Big Ten expansion survey

[mplsbadger]

Thanks for posting.

My cheat for knowing the division names is that BB posted a cryptic tweet indicating Russell Wilson was going to be a 'LEADER' a year and a half ago. It's pretty ridiculous that everyone needs to have a hint to help them remember. There's a reason the NHL moved away from Norris, Adams, Patrick, Smythe, etc. Our commish is swimming against the current.

I voted for:
Get rid of names. Use east and west as new names. Redraw divisions from scratch. 1) Traditional rivalries 2) Geography 3) Balance. . No divisions for hoops. All teams in the hoops tourney. Add ND if possible, even if it means going to a 7 game divisional conference schedule with the cross-division games as 'scheduling agreements' not counting in the standings (let ND play USC, Navy, etc).

 

[station19]

Thanks for posting.

My cheat for knowing the division names is that BB posted a cryptic tweet indicating Russell Wilson was going to be a 'LEADER' a year and a half ago. It's pretty ridiculous that everyone needs to have a hint to help them remember. There's a reason the NHL moved away from Norris, Adams, Patrick, Smythe, etc. Our commish is swimming against the current.

Ha. I go with; we are by no means Leaders right now. Our claim to fame is our long ago championships - as in Legends.

On the survey I did select 'I don't know' as a protest selection.

 

[MNVCGUY]

While they may not change a thing, i appreciate the attempt (even if it is all b.s. and won't be seen by anyone) of listening to the fans. My hope is that they will compile all the responses and understand what the fans what without being blinded by money.

Pretty sure the survey came from the BTN so they will use the results in their programming assuming they get enough people to vote to make the sample size worthwhile. Don't think this has any real connection to the Big Ten office other than the fact that the BTN basically runs things now so maybe they will pay some attention to the results.

 

[RailBaronYarr]

Took the survey.

Do you actually care more about playing Purdue and Indiana compared to Maryland and Rutgers? As long as Minnesota plays what would be considered their rivals every year what difference does it make if they play Rutgers or Indiana in any given season other than Indiana is a traditional B1G team.

Yes. They have down years (Indiana moreso than Purdue), but I have a tie to them. They may not be football "powerhouses" but I have a shared connection with their school from also playing them in basketball. I recognize their school songs, their rivalries with one another and other schools in the conference. Even if they are my least favorite teams to play in the Big Ten (Illinois being the other) from a fan excitement perspective, they are 10x more exciting than Maryland or Rutgers (and both of them are only exciting to me because they're new, which will wear off. I used Purdue and Indiana to illustrate a point. How about Ohio State? Michigan State? How do YOU know what the lineup of divisions will be? Ho do you know that our traditional rivals will even be maintained? They had us on a rotating schedule with Michigan for quite some time. They've contorted divisions to suit possible CCG matchups, why not again? They try to force-feed us rivalries like Nebraska-Iowa while making meaningful rivalries like MN-WI and MN-IA in the middle of the season. How do you know what our future schedule will be? All I know is Maryland and Rutgers will be added, and two of any of the other 11 current teams will be dropped.

 

[GopherinPhilly]

I don't think we should stop growing the Big Ten. Add GTech, UNC, Duke, Uva...get them all. Break us into two divisions (east/west). Would allow us to maintain the old Big Ten rivalries in football and start building new ones in the east...and also make our bb tourny best in the country. While others are trying to survive or maintain status quo is the time we should dominate!

Eff Notre Dame...don't ever let them in unless the convince Tx to come with them!

 

[6 Nov 1999]

Took the survey.

Do you actually care more about playing Purdue and Indiana compared to Maryland and Rutgers? As long as Minnesota plays what would be considered their rivals every year what difference does it make if they play Rutgers or Indiana in any given season other than Indiana is a traditional B1G team.

This suggests a lack of historical perspective and a total disregard of tradition. Disregarding and dishonoring tradition seems to be the new normal in the USA. It was Purdue's chancellor who called a meeting of the major midwestern universities at the Palmer House in Chicago in 1896 to form the conference, which I believe was called the "Western" conference at inception, or a short while later. There are 4 original charter members of this Big Ten conference who never wavered, never bolted even for one season, and have a perfect record of longevity since 1896, that being the following original Morrill Act of 1862 Land Grant Universities: Purdue, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. Michigan, Northwestern, and Chicago were also charter members, but they dropped (Chicago) or bolted for at least one year (Northwestern) and for a few years in the 1910s (Michigan). Iowa and Indiana were added in 1899 I believe. OSU in 1912. MSU was added around 1953 or 1954, some 20 years after Chicago dropped football. By the way, this is an academic association first and I hope foremost, as Chicago, a highly respected and competitive institution is still part of the Big Ten. PSU did not gain entrance until they upgraded their library, which was not on par with Big Ten academic standards. The original conference members radiated like spokes out of the railroad center of Chicago, as we were growing as a nation and flexing our industrial muscles. A corrupt and criminal 103rd Congress undid all that with the passage of Public Laws 103-182 (NAFTA) and 103-465 (GATT Uruguay round) which effectively shuttered our heavy industry and transferred some of our industrial capacity to Mexico and most of our industrial capacity to Red China. It is no coincidence that the industrial midwest then became known as the "rust belt" and the prominence of the Big Ten started to falter concurrently. I did not check Eric Thrall's website prior to typing this, but I don't believe we have any history with Rutgers and I believe we have only played 2 games against Maryland. All Big Ten history and tradition is being trashed in the name of quick and easy money. That is the American way, and that is why we will all be speaking Chinese or will be fighting the Red Chinese in a major world war, hopefully after I pass away, because this time, the continental USA will incur heavy casualties. Hope I am wrong. Bottom line, "Yes I do care about playing Purdue and Indiana." They are midwestern land grant universities. They share a common culture with Minnesota. I don't see our connection with Rutgers and Maryland, or with PSU for that matter. Sorry for the rant.

 

[Gopher07]

Tell the Big Ten what you think about expansion and realignment

Oops, guess this was already posted.