Blum: B1G Bedlam
- Thread starter ChrisMWilliams
- Start date
That is a great read by Brent and I completely agree with him. I have thoroughly enjoyed watching ISU compete against all other conference members this season and it will be even better in MBB and WBB.
I hope the B12 sticks with 10 schools. Expanding to 12 with ND as a FB member should be the only expansion alternative. Otherwise, don't expand, it's definitely not worth it.
I bet if you polled the incumbent P12 schools, I bet all 10 of them are kicking themselves for letting Larry Scott talk them into expanding with Utah and Colorado. And as Brent mentions, the possibility of A&M playing at Florida in the 14-team SEC once every 12 years is ridiculous.
"The SEC is facing a large conundrum with their newly minted 14 team league. The power-houses only want an eight game conference schedule. So with six games against your division and two games against the opposite division, a Texas A&M, for example, will visit Florida once every 12 years. How is that healthy?"
This is really an argument against 14 team leagues, not a conference championship game. And it could be even worse if it goes to 16 team leagues.
I have mixed feelings on the conference make-up. I believe it may be possible for ISU to have more success in terms of wins/losses and possible divisional or even conference titles in a 12 team set-up. However, I agree, this is the first time since I started following ISU in 2005 that the Big 12 has really felt like one whole conference, and that is pretty cool. It also feels like our successes somehow mean more in this set-up, but I can't really explain why it feels that way.
At first, I thought it was nostalgia for those seasons when I was a kid, taking on everyone in the league to find out exactly where you stood.
But I did watch. Heck, I watched KU and Mizzou play for the first time in I don't know how long, and it wasn't because it was Mizzou's swan song, either. I found it really interesting to be able to go up against the entirety of the "old South" for once, and watch K-State dominate the state of Texas, ISU come out with more South wins than usual, and to realize that the State of Oklahoma is, first and foremost, old Big Eight country, and not really old South Division territory after all.
I also realized, in the midst of all of this, how much the league misses the old Nebraska/OU annual throwdown, even if we don't miss Nebraska one bit.
It was especially fun to see the old Big 8 dominate the top three slots in the division.
In the old divisional system, you knew where you stood within the division, but extrapolating that out to league standings never felt right. Technically, Iowa State finished last year tied for 7th in the league standings, but they didn't have A&M and Baylor on the schedule so the middle of the pack just gets really gray.
Round robin does have more definition. My biggest complaint with the old Big 11 is that two teams could go undefeated in conference and "share" a title without ever playing one another. Without that peculiarity, round robin is clearly a superior season in most ways. The only advantage that divisions have is that you can more easily theoretically "catch up" after a bad start, and still play for the title. 3 losses pretty much knock you out of round robin title contention, but you could theoretically make it to the title game in a divisional format.
But, to me, that's a feature, not a bug. See also UCLA.
If they play 2 teams from the other division every year and rotate every two years, They would play at Florida every 6 or 7th year, depending on how the odd number team rotation worked out.
However, remember the SEC does the protected rival thing, so unless A&Ms protected rival is Florida (which it won't be). They would play at Florida every 12th year.
I think the last scenario is what was assumed in the article.
When we first went down to 10 schools I thought ISU was screwed, but I have since rethought my position, based on few things.
1. It is damn tough for everyone in a round robin schedule so it levels the playing field for everyone including those at the top, so ISU upsets of UT, OU and other top teams are more likely to happen.
2. I think it will be better for our recruiting, we will get to tell players that we will be in Texas twice, and Oklahoma once every year. Also we will be able to tell recruits they will get to play Texas and Oklahoma every year they are in school.
3. As previously mentioned we will pay more attention to the schools in the conference, that means they are paying more attention to us. This is a good thing for ISU.
I have changed my tune on the 10 team league and think the B12 would be stupid to go to 12 at this point.
1. It is damn tough for everyone in a round robin schedule so it levels the playing field for everyone including those at the top, so ISU upsets of UT, OU and other top teams are more likely to happen.
2. I think it will be better for our recruiting, we will get to tell players that we will be in Texas twice, and Oklahoma once every year. Also we will be able to tell recruits they will get to play Texas and Oklahoma every year they are in school.
3. As previously mentioned we will pay more attention to the schools in the conference, that means they are paying more attention to us. This is a good thing for ISU.
I have changed my tune on the 10 team league and think the B12 would be stupid to go to 12 at this point.
I'm torn on this one. Where I agree with Brent on just about every point. I can't help but think about the Cyclones getting a shot at that Championship game and how tough it is to get out of this conference with a winning record. That being said, it's niceto say at the end of the year that you played them all.
One thing that cracks me up about all of this , living in B1G country, is the love for a championship game all of a sudden. For years, all I heard was that a championship game shouldnt' matter. You didn't need it to determine a conference champion, etc. Now all I've heard this year is how they are proving a champion. And how much tougher it is to actually be crowned champion and how much more it means. Really B1G? You don't think playing a 9 game conference schedule and being able to outright say you won the league or not by playing everyone determines a conference champion? Texas proved on more than one occassion to Nebraska that you didn't have the be the best team over the course of the year to be the conference champion. Which basically is why I kind of miss the format. All we need is a decent season and one great game to be Big XII champs. It's a tough road ahead with a 10 team league.
One thing that cracks me up about all of this , living in B1G country, is the love for a championship game all of a sudden. For years, all I heard was that a championship game shouldnt' matter. You didn't need it to determine a conference champion, etc. Now all I've heard this year is how they are proving a champion. And how much tougher it is to actually be crowned champion and how much more it means. Really B1G? You don't think playing a 9 game conference schedule and being able to outright say you won the league or not by playing everyone determines a conference champion? Texas proved on more than one occassion to Nebraska that you didn't have the be the best team over the course of the year to be the conference champion. Which basically is why I kind of miss the format. All we need is a decent season and one great game to be Big XII champs. It's a tough road ahead with a 10 team league.