Bonus Reusse: Big Ten should go to two divisions in basketball

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
61,974
Reaction score
18,168
Points
113
per Reusse:

Without division play, the Gophers will be playing Wisconsin and Iowa twice a winter precisely as often as they will be playing Rutgers and Penn State.

Take your head out of a football helmet, Delany, and do what should be done with basketball:

East and West divisions. Home-and-home with six division opponents; six singles and one home-and-home (based on previous season’s standings: 1s vs. 1s, etc.) with the seven teams from the other division.

That’s a 20-game schedule. That’s 10 conference home games. Somehow, the Williams Arena crowd would be able to overcome not seeing Coastal Carolina.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/gophers/241576651.html?page=all&prepage=1&c=y#continue

Go Gophers!!
 

20 games? Great. But don't do divisions. Nothing is less exciting that conference tournament of E2 vs W7 and W6 vs E3, etc. ZZZ.
 

Does any conference play with divisions in basketball? Maybe the old Big East when they had 16 teams or whatever?
 

Two years later the stench of Rutgers has not subsided, what a horrible decision.
 

When they go to 14 teams, each team should have 2 protected home & home series. There should never be a reason why we don't play Wisconsin & Iowa home & home each year.
 


Divisions are a pretty good idea in a 14 team conference if they are willing to go to 20 (or I guess 19) league games. Not so much because they need divisions per se or because of the BIG Tournament bracket, but because it neutralizes some of the inherent unfairness of the unbalanced schedule. There could still be significant imbalance between the divisions, but at least everyone you are in direct competition with in your division would be playing basically the same schedule. Plus, it would preserve most of the bigger rivalries without giving some teams an annual advantage by getting extra games against weaker competition while others they compete with in the standings have to face tougher opponents (if there were protected rivalries).
 

Regardless of divisions, would love to see a 20 game schedule. Agree with Reusse, I don't care about the Coastal Carolina game.
 

Reusse is right. It makes the schedule stronger by eliminating cupcakes, and it balances out what would otherwise be an unbalanced schedule. This is what happens when you expand Delaney. Now make the right adjustments to the schedule and make divisions.

And yes, Rutgers was a putrid decision. We'd have been better off with Missouri. Maryland is fine, but Notre Dame would've been much better. They would've made basketball, football, and hockey better. However, I don't think they could have gotten Notre Dame.
 

Agree with Patrick on 20 conference games, thus eliminating a couple cupcakes and stengthening the overall schedule. I don't think the coaches will ever go for the 20-gamer, though.

Disagree on divisions, no thanks. Just have one, big 14-team league. The SEC did the East-West divisions crossover thing in the conference tourney for many years, and that was stupid. One league, seed teams #1 to #14 for the Big Ten tourney. Simple. There are going to be unbalanced conference schedules no matter how they do this. That's one of the many downfalls of conference expansion.
 



i don't really like the concept of divisions in football or basketball really. it just divides the conference up and it makes you feel like the team in you're opposite division isn't even in your'e conference at all. there shouldn't be a possibility where you could go 2 or 3 years without playing a team that is in you're own conference. you should play every team in you're conference every year. 14 is just way too much
 

Divisions might not be ideal, but the idea of playing Rutgers twice and Wisconsin once just leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
 

Looking down the road, will there come a time when the conferences and schools look back and regret all the expansion?
 

station19 said:
Looking down the road, will there come a time when the conferences and schools look back and regret all the expansion?
Click to expand...

Yes, and they will just dig their hole a little deeper by realigning again in an even worse scenario. Welcome to the Big 10 Louisiana-Lafayette!
 




I'm not on board for divisions, but I'm definitely on board for increasing the amount of conference games. That's the only way to maintain some sort of conference feeling in both football and basketball with the amount of teams that will be in conferences. And everyone knows we'll be at 16 teams by 2020.
 

station19 said:
Looking down the road, will there come a time when the conferences and schools look back and regret all the expansion?
Click to expand...

