didn't just randomly pick 1993! That's the date laid out by Delany in yesterday's presser. That's the year PSU joined and scholarships were cut to 85. "Modern CFB era." To post a scenario that goes against "the man's" comments wouldn't make any sense.
 
nationalchamps said:
No way will Michigan and OSU be divided up. Big10 will not risk them playing in back to back games (end of year rival game and then again in Big10 title game) and risk "cheapening" the Big10 title game. This will never happen. Like it was said yesterday on the BTN - there could be an argument made for PSU, OSU and Michigan all being in the East.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that exactly. Michigan and Ohio State possibly playing back to back games, to me would not be appealing.
I think it would work out the best to keep them in the same division.
 
All of these permutations simply support the problem with splitting a conference into divisions. I recognize their desire to have divisions for the all-important conference champion$hip game (it's amazing to me the Big 10 conference has been able to exist for all of these years without a championship game, I don't know how they did it), but any split is going to have some inequity or unfairness to it.

Trying to split the conference to keep a "competitive balance" is dangerous because you run the risk that the "balance" could shift over time by one or more program getting better and others falling off. What to do then? Switch the alignment? That seems hokey. Worse than that, by aligning the conference now with how the "competitive balance" seems to be at present, you run the risk of pre-ordaining what teams are considered better than others thus further cementing the haves and have-nots in the conference.

IF there is a split in the conference, it ought to be done by geography only. Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern in the "west" and the others in the "east". It may not seem as fair right now, but in a few years, if Illinois or Minnesota get stronger and/or Penn State or Michigan, for example, get weaker, then things could swing as to which is the better division. Trying to tweak the divisions now by what is perceived to be the best "balance" will only lead to problems later. There are always going to be problems with splitting a conference into divisions, but if they need to do it, do it by geography, it's simple and logical. Trying to engineer something else I believe will lead to bigger issues down the road.
 
Last edited:
bwsmoney said:
That was a helluva post, and thanks for promoting the same division names that I suggested (if they don't just go E/W). But it does not preserve rivalries to the same degree as E/W. Remember, rivalries are not just who cares about a game nationally, it's LOCAL. When your neighbor is rooting for the other team it's a much more interesting game. And having two static games in the other division both defeats the definition of the word division and would mean you would play the other four teams across the aisle even less. Not buying that set up, but great effort. EAST/WEST IS BEST
Click to expand...
Good stuff.
 
Plain and simple: do a east/west breakup
EAST:
Indiana
Michigan
Michigan St
Ohio St
Penn St
Purdue

West:
Illinois
Iowa
Minnesota
Nebraska
Northwestern
Wisconsin
 
eyekwah said:
Could you identify which rivalries that I missed? I thought I pretty much saved them all.
Click to expand...

"saved" is relative, I guess ... I hate the protected rivals in the other division scheme and if you must do it, it should be limited to 1 ... to me, splitting rivals into different divisions diminishes the meaning of the game, especially if they can meet a second time

To answer your question, specifically, the main one that got me was Iowa/Illinois ... is that a traditional rivalry? depends who you ask ... pretty intense in the QCA when I was growing up, and in my family
 
bwsmoney said:
To answer your question, specifically, the main one that got me was Iowa/Illinois ... is that a traditional rivalry? depends who you ask ... pretty intense in the QCA when I was growing up, and in my family
Click to expand...

I'm an older guy and Iowa/Illinois went many years without playing. I grew up in Eastern Iowa as well, but never considered the Illinois game as anything special when they did resume play.
 
It should be east and west.

OSU/PSU/MICH = NEB/IA/WIS

THe rest of the teams are a wash but Ill and NW have at least risen up a few times lately and won or competed to win the league
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top