Gophers 2024 and 2025 Big Ten opponents announced.

[short ornery norwegian]

FWIW, was listening to a sports talk show that is based out west. The hosts were praising the B1G for its new schedule model, and saying that every P5 conference should follow a similar model that emphasizes rivalries and traditional matchups.

the hosts also spent some time taking shots at Nebraska and Matt Rhule, so that was fun.

 

[Some guy]

The BIG tried divisions twice and the concept was a failure.
The West division did give a few West teams the chance to go to the championship game, where they always lost and in general provided an easier schedule for the West teams.
The reactionaries can wish divisions will come back, but they will not.

I’m not sure how you said the divisions were a failure when the ratings generated from the divisions era is what led to this huge lucrative contract.

Yes Ohio state dominated the era.




The east/west divisions didn’t give more of a chance at championship teams, it gave less of a chance.


From 2011-2022 west teams won two big ten championships.
From 2000-2010 west teams won 7
Divisional alignment hurt the west’s ability to claim championships. The easiest era for west teams to win championships was clearly 1993-2011 where you could miss 2 teams in the conference and claim co-titles.
You can claim that the west/east allowed the west to miss certain teams, but that was also true before 2011
If you wanted a system that was best for the west you’d have just put all 14 in one group and not had a championship game.

 

[Some guy]

FWIW, was listening to a sports talk show that is based out west. The hosts were praising the B1G for its new schedule model, and saying that every P5 conference should follow a similar model that emphasizes rivalries and traditional matchups.

the hosts also spent some time taking shots at Nebraska and Matt Rhule, so that was fun.

I like the model for a scheduling standpoint and a rivalry standpoint

I do not like the model for picking the best team as the conference champion.
Really unbalanced schedules with possibilities of 3 way ties where none of the teams played each other. That’s fine though, championships don’t really matter anymore as all 3 probably make the 12 team playoff in that case.

 

[Ope3]

In the long turn the teams will adjust non conference schedules though and they’ll play their road games in a way where they usually end up 7 and 5.


I wish all the conference not named the SEC would’ve agreed upon a formula to rank the teams like the hockey pair wise type system. Objective criteria would be better than a committee. At least we have some auto bids for conference champs now.

For the Road/Home split I was only referring to the Big 10 Conference. In the Penn St-Mich-Iowa all go unbeaten scenario, because Iowa gets the benefit of 5 Home games, I would say let Penn St-Mich meet for the title.

Unfair, certainly, but I think no matter what the team that gets left outside would think it's unjust.

 

[Cayman]

The only "must have" for Penn State is to not play Ohio State yearly, ever again. They're so sick of being in the East with OSU.

The "Land Grant" trophy, I bet they're like "meh ... OK, sure we need something to play for on rivalry weekend when Michigan OSU is the game, and we've never had history with Rutgers or Maryland".

Could be that the school's desires aren't aligned with those of the fans, but I saw a number of Penn State fans at least somewhat disappointed that they don't get to play Ohio State every year now. It was the biggest game on their schedule most years.

 

[Ope3]

Iowa does indeed want Nebraska as a rival.

Ok, I take your word on it.

Just seems like it was more of a "nice to have" rather than "must have" from the Hawkeyes perspective to play every year. Must have felt strongly enough to agree to it.

Maybe going 8-4 vs the Huskers since they joined the Big 10 has something to with it. Had a 7 game winning streak snapped in 2022.

Prior to Nebraska coming on board in the Conference, they only played each other 6 times after 1946. Four of those meetings were from 1979-82 then they played again 1999 & 2000.

 

[Some guy]

Could be that the school's desires aren't aligned with those of the fans, but I saw a number of Penn State fans at least somewhat disappointed that they don't get to play Ohio State every year now. It was the biggest game on their schedule most years.

The downside for coach Franklin is he doesn’t get to whine about how unfair his schedule is anymore.

 

[WAGopher]

Ok, I take your word on it.

Just seems like it was more of a "nice to have" rather than "must have" from the Hawkeyes perspective to play every year. Must have felt strongly enough to agree to it.

Maybe going 8-4 vs the Huskers since they joined the Big 10 has something to with it. Had a 7 game winning streak snapped in 2022.

Prior to Nebraska coming on board in the Conference, they only played each other 6 times after 1946. Four of those meetings were from 1979-82 then they played again 1999 & 2000.

I think that Iowa wanted the same opponent for the last game of the year. Since Minnesota and Wisconsin are playing then, Iowa wanted Nebraska. This may be proven true if the schedule changes to Mn vs IA for the last game in the next schedule cycle, and then Wisconsin gets Nebraska as their third protected rivalry.

 

[Some guy]

I think that Iowa wanted the same opponent for the last game of the year. Since Minnesota and Wisconsin are playing then, Iowa wanted Nebraska. This may be proven true if the schedule changes to Mn vs IA for the last game in the next schedule cycle, and then Wisconsin gets Nebraska as their third protected rivalry.

Don’t have the link right now but read an article that interviewed Nebraska AD.

Basically each team was told to give top 3 rivals in order.
If they intersected everyone got their number one.
Nebraska AD said 1) iowa, 2) wisconsin 3) Minnesota

Reading between the lines…everyone got their top 3 for at least a “two play”
Meaning in 26-27, nebraska probably loses us as a two play and replaces with Wisconsin.


I would be curious who our top 3 are.
Obviously Iowa and Wisconsin.
Was if our third was Nebraska, it would’ve probably been a locked game given what Nebraska AD said. So I’m guessing it’s either Michigan, northwestern, Illinois, or Purdue.



Penn state is a funny case. I bet penn state put:
USC, UCLA, Michigan state.
Which is why they have no rivals.
They will two play with UCLA instead of USC in 26-27
Will get Maryland (who probably had them top 3) instead of Rutgers in 26-27
Will get someone instead of Michigan state (maybe Ohio state or maybe Nebraska)

I wish they had released the 4 year schedule instead of 2. It would be interesting to look at.

 

[WAGopher]

Don’t have the link right now but read an article that interviewed Nebraska AD.

Basically each team was told to give top 3 rivals in order.
If they intersected everyone got their number one.
Nebraska AD said 1) iowa, 2) wisconsin 3) Minnesota

Reading between the lines…everyone got their top 3 for at least a “two play”
Meaning in 26-27, nebraska probably loses us as a two play and replaces with Wisconsin.


I would be curious who our top 3 are.
Obviously Iowa and Wisconsin.
Was if our third was Nebraska, it would’ve probably been a locked game given what Nebraska AD said. So I’m guessing it’s either Michigan, northwestern, Illinois, or Purdue.



Penn state is a funny case. I bet penn state put:
USC, UCLA, Michigan state.
Which is why they have no rivals.
They will two play with UCLA instead of USC in 26-27
Will get Maryland (who probably had them top 3) instead of Rutgers in 26-27
Will get someone instead of Michigan state (maybe Ohio state or maybe Nebraska)

I wish they had released the 4 year schedule instead of 2. It would be interesting to look at.

Thank you for the new info (for me). I had seen it described as schools could list up to three rivals. It is interesting that Nebraska chose the teams I would expect would want to stay together if the 4 x 4 team ‘pods’ were chosen for the new schedule.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Could be that the school's desires aren't aligned with those of the fans, but I saw a number of Penn State fans at least somewhat disappointed that they don't get to play Ohio State every year now. It was the biggest game on their schedule most years.

I guess they'll have to get used to not losing that game every year.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Really unbalanced schedules with possibilities of 3 way ties where none of the teams played each other.

Unbalanced is how they want it. Gives Big 3 + USC best chance into CFP every year. That's what they and TV want.

3 way unbeaten tie with no games against each other isn't going to be likely. Not worth discussing much if at all.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Ok, I take your word on it.

Just seems like it was more of a "nice to have" rather than "must have" from the Hawkeyes perspective to play every year. Must have felt strongly enough to agree to it.

Maybe going 8-4 vs the Huskers since they joined the Big 10 has something to with it. Had a 7 game winning streak snapped in 2022.

Prior to Nebraska coming on board in the Conference, they only played each other 6 times after 1946. Four of those meetings were from 1979-82 then they played again 1999 & 2000.

It's now a border battle with a trophy. Those are good for business. Two good programs that get 70-80k sold out stadiums, seem to be at about the same level of program now.

As you say, Iowa (and the most of the Big Ten West for that matter) have gotten to beat up on Neb, so that has been nice.


