What do you think the divisions will be?

Donate To GopherHole
M

mplsbadger

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
2,267
Reaction score
43
Points
48
Regardless of what you think the Big Ten should do, what do you think they will do?

I think:

East
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Nortwestern
Purdue
Indiana

West
Penn State
Nebraska
Wisconsin
Iowa
Minnesota
Illinois

Because PSU will stomp their feet about losing OSU, they will create a crossover game between PSU/OSU and Michigan/Nebraska. The rest of the crossover games don't make sense so who cares but we'll probably have them anyway.

End of season rivals will be divisional. MI/OSU, MSU/NW, PUR/IN, PSU/NU, MN/WI, IA/IL
 

Groups of People division:
Spartans
Hoosiers
Boilermakers
Hawkeyes
Illini
Cornhuskers

Animals and a Nut division:
Wolverines
Nittany Lions
Gophers
Badgers
Wildcats
Buckeyes

****

Charter Members division:

Illinois
Minnesota
Northwestern
Purdue
Wisconsin
Michigan

Johnny Come Lately Division:

Indiana
Iowa
Michigan State
Ohio State
Penn State
Nebraska
 

Trusting my days at the Library (I'm sure Unregistered will love this nerdism :D)

Ba-Ha
Badgers
Boilermakers
Buckeyes
Cornhuskers
Gophers
Hawkeyes

Ho-Wo
Hoosiers
Illini
Nittany Lions
Spartans
Wildcats
Wolverines
 

Yes, I do.

But first:

AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH...another division thread!

[head explodes]
 

Ohio State in one division with Michigan, Penn State, and Nebraska in the other. This will ensure that the "brand" schools play in the championship game every year.

Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Northwestern, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan State, and Purdue will be dropped.
 


Assuming that the conference championship is more important than a division championship, I'm going to think they'll split the big four and then go geography on the rest.

So:

PSU
OSU
Purdue
Indiana
Mich State
Illinois


and

Michigan
Nebraska
Wisconsin
Iowa
Gophers
NorthWestern

the only other consideration I can see is if they want to balance they may flip flop Wiscy with Illinois. geographically speaking Ill fits well with the other four schools in the west.

They really aren't going to care much about our concerns. So I wouldn't be surprised to see Wiscy head east.

The other consideration is if we are working towards 16, they may set up alignments to reflect the future conference.
 

Schnoodler said:
Assuming that the conference championship is more important than a division championship, I'm going to think they'll split the big four and then go geography on the rest.

So:

PSU
OSU
Purdue
Indiana
Mich State
Illinois


and

Michigan
Nebraska
Wisconsin
Iowa
Gophers
NorthWestern

the only other consideration I can see is if they want to balance they may flip flop Wiscy with Illinois. geographically speaking Ill fits well with the other four schools in the west.

They really aren't going to care much about our concerns. So I wouldn't be surprised to see Wiscy head east.

The other consideration is if we are working towards 16, they may set up alignments to reflect the future conference.
Click to expand...

There's no way they separate Michigan from MSU and OSU.
 

Sense and logic

What makes more sense:

Splitting OSU and Michigan.

or

Placing the PSU in the West?

If the later makes sense the Charter member JCL division is the one to go with.:eek:
 

I'm not sure they'll look at it that way. The cherry might be the conference championship game. Plus in a 12 team league with two divisions that means only five divisional games. Plenty of opportunity to see the other schools if need be. They are not placing PSU in the west.
 



West: Neb, Min, Ia, wis, NU, PSU

East: Ill, Pur, IU, OSU, MSU, Mich

And it will be perfectly geographical because PSU will disassemble Beaver Stadium (again) and this time move it to the middle of Iowa.

This is clearly the most logical.
 

Ohio State
Michigan State
Minnesota
Northwestern
Purdue
Indiana

Penn State
Michigan
Nebraska
Wisconsin
Iowa
Illinois

This way it is always Ohio State against one of the other top 6......worst case scenario it is Illinois, who is the largest market int he conference.
 

Tv revenue division:
Wisky
OSU
Mich
PSU
Nebraska
Illinois

Happy to be here
Minn
NW
Pur
Indiana
Iowa
MSU
 

Here is how it's going to happen!

Everyone is wrong about the divsions. I heard from some very good sources about the break up of the division. There is actually going to be three divisions.

Group I - Minnesota, Indiana, Illinios, Purdue

Group II - Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State

Group III - Northwestern, Wisconsin, Iowa and Nebraska

Your going to play everyone from your group twice in a season. One game at home and one game away. When it's time to decide the conference champion Group I gets an automatic bye becuase it's the toughest division. The winner of group two and group three playoff then plays the group I winner.

After talking to some people I'm pretty sure this is the way it's going to be. Any Questions?
 



gold04 said:
Everyone is wrong about the divsions. I heard from some very good sources about the break up of the division. There is actually going to be three divisions.

Group I - Minnesota, Indiana, Illinios, Purdue

Group II - Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State

Group III - Northwestern, Wisconsin, Iowa and Nebraska

Your going to play everyone from your group twice in a season. One game at home and one game away. When it's time to decide the conference champion Group I gets an automatic bye becuase it's the toughest division. The winner of group two and group three playoff then plays the group I winner.

After talking to some people I'm pretty sure this is the way it's going to be. Any Questions?
Click to expand...

A for originality
C+ for effort
D- for contributive value
F--- for humorous value
 

I have complete confidence that the Big 10 will:


ROYALLY SCREW THIS UP !!


But that is OK, cuz the implications will only last for DECADES !!

(In other words they will do something OTHER than a East/West split.)
 

Coburn said:
I have complete confidence that the Big 10 will:


ROYALLY SCREW THIS UP !!


But that is OK, cuz the implications will only last for DECADES !!

(In other words they will do something OTHER than a East/West split.)
Click to expand...

I'm a little curious as to why people think that the Big Ten leadership is so inept. Did the conference accidently develop the BTN? Did the conference luck into 20-22 mln $ payouts to all members?

I'm pretty confident that the conference leadership will handle this well, based on the track record.
 

ruralgopher said:
I'm a little curious as to why people think that the Big Ten leadership is so inept. Did the conference accidently develop the BTN? Did the conference luck into 20-22 mln $ payouts to all members?

I'm pretty confident that the conference leadership will handle this well, based on the track record.
Click to expand...

For me personally, it has nothing to do with precedent, and everything to do with what Delany has said. When the first words out of his mouth were "competitive balance," he's setting up against the inevitable backlash that will occur when they idiotically do something other than the blatantly obvious E-W split.
 

There is a time to tell the marketing people to sit down and shut up. Yes, there is a lot of money involved in college football. But it is a mistake to let the money people tweak every aspect. Geese and golden eggs and all that.

It is not at all clear that there is a competive imbalance between Nebraska/Wisconsin/Iowa and OSU/Michigan/PSU. If there is any, it's so small and uncertain that it does not merit messing with the obvious split.

Another thing that is disturbing is that some Big Ten officials have called 10 years a "snapshot". It's not, it's a long time. If 10 years have passed since glory days, they probably are gone, or at least won't bounce back on their own.
 

dpodoll68 said:
For me personally, it has nothing to do with precedent, and everything to do with what Delany has said. When the first words out of his mouth were "competitive balance," he's setting up against the inevitable backlash that will occur when they idiotically do something other than the blatantly obvious E-W split.
Click to expand...


I don't think something besides an east-west split is necessarily the wrong move. I'd rather see PSU in the 'west' with us, ia, wi, nebraska and northwestern than purely geographic split. Competitive balance, in my mind, is more important than ease of naming and cutting down on JoePa's travel time.
 

RedPoo said:
I don't think something besides an east-west split is necessarily the wrong move. I'd rather see PSU in the 'west' with us, ia, wi, nebraska and northwestern than purely geographic split. Competitive balance, in my mind, is more important than ease of naming and cutting down on JoePa's travel time.
Click to expand...

It's not remotely clear that NE/WI/IA doesn't balance MI/OSU/PSU. We have people talking about competitive balance who are looking back at the last 50 years. What happened 50 years ago is long gone. Altering a natural dividing line ought to take some compelling evidence.
 

Whether or not NE WI IA are as good as MI OSU PSU is sort of irrelavent isn't it? It is all about brand names and the power associated with them. I've long thought that Our Family Black Cherry is the best pop on the market, ever since I can remember this has been my favorite pop. Unfortunately I can't buy it at many places or order it anywhere. Not because of lack of Quality, but lack of brand. WI and IA fans can talk all they want about how legit their programs have been of late, and they are right, but an epic WI v IA tilt doesn't turn on TV sets outside of a small area like NE v PSU would. And if we've learned anything over the last 7 months, its that it all comes down to TV sets being tuned in.
 

ruralgopher said:
Whether or not NE WI IA are as good as MI OSU PSU is sort of irrelavent isn't it? It is all about brand names and the power associated with them. I've long thought that Our Family Black Cherry is the best pop on the market, ever since I can remember this has been my favorite pop. Unfortunately I can't buy it at many places or order it anywhere. Not because of lack of Quality, but lack of brand. WI and IA fans can talk all they want about how legit their programs have been of late, and they are right, but an epic WI v IA tilt doesn't turn on TV sets outside of a small area like NE v PSU would. And if we've learned anything over the last 7 months, its that it all comes down to TV sets being tuned in.
Click to expand...

No, it's not irrelevant, so long as we're talking about competitive balance. If they mean "brand name" when they say "competitive balance", then they are liars. Support balancing brands, if they must, but they should at least be honest about it.

Why not build the brand? Have NE/WI/IA in one division, MI/OSU/PSU in the other. The divisions are balanced competitively, but the brands aren't balanced. But it gives you the opportunity to build the brand - just like Our Family Black Cherry would if they could get it into more stores. Why shouldn't we have access to the highest quality?
 

Good take on the difference between balancing brands and competative balance. perhaps it is a wording issue. I don't think the Big Ten is interested in putting in the required years necessary to 'build' WI or IA's profile nationally when the college football TV market is changing so quickly and dramatically. How quickly the Big 12's TV contract became grossly outdated I think has given everyone pause.
 

The ACC is the better example for what the Big Ten has in mind, with contrived outcomes.
 

RodentRampage said:
No, it's not irrelevant, so long as we're talking about competitive balance. If they mean "brand name" when they say "competitive balance", then they are liars. Support balancing brands, if they must, but they should at least be honest about it.

Why not build the brand? Have NE/WI/IA in one division, MI/OSU/PSU in the other. The divisions are balanced competitively, but the brands aren't balanced. But it gives you the opportunity to build the brand - just like Our Family Black Cherry would if they could get it into more stores. Why shouldn't we have access to the highest quality?
Click to expand...

I've got 2 thoughts on this.

I think calling them strong 'brands' is a bit misleading. It's not only that some teams are more popular than others, but that they're seen as better teams by the general public. If OSU, Mich and PSU are in one division, that will be seen as the stronger division, and the Big 10 West would become an afterthought to most of the country.

I also think the discussions about trends/recent vs. distant history, etc is missing an important point. It's not just that OSU, PSU and Mich have been better recently. I think its obvious that they have competitive advantages over other schools. Yes, Michigan is down, and wisconsin and iowa have been strong programs lately. But Michigan still has more revenue, a higher profile, and a bigger pool of recruits to choose from.
All programs have ups and downs, but there are certain built-in advantages that need to be taken into account.
 

RedPoo said:
I've got 2 thoughts on this.

I think calling them strong 'brands' is a bit misleading. It's not only that some teams are more popular than others, but that they're seen as better teams by the general public. If OSU, Mich and PSU are in one division, that will be seen as the stronger division, and the Big 10 West would become an afterthought to most of the country.
Click to expand...

How is that misleading? You've just given a textbook example of "brands". If someone is interested in competitive balance, then perception needs to be thrown out the window.

I also think the discussions about trends/recent vs. distant history, etc is missing an important point. It's not just that OSU, PSU and Mich have been better recently. I think its obvious that they have competitive advantages over other schools. Yes, Michigan is down, and wisconsin and iowa have been strong programs lately. But Michigan still has more revenue, a higher profile, and a bigger pool of recruits to choose from.
All programs have ups and downs, but there are certain built-in advantages that need to be taken into account.
Click to expand...

That's like saying Niagra Falls is missing water, this has been hammered into us, the assumption that OSU/MI/PSU will always be head and shoulders above NE/IA/WI.
 

RodentRampage said:
How is that misleading? You've just given a textbook example of "brands". If someone is interested in competitive balance, then perception needs to be thrown out the window.



That's like saying Niagra Falls is missing water, this has been hammered into us, the assumption that OSU/MI/PSU will always be head and shoulders above NE/IA/WI.
Click to expand...

It's misleading (as opposed to untrue) because while the idea of having sellable 'brands' in each division is important insofar as it can help with ensuring big-ticket games, the perception that the divisions are roughly equal is important to keeping the entire conference relevant in the eyes of the average rube from outside the Big 10 footprint. It's related to the relative strength of the 'brands' of the teams, but that doesn't illustrate the entire issue.


And I don't think I ever suggested OSU/MI/PSU will always be head-and-shoulders above everyone else. I actually went out of my way to point out that's not the case (and isn't even true right now). But ignoring the inherent advantages or weaknesses of the programs in the conference and just saying 'it's all cyclical' is just ignoring the facts on the ground.

As an illustration: Imagine every program in the Big Ten went back to square one...got rid of all their players, coaches and athletic departments and had to start over. Hire a new AD, who would hire a new coach, who would then recruit an entire new team. OSU, Michigan and PSU would have the revenue to spend on a higher-grade AD. They have the funding and the profile to attract better coaches. They have the recruiting bases and exposure (and coaches, and facilities) to bring in higher-rated recruits. And they would, in all likelyhood, return to the top of the conference before long.
I'm not saying other teams can't compete, or that these teams will ALWAYS have all of these advantages. But it's foolish to think that we're on a level playing field, that Wisconsin and Iowa will continue to surpass Michigan and challenge PSU, or that we're just the right coaching hire away from returning to our time as an entrenched force in college football.
 

RedPoo said:
It's misleading (as opposed to untrue) because while the idea of having sellable 'brands' in each division is important insofar as it can help with ensuring big-ticket games, the perception that the divisions are roughly equal is important to keeping the entire conference relevant in the eyes of the average rube from outside the Big 10 footprint. It's related to the relative strength of the 'brands' of the teams, but that doesn't illustrate the entire issue.
Click to expand...

Ah, I thought that you were using the word 'misleading' as is used in the English language. Obviously, there is some definition that means the exact opposite of how it is used in English. I'd much rather have the divisions actually be comparable than to worry about a mistaken perception of balance. Would you rather have a good car or a lemon that merely has a reputation for being a good car?

And I don't think I ever suggested OSU/MI/PSU will always be head-and-shoulders above everyone else. I actually went out of my way to point out that's not the case (and isn't even true right now). But ignoring the inherent advantages or weaknesses of the programs in the conference and just saying 'it's all cyclical' is just ignoring the facts on the ground.
Click to expand...

If you don't consider OSU/MI/PSU to always be head and shoulders above everyone else, then the justification for an alignment other than east-west fails. What is ignoring the facts on the ground is to assume that events from 50 years ago matter.

As an illustration: Imagine every program in the Big Ten went back to square one...got rid of all their players, coaches and athletic departments and had to start over. Hire a new AD, who would hire a new coach, who would then recruit an entire new team. OSU, Michigan and PSU would have the revenue to spend on a higher-grade AD. They have the funding and the profile to attract better coaches. They have the recruiting bases and exposure (and coaches, and facilities) to bring in higher-rated recruits. And they would, in all likelyhood, return to the top of the conference before long.
I'm not saying other teams can't compete, or that these teams will ALWAYS have all of these advantages. But it's foolish to think that we're on a level playing field, that Wisconsin and Iowa will be the continue to surpass Michigan and challenge PSU, or that we're just the right coaching hire away from returning to our time as an entrenched force in college football.[/QUOTE]
 

RodentRampage said:
If you don't consider OSU/MI/PSU to always be head and shoulders above everyone else, then the justification for an alignment other than east-west fails. What is ignoring the facts on the ground is to assume that events from 50 years ago matter.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

I'm going to ignore the first part here, because the last thing we need is a grammatical argument about the difference between 'popular' and 'presumed to be good.'

As to the second thing, what's happening now DOES matter. There's no doubt that those 3 teams are considered (whether correctly or not) to be the class of the Big Ten right now. Putting them, and all their built-in advantages, in another division would only serve to widen the gap and increase their advantages.
Whether we like it or not, a lot of our profile, recruiting leverage, etc comes from the fact that we play and compete directly with OSU, Michigan and Penn State. Once you officially separate us and our tri-state breatheren from those teams, we lose a direct connection that serves us well. We become members of the Afterthought Division of the Big Ten, we play fewer games against marquee opponents, slip even further into background, and it gets even harder for us to make up the ground between us and the top of the conference (by a good bit, I'd imagine). That's not only bad for Minnesota, but bad for the entire Big 10. The more teams that are relevant, the better. That's why people are seriously thinking about a split along something besides purely geographic lines, and I think it's an option that's at the very least worth considering.
 

A Gopher in Husker Clothing

Ok, I admit it. I am from Nebraska. Born, raised and love the state. I love the Gophers now. Been here for 22 years. The alignment issue is really easy for me. Think beyond football. Think all sports. I am completely fired up to see Nebraska play the other outstanding Big Ten teams in Wrestling, Volleyball, Baseball, No Hockey but the UNO Mavericks join the WCHA this year, and many other sports. Basketball is bad right now at Nebraska but we are ever hopeful.

East/West with one rivalry for now. When ND and Pitt are added. Re-alignment allows ND to be in the West and Pitt in the East. If everything goes 16 team mega-conferences you think outside the box a little on who to add. But, the Big Ten will have first pick of a lot of good schools.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom