Warren suggests Divisions could be gone when USC/UCLA join

[mnsportsgeek]

https://theathletic.com/3732180/2022/10/26/big-ten-2023-schedule/

When USC and UCLA join the league in 2024, Big Ten and school officials not only will discuss its structure but the number of permanent opponents. The likely outcome is either three designated rivals and playing the other 12 schools twice every four years, or two rivals with a seven-game/11-year rotation.

@Ope3

Assume you'd choose the latter. I would vote for the former, myself. But I could be good with either of these.

To clarify: in the former, it takes 14 years to play every non-locked in team 7 times. In the latter, it "only" takes 11 years.


I guess I don't feel very strongly about a third rival, strictly speaking for us. I just want Wisc and Iowa for sure. I actually don't want to play Michigan every year. And I don't feel strongly about Nebraska as some maybe do.

Either option feels like a strong improvement over what we have now. I want us to go to every big ten stadium on a semi regular basis. The last time we went to Ann Arbor was 2017, and before they scrapped the future schedule we weren't even scheduled to go through beyond 2026. Ridiculous.

I'd welcome any situation where we go to every big ten stadium 3 or 4 times every 11-14 years.

 

[Ope3]

Either option feels like a strong improvement over what we have now. I want us to go to every big ten stadium on a semi regular basis. The last time we went to Ann Arbor was 2017, and before they scrapped the future schedule we weren't even scheduled to go through beyond 2026. Ridiculous.

I'd welcome any situation where we go to every big ten stadium 3 or 4 times every 11-14 years.

Not that I really care, but the Hoosiers have only been to the Bank once in what is now Year 14 of the stadium. Nebraska, Maryland & Rutgers all played there before Indiana, and they weren't even members of the Big 10 when it opened.

After Saturday, all 3 of those schools will have played there multiple times before Indiana's 2nd visit.

Even the game they appeared there was on a Friday night, so they yet to take the field on a Saturday. Driving rain storm in the 2nd half. There were hundreds of fans still around at the end.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Yes, I would choose the 2 rivals seven-game/11-year rotation. The article does point out that it really is only Iowa that has 3 rivals it feels strongly about. Even AD Barta seems resigned to the fact there may have to be some give on that.

Even in that 2 rival scenario, there are 11 annual match ups that feel concocted forced marriages of sorts. I don't really see the reason for it to be so rigid, but ok...fine.

I think it's just because that makes it work out nicely.

They did the exact same thing with the locked-in crossover game that every Big Ten had to play. We just did Maryland, who we have absolutely nothing with, for six years. All so Purdue and IU could play every year.


Maybe I am changing my mind to your stance, at least between the two, though. Two rivals per year, and play each o the 13 remaining con teams 7 times every 11 years. Probably good enough for almost everyone.

Iowa will have to decide if they give up their yearly "trophy" with Nebraska or their "trophy" with Wisconsin. (both were just made-up recently-ish)

My guess is they choose to not see Wisconsin every year, based on how poorly Neb has done and how often losing to Wisc has kept them out of Indy. Who knows if that will be the right decision in the long run.

 

[Some guy]

https://theathletic.com/3732180/2022/10/26/big-ten-2023-schedule/

When USC and UCLA join the league in 2024, Big Ten and school officials not only will discuss its structure but the number of permanent opponents. The likely outcome is either three designated rivals and playing the other 12 schools twice every four years, or two rivals with a seven-game/11-year rotation.

@Ope3

Assume you'd choose the latter. I would vote for the former, myself. But I could be good with either of these.

To clarify: in the former, it takes 14 years to play every non-locked in team 7 times. In the latter, it "only" takes 11 years.


I guess I don't feel very strongly about a third rival, strictly speaking for us. I just want Wisc and Iowa for sure. I actually don't want to play Michigan every year. And I don't feel strongly about Nebraska as some maybe do.

To me this suggest a 9 game schedule is staying.

I think our 3 will end up Wisconsin, Iowa, and maybe Nebraska. I don’t think the third will be Michigan. Michigan will get Ohio state and Michigan state and UCLA. They want penn state, Michigan, and Ohio state locked with people out west

I suspect Penn State will get USC, Maryland, Rutgers
Ohio state will get Michigan, USC, and someone
Michigan will get Ohio state, Michigan state, and UCLA
USC will get UCLA, Ohio state, penn state
UCLA will get Nebraska, USC, michigan
Nebraska will get UCLA, Iowa, and either MN/WI

They’re going to want to get the “helmets” playing on the west coast.

If they ever go 10 game schedule I think they’ll go 5 locked games to minimize chances of tiebreakers and make it east to play the other 10 twice in 4 years.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Not that I really care, but the Hoosiers have only been to the Bank once in what is now Year 14 of the stadium. Nebraska, Maryland & Rutgers all played there before Indiana, and they weren't even members of the Big 10 when it opened.

After Saturday, all 3 of those schools will have played there multiple times before Indiana's 2nd visit.

Even the game they appeared there was on a Friday night, so they yet to take the field on a Saturday. Driving rain storm in the 2nd half. There were hundreds of fans still around at the end.

I believe the last home game Robb Smith was ever DC, almost let IU come back and win the game.

Went to ILL the next week and lost his job.

 

[Zeppelin Gopher]

Either option feels like a strong improvement over what we have now. I want us to go to every big ten stadium on a semi regular basis. The last time we went to Ann Arbor was 2017, and before they scrapped the future schedule we weren't even scheduled to go through beyond 2026. Ridiculous.

I'd welcome any situation where we go to every big ten stadium 3 or 4 times every 11-14 years.

This, 100%. As long as we play Wisconsin and Iowa every year, I'm good.

I do like the idea of playing Nebraska every year as well, but not every team has 3 natural rivals and it doesn't make sense to force it.

 

[Gophers_4life]

True that most Big Ten teams don't have 3 rivals. In the West though, most have 2, including for example Illinois playing Purdue and NW every year and Purdue playing Illinois and IU every year.


But then .... what to do with USC and UCLA coming in? They need to play current West teams, to minimize travel. We can't have them locked into playin Penn St and Rutgers, can we?

So that might be where having 3 locked in, even though they aren't really rivalries, is very helpful. Just something to chew on, nothing is final.

 

[Ope3]

True that most Big Ten teams don't have 3 rivals. In the West though, most have 2, including for example Illinois playing Purdue and NW every year and Purdue playing Illinois and IU every year.


But then .... what to do with USC and UCLA coming in? They need to play current West teams, to minimize travel. We can't have them locked into playin Penn St and Rutgers, can we?

So that might be where having 3 locked in, even though they aren't really rivalries, is very helpful. Just something to chew on, nothing is final.

Even Nebraska-Iowa have only been "rivals" since 2011. Between 1946 - 2010 they only played each other 6 times.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Yeah, that's fine. They (Iowa) could easily say "Minnesota and Wisconsin, call it a day" (technically Iowa State as well, but besides the point).

But my point still stands: what to do with USC and UCLA? We can't very well pair them up with Rutgers and Penn State, can we?


I suppose one possible solution in the 2 locked-in would be: they each play themselves, for sure, and then they both play Nebraska.

Take that Nebraska. Or would Nebraska like that? Guaranteed in LA every year .... pump up LA/SoCal recruiting?

 

[Gophers_4life]

Let's see, can I make this work?

USC - UCLA, Neb
UCLA - USC, Neb
Neb - USC, UCLA

Minn - Iowa, Wisc
Wisc - Minn, Iowa
Iowa - Minn, Wisc

NW - ILL, IU
ILL - Pur, NW
Pur - ILL, IU
IU - Pur, NW

Mich - OSU, MSU
OSU - Mich, Rut

(A)
MSU - Mich, Mary
Mary - PSU, MSU
Rut - PSU, OSU
PSU - Rut, Mary

(B)
MSU - Mich, PSU
Mary - Rut, PSU
Rut - Mary, OSU
PSU - MSU, Mary

Seems reasonable. Main sacrifice in (A) is the PSU vs MSU "trophy" game that they invented, between the two original Land Grants. Not sure if either care enough about it. If they do, then go (B).

Someone has to get screwed with OSU. Sorry Rutgers

 

[Ope3]

Yeah, that's fine. They (Iowa) could easily say "Minnesota and Wisconsin, call it a day" (technically Iowa State as well, but besides the point).

But my point still stands: what to do with USC and UCLA? We can't very well pair them up with Rutgers and Penn State, can we?


I suppose one possible solution in the 2 locked-in would be: they each play themselves, for sure, and then they both play Nebraska.

Take that Nebraska. Or would Nebraska like that? Guaranteed in LA every year .... pump up LA/SoCal recruiting?

Iowa could very well prefer Nebraska than Wisconsin. I get the sense they both want to keep playing each other specifically on Thanksgiving Friday. I was just pointing out how recent the "rivalry" was, but heck a tradition has to start somewhere.

USC-Penn St could be a pair up. Nits would probably fine with that if they aren't also paired with Ohio St.

No easy solution. It would be better for whatever the 2nd (or 3rd) rivals turn out to be for either of the LA schools were in the Central Time zone at least, but for a road trip every either year probably not that big of deal, whomever it winds up. They are going to have to travel far no matter who they play. Every flight is going to be 3-6 hours over either 2 or 3 times zones. They knew that when they signed up, at least for the time being.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Yes but, a 2hr in the air flight to Lincoln 2 time zones away, vs a 5hr in the air flight to Newark 3 time zones away .... it might not seem like much, but especially that extra time zone it can add up quick.

For one-off football weekend games, probably not as big a deal.

The rest of the sports in particular I think are going to suffer more.

 

[Ope3]

Yes but, a 2hr in the air flight to Lincoln 2 time zones away, vs a 5hr in the air flight to Newark 3 time zones away .... it might not seem like much, but especially that extra time zone it can add up quick.

For one-off football weekend games, probably not as big a deal.

The rest of the sports in particular I think are going to suffer more.

No argument there. Football will be ok with whatever.

They are going to have to go to the Eastern Time Zone, minimum twice and as many as three times. Can help them out with having 1 game early (Labor Day weekend) as well as perhaps scheduling a bye after a road trip.

Perhaps they might even be up for a 2 game road trip, play a Saturday game and stay the week for another game, perhaps even on a Friday.

The other sports, yeah. What a hassle.

 

[Plato]

To me this suggest a 9 game schedule is staying.

I think our 3 will end up Wisconsin, Iowa, and maybe Nebraska. I don’t think the third will be Michigan. Michigan will get Ohio state and Michigan state and UCLA. They want penn state, Michigan, and Ohio state locked with people out west

I suspect Penn State will get USC, Maryland, Rutgers
Ohio state will get Michigan, USC, and someone
Michigan will get Ohio state, Michigan state, and UCLA
USC will get UCLA, Ohio state, penn state
UCLA will get Nebraska, USC, michigan
Nebraska will get UCLA, Iowa, and either MN/WI

They’re going to want to get the “helmets” playing on the west coast.

If they ever go 10 game schedule I think they’ll go 5 locked games to minimize chances of tiebreakers and make it east to play the other 10 twice in 4 years.

I believe The Atlantic published the list of BIG team's "must-have" games. Some teams had none, IA had three, and most had two.
I suspect IA will end up with WI and MN.

 

[Ope3]

I believe The Atlantic published the list of BIG team's "must-have" games. Some teams had none, IA had three, and most had two.
I suspect IA will end up with WI and MN.

Actually most have 1. In addition to Iowa having 3, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan & Ohio St have 2. The other 11 have 1.

Even that is manufactured as I really don't think anyone thinks these are "Must haves":

Ohio St - Penn St
Maryland - Rutgers

'There’s a lot of nuance': Big Ten still mulling its future scheduling model for football

The 2023 Big Ten football schedule sits blank, and USC and UCLA are set to join the conference in 2024.

theathletic.com

 

[Some guy]

I believe The Atlantic published the list of BIG team's "must-have" games. Some teams had none, IA had three, and most had two.
I suspect IA will end up with WI and MN.

If they do 3 I think it’ll less for IA-WI and more for OSU/PSU/MI to play on west coast with Iowa-Wi as the “reason”

 

[Gophers_4life]

If they do 3 I think it’ll less for IA-WI and more for OSU/PSU/MI to play on west coast with Iowa-Wi as the “reason”

Bolded: they will, but within the "every other year" group. No way they'll pair LA schools up with Eastern teams for every year locked in games. Not sure if you were saying that.

But with those three, at least one of them will be in LA every year and there will be those big $$$ matchups, in some form, every year.

 

[Ope3]

Big 10 is not going to wait for Warren's replacement to be named in order to decide on 2024 and beyond. Meetings in 3 weeks, final decisions could be made.

Biggest principles:

- Maximizing BCS Playoff Participation
- Teams play at every Big 10 Stadium.

Sounds like 3 protected rivals is most likely, per the article, which could rotate after 6 years.

Iowa AD Gary Barta on timeline for Big Ten's schedule changes

Gary Barta: “I think we're far enough along in the concept. And, really, we can't wait much longer."

theathletic.com

 

[1983]

Basketball in L.A.? That is a way to kill the event. It most definitely be central as possible to all teams.

 

[Ope3]

Basketball in L.A.? That is a way to kill the event. It most definitely be central as possible to all teams.

On a night like tonight in the Twin Cities (-20 possibly), a trip to LA sounds wonderful.

I would support an LA Big 10 Tournament, if was likely to draw substantial local fans. However, the PAC12 was never a hot ticket there and it's was moved to Las Vegas for what seems like at least a decade.

I think the Big 10 Tournament would do better in LV than LA. I would be all in.

 

[Plato]

Let's see, can I make this work?

USC - UCLA, Neb
UCLA - USC, Neb
Neb - USC, UCLA

Minn - Iowa, Wisc
Wisc - Minn, Iowa
Iowa - Minn, Wisc

NW - ILL, IU
ILL - Pur, NW
Pur - ILL, IU
IU - Pur, NW

Mich - OSU, MSU
OSU - Mich, Rut

(A)
MSU - Mich, Mary
Mary - PSU, MSU
Rut - PSU, OSU
PSU - Rut, Mary

(B)
MSU - Mich, PSU
Mary - Rut, PSU
Rut - Mary, OSU
PSU - MSU, Mary

Seems reasonable. Main sacrifice in (A) is the PSU vs MSU "trophy" game that they invented, between the two original Land Grants. Not sure if either care enough about it. If they do, then go (B).

Someone has to get screwed with OSU. Sorry Rutgers

USC and UCLA are not coming east by stagecoach.
Flying to Columbus or Detroit is easier than flying from LA to Lincoln.
Getting to PSU is dillicult for any BIG team.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Big 10 is not going to wait for Warren's replacement to be named in order to decide on 2024 and beyond. Meetings in 3 week, final decisions could be made.

Biggest principles:

- Maximizing BCS Playoff Participation
- Teams play at every Big 10 Stadium.

Sounds like 3 protected rivals is most likely, per the article, which could rotate after 6 years.

Iowa AD Gary Barta on timeline for Big Ten's schedule changes

Gary Barta: “I think we're far enough along in the concept. And, really, we can't wait much longer."

theathletic.com

So long as we stay at 9 conf games — and I don’t think we can do 8 or 10 without a new TV negotiation? — then 3 yearly opponents is a no-brainer.

Play every team in the conference over two years, so visit every stadium in the conference over four years.

Largely irrelevant that some teams don’t feel like they have three true rivals. We just got done having to play a yearly game against Maryland. Whoopty do

 

[Gophers_4life]

As far as “maximizing playoff”, that is probably just a hand-waiving way to say that Penn St won’t play Ohio St or Michigan yearly or both in the same year.

Those three, like it or not, are the big dogs and most likely to make the playoff.

 

[Gophers_4life]

So digging out again guesses at what the 3 yearly/locked-in might look like.

I just don't think it makes sense to lock in the "Quadrangle", and leave the two CA schools high and dry. I don't think they'll do that, and only Wisc and Iowa are our "real" rivals. The Neb games are nice (nice to get the wins!) but I don't look at them as a rival any more than Illinois.

Wild guess:

Minn - Wisc, Iowa, UCLA
Wisc - Minn, Iowa, USC
Iowa - Minn, Wisc, Neb

Neb - USC, UCLA, Iowa
USC - Neb, UCLA, Wisc
UCLA - Neb, USC, Minn

Ill - NW, Pur, IU
NW - Ill, Pur, IU
Pur - Ill, NW, IU
IU - Ill, NW, Pur

MSU - Mich, OSU, PSU
Mich - MSU, OSU, Mary
OSU - Mich, MSU, Rut

PSU - Rut, Mary, MSU
Rut - PSU, Mary, OSU
Mary - PSU, Rut, Mich

(the Mich-Mary and OSU-Rut could be switched and were selected arbitrarily)


This seems about as balanced, fair, and well matched as you're going to get. Would not be surprised if it ends up being close to this.

MSU gets the shaft. But not sure what to say. Sucks to suck?

 

[Ope3]

As far as “maximizing playoff”, that is probably just a hand-waiving way to say that Penn St won’t play Ohio St or Michigan yearly or both in the same year.

Those three, like it or not, are the big dogs and most likely to make the playoff.

If Lincoln Riley sticks around long term, USC is likely to make the playoff more consistently than Penn St, IMO.

He just needs to find a few players adept at the art of tackling.

 

[mngolf]

If Lincoln Riley sticks around long term, USC is likely to make the playoff more consistently than Penn St, IMO.

He just needs to find a few players adept at the art of tackling.

Possibly, but I also think he'll find the B1G games much tougher than he's experienced. I've no fear of them or him at all from a Gopher perspective.

 

[GopherTheJugular]

Big 10 is not going to wait for Warren's replacement to be named in order to decide on 2024 and beyond. Meetings in 3 weeks, final decisions could be made.

Biggest principles:

- Maximizing BCS Playoff Participation
- Teams play at every Big 10 Stadium.

If they are thinking about making the BCS, which hasn't existed for almost 10 years, they probably should wait for Warren's replacement before doing anything else.

 

[GopherTheJugular]

As far as “maximizing playoff”, that is probably just a hand-waiving way to say that Penn St won’t play Ohio St or Michigan yearly or both in the same year.

I take it to mean that they won't call penalties against MI or tOSU if those teams are being challenged by teams like MN or Illinois.

ACC is doing the same thing with Clemson, their "playoff hope". Last year Syracuse was taking it to Clemson, at Clemson, and then lo and behold, the refs start throwing flags and marching the Clemson offense down the field and into the end zone. The refs made sure Syracuse had no chance going forward.

Sigh.

 

[Ope3]

If they are thinking about making the BCS, which hasn't existed for almost 10 years, they probably should wait for Warren's replacement before doing anything else.

BCS is what I was calling it, not in the article. I have never adapted to CFP. Had to look up what it's even called now.

Perhaps they should just get a sponsor, like Dr Pepper and rename it to make it more memorable.

 

[RememberMurray]

Question: Was Rutgers added to the B1G specifically for access to the lucrative East Coast TV market? Same story (opposite coast) for USC and UCLA, right? Wasn't all of this about money, from day one?

If so, would the B1G bosses fret about the difficulties of flying from one coast to the other?