3 locked rivals schedule

[Some guy]

Illinois - Northwestern
Indiana - Purdue
Iowa- Minnesota, Nebraska, wisconsin
Maryland - Penn State
Michigan - Ohio state, Michigan state
Michigan state - Michigan
Minnesota - Iowa, wisconsin
Nebraska - iowa
Northwestern - Illinois
Ohio state - penn state, Michigan
Penn State - Maryland, Rutgers, Ohio State
Purdue - Indiana
Rutgers - Penn State
UCLA - USC
USC - UCLA
Wisconsin - Minnesota, iowa


These are locks. No chance these aren’t in there.
My take on how it works out:
Opponent (#oftop4brands/#oftop8brands)

Illinois - Northwestern, Purdue, michigan state (0/1)
Indiana - Purdue, Michigan State, Maryland (0/1)
Iowa- Minnesota, Nebraska, wisconsin (0/2)
Maryland - Penn State, Rutgers, Indiana (1/1)
Michigan - Ohio state, Michigan state, USC (2/3)
Michigan state - Michigan, Illinois, Indiana (1/1)
Minnesota - Iowa, wisconsin, northwestern (0/2)
Nebraska - iowa, USC, UCLA (1/2)
Northwestern - Illinois, wisconsin, Minnesota (0/1)
Ohio state - penn state, Michigan, UCLA (2/2)
Penn State - Maryland, Rutgers, Ohio State (1/1)
Purdue - Indiana, Illinois, Rutgers (0/0)
Rutgers - Penn State, Maryland, Purdue (1/1)
UCLA - USC, Ohio State, Nebraska (2/3)
USC - UCLA, Nebraska, Michigan (1/2)
Wisconsin - Minnesota, iowa, Northwestern (0/1)


They want brands playing brands.
They don’t want anyone playing more than 2 of the big 4 (PSU/OSU/MI/USC)/at least 1 of the top 8 (top 4 plus WI/IA/NE/MSU)


How do you think it works out?

 

[Gophers_4life]

In my opinion there is no chance that Penn State plays either Ohio State or Michigan every year. They'll only play one of the two in any given year.

 

[Some guy]

In my opinion there is no chance that Penn State plays either Ohio State or Michigan every year. They'll only play one of the two in any given year.

PSU vs Ohio State is probably the one game PSU wants to keep though.

If they don’t want to keep it it really opens up more options though.

 

[Gophers_4life]

PSU vs Ohio State is probably the one game PSU wants to keep though.

If they don’t want to keep it it really opens up more options though.

I am under the understanding that PSU wants the opposite of what you state here. That having to play Ohio State every year has really limited them and they want to get away from that as much as the conference will allow.

If you have PSU message board posts largely arguing that they want the game, etc., then I will defer to that and admit I am wrong.

 

[Some guy]

I am under the understanding that PSU wants the opposite of what you state here. That having to play Ohio State every year has really limited them and they want to get away from that as much as the conference will allow.

If you have PSU message board posts largely arguing that they want the game, etc., then I will defer to that and admit I am wrong.

Penn state fans don’t want divisions so when they go 11-1 with a loss to Ohio state they can still make conference title game. They don’t want to throw the only rivalry they’ve developed away

I don’t read penn state message boards so I guess I’m going to just have to be okay not agreeing with you

 

[cjbfbp]

Penn state fans don’t want divisions so when they go 11-1 with a loss to Ohio state they can still make conference title game. They don’t want to throw the only rivalry they’ve developed away

I don’t read penn state message boards so I guess I’m going to just have to be okay not agreeing with you

So, you don't bother to do any research but that never prevents an unshakable faith in your own ideas.

 

[Some guy]

So, you don't bother to do any research but that never prevents an unshakable faith in your own ideas.

You think reading a bunch of fans on a message board would qualify as research?

 

[Gophergrandpa]

I realize that it makes the schedule harder every year, but I'd vote for Michigan as our third lock. Play every great historic rivalry game each year. Axe, Pig, Jug. Go from there.

 

[Some guy]

I realize that it makes the schedule harder every year, but I'd vote for Michigan as our third lock. Play every great historic rivalry game each year. Axe, Pig, Jug. Go from there.

I just don’t see it.
I feel like they’re going to give Michigan OSU and MSU for sure.

And I feel like they’ll want Michigan on the west coast for the third because of money reasons. But maybe I’ll be wrong.


Ideally, I prefer Nebraska as our third because I have a lot of Nebraska fan friends




Schedule is going to be harder every year. Let’s say the locks were WI, IA, and NE

The others 6 games will average 2 of Michigan, PSU, OSU, USC in a year because of how it’s going to work.

 

[PMWinSTP]

I realize that it makes the schedule harder every year, but I'd vote for Michigan as our third lock. Play every great historic rivalry game each year. Axe, Pig, Jug. Go from there.

Agree.

 

[Plato]

It has been reported elsewhere that having three locked-in games makes scheduling very difficult.
There probably will be nine conference games-even the SEC is tending to nine games- with two locked-in games.
Some schools might opt for one or none.

 

[Cayman]

Without digging into the idea of the conference wanting big brands to play other big brands, and wanting to grant the small brands some opportunities to play the big brands, I will say I don't think the Big Ten would consider the following protected games important:

Penn State/Rutgers
Penn State/Maryland - This is a game that at least many Penn State fans would tell you is a one-sided rivalry that is much more important to Maryland.
Penn State/Ohio State - I could see this one being protected, if Ohio State is considered the closest thing to a rival that Penn State has, and if Ohio State wants to guarantee a home game against either Michigan or Penn State every year. But if Ohio State doesn't care about always getting to play Penn State, and Penn State doesn't want a game against the Buckeyes every year as a major obstacle to winning the conference, or playing in the championship game, I could see the two mutually being okay with not protecting this game.

Games that you didn't list which I think some people will want protected, but may not happen:

Minnesota/Nebraska
Minnesota/Michigan
Wisconsin/Nebraska

None of these are really A-list Big Ten rivalry games. You could maybe put Michigan State/Indiana in that category as well.

Games that you didn't list that I could see being protected:

Penn State/Michigan State - These two teams have played each other at the end of the season several times since Maryland and Rutgers were added for the 2014 season, and they play for a trophy.
Maryland/Rutgers - This is already a year end "rivalry" game, even if it's not really a rivalry in the conventional sense. The games would be more competitive than a protected matchup with Penn State would be for either of them.

Then does the Big Ten protect any games between USC and/or UCLA against either Penn State or Nebraska, if PSU and NU end up with 0 or 1 protected rival otherwise, and the Big Ten wants to give the new guys some games against the bigger brands? Or maybe the Big Ten will just schedule matchups between those teams in the first season or two, and then be less committed to it as the years go on.

 

[Some guy]

Without digging into the idea of the conference wanting big brands to play other big brands, and wanting to grant the small brands some opportunities to play the big brands, I will say I don't think the Big Ten would consider the following protected games important:

Penn State/Rutgers
Penn State/Maryland - This is a game that at least many Penn State fans would tell you is a one-sided rivalry that is much more important to Maryland.
Penn State/Ohio State - I could see this one being protected, if Ohio State is considered the closest thing to a rival that Penn State has, and if Ohio State wants to guarantee a home game against either Michigan or Penn State every year. But if Ohio State doesn't care about always getting to play Penn State, and Penn State doesn't want a game against the Buckeyes every year as a major obstacle to winning the conference, or playing in the championship game, I could see the two mutually being okay with not protecting this game.

Games that you didn't list which I think some people will want protected, but may not happen:

Minnesota/Nebraska
Minnesota/Michigan
Wisconsin/Nebraska

None of these are really A-list Big Ten rivalry games. You could maybe put Michigan State/Indiana in that category as well.

Games that you didn't list that I could see being protected:

Penn State/Michigan State - These two teams have played each other at the end of the season several times since Maryland and Rutgers were added for the 2014 season, and they play for a trophy.
Maryland/Rutgers - This is already a year end "rivalry" game, even if it's not really a rivalry in the conventional sense. The games would be more competitive than a protected matchup with Penn State would be for either of them.

Then does the Big Ten protect any games between USC and/or UCLA against either Penn State or Nebraska, if PSU and NU end up with 0 or 1 protected rival otherwise, and the Big Ten wants to give the new guys some games against the bigger brands? Or maybe the Big Ten will just schedule matchups between those teams in the first season or two, and then be less committed to it as the years go on.

All good points.


I think they give every team their “top” rival for sure was my logic.
Which means penn state is getting Rutgers and Maryland even if it is one sided.

 

[mngolf]

So, you don't bother to do any research but that never prevents an unshakable faith in your own ideas.

Doesn't everyone?

 

[Gophers_4life]

Penn state fans don’t want divisions so when they go 11-1 with a loss to Ohio state they can still make conference title game. They don’t want to throw the only rivalry they’ve developed away

I don’t read penn state message boards so I guess I’m going to just have to be okay not agreeing with you

I only meant the message board bit to get an idea of what their fans want. I haven't done it either.

Your argument is fine. I'm only guessing that PSU fans/admin/team want nothing to do with playing OSU every year.

Disagree that it is a rivalry or the best rivalry they've developed in the Big Ten. It's about as one-sided as OSU has with pretty much every other team in the last 10 years other than Michigan.


- Prior to PSU playing its first Big Ten season in 1993, the two schools had only played 8 football games from 1912 to 1980.
- Over 1993 - 2001 PSU went 4-5, pretty evenly matched
- Over 2002 - 2011 PSU went 3-6 plus one vacated OSU win
- Since 2012 PSU has gone 1-11.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Without digging into the idea of the conference wanting big brands to play other big brands, and wanting to grant the small brands some opportunities to play the big brands, I will say I don't think the Big Ten would consider the following protected games important:

Penn State/Rutgers
Penn State/Maryland - This is a game that at least many Penn State fans would tell you is a one-sided rivalry that is much more important to Maryland.
Penn State/Ohio State - I could see this one being protected, if Ohio State is considered the closest thing to a rival that Penn State has, and if Ohio State wants to guarantee a home game against either Michigan or Penn State every year. But if Ohio State doesn't care about always getting to play Penn State, and Penn State doesn't want a game against the Buckeyes every year as a major obstacle to winning the conference, or playing in the championship game, I could see the two mutually being okay with not protecting this game.

Games that you didn't list which I think some people will want protected, but may not happen:

Minnesota/Nebraska
Minnesota/Michigan
Wisconsin/Nebraska

None of these are really A-list Big Ten rivalry games. You could maybe put Michigan State/Indiana in that category as well.

Games that you didn't list that I could see being protected:

Penn State/Michigan State - These two teams have played each other at the end of the season several times since Maryland and Rutgers were added for the 2014 season, and they play for a trophy.
Maryland/Rutgers - This is already a year end "rivalry" game, even if it's not really a rivalry in the conventional sense. The games would be more competitive than a protected matchup with Penn State would be for either of them.

Then does the Big Ten protect any games between USC and/or UCLA against either Penn State or Nebraska, if PSU and NU end up with 0 or 1 protected rival otherwise, and the Big Ten wants to give the new guys some games against the bigger brands? Or maybe the Big Ten will just schedule matchups between those teams in the first season or two, and then be less committed to it as the years go on.

PSU - MSU is the "rivalry" game, as far as the conference is concerned. The two schools were the model for the Land Grant Act and what a "Land Grant School" was to be in each state. So they play for the Land Grant Trophy.

 

[Gophers_4life]

As for the actual topic of the thread -- since I agree 100% that it's all but a lock that we're going to see a 9 game conference schedule, no divisions, with 3 locked-in yearly games per team once USC and UCLA join -- here is the guess I made in the other thread:


Minn - Wisc, Iowa, UCLA
Wisc - Minn, Iowa, USC
Iowa - Minn, Wisc, Neb

Neb - USC, UCLA, Iowa
USC - Neb, UCLA, Wisc
UCLA - Neb, USC, Minn

Ill - NW, Pur, IU
NW - Ill, Pur, IU
Pur - Ill, NW, IU
IU - Ill, NW, Pur

MSU - Mich, OSU, PSU
Mich - MSU, OSU, Mary
OSU - Mich, MSU, Rut

PSU - Rut, Mary, MSU
Rut - PSU, Mary, OSU
Mary - PSU, Rut, Mich

(the Mich-Mary and OSU-Rut could be switched and were selected arbitrarily)

 

[Ope3]

I only meant the message board bit to get an idea of what their fans want. I haven't done it either.

Your argument is fine. I'm only guessing that PSU fans/admin/team want nothing to do with playing OSU every year.

Disagree that it is a rivalry or the best rivalry they've developed in the Big Ten. It's about as one-sided as OSU has with pretty much every other team in the last 10 years other than Michigan.


- Prior to PSU playing its first Big Ten season in 1993, the two schools had only played 8 football games from 1912 to 1980.
- Over 1993 - 2001 PSU went 4-5, pretty evenly matched
- Over 2002 - 2011 PSU went 3-6 plus one vacated OSU win
- Since 2012 PSU has gone 1-11.

Even the Ohio St - Michigan rivalry is pretty one sided the past 10 meetings over 11 years. No game in 2020. Ohio St is 8-2 in those games, but on a 2 game losing streak.

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

As for the actual topic of the thread -- since I agree 100% that it's all but a lock that we're going to see a 9 game conference schedule, no divisions, with 3 locked-in yearly games per team once USC and UCLA join -- here is the guess I made in the other thread:


Minn - Wisc, Iowa, UCLA
Wisc - Minn, Iowa, USC
Iowa - Minn, Wisc, Neb

Neb - USC, UCLA, Iowa
USC - Neb, UCLA, Wisc
UCLA - Neb, USC, Minn

Ill - NW, Pur, IU
NW - Ill, Pur, IU
Pur - Ill, NW, IU
IU - Ill, NW, Pur

MSU - Mich, OSU, PSU
Mich - MSU, OSU, Mary
OSU - Mich, MSU, Rut

PSU - Rut, Mary, MSU
Rut - PSU, Mary, OSU
Mary - PSU, Rut, Mich

(the Mich-Mary and OSU-Rut could be switched and were selected arbitrarily)

A trip to Pasadena every other year would be nice. especially in November

 

[Gophers_4life]

Even the Ohio St - Michigan rivalry is pretty one sided the past 10 meetings over 11 years. No game in 2020. Ohio St is 8-2 in those games, but on a 2 game losing streak.

Quite honestly, I can't see a single team in the Big Ten other than Michigan that actually wants to play Ohio State every year. It's gonna be two unlucky programs who get stuck with it.

 

[Ope3]

Quite honestly, I can't see a single team in the Big Ten other than Michigan that actually wants to play Ohio State every year. It's gonna be two unlucky programs who get stuck with it.

Exactly! That's been my whole point of contention with "locking in opponents" when there really isn't a rivalry.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Exactly! That's been my whole point of contention with "locking in opponents" when there really isn't a rivalry.

Well like I said in the other thread, I'm sure it is mathematically possible to rig up a system where teams have uneven numbers of locked in year opponents, but I really doubt they're going to bother to take the effort to figure that out.

9 conf games, 3 locked in for everyone, rotate among the remaining 12 every two years, visit every stadium every four years ..... way too simple, way too clean. Book it

 

[MaxyJR1]

What is the context behind this? Is it being announced that 3 locked rivals is the decision or just a prediction?