Wonder if they're going to try to use this third rivalry as justification for eventually not renewing the Cy-Hawk yearly games? Not sure if either side actually wants that, or if state government will step in to force it.


One day in the future, maybe 10+ years from now, a pod of Minnesota, Iowa, Iowa State, Wisc, Nebraska, all playing each other every year, wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Could do that with 20 team league and 10 conf games. Would then cycle through the remaining 15 teams home and home every five years.

 

[Gophers_4life]

I think that Iowa wanted the same opponent for the last game of the year. Since Minnesota and Wisconsin are playing then, Iowa wanted Nebraska. This may be proven true if the schedule changes to Mn vs IA for the last game in the next schedule cycle, and then Wisconsin gets Nebraska as their third protected rivalry.

And Neb got official trophies made up with both Iowa and Wisconsin, so they're good either way on that.

The "trophy" between Neb and Minn isn't official, but fans do like it and it is a great fundraiser.

 

[Ope3]

It's now a border battle with a trophy. Those are good for business. Two good programs that get 70-80k sold out stadiums, seem to be at about the same level of program now.

As you say, Iowa (and the most of the Big Ten West for that matter) have gotten to beat up on Neb, so that has been nice.


Wonder if they're going to try to use this third rivalry as justification for eventually not renewing the Cy-Hawk yearly games? Not sure if either side actually wants that, or if state government will step in to force it.


One day in the future, maybe 10+ years from now, a pod of Minnesota, Iowa, Iowa State, Wisc, Nebraska, all playing each other every year, wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Could do that with 20 team league and 10 conf games. Would then cycle through the remaining 15 teams home and home every five years.

For the Iowa St rivalry, Hy Vee sponsors it (Cy-Hawk). No idea if it's the type of cash to move the needle.

I do find it crazy the Gophers-Cyclones can't meet up for a Home & Home at least once per decade. Should be a no brainer. I get why Iowa St isn't keen on playing another B1G regularly, but twice in a 10 year span should be doable.

 

[Gophers_4life]

For the Iowa St rivalry, Hy Vee sponsors it (Cy-Hawk). No idea if it's the type of cash to move the needle.

I do find it crazy the Gophers-Cyclones can't meet up for a Home & Home at least once per decade. Should be a no brainer. I get why Iowa St isn't keen on playing another B1G regularly, but twice in a 10 year span should be doable.

Big 12 have been playing 9 conf games for a while I believe. They needed that to be able to host a Conf Champ Game without divisions, when that rule was updated (had to be a round-robin regular season, and they had 10 teams). Then the yearly Iowa game is already a 10th P5 game per year.

No surprise then that Campbell (at least, if not others before him) have vetoed an additional P5 Minnesota game.

(Then there is the very ugly, racially-charged history of Iowa State claiming that white Minnesota players murdered their Black star player Jack Trice, for whom their stadium is named, during the 1923 game)

 

[Gophers_4life]

@Ope3 the Big 12 has been playing a round-robin 9 conference game regular season schedule since 2011.

Prior to that, I would think Iowa State would have less of an excuse, other than perhaps just that most of the P5 confs were only playing 8 conf games back then and then Iowa was 9 and playing a 10 would be pretty rare.

Probably in any case, playing two P5 non-conf is going to be pretty rare for any P5 conf team. And they have Iowa every year.

 

[Ope3]

Big 12 have been playing 9 conf games for a while I believe. They needed that to be able to host a Conf Champ Game without divisions, when that rule was updated (had to be a round-robin regular season, and they had 10 teams). Then the yearly Iowa game is already a 10th P5 game per year.

No surprise then that Campbell (at least, if not others before him) have vetoed an additional P5 Minnesota game.

Yes, I understand all of that which is why I completely understand why it's not a regular thing. Even with those factors though, the greater good (fans, alums, TV etc) to me is still have a game in Minneapolis and another in Ames once a decade. Wouldn't even have to be in back-to-back years.

Especially without Texas & Oklahoma not coming to Ames beyond this year, feels like it would be a good way to bolster their home schedule every once in a while.

