Unlike Andy, I think expansion is more likely to happen over the next 3 years than not. I'd put it at about 60/40 [80/20] right now, maybe even a bit more. It seems like money and the Big Ten Network are driving this so my guess is it happens. If it does, the most important thing will be (besides what school comes in) will be the divisions in football. What do you think is the best way to divide the divisions in the Big Ten? Why? What should the divisions be called? What do you think will happen.
Here's my first blush attempt:
Ameche Division (or Nagurski)
Illinois
Iowa
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Hayes Division (or Schembechler)
Indiana
Northwestern
Ohio State
Penn State
Purdue
New team
_____________________________________________________
What will happen:
East
Michigan
Michigan State
Ohio State
Penn State
Purdue
New team
West
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Minnesota
Northwestern
Wisconsin
12 comments:
I guess to me it's a no-brainer how the divisions will end up, and its now how you think it will be. There's no way they'll put OSU, PSU, and Michigan in the same division. It'll probably look like this...
Schembechler Division:
Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin
Michigan State
Michigan
Northwestern
Hayes Division:
Ohio State
Penn State
Indiana
Purdue
Illinois
Rutgers
Now, here is the list of my preference for a 12th team. Not what I think will happen, but who I'd realistically want.
1. Notre Dame (the obvious choice, even though I hate them. They should
be in the Big Ten)
------------------------------------
2. Iowa State (the oddball team in the Big XII, really want them in the
Big Ten)
3. Missouri (state school, adds St Louis and KC TV markets, I like em)
------------------------------------
4. Pittsurgh (makes geographic sense w/PSU)
5. Rutgers (state school, decent academics, adds NY/NJ TV markets, too
far east)
6. West Virginia (seems bad, but it's a state school close to Ohio and a
good athletics school)
-------------------------------------
7. Ohio (state school, makes sense geographically, bad teams, adds no TV)
8. Nebraska (bad academics, state school, great athletics, adds nothing
for TV)
9. Cincinnati (don't really add much with Cincy, but makes geographic sense)
10. Louisville (good athletics school, adds some southern TV markets)
11. Miami, OH (makes Geo sense)
12. Syracuse (adds NY TV markets, but is not close to the Big Ten
geographically, at all!)
Now, what I think will happen? Well thats a different story:
1. Rutgers (TV, NY, TV, NY)
2. Syracuse (TV, NY, TV, NY)
3. Missouri (Delaney says he wants to add a state. After NY, Missouri makes sense b/c you add both St Louis and KC)
4. Louisville (they're going to have to raid the Big East, s its the weakest conference, and this adds Kentucky and gets them inroads in the South)
5. Pittsburgh (bring back PSU-Pitt game, makes sense geographically, but they're just not what the Big Ten is looking for...they play in an NFL stadium and don't add anything)
6. Cincinnati (big east team, good basketball, and in the region, but doesnt add any other TV markets)
7. Not gonna happen, but would be great for Big Ten network)
Or maybe they add 5 teams, and go to 2 divisions of 8! The biggest conference in the nation!!!!
East:
Penn State
Ohio State
Pitt
Rutgers
Syracuse
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
West:
Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Illinois
Missouri
Indiana
Iowa State
#7 was supposed to be Notre Dame
Do you really think they will put OSU and Michigan in different divisions? Do those two teams prefer to not play every year?
I could see
Michigan
OSU
Indiana
Purdue
Michigan State
Northwestern
and
Illinois
Iowa
Minnesota
Penn State
New Team
Wisconsin
I'd be pretty happy with your probable divisions ... it is my desired divisions with just Illinois and Northwestern switched.
I would like to see a true east-west split, like you have, but that would put all the power in the east, so it won't happen. They would put Michigan and Ohio State in different divisons w/o question. They'd want a Michigan-OSU championship game whenever possible. In a 12 team conference, you'd play the 5 other teams in your division every year, and 1 team in the other division every year (Michigan and Ohio State, Illinois and Northwestern, Minnesota-Penn State, etc.)and then rotate the other 2 teams you play in the other division. I'm sure thats how it would work and that would be fine with me as long as the do the divisions correctly. If they don't do it geographically and Minnny ends up in a division w/Penn State, Rutgers, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Ohio State.....that would suck!
I think the only way they would put the 2 teams in different divisions is if they keep could keep MI-OSU on the schedule. But they could not keep playing the last game of the season, since that would lead to the possibility of back to back games. If they like that idea, they'll do it. I agree that the prospect of Michigan Ohio State Championship Game is very appealing.
I'm sitting here getting a bit skeptical of that scenario. The reality of such a scheduling gimmick is to make Michigan and Ohio State's schedule more difficult every year and make it more likely that one of the two doesn't make the Championship Game. You also will be scheduling someone with a sure victory year in-year out. No matter what you do, such a locked in game is fraught with problems. So Penn State plays Wisconsin every year. Say Wisconsin, not unimaginable, returns to Dave McClain form, now you've given Penn State an easy victory every year and handicapped a bad Wisconsin team.
At the bottom, you want to pare up say Northwestern and Indiana, and you've, at least theoretically, made it more likely that one of those 2 teams can win more games year in, year out.
Right, but we already do that. Minnesota plays Wisconsin and Iowa every year no matter what. All other teams rotate of the schedule every 2 years. So doesn't that give Wisconsin and Iowa a built in advantage? ;)
Right now every team has 2 locked in teams, this would only make it 1!
It seems to me that it is all up to OSU and Michigan. And given that, what is more appealling, playing every year but never playing against each other for a BT Championship or playing every year and being able to play for the Championship? That isn't even a choice.
Right.....so you're agreeing with me. They have to split them up, have them play every year anyway (although in the middle of the season) and still have th possibility of a re-match in the championship game. They could easily do a NW/SE split. That would put them in differnt divisions, balance the power in the conference for all sports, and make some geographic sense.
The real question to me isnt that, it's still which team?
Will they still call it the Big Ten. Probably, although I think it might be time for a name change...
"The Big One"
"The Stacked 12"
"Ice 12"
"The Hard 12"
"The Diamond 12"
"The United 12"
"Lake's 12" (get it?)
"America's 12" (for the patriots among us)
"Midwestern Conference"(MWC)
and my personal favorite:
"The Great Lakes Conference" or "Great Lakes 12"
or Great Lakes 12 + Iowa and Rutgers
or Big Ten + Penn State and Rutgers
Great Lakes Conference is nice but Big Ten is better.
The more I see on this the more I think this is going to happen no matter what. I hope that given that, maybe Notre Dame will understand that this is the last opportunity to join the Big Ten, the Big Ten will overcompensate them in some way in the short term and they get ND. In 1999, it was ND or no one. This time, perhaps, ND will recognize that the Big Ten is getting a team whether it is them or not and they will come in.
None of the other schools mentioned excite me. Pitt fits. Mizzou fits. Neither gets the blood boiling. Maybe Nebraska will see this as their only realistic chance of changing conferences and look at it seriously. Rutgers, no. If New Jersey wasn't an East Coast school it would be a nice fit -- although before its recent success was the absolute worst team in College football and I find it hard to believe the Big ten really would risk having that kind of loadstone in the conference. A New York School, no. I guess I have to hope for Pitt.
Post a Comment