My guess would be that 1 and 2 would be combined and 3 and 4 would be combined with the champs in the title game. One other "protected" rivalry so Ohio State and Michigan always play at least one game and then one other floating game.

I'd personally really like that division because Purdue actually does pretty well against Ohio State as compared to most other good football schools.

I just don't see it happening. But we'll see.

Don't just leave it with that. Explain why you don't see it? What do you see happening?

Not so much... but much better than NU, I admit. The lifetime dOSU record against Purdue is 37-12-2. You guys win 24% of the time. That compares against 28% for the rest of the Big 10 and about 26% for all opponents. I'd assume that would be even better when you compared against "good" football programs.

Here is what my guy says:


BIG TEN SHAKEUP: 16 teams, 4 divisions.

The Big Ten divisions: (1) Cuse, Pitt, Rut., Penn St.(2) Mich., Wisc., Mich. St., Minny. (3) Ohio St., Purdont., IU, ILL. (4) Mizzou, Iowa, Neb., Kittens.

No offense Vince - but if expanding the Big Ten to the extent that is being rumored comes at the expense of ruining Iowa's "biggest conference rivalries", well......you know......yeah.......

Sorry. The rest of the 50 million football fans in the midwest......We'll take it.

I hate this idea. The conference would have absolutely no identity. The football would not even be all that great.

You must have misunderstood me. I believe Purdue is 3-5 against Ohio State since I've been a fan with roughly half of those losses being by a touchdown or less.

I like spmack's lineup best.

So would Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern and Indiana.

They might as well call that group "Big Ten:Slightly better than the MAC division".

So would Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern and Indiana.

They might as well call that group "Big Ten:Slightly better than the MAC division".

That's a good point. Adding Nebraska/Missouri and Rutgers/Syracuse/Pittsburgh does really seem to make the conference lose some identity. That's a huge geographic region.

Maybe just a failure of imagination. But there's too many moving parts, too many campus presidents, conferences, etc. involved.

I think the Big East is preparing to defenestrate Notre Dame to save their football conference. If that happens, ND might be SOL and have to join. If not that, I could see picking off a single team, most likely Pitt, Rutgers, or Mizzou. But I just can't see the dissolution of two major conferences. But I have no inside info and could very well be wrong.

Rumblings out of Big Least that they want the Irish all in....Football, too, or the Irish out.
Big 10 vs. Big Least should be a no brainer for Irish, but who knows how they think down there after two bottles of wine and a trip to the Grotto.

BIG MONEY FOR BTN – It doesn’t seem long ago that the world was full of doubters and complainers regarding the launch of the Big Ten Network.

Access during the network’s first year was difficult due to rough negotiations with Comcast and Time-Warner, but after an agreement was reached in 2008, the network has taken off big-time and now is the envy of all of college sports.

According to an article in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, the Big Ten now leads all conferences in television revenue, turning $22 million over to each member institution in 2008-09.

Southeastern Conference schools, by comparison, pulled in the second-most at $17 million each. But the dropoff was significant after that. Big 12 schools were third at $6.5 million each.
That’s why when the Big Ten considers expanding to 12, 14 or 16 teams, schools like Missouri have to take a very serious look at the financial implications.

Over a five-year period, Missouri’s TV revenue from the Big 12 Conference would be $32.5 million. If Missouri was in the Big Ten during the same period, the school’s TV revenue would be $110 million.

How many schools presidents and athletic directors can afford to sniff away $77.5 million?