(Then there is the very ugly, racially-charged history of Iowa State claiming that white Minnesota players murdered their Black star player Jack Trice, for whom their stadium is named, during the 1923 game)

That is a sad and tragic circumstance. It can be used as a great learning experience, just as I learned about it while I was a student and they did play each other in the 90s. The Minnesota Daily had a really good article on it.

 

[Some guy]

Unbalanced is how they want it. Gives Big 3 + USC best chance into CFP every year. That's what they and TV want.

3 way unbeaten tie with no games against each other isn't going to be likely. Not worth discussing much if at all.

Feel free to not discuss it then. Though you aren’t capable

 

[Some guy]

I think that if they ever went to 18 or 20 they would need to go to some kind of divisional scheduling. Even if they didn’t name divisions. Even if they changed it every year.
But if they actually want a conference champ it would be mathematically necessary.




These three way ties would be great in number and there would also be 4 way ties too in an 18 or 20 team league.

Here is SEC for 2024 if interested

 

[Ope3]

Here is SEC for 2024 if interested

I can't quantify it exactly, but the fact the SEC schedule is only 8 game as opposed to 9, makes it a far more thinkable possibility. Could easily see at least 3 unbeatens in mid-November or later.

 

[Gophers_4life]

I can't quantify it exactly, but the fact the SEC schedule is only 8 game as opposed to 9, makes it a far more thinkable possibility. Could easily see at least 3 unbeatens in mid-November or later.

None of the 20 possibilities seem realistic, to me. It's a brutal league. Pretty phenomenal what Alabama, then Georgia have been able to do.

 

[Ope3]

None of the 20 possibilities seem realistic, to me. It's a brutal league. Pretty phenomenal what Alabama, then Georgia have been able to do.

I won't pretend to even look at the SEC schedules, but in the Ala-Miss-Tex or Ala-Miss-A&M combos, I could see there being some possibility of all making it to 6-0 leading up to some handwringing in the final weeks.

Geo-LSU-Mo, if Mizzu got hot, again it's possible to get into November without a loss for all 3.

Still getting to 8-0 would be extremely difficult, but 9-0 would be exponentially even harder. I think "exponentially" is the right term but my math skills are quite rusty, having not been in a classroom for 30+ years.

 

[Gophers_4life]

I won't pretend to even look at the SEC schedules, but in the Ala-Miss-Tex or Ala-Miss-A&M combos, I could see there being some possibility of all making it to 6-0 leading up to some handwringing in the final weeks.

Geo-LSU-Mo, if Mizzu got hot, again it's possible to get into November without a loss for all 3.

Still getting to 8-0 would be extremely difficult, but 9-0 would be exponentially even harder. I think "exponentially" is the right term but my math skills are quite rusty, having not been in a classroom for 30+ years.

Aside: even though 100% agree that technically only conference record matters, and should matter, if you have two teams sitting at 12-0 (9-0) (or 8-0 for SEC) and another sitting at 10-2 (9-0) or even 11-1 (9-0) ... right there, the court of public opinion is already going to cast down the latter.

It really needs to be three at 12-0 to cause an uproar.

Anything short of that ... like three at 11-1 .... Nope. Each team has a loss, that means each team had a chance to take care of business on the field and didn't get it done. My sympathy goes out the window then.

 

[Some guy]

Aside: even though 100% agree that technically only conference record matters, and should matter, if you have two teams sitting at 12-0 (9-0) (or 8-0 for SEC) and another sitting at 10-2 (9-0) or even 11-1 (9-0) ... right there, the court of public opinion is already going to cast down the latter.

It really needs to be three at 12-0 to cause an uproar.

Anything short of that ... like three at 11-1 .... Nope. Each team has a loss, that means each team had a chance to take care of business on the field and didn't get it done. My sympathy goes out the window then.

You’re funny that you dismiss it as u realistic and then two posts later suggest a team is going to go lose two non conference and go unbeaten in conference

 

[Some guy]

I can't quantify it exactly, but the fact the SEC schedule is only 8 game as opposed to 9, makes it a far more thinkable possibility. Could easily see at least 3 unbeatens in mid-November or later.

For sure.
Especially because as good as the SEC is (making it hard to go unbeaten)
Every SEC team misses 7 teams per year.

As unthinkable as Florida, Arkansas, Alabama going all undefeated seems. It seems less unthinkable when you consider Arkansas misses Georgia, Florida, and Alabama.
Especially when you consider Oklahoma was 6-7 and Texas was 8-5 last year

Especially when you consider this isn’t just a problem if they all go unbeaten.

What if Alabama goes unbeaten. How many 3 way ties for second where nobody plays each other are there?
What if Georgia goes unbeaten. How many 3 way ties for second where no one plays each other?
The 12 team pac 12 has gone divisionless for 1 season and already is shooting 100% at a stupid tiebreaker for second place. 16 makes it much more likely than 12. Pac 12 played a 9 game schedule SEC only playing 8.


It’s going to be fun to watch. Fact of the matter is, conference championships don’t really matter anymore and they don’t really measure who the best team in the conference is with how unbalanced schedules can get.

 

[Ope3]

For sure.
Especially because as good as the SEC is (making it hard to go unbeaten)
Every SEC team misses 7 teams per year.

As unthinkable as Florida, Arkansas, Alabama going all undefeated seems. It seems less unthinkable when you consider Arkansas misses Georgia, Florida, and Alabama.
Especially when you consider Oklahoma was 6-7 and Texas was 8-5 last year

Especially when you consider this isn’t just a problem if they all go unbeaten.

What if Alabama goes unbeaten. How many 3 way ties for second where nobody plays each other are there?
What if Georgia goes unbeaten. How many 3 way ties for second where no one plays each other?


It’s going to be fun to watch. Fact of the matter is, conference championships don’t really matter anymore and they don’t really measure who the best team in the conference is with how unbalanced schedules can get.

Yes, quite a potential quagmire especially with only 8 games for the 2nd spot. The Pac 12 demonstrated last year in a 9 gamer how convoluted that can be.

Regarding "conference championships don't really matter anymore", with the proposed CFP there is incentive to be a Conference Champion by getting a 1st Round Bye. How much that is valued versus just getting in the field, hard to say.

I think there will at least be a week or two gap between the Conf Championship and the first round, but the schedule itself for the playoffs also could have impact on how much getting a Bye is desired.

 

[Some guy]

Yes, quite a potential quagmire especially with only 8 games for the 2nd spot. The Pac 12 demonstrated last year in a 9 gamer how convoluted that can be.

Regarding "conference championships don't really matter anymore", with the proposed CFP there is incentive to be a Conference Champion by getting a 1st Round Bye. How much that is valued versus just getting in the field, hard to say.

I think there will at least be a week or two gap between the Conf Championship and the first round, but the schedule itself for the playoffs also could have impact on how much getting a Bye is desired.

Yeah. It matters, but it doesn’t “matter”
Kind of like people remember purdues first round basketball loss more than their big ten championship.

With the expansion of the playoff going to all these at large teams (6 at larges), playoff births, final four, championship game, and championships will matter than regular season conference titles.

Now winning the conference matters because it puts you in the round of 8.
But if Arkansas avoids Bama, Georgia, and Florida and then beats a 1 loss Florida who won a 5 way tie for second because of SOS tiebreaker….when Georgia and Bama meet in the national title game and Arkansas loses in the round of 8….that SEC championship wouldn’t “matter” that much.

 

[Ope3]

Yeah. It matters, but it doesn’t “matter”
Kind of like people remember purdues first round basketball loss more than their big ten championship.

With the expansion of the playoff going to all these at large teams (6 at larges), playoff births, final four, championship game, and championships will matter than regular season conference titles.

Now winning the conference matters because it puts you in the round of 8.
But if Arkansas avoids Bama, Georgia, and Florida and then beats a 1 loss Florida who won a 5 way tie for second because of SOS tiebreaker….when Georgia and Bama meet in the national title game and Arkansas loses in the round of 8….that SEC championship wouldn’t “matter” that much.

I can certainly see it playing out that way.

Another aspect could be financial incentive to be a Final 8 participant. That would likely get shared in large part with the conference, so highly uncertain what the "reward" will be.

 

[Gophers_4life]

two posts later suggest a team is going to go lose two non conference and go unbeaten in conference

I did no such thing of suggesting it would happen.

It was purely a hypothetical, showing that only three (or more) 12-0 teams are going to cause an uproar and nationwide spectacle.

It should never happen.


So, of course, because football gods love nothing more than F'ing with fans, it will probably happen in the first three years.