Maybe. If they do, they will do it like every other big business that loses its a**. They will try to sound contrite and sincere, and even say there should have been more oversight over them, and it will all be very pathetic and self-serving.
 


No reason we'd have to have one home-and-home with an extra-division team. There's nothing wrong with a 19-game schedule, is there?

In a similar vein, we were doing the math over a pre-game dinner, and the way we figure, there's no way to seed a Big Ten Tournament with 14 teams other than to limit the number of first round byes to two. Unless, of course, you left some teams out. Either way, I anticipate some heartburn over that.
 


Bad Gopher said:
No reason we'd have to have one home-and-home with an extra-division team. There's nothing wrong with a 19-game schedule, is there?

In a similar vein, we were doing the math over a pre-game dinner, and the way we figure, there's no way to seed a Big Ten Tournament with 14 teams other than to limit the number of first round byes to two. Unless, of course, you left some teams out. Either way, I anticipate some heartburn over that.
Click to expand...

The fundamental flaw with a 19 game schedule is the teams wouldn't have the same number of home games in conference. That won't happen.
 

All for Divisions and a 19 or 20 game schedule. Would let fans actually travel to consistent road locations. No reason to NOT play Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin and Northwestern every year. Big Ten Tourney crossover ? WHO Cares! I'd rather play rivals more often.
 

golfing18now said:
The fundamental flaw with a 19 game schedule is the teams wouldn't have the same number of home games in conference. That won't happen.
Click to expand...

How stupid could I be? Don't tell anyone about that post, ok?
 


Cayman said:
Does any conference play with divisions in basketball? Maybe the old Big East when they had 16 teams or whatever?
Click to expand...

The Big East with 16 did not have divisions. I believe the SEC did until ~3 years ago. They decided to scrap the divisions, partly due to being the odd ball among 'big conferences'.

Having 'protected games' could cause angst because of the RPI's perceived weight in tourney selection... "wah wah, it's not fair"...

I think they should go with 18 games and schedule the mirror opponents objectively.

Bigger question may be the conference tournament. Let 'em all play, right?
 

14 team field

Bad Gopher said:
No reason we'd have to have one home-and-home with an extra-division team. There's nothing wrong with a 19-game schedule, is there?

In a similar vein, we were doing the math over a pre-game dinner, and the way we figure, there's no way to seed a Big Ten Tournament with 14 teams other than to limit the number of first round byes to two. Unless, of course, you left some teams out. Either way, I anticipate some heartburn over that.
Click to expand...

My guess as to how they will seed the 14 team Tourney-

#1 - 4 seeds get double byes. #5 - 10 get single bye. Teams 11-14 play on day one to get the field to 12 remaining. Teams 5 and up play on day 2 to get to 8 remaining and so on.
 


Ope3 said:
My guess as to how they will seed the 14 team Tourney-

#1 - 4 seeds get double byes. #5 - 10 get single bye. Teams 11-14 play on day one to get the field to 12 remaining. Teams 5 and up play on day 2 to get to 8 remaining and so on.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. I think they will give teams 1 and 2 a bye on day one. Teams 3 through 14 will play (Thursday). Then you would be down to a final eight playing on day two (Friday). Final four playing on Saturday. Final game on Sunday.

EDIT: didn't realize the SEC had set precedent on this format. Ope3 and SS are probably right. Seems like it is unnecessary to have a fifth day, but who knows.
 

golfing18now said:
I don't think so. I think they will give teams 1 and 2 a bye on day one. Teams 3 through 14 will play (Thursday). Then you would be down to a final eight playing on day two (Friday). Final four playing on Saturday. Final game on Sunday.
Click to expand...

I don't think playing 6 games in one day (Thursday) is feasible. A lot of conferences have gone to the double bye for the top teams.
 

SelectionSunday said:
I don't think playing 6 games in one day (Thursday) is feasible. A lot of conferences have gone to the double bye for the top teams.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. Logistics probably dictates this format. Thanks for the clarification.
 

Not to mention that having so many games would dilute fan interest in the tournament and burn out teams a week prior to the NCAA tournament at the same time.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom