Will have to have divisions in B10

Donate To GopherHole
PMWinSTP said:
That could be true, they didn't have the tournament at the newer Barclays Center.
Click to expand...
Not really comparable as MSG is in Manhattan, a destination in and of itself and slightly more capacity than Barclays

Not true of Inglewood, where the Forum sits, though maybe it's different with nearby SoFi and will part of the new Clippers facility.

Plus the Forum's capacity is about 5000 less than the Laker arena. Now, if they want/need 2 arenas to accommodate an 18 team (or more) field, then sure the Forum + Clippers arenas could be ideal venues.
 

Otis said:
If you add Notre Dame and Stanford, How would the three game rivalry schedule work?

Minnesota - Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska?
Wisconsin - Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern
Iowa - Minnesota, Wisconsin, Nebraska

These are the teams Gopher fans care about. There has been talk of the West Coast Schools playing their pod yearly, but USC and Stanford have long histories with ND as does Michigan. So…

USC - UCLA, Notre Dame, Washington?
Norte Dame - Michigan, USC, Stanford
Michigan - OSU, MSU, Notre Dame
Stanford - Notre Dame, Washington, Oregon

Washington and Oregon don’t have historical rivalries outside their states. How would this get mixed in? Obviously they would want games in the same time zone but they have been in opposite divisions from the LA schools for awhile.

This will get more and more complicated and probably require a ten game conference slate.
Click to expand...
Nice breakdown!!
 

Why do we have to destroy the PAC-12 by poaching their four best programs? "Merge" with them so they stay intact out there but play four B10 teams each and those games count in the PAC-12 standings; ditto in the Big Ten - games with PCC count as B10 wins or losses. You can still divvy up the TV money and the two conferences winners (keeping their divisional playoffs) would play in the Rose Bowl for the B10/Pac12 union championship. End the easy transfers, stop paying players for anything except scholarships, and stop building skyscraper conferences with 20 teams, etc. Let college football remain regional. The 12 team national playoff is another turkey - replaces the season in nat'l championship importance: go back to 4, which was perfect. TV greed should not determine everything that happens - schools should stand up for other values, other traditions.
 

I expect within in 10 years football will break off from the non-revenue sports and do their own thing.

The non-revenue sports end up going back to more geographically located conferences.
 

scools12 said:
I expect within in 10 years football will break off from the non-revenue sports and do their own thing.

The non-revenue sports end up going back to more geographically located conferences.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't doubt it. Football affiliate conferences are pretty common at the levels below FBS; more because plenty of schools don't have football at those levels, but it happens.

I have no idea how basketball TV ratings factor in to all this. Football obviously drives the show.
 


GoldGoldGold said:
I agree. It would be very nice if they end up at 20 teams, to have two divisions.... Division 1... original B1G members and Division 2 all new members. This would maintain existing rivalries and on a rotating basis create new matchups and new rivalries. And a four team playoff for Conference championship (best 4 teams regardless of division)
Click to expand...
Either that or 4 divisions with a playoff for the division champions.
 

Ope3 said:
Not really comparable as MSG is in Manhattan, a destination in and of itself and slightly more capacity than Barclays

Not true of Inglewood, where the Forum sits, though maybe it's different with nearby SoFi and will part of the new Clippers facility.

Plus the Forum's capacity is about 5000 less than the Laker arena. Now, if they want/need 2 arenas to accommodate an 18 team (or more) field, then sure the Forum + Clippers arenas could be ideal venues.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure the Forum no longer has scoreboards/jumbotron etc. any longer. The Lakers played a pre-season game there a few years ago for old times sake, and they had to bring in temporary stuff. It's not a major arena anymore and isn't going to be hosting an event like this.
 

disco said:
Pretty sure the Forum no longer has scoreboards/jumbotron etc. any longer. The Lakers played a pre-season game there a few years ago for old times sake, and they had to bring in temporary stuff. It's not a major arena anymore and isn't going to be hosting an event like this.
Click to expand...
Probably not viable for a sporting event such as this, but it is still is a major arena in terms of hosting big time concerts.

I am sure it will also be used for the 2028 Olympics in some capacity,
 

Clipper’s Inglewood Intuit Dome will open for the 2024-25 season. Forum will remain as a concert venue and host 2028 Olympic events.
 



Great Plains Gopher said:
Why do we have to destroy the PAC-12 by poaching their four best programs? "Merge" with them so they stay intact out there but play four B10 teams each and those games count in the PAC-12 standings; ditto in the Big Ten - games with PCC count as B10 wins or losses. You can still divvy up the TV money and the two conferences winners (keeping their divisional playoffs) would play in the Rose Bowl for the B10/Pac12 union championship. End the easy transfers, stop paying players for anything except scholarships, and stop building skyscraper conferences with 20 teams, etc. Let college football remain regional. The 12 team national playoff is another turkey - replaces the season in nat'l championship importance: go back to 4, which was perfect. TV greed should not determine everything that happens - schools should stand up for other values, other traditions.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone in the B1G office thought the PAC-12 would implode so fast. Even with USC and UCLA leaving, the conference was still strong. Just think if the PAC could have inked a deal before the Big 12 when TV money was still flowing. Maybe they pick up SDSU and SMU and everyone stays. In that scenario even if Colorado leaves, the conference had a good chance to stick together.

Because Washington and Oregon left the PAC after the TV deal failed for the nth time, I look at the B1G as picking up the scraps before they were taken by another conference.

The blame for the PAC-12 breakup lies mostly on the last two commissioners, Larry Scott and George Kliavkoff.
 

Some guy said:
What would have been good was to bring back legends and leaders without telling anyone. And then say top 2 instead of division winners
Teams across from each other with locked games

Ohio State-Michigan
Wisconsin-Minnesota
Northwestern-Illinois
Penn State-Nebraska
Indiana - Michigan State
Northwestern - Purdue
Rutgers - Maryland
USC - UCLA
Washington - Oregon

Problem with this, is with static divisions you really never play the other division.
So really you need “groupings” that rotate.
Divisions that change every year and don’t appear in the standings.
Click to expand...
You have Northwestern twice...and no Iowa
so, Nebraska vs Iowa
Purdue vs Indiana
Penn State vs Michigan State
 


I agree with the OP, I really think we need divisions. With the PAC12 additions, I think the argument of the superiority of the East is basically eliminated. Could look like this (can swap Illinois and NW):

East
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Michigan State
Maryland
Indiana
Purdue
Illinois
Rutgers

West
USC
UCLA
Oregon
Washington
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Iowa
Nebraska
Northwestern
 



Donovan said:
I agree with the OP, I really think we need divisions. With the PAC12 additions, I think the argument of the superiority of the East is basically eliminated. Could look like this (can swap Illinois and NW):

East
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Michigan State
Maryland
Indiana
Purdue
Illinois
Rutgers

West
USC
UCLA
Oregon
Washington
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Iowa
Nebraska
Northwestern
Click to expand...
You could make a claim the west is more of a gauntlet to get through then the east
 

Donovan said:
I agree with the OP, I really think we need divisions. With the PAC12 additions, I think the argument of the superiority of the East is basically eliminated. Could look like this (can swap Illinois and NW):

East
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Michigan State
Maryland
Indiana
Purdue
Illinois
Rutgers

West
USC
UCLA
Oregon
Washington
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Iowa
Nebraska
Northwestern
Click to expand...

That makes sense, but I don't see it happening. The TV networks and West Coast teams would want to have occasional games against the big names in the East OSU/MI/PSU for the eyeballs and excitement.
 

Having divisions doesn't guarantee your two top teams play for the conference championship.
 

PMWinSTP said:
Having divisions doesn't guarantee your two top teams play for the conference championship.
Click to expand...
Agree, it never has. If your point is that’s the B1G’s stated mission, you’re probably right, divisions are not happening.

Would folks prefer the NFL eliminates divisions and just puts the the NFC teams in a stack rank and the top 7 make the playoffs? Or, I guess you could stack rank all 32 NFL teams and the top 14 are in the playoffs.
 
Last edited:

Great Plains Gopher said:
A list of 18 teams doesn't make a conference - imagine the enthusiasm fans will have being 11th of 18 teams. Adding four genuine powers from the Pacific Coast will just push teams like Minnesota, Purdue, Northwestern probably Nebraska, into the also-rans. If the Gophers couldn't win the West when it had 7 teams, how will it ever climb over the likes of USC, Washington, Wisconsin, Iowa or some equivalent. It won't. A new East-West alignment will have to be established in the conference even if the location of some teams is vague, maybe even ridiculous. The PCC doesn't belong in the B10, but then neither did Maryland or Rutgers.
Click to expand...
Have faith in PJ Fleck. Where there is a will, there is a way.
 

There will be kind-of divisions, but only for scheduling purposes. The conference standings table will appear in newspapers and websites as a single list of 18 teams. And that is just fine.

The conf championship game will simply pick off the top two (by some measure) teams. I think that's fine as well.


They'll use the same "Flex" scheduling mechanism that was announced earlier, with some tweak. All that is, is saying you have X "locked-in" teams you play every year, and you cycle through the Y=18-X remaining teams until you've played everyone home/home, and the "locked-in" teams can change as soon as every two years, on one side of the spectrum, to being permanent (actually locked-in), on the other side. That's all it is. It's a great setup, that can continue to expand indefinitely.

Reasonable options, for number of teams in conference and number of conf games:

18 teams, 9 conf games: 5 "locked-in" -> cycle through the remaining 12 teams with the remaining 4 conf games in 3 years, home/home in 6 years
18 teams, 10 conf games: 3 "locked-in" -> cycle through the remaining 14 teams with the remaining 7 conf games in 2 years, home/home in 4 years (this is the most straightforward extension of what was announced)

20 teams, 9 conf games: 4 "locked-in" -> cycle through the remaining 15 teams with remaining 5 conf games in 3 years, home/home 6 years
20 teams, 10 conf games: 4 "locked-in" -> cycle through remaining 15 teams with remaining 6 conf games home/home in 5 years
20 teams, 11 conf games: 3 "locked-in" -> cycle through the remaining 16 teams with the remaining 8 conf games in 2 years, home/home in 4 years (this is the most straightforward extension of what was announced)
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom