Splitting Big 10 into 2 divisions = dumb idea!!

Donate To GopherHole
C

ConferenceChamp

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
210
Reaction score
0
Points
16
With the Big 10 Conference's upcoming addition of Nebraska in 2011, I have been seeing/hearing all this nonsense about somehow splitting the Conference into east and west, or north and south, or whatever...

Sounds stupid to me...:rolleyes:

Why not just leave the current structure in place? Just one so-called division...

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing a round-robin schedule (at least until new teams are added to the conference). Each conference member should play the other 11 every year, with one non-conference game to be scheduled.

The leader at the end of the regular season wins the Conference and advances to the Rose Bowl, or to the national championship game, or whatever is in place at the time.

If two teams tie for the lead (i.e. at 10-1, in conference), then the head-to-head result between the two determines the winner, with the runner-up getting the Cap One Bowl, or better.

If 3 or more tie for the lead, then the tie breaker goes to whoever scheduled the toughest non-conference game. Tough scheduling should be rewarded, for the heavyweights...

If...and this is a big if...it is determined that a Big 10 Conference Championship game must be played, then the two best records should square off. But none of this pre-determined best from the east vs. best from the west garbage.:rolleyes:

I'm NOT in favor of organizing things in a manner such that the probability of a 'fluke' occurring is increased. Ya gotta earn it on the field...

Best example is the Big 12 of recent years. The North Division was rarely worthy of sending anyone to their Conference Championship game. It should have been Texas vs. Oklahoma.
 

If you think it's a dumb idea, then it's probably a good idea.
 

Big Ten makes more money = we get more money = good idea.
 

I like your idea of no split, just not more than actually splitting (smily)

Also, we need a championship or the expansion wasn't really worth it.
 

not splitting into 2 divisions and having a championship game makes the expansion worthless. The Split needs to happen.
 


Yeah, because all the money and attention around the SEC Championship game, and the Big 10 disappearing every year late in the season makes it SO not worth it.

Give me a break.
 

ConferenceChamp said:
With the Big 10 Conference's upcoming addition of Nebraska in 2011, I have been seeing/hearing all this nonsense about somehow splitting the Conference into east and west, or north and south, or whatever...

Sounds stupid to me...:rolleyes:

Why not just leave the current structure in place? Just one so-called division...

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing a round-robin schedule (at least until new teams are added to the conference). Each conference member should play the other 11 every year, with one non-conference game to be scheduled.

The leader at the end of the regular season wins the Conference and advances to the Rose Bowl, or to the national championship game, or whatever is in place at the time.

If two teams tie for the lead (i.e. at 10-1, in conference), then the head-to-head result between the two determines the winner, with the runner-up getting the Cap One Bowl, or better.

If 3 or more tie for the lead, then the tie breaker goes to whoever scheduled the toughest non-conference game. Tough scheduling should be rewarded, for the heavyweights...

If...and this is a big if...it is determined that a Big 10 Conference Championship game must be played, then the two best records should square off. But none of this pre-determined best from the east vs. best from the west garbage.:rolleyes:

I'm NOT in favor of organizing things in a manner such that the probability of a 'fluke' occurring is increased. Ya gotta earn it on the field...

Best example is the Big 12 of recent years. The North Division was rarely worthy of sending anyone to their Conference Championship game. It should have been Texas vs. Oklahoma.
Click to expand...

Just say "No" to drugs!
 

If ConferenceChump thinks it's a bad idea, it's probably a really, really good idea.
 

Isn't it an NCAA rule that we have to break into divisions in order to have the championship game? It's not like we'll never play the other teams again. Think about it. We would have 5 division games leaving 3-4 (going to 9 conference games is being discusssed) games outside of the division. Right now we miss two teams for two years at a time. If we go to 9 conference games, that would still be the case. If we stay at 8 then it's three, so not too much difference.
 




ConferenceChamp said:
Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing a round-robin schedule (at least until new teams are added to the conference). Each conference member should play the other 11 every year, with one non-conference game to be scheduled.
Click to expand...

While most Big10 fans would love to see more conference matchups, it simply ain't gonna happen. The Athletic Dept budgets for the Big10 schools rely heavily on the home games with non-conference teams from Creampuff U and Cupcake Tech in order to generate revenue for the overall programs.
 

Thanks for your input Pantherhawk. Nobody cares what Iowa thinks. Go away.
 

I'm going to have to agree with a number of people here. Since you're in favor of something, ConferenceChamp, it shows that it's a bad idea. I don't believe you've posted one intelligent thing in your time here.
 



The interesting thing is that conferenceChump has a dog in this race.

It just goes to show you that even when there is an opportunity to speak intelligently about the future of his Iowa team, he is incapable of doing so.

I don't hate Iowa, the State, the University or the people. But I sure do hates me some idiot hogeye fans.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom