BTN: Which division ideas do you prefer? (3 Options Provided)


I just prefer East/West. Clean. Simple.

But I just can't see them having Michigan and OSU in the same division.
 


Inner/outer is really, truly, ridiculous. I mean, what are they thinking?
 

#2 for sure. It makes more sense plus Penn St., Maryland, and Rutgers are tougher than NW, Purdue, and Illinois as a group.

I agree with Gopher07 though. I find it hard to believe that they will put Michigan and Ohio St. in the same division.
 


East/West is best
Next best is the existing (which aren't that bad, actually), but then have Illinois slid over to the west and Maryland/Rutgers in the East. Oh, and then just go ahead and rename to West/East and put this silly Legends/Leaders fiasco behind us. If we're still the Big 10, we can certainly use West/East even though it's not 100% geographically accurate.
 

I think east/west with some balancing, split the indiana and michigan schools so Indian/Michigan go to one division and Michigan State/Purdue to the other.
 

Why would they even propose #3??? That inner/outer idea needs to stay in the world of belly buttons.
 

East/West is best
Next best is the existing (which aren't that bad, actually), but then have Illinois slid over to the west and Maryland/Rutgers in the East. Oh, and then just go ahead and rename to West/East and put this silly Legends/Leaders fiasco behind us. If we're still the Big 10, we can certainly use West/East even though it's not 100% geographically accurate.

This is what the Maryland president mentioned at the announcement press conference.
 



I'm split between 2 and 3, can't decide which one would be better for us.

2 is probably an easier division and more regional but I don't think it's going to happen.

3 would be nice for eastern exposure and recruiting, we need to branch out more and NJ/Penn/NoVa could be a goldmine for talent.

If I had to chose today I'd go with 3. But ultimately I don't think Delany will let Michigan/OSU be together, so it's a mute point. I bet he just tinkers with the divisions we have now and keeps the names just to piss everybody off.
 


I still don't understand why Ohio St. and Michigan can't be in the same division. The SEC doesn't have any problem putting Auburn/Alabama or Florida/Georgia in the same division. And the PAC 12 doesn't fret over having USC/UCLA or any long time rivals in the same divisions. I would love to see OSU vs. Michigan in the last game of the regular season as a "semi-final" to the championship game. What could be sweeter to a Michigan or OSU fan that watching your team knock your rival out of the championship game. As it is now, you could beat your rival only to face them again a week later.
 

I still don't understand why Ohio St. and Michigan can't be in the same division. The SEC doesn't have any problem putting Auburn/Alabama or Florida/Georgia in the same division. And the PAC 12 doesn't fret over having USC/UCLA or any long time rivals in the same divisions. I would love to see OSU vs. Michigan in the last game of the regular season as a "semi-final" to the championship game. What could be sweeter to a Michigan or OSU fan that watching your team knock your rival out of the championship game. As it is now, you could beat your rival only to face them again a week later.

Not to mention, assuming they expand to 16 teams, then OSU and Michigan would almost have to be in the same division to ensure they'd play against each other every year.
 



East/West is best
Next best is the existing (which aren't that bad, actually), but then have Illinois slid over to the west and Maryland/Rutgers in the East. Oh, and then just go ahead and rename to West/East and put this silly Legends/Leaders fiasco behind us. If we're still the Big 10, we can certainly use West/East even though it's not 100% geographically accurate.

My thoughts exactly.
 

I chose 3, 2, 1.

I like the balance of three because you get the western 'rivalry' quad. But get every year east coast exposure for recruiting.

I like geographic, but when you look at it on a map it looks a little too much like the Big 12 North. I just don't think it will be appealing for recruits.

I also assumed for both 2 & 3 that no protected crossovers are needed, which is probably what I liked least about 1.
 

Seems like they're fishing for #2 there...I can't imagine many people think much of the other options
 


I still don't understand why Ohio St. and Michigan can't be in the same division. The SEC doesn't have any problem putting Auburn/Alabama or Florida/Georgia in the same division. And the PAC 12 doesn't fret over having USC/UCLA or any long time rivals in the same divisions. I would love to see OSU vs. Michigan in the last game of the regular season as a "semi-final" to the championship game. What could be sweeter to a Michigan or OSU fan that watching your team knock your rival out of the championship game. As it is now, you could beat your rival only to face them again a week later.

Personally, I don't think it's about the rivalry as much as it is that Ohio State and Michigan are usually going to be the two best teams in the Big Ten in a given year. As the divisions are right now, I have a hard time seeing anything other than Ohio State dominating the Leaders division for years under Urban Meyer. If you look at it from Indiana's point of view, Wisconsin is removed from your division, but then Michigan and a resurgent Michigan State team are added. Sure Indiana's been bad for a long time anyway, but it is going to be incredibly difficult for them to ever win that division. Indiana, Rutgers, Maryland, they all have to beat out Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State to win that division. Just beating Ohio State is going to be hard enough.

If you look at it from our point of view, sure we have to beat Nebraska and Wisconsin to win the west division, but that's not an entirely ridiculous scenario, and neither of those two is as good as Ohio State. Nebraska's good, but not win-the-conference-five-straight-times good (six if you count Ohio State's vacated 2010 season). Wisconsin's good too, but again, they're not Ohio State or Michigan.

I like option #2, the east/west split for the Gophers. That west division looks like it could be very competitive, with Nebraska or Wisconsin being favored most years, but not a foregone conclusion that the winner will be one of those two. Iowa, Purdue, and Illinois are about on our level right now, and while Northwestern has beaten us a lot recently and has even put together a couple of 9 win seasons, they've never really dominated us on the field, they won by 8 or something this year, by 1 last year, in Brewster's first year they beat us in overtime.

Basically, while I like the idea of a geographical split, and while I like where the Gophers end up in that split, in a competitive division, and in a division with Iowa, Wisconsin, and Nebraska, I'm not sure it's best for the conference. I just see the proposed eastern division being primarily dominated by Ohio State, with Michigan or Michigan State winning sometimes, maybe Penn State if the sanctions don't cripple the program. I don't know much about Maryland or Rutgers football, but I get the feeling that Rutgers only cracked the top 15 this year because they play in the Big East, and so I see very little chance of Indiana, Rutgers, or Maryland ever winning the division. Sanctions have done very little, if anything, to slow down Ohio State, and with a big name SEC coach at the helm, I just don't see anyone beating them anytime soon. That said, they didn't seem like one of the better 12-0 teams that college football has seen, with fairly close calls against Cal, Purdue, and Indiana.

TL;DR Western division looks like a great place for the Gophers to be, Eastern division is very top-heavy, and when Ohio State doesn't win it, Michigan probably will, leaving very small likelihood that any of the lower tier teams can rise up.
 

Inner/Outer? Really? That has to be the dumbest idea I have ever heard. Why not just draw names out of hat every year or follow the European soccer model and have an upper/lower divisions with relegation? (No, I'm not being serious)

Either keep them as they are and add the 2 new schools to the Leaders while sliding UW or Illinois to the Legends...or go straight East/West.
 

Personally, I don't think it's about the rivalry as much as it is that Ohio State and Michigan are usually going to be the two best teams in the Big Ten in a given year. As the divisions are right now, I have a hard time seeing anything other than Ohio State dominating the Leaders division for years under Urban Meyer. If you look at it from Indiana's point of view, Wisconsin is removed from your division, but then Michigan and a resurgent Michigan State team are added. Sure Indiana's been bad for a long time anyway, but it is going to be incredibly difficult for them to ever win that division. Indiana, Rutgers, Maryland, they all have to beat out Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State to win that division. Just beating Ohio State is going to be hard enough.

If you look at it from our point of view, sure we have to beat Nebraska and Wisconsin to win the west division, but that's not an entirely ridiculous scenario, and neither of those two is as good as Ohio State. Nebraska's good, but not win-the-conference-five-straight-times good (six if you count Ohio State's vacated 2010 season). Wisconsin's good too, but again, they're not Ohio State or Michigan.

I like option #2, the east/west split for the Gophers. That west division looks like it could be very competitive, with Nebraska or Wisconsin being favored most years, but not a foregone conclusion that the winner will be one of those two. Iowa, Purdue, and Illinois are about on our level right now, and while Northwestern has beaten us a lot recently and has even put together a couple of 9 win seasons, they've never really dominated us on the field, they won by 8 or something this year, by 1 last year, in Brewster's first year they beat us in overtime.

Basically, while I like the idea of a geographical split, and while I like where the Gophers end up in that split, in a competitive division, and in a division with Iowa, Wisconsin, and Nebraska, I'm not sure it's best for the conference. I just see the proposed eastern division being primarily dominated by Ohio State, with Michigan or Michigan State winning sometimes, maybe Penn State if the sanctions don't cripple the program. I don't know much about Maryland or Rutgers football, but I get the feeling that Rutgers only cracked the top 15 this year because they play in the Big East, and so I see very little chance of Indiana, Rutgers, or Maryland ever winning the division. Sanctions have done very little, if anything, to slow down Ohio State, and with a big name SEC coach at the helm, I just don't see anyone beating them anytime soon. That said, they didn't seem like one of the better 12-0 teams that college football has seen, with fairly close calls against Cal, Purdue, and Indiana.

TL;DR Western division looks like a great place for the Gophers to be, Eastern division is very top-heavy, and when Ohio State doesn't win it, Michigan probably will, leaving very small likelihood that any of the lower tier teams can rise up.

Haven't we proven that with the 12 teams we currently have, if the divisions they chose (L/L) had been in effect for the last 15 years Mich and OSU would have met in the title game like 2-3 times? Does NOT seem worth it to continue forcing them to be in opposite divisions, even if you do end up with protected crossovers. I understand the difference between what Delany SHOULD do vs WILL do, but they should really stop this nonsense of trying to get a UM-OSU CCG matchup that may only happen once a decade.

The E/W split (yes, with MSU on the east) produced combined records since the 2000 season of EXACTLY the same winning percentage. Maryland and Rutger's schedule being weaker and Nebraska's being tougher only further enhances that an East division with Michigan, PSU, OSU and MSU is not dominant over a West with Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Northwestern over the long haul. Also, again, throw OSU out of the comparison because they've been so ridiculously dominant over the past 10+ years that the comparison isn't even fair no matter what side they're on.

Also, undefeated Notre Damn ALSO struggled at home against Purdue, barely beat a bad Pitt team in overtime, and barely beat a 7-5 BYU team at home. Even undefeated teams struggle sometimes against weaker opponents, especially in year one of a coach's regime and in a big time conference with sanctions and a target on their back being the powerhouse.
 





He also give an explanation for why the "Inner/Outer" option was given.

8 Games, No Locked Rival

If the B10 really wants to stay with 8 games, I think they’ll decide to drop locked rivals. That means they need to keep every important rivalry within the division. The only alignment that works for this is the edges versus the middle.

X – OSU, MI, MSU, NW, IL, PU, IN

O – PSU, MD, RU, NE, WI, IA, MN

Lost rivalries – Little Brown Jug (MI/MN), OSU/PSU, MI/NE, OSU/WI

Gained rivalries – OSU/MSU, WI/IA, NE/WI
 

Yup, it's a good explanation. I don't like it from a fan travel perspective - in fact, I think it's heinous from that perspective, and it essentially ruins it for me, personally - but he brings a good argument as to why inner/outer makes some sense.
 


East\West is by far most logical. But I'm sure they would never due what is logical.
 

When the PAC 12 was forming the Washington and Oregon schools fought like hell (and lost) to guarantee an LA game every year. Because of recruiting.

This is the appeal of the inner outer (option three). Someone with a Rivals account should look up how many D1 players last year came from the division footprint (states) that the Gophers would be in for each of the three scenarios. I suspect that that number will be way higher under option three
 

I went:

1) East/West- simple, easy, and fair
2) Current plus adding one to each- also somewhat simple and fair
3) Inner/Outer- one of the worst ideas I have heard
 

When the PAC 12 was forming the Washington and Oregon schools fought like hell (and lost) to guarantee an LA game every year. Because of recruiting.

This is the appeal of the inner outer (option three). Someone with a Rivals account should look up how many D1 players last year came from the division footprint (states) that the Gophers would be in for each of the three scenarios. I suspect that that number will be way higher under option three

PA, DC, & NJ had 183 FBS signees last year (inner outer). While IN & IL had only 109 FBS signees last year (east west).
 




Top Bottom