I don't see Penn State having both Rutgers and Maryland. I think it would be Michigan State, Ohio State and Rutgers

 

[Ope3]

Well like I said in the other thread, I'm sure it is mathematically possible to rig up a system where teams have uneven numbers of locked in year opponents, but I really doubt they're going to bother to take the effort to figure that out.

9 conf games, 3 locked in for everyone, rotate among the remaining 12 every two years, visit every stadium every four years ..... way too simple, way too clean. Book it

Does "simple and clean" outweigh the bitching and whining for teams that get stuck having to play Ohio St (and to some degree, USC, Michigan, & Penn St)?

To me, it's emphatically no, but unfortunately I do not get a say in the matter.

 

[GopherTheJugular]

You think reading a bunch of fans on a message board would qualify as research?

In regards to what the fans want, which was what you were responding to, then yes, I would definitely say that reading a fan message board would be a good way to research said topic.

 

[Some guy]

As for the actual topic of the thread -- since I agree 100% that it's all but a lock that we're going to see a 9 game conference schedule, no divisions, with 3 locked-in yearly games per team once USC and UCLA join -- here is the guess I made in the other thread:


Minn - Wisc, Iowa, UCLA
Wisc - Minn, Iowa, USC
Iowa - Minn, Wisc, Neb

Neb - USC, UCLA, Iowa
USC - Neb, UCLA, Wisc
UCLA - Neb, USC, Minn

Ill - NW, Pur, IU
NW - Ill, Pur, IU
Pur - Ill, NW, IU
IU - Ill, NW, Pur

MSU - Mich, OSU, PSU
Mich - MSU, OSU, Mary
OSU - Mich, MSU, Rut

PSU - Rut, Mary, MSU
Rut - PSU, Mary, OSU
Mary - PSU, Rut, Mich

(the Mich-Mary and OSU-Rut could be switched and were selected arbitrarily)

The round robin aspect of this makes sense.
Also it will be very easy to schedule to make sure USC plays at least one of Ohio State/Michigan State every year.

The Indiana/Illinois teams definitely are the teams with the most scheduling advantages. But it’s going to be harder to avoid people in the new scheduling model.

 

[Some guy]

What is the context behind this? Is it being announced that 3 locked rivals is the decision or just a prediction?

I don't see Penn State having both Rutgers and Maryland. I think it would be Michigan State, Ohio State and Rutgers

They have all but announced the following things:
Will stay at 9, not go to 8 or 10
Divisions are gone, top 2 in championship


In a 9 game schedule with 16 teams, that’s the only model that mathematically makes any sense.

Unless a 17th and/or 18th team are added before 2024 I see it as like a 98% chance of being the model.

 

[Some guy]

Quite honestly, I can't see a single team in the Big Ten other than Michigan that actually wants to play Ohio State every year. It's gonna be two unlucky programs who get stuck with it.

Yeah but everyone else is playing them every other year anyways.

There won’t be a time again where Minnesota plays Maryland 6 years in a row but only sees Ohio state twice in that same span

 

[highwayman]

I think we need another scheduling thread! I’ll start the next one tomorrow! I’ll make sure it’s also mathematically unworkable and based on false suppositions! Pods! Rivals that aren’t rivals! Pods! No divisions but scheduling the same teams every year! Pods! Indiana at home every 40 years! Pods!

 

[Some guy]

I think we need another scheduling thread! I’ll start the next one tomorrow! I’ll make sure it’s also mathematically unworkable and based on false suppositions! Pods! Rivals that aren’t rivals! Pods! No divisions but scheduling the same teams every year! Pods! Indiana at home every 40 years! Pods!

Or you can just keep bumping this one to the top. Your call!

I’ll never understand people who go into the st Thomas thread to complain about its existence either.

You have the freedom to not care, you just don’t have the ability to I guess.