Shama: Big Ten Alignment Might be Known by Sept. 1

Donate To GopherHole

ruralgopher said:
Thereby making him the fittest kid that gets the hot athletic girl, right?
Click to expand...

No, it makes him the kid who sits in the back, never standing up for himself, never doing anything because someone else might want it too.
 


I would trade the IA game for Mich every year everyday of the week and twice on Sundays personally. The thing I don't get about Maturi is why he is saying anything. It serves no purpose.
 

RodentRampage said:
The marketing people don't see "Competitive balance". All they see is that Nebraska, Michigan, OSU and Penn State are the four biggest brands. These are the people who, if you presented them with a golden goose would be the first to propose killing it for short-term gain.

Of course everyone is going to claim it's about competitive balance, but that's only because they would be blasted if they told the truth that this is about marketing. It is not at all clear that if there is any imbalance in an east-west alignment that is sufficiently great to merit disrupting a natural east-west alignment.

What happens if Michigan doesn't turn it around? If Penn State is in the west, then OSU would be the only strong team in the east. Take the top six teams, put three in each division. That's obvious to any honest person. An east-west split preserves rivalries, gives a natural geographical division, and splits the top 6 teams.
Click to expand...

The only thing holding back everything is Michigan/tOSU. If you put NW/Illinois in the East, and Michigan/MSU in the West story would be done.
 


anticallihan said:
The only thing holding back everything is Michigan/tOSU. If you put NW/Illinois in the East, and Michigan/MSU in the West story would be done.
Click to expand...

This would be terrible and would keep most rivalaries intact and provide a logical borderline, although it would be more North/South then East/West. It would actually leave the West as the far stronger conference if Michigan gets back on track. Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan? I feel bad for the Gophers and Sparty in that case? East/West really makes the most sense.
 

Maturi says that he's willing to throw our rivalries under the bus if it's in the best interests of the Big Ten. But he doesn't seem to have any strong opinions on what the best interests of the Big Ten and the University of Minnesota even ARE. This implies that he's going to just go along with what the others there say is best.

The person at the other side of the negotiation table may not be an enemy, but they have their own interests at heart. Go into negotiations unwilling to stand up for your own interests, and you'll lose your shirt.

It's like walking into a car dealership, handing over your wallet and saying "take what you think is best". You'll get a car, but you'll pay too much.
 


East/West Split (using last 10 years)

The East/West split is competitively balanced over the last 10 years."

In fairness, the numbers pretty much back you up on that, though there would be an edge for the East based on conference games only (using Nebraska's Big 12 record).

Since 2000 Season
East
1. Ohio State (64-16)
2. Michigan (53-27)
3. Penn State (44-36)
4. Purdue (41-39)
5. Michigan State (31-49)
6. Indiana (18-62)
Totals = 251-229 (52.3 winning percentage)

West
1. Iowa (49-31)
2. **Nebraska (47-33)
3. Wisconsin (44-36)
4. Northwestern (38-42)
5. Minnesota (30-50)
6. Illinois (26-54)
Totals = 234-246 (48.8 winning percentage)

**Nebraska's 5-1 record vs. Big Ten programs during regular season & bowl games not included

That said, swapping let's say Penn State for Northwestern using the last 10 years (the measuring stick you prefer when bringing up Iowa & Wisconsin's recent surge) would not hinder the "competitive balance" Jim Delany desires, nor create the imbalance you are concerned about (West significantly > East). Even with Iowa, Nebraska, Penn State & Wisconsin all in the same division, the East teams would still have the better overall (conference) record over the last 10 seasons:

East = 245-235 (with Northwestern)
West = 240-240 (with Penn State)

Again, I'd have no problem with the East/West set-up for football. It makes sense. No argument here. But it certainly won't be the end of the world or screw over the Gophers if Penn State gets moved West in place of Northwestern. The rivalry games with Iowa and Wisconsin would remain in place, which are the two most important ones, in my opinion.

Now if Penn State swaps with Illinois, then I think there will be a legitimate argument for unbalanced divisions.
 



anticallihan said:
The only thing holding back everything is Michigan/tOSU. If you put NW/Illinois in the East, and Michigan/MSU in the West story would be done.
Click to expand...
So you want to put the bottom 4 teams (taking into account resources, history, recent and current strength) in the same division and call it even?
Illinois
Purdue
Indiana
Northwestern


Any trading of PSU or Mich into the west would have to include either Wisconsin or Iowa moving to the East due to the fact that "competitive balance" is the reason for the switch in the first place. If it isn't East/West, the only possible alignments would be:

Mich-OSU
MSU-PU
MN-WI
IA-NU
Neb-PSU
IL-IU

or

PSU - OSU
IA - MSU
MN -WI
Neb - Mich
IL -IU
NU - PU

(In this second one IA and WI are interchangeable)
 

Many things aren't the end of the world, but still are a bad idea.
 

Competitive balance changes from year to year, geography does not. Nuff said.


By the way, I could care less about Michigan, I want to be in a division with the Badgers, Hawkeyes, and Cornhuskers and play them every year.
 




You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom