The Latest on Big 10 Divisions (WGN Chicago)
- Thread starter Wingback
- Start date
Iowa, PSU, Wisky and Nebraska is a pretty solid division. That is 4 teams that could win the division and represent it any year. I don't see Ill or Minny doing anything.
That division will suck in basketball though. Which should help Iowa out since they will most likely get to play PSU and nebraska 2 times each year.
That division will suck in basketball though. Which should help Iowa out since they will most likely get to play PSU and nebraska 2 times each year.
So if the number one priority is competitive fairness, do they plan on changing the divisions when there is a shift of power to other schools. I know you can argue that schools like OSU have had a long history of success so thats why they are considered a top tier school, but you never know what could happen down the road.
Personally, I liked that 3-team "pod" idea that someone proposed, but I don't know how you'd schedule a conference championship game around that.
I'm not sure that Michigan and tOSU would be too keen on being in the same division. Using current records now makes sense, but Michigan is not a school that will be at the bottom for very long. Could you imagine the ratings for a Michigan - Ohio St Big 10 Championship game in a couple years?
I'm with you.
Nobody knows if Penn State will remain huge after Paterno's era (officially) ends. No guarantee U-M will stay at powerhouse level (although I figure that'll get corrected in "or else" fashion very soon).
Nebraska has as much of that "long history of success" as PSU, and more than Illinois, so flipping that strength to the East seems shortsighted, considering Wisconsin and Iowa have had legitimate success for an extended period. (That paragraph was painful to write for a couple of reasons, but I can't pretend it isn't true).
I suppose SI's plan figures NW-Illinois is a rivalry-split that's manageable, in exchange to keep all other rivalries, most geography, and balance. But geography doesn't change, and competitive balance might.
But if they were not in the same division then they could possibly have to play each other 2 times in 1 year. They are not going to like that either.
Thank god there was a husker fan to bring us all a link about the new bigten divisions!!!
I don't think any of us have seen a single column or article about the subject since the bugeaters turned benedict arnold
*puke*
I don't think any of us have seen a single column or article about the subject since the bugeaters turned benedict arnold
*puke*
Does anyone remember when Neb, KSU, and CU were the stalwarts of the conference? The conference was split geographically for good reason.
What does the Big 10 do when the competitive scales tip and a future imbalance happens?
The big difference I see between the two conferences is that Texas is the recruiting seed ground all Big 12 schools pull from. Imo, this is what lead to the balance of power shifting to Texas and OU.
The Big 10 doesn't have an "in conference" state that every school pulls a majority of their recruits from. (Ohio is probably the closest, but doesn't compare to Texas)
What does the Big 10 do when the competitive scales tip and a future imbalance happens?
The big difference I see between the two conferences is that Texas is the recruiting seed ground all Big 12 schools pull from. Imo, this is what lead to the balance of power shifting to Texas and OU.
The Big 10 doesn't have an "in conference" state that every school pulls a majority of their recruits from. (Ohio is probably the closest, but doesn't compare to Texas)
"Competetive fairness" is a silly requirement imo. A conference commissioner should consider his teams as equals, they share revenue don't they?
I can understand rivalries having to stay intact but those are typically geographic anyway. If they split, the B10 should split east-west. The trio of NU, Iowa and Wisc. should be considered on par w/ tOSU, Mich and PSU by the B10.
I can understand rivalries having to stay intact but those are typically geographic anyway. If they split, the B10 should split east-west. The trio of NU, Iowa and Wisc. should be considered on par w/ tOSU, Mich and PSU by the B10.
How easily we forget that in '94 when the texas 12 er....the Big XII was formed that one thing that was paramount was maintaining the Texas--Oklahoma rivalry!!!
That Rivalry Plus Geographic Purity brought us a very unbalanced conference that was doomed from the start.
Texas should have headed up the south ...With Oklahoma and Nebraska heading up the north and then you would have had "Competitive Balance" and also it would have preserved the best rivalry aka Nebbie v. Okie!!!!
Boys it was doomed from the start and I think that the over and under on this conference is about five fricking years!!!!! (butt then again i could be wrong :biglaugh:
When the Big 12 was formed, if you moved Oklahoma to the North who would you have moved to the South?
A division of Oklahoma, Nebraska, Colorado, and Kansas State would have trumped anything the South could have mustered back then.
"Competitive Balance" is a dumb Reason #1 to form divisions. It has the capability to swing all over the place especially in a conference like the Big Ten.
In hindsight it would probably have been best to do a Big Six division and a SW divsion with OSU and CU joining the Texas teams but that would've seemed kind of strange back in '96 (including to me).
When the Big 12 formed OU wasn't that good, they didn't have a winning record fror 5 seasons starting in 94. They did have a history of being good so one could assume they would become good again.
1995 Final AP College Football Poll
1. Nebraska
2. Florida
3. Tennessee
4. Florida State
5. Colorado
6. Ohio State
7. Kansas State
8. Northwestern
9. Kansas
10. Virginia Tech