Schedule Format

Donate To GopherHole

Another reason to subscribe to The Athletic, that said, I would go for Flex first and two rivals next.
 





Article from March 17.

All the same, “protect 3” keeps consistency among all teams and the three teams wouldn’t be set in stone, but could be switched up every four years.

So that’s my choice.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Article from March 17.

All the same, “protect 3” keeps consistency among all teams and the three teams wouldn’t be set in stone, but could be switched up every four years.

So that’s my choice.
Click to expand...

I think the reason the other 2 options (Protect 2 and Flex Protect) are even on the table is because nobody wants to get saddled having to play Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St or USC for 4 straight years (unless they are already considered true rivals).

So what if the Flex 3 is more "consistent"? It's consistently prohibitive for the teams that draw those top 4 helmets.

Apologies in advance. This is just rehashing past discussions.
 

Ope3 said:
I think the reason the other 2 options (Protect 2 and Flex Protect) are even on the table is because nobody wants to get saddled having to play Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St or USC for 4 straight years (unless they are already considered true rivals).

So what if the Flex 3 is more "consistent"? It's consistently prohibitive for the teams that draw those top 4 helmets.

Apologies in advance. This is just rehashing past discussions.
Click to expand...
You're right in all your points.

And all the same, I think they'll choose "protect 3" because it's the simplest, most consistent, and I don't think they care about anyone other than the big programs.

Also, "trying to cherry pick winners" is how we got Leaders and Legends. It was a disaster and going West/East was much cleaner and worked better.
 

Gophers_4life said:
You're right in all your points.

And all the same, I think they'll choose "protect 3" because it's the simplest, most consistent, and I don't think they care about anyone other than the big programs.

Also, "trying to cherry pick winners" is how we got Leaders and Legends. It was a disaster and going West/East was much cleaner and worked better.
Click to expand...
West/East definitely worked better for scheduling and regular season drama. Unfortunately though, the East is undefeated in Indianapolis.
 



Ope3 said:
West/East definitely worked better for scheduling and regular season drama. Unfortunately though, the East is undefeated in Indianapolis.
Click to expand...
And as I'm sure you also suspect, we shouldn't expect to see anyone outside the "big 4" in the championship game other than maybe once every five years.
 

Who knows though, maybe Rhule will revive the glory days in Lincoln.

They certainly spend money on football like they think they're Alabama. LOL Fake it til you make it
 


Gophers_4life said:
And as I'm sure you also suspect, we shouldn't expect to see anyone outside the "big 4" in the championship game other than maybe once every five years.
Click to expand...
In the Division-less format, I do see those 4 as getting majority of the Top 2 spots. Perhaps the portal and NIL solidifies their success even more.

However, the other 10 I would hope/think get in more than once every 5 years. Lots can happen. Harbaugh could go back to the NFL and Michigan could fall apart. Same with Riley/USC.

Kelly could be building something in UCLA. Wisconsin & Nebraska could be home run hires, or just more of the same. Iowa might figure out how to score a few offensive TDs per game.
 



Ope3 said:
In the Division-less format, I do see those 4 as getting majority of the Top 2 spots. Perhaps the portal and NIL solidifies their success even more.

However, the other 10 I would hope/think get in more than once every 5 years. Lots can happen. Harbaugh could go back to the NFL and Michigan could fall apart. Same with Riley/USC.

Kelly could be building something in UCLA. Wisconsin & Nebraska could be home run hires, or just more of the same. Iowa might figure out how to score a few offensive TDs per game.
Click to expand...
Yep for sure, and how about those Gophers! :)

I hope it works like you say, more than the other way. I just don't have hope that it will. :(
 



RememberMurray said:
I find it interesting that Wisconsin won the first two B1G championship games played in Indy.
Click to expand...
Oh, that.

They had back-to-back Rose Bowl teams in 2010 and 2011. JJ Watt and Russell Wilson. Two of their best ever. Kudos to them for those two years. 2011 timed it perfectly. Kirk Cousins' MSU team won the Legends and put up a solid fight but Wisc won by 3 in a shootout.

In 2012 they came in 3rd place in the Ohio State/Penn State division ("Leaders") but both those teams were ruled ineligible. Nebraska won the Michigan/Nebraska division ("Legends") but ended up being probably the weakest division winner in the history of Big Ten divisions that year.
 

RememberMurray said:
I find it interesting that Wisconsin won the first two B1G championship games played in Indy. Unless I'm mis-reading it (which is possible).
Click to expand...
Yes, they won with the Legends-Leaders Divisions format, prior to the East-West. O-fer since.
 

Ope3 said:
Yes, they won with the Legends-Leaders Divisions format, prior to the East-West. O-fer since.
Click to expand...

Yes.

Streaks end, though, eventually. 2023 will be the end of East vs West, so this streak of 9 straight wins by East over West may not change. We'll see what 2023 brings. Last opportunity for the West.
 


No matter which schedule is chosen, some team or teams will complain that they got a tougher schedule. Cold, hard truth - unless you play every team in the conference, there is no way to have a schedule that makes everyone happy. And at the same time, it is also true that if you win all or most of your games, you're going to end up with a positive season.
 

I posted the perfect schedule system on the last thread like this:

2 permanently protected rivalries
1 four-year rival (much like Maryland was in the past). You would play that team 4 years in a row
The other 12 teams you would play home & home over that same four-year period.
Then the cycle starts again with another four-year rival.
 


Ski U Mah Gopher said:
I posted the perfect schedule system on the last thread like this:

2 permanently protected rivalries
1 four-year rival (much like Maryland was in the past). You would play that team 4 years in a row
The other 12 teams you would play home & home over that same four-year period.
Then the cycle starts again with another four-year rival.
Click to expand...
So that cycle would take 52 years to complete. It would be absolutely fair if the membership stays exactly the same over that time frame. Odds of that are nil.

The Flex 2 proposal makes the most sense to me. 2 protected rivals, 2 teams play 3 times over 4 years, other 11 play twice.
 

Ope3 said:
The Flex 2 proposal makes the most sense to me. 2 protected rivals, 2 teams play 3 times over 4 years, other 11 play twice.
Click to expand...
I’m just wondering why:

2 teams - play 4x in 4 years
2 teams - play 3x in 4 years
11 teams - play 2x in 4 years

is superior to:

3 teams - play 4x in 4 years
12 teams - play 2x in 4 years

?

How would you pick the pods of 5 for the first proposal vs pods of 4 for the second proposal?
 

Whatever team draws a power (OSU, Mich, USC, PSU) only has to play them 3x instead of 4x, which is much more palatable.

Pods, you mean how are the 3x selected? Not sure. Random would be ok. Let a computer try to figure it out to be equitable would also be fine (essentially 1 team from top half, 1 team from bottom historically over last 4 years).
 

Gophers_4life said:
I’m just wondering why:

2 teams - play 4x in 4 years
2 teams - play 3x in 4 years
11 teams - play 2x in 4 years

is superior to:

3 teams - play 4x in 4 years
12 teams - play 2x in 4 years

?

How would you pick the pods of 5 for the first proposal vs pods of 4 for the second proposal?
Click to expand...
See post above. I miskeyed on "reply".
 

Ope3 said:
Whatever team draws a power (OSU, Mich, USC, PSU) only has to play them 3x instead of 4x, which is much more palatable.

Pods, you mean how are the 3x selected? Not sure. Random would be ok. Let a computer try to figure it out to be equitable would also be fine (essentially 1 team from top half, 1 team from bottom historically over last 4 years).
Click to expand...
In the first proposal, each team needs to have four other “rival” teams, two of which play every year and the other two play 3 out of 4 years.

In the second, it’s each team needs to have three other “rival” teams that they play every year.


Selecting those randomly defeats the entire point of why you protect certain games in the first place. One of the reasons making sure the new California teams play relatively close teams and not go to the East Coast.


For Minnesota it could be:

- Wisc, Iowa, Neb, Mich
- Wisc, Iowa, Neb or Mich

But I’m not sure that can work out cleanly for everyone, in the first proposal. I’ve done it in one of these threads for the 2nd proposal.

California teams need regular games against Centeal timezone schools and to avoid Eastern timezone schools if possible, save for a few meaty games that TV drools over like USC Michigan and so on.
 

Gophers_4life said:
In the first proposal, each team needs to have four other “rival” teams, two of which play every year and the other two play 3 out of 4 years.

In the second, it’s each team needs to have three other “rival” teams that they play every year.


Selecting those randomly defeats the entire point of why you protect certain games in the first place. One of the reasons making sure the new California teams play relatively close teams and not go to the East Coast.


For Minnesota it could be:

- Wisc, Iowa, Neb, Mich
- Wisc, Iowa, Neb or Mich

But I’m not sure that can work out cleanly for everyone, in the first proposal. I’ve done it in one of these threads for the 2nd proposal.

California teams need regular games against Centeal timezone schools and to avoid Eastern timezone schools if possible, save for a few meaty games that TV drools over like USC Michigan and so on.
Click to expand...
I don't get the hang up on USC/UCLA going Eastern Time Zone. They are going to have to do it probably twice a year no matter what the format is, and for football that's no big deal. USC will probably have to do it at least three times (maybe 4) in years they play at South Bend.

If it's already a 3.5 to 4 hour flight to Big 10 West teams, I just don't see it being a big deal to have to go 5 - 5.5 hours to Big 10 East teams, on a weekend. When they don't play each other, it's going to be a long chartered flight, no matter who they are scheduled against.

That's just part of the deal in signing up for a conference with 8 teams in the Eastern Time Zone. They can mitigate somewhat by having at least one of the games early in the season/Labor Day weekend.
 

Ope3 said:
I don't get the hang up on USC/UCLA going Eastern Time Zone. They are going to have to do it probably twice a year no matter what the format is, and for football that's no big deal. USC will probably have to do it at least three times (maybe 4) in years they play at South Bend.

If it's already a 3.5 to 4 hour flight to Big 10 West teams, I just don't see it being a big deal to have to go 5 - 5.5 hours to Big 10 East teams, on a weekend. When they don't play each other, it's going to be a long chartered flight, no matter who they are scheduled against.

That's just part of the deal in signing up for a conference with 8 teams in the Eastern Time Zone. They can mitigate somewhat by having at least one of the games early in the season/Labor Day weekend.
Click to expand...
What you say is all true.

At the same time, also true that the difference between Indiana/Michigan/Ohio away trips vs Maryland/NJ could be up to 2 more hours. Plus extrahour time difference from Central schools.

It’s not nothing.


Just saying, at the end of the day: despite the appearance of affording “more flexibility”, I challenge you or anyone to come up with a workable scenario for each of the 16 teams with 4 protected games each, two every year, two 3/4. It could easily be possible, not saying it’s not. Just want to see it
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom