Chicago Fanatics Message Board
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

Big Ten Realignment
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=101&t=77808		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Brick [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:03 am ]
Post subject:  Big Ten Realignment
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/77632/divisions-debate-down-to-indiana-purdue

"East" division

Maryland
Michigan
Michigan State
Ohio State
Penn State
Rutgers
Purdue or Indiana

"West" division

Illinois
Iowa
Minnesota
Nebraska
Northwestern
Wisconsin
Purdue or Indiana

Please send Purdue to the West.
Author:  Bucky Chris [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
Holy lopsided if Purdue goes West. Would definitely take that.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
Bucky Chris wrote:
Holy lopsided if Purdue goes West. Would definitely take that.
Huh?

It's lopsided either way. That's why I want Purdue going West.
Author:  Bucky Chris [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Bucky Chris wrote:
Holy lopsided if Purdue goes West. Would definitely take that.
Huh?

It's lopsided either way. That's why I want Purdue going West.


Yea it's lopsided either way, but way worse if Purdue goes West.
Author:  RFDC [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
I don't like it either way.

Any idea how they go about deciding?
Author:  Brick [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
RFDC wrote:
I don't like it either way.

Any idea how they go about deciding?
Since the march to 16 teams seems inevitable, I would guess that IU or Purdue jumps over in a few years too. Nebraska has to love it. They should be in the title game most of the time.
Author:  Urlacher's missing neck [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
RFDC wrote:
I don't like it either way.

Any idea how they go about deciding?
Since the march to 16 teams seems inevitable, I would guess that IU or Purdue jumps over in a few years too. Wisconsin has to love it. They should be in the title game most of the time.


fixed
Author:  pittmike [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
Urlacher's missing neck wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
RFDC wrote:
I don't like it either way.

Any idea how they go about deciding?
Since the march to 16 teams seems inevitable, I would guess that IU or Purdue jumps over in a few years too. Wisconsin has to love it. They should be in the title game most of the time.


fixed

ii Had the same thought that Wis doesn't have a worry about Neb.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
pittmike wrote:
ii Had the same thought that Wis doesn't have a worry about Neb.
If your frame of reference is simply the last 3 years.
Author:  pittmike [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
Nebraska hasn't been to a level in a while in which you could say they would be in this proposed title game. I am not saying they are bad in any way but Wisconsin seems to find a way to be close every year.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
pittmike wrote:
Nebraska hasn't been to a level in a while in which you could say they would be in this proposed title game. I am not saying they are bad in any way but Wisconsin seems to find a way to be close every year.
Nebraska is a national cornerstone program just below Michigan and Ohio State and Notre Dame. They've also won their division 3 of the last 4 years.

Wisconsin has had a great 3 year run, and it probably will continue in the short term, but Nebraska is the best program in that division. Iowa and Wisconsin are probably second and third though Iowa has fallen off recently.
Author:  pittmike [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
Nebraska year-by-year records / rankings


mcubed PFPG PAPG
Year Rank Rank Rank Score W L T GWF BLF OW% OOW%
2012 19 28 59 0.918 10 4 0.609 -0.281 58.6 53.0
2011 24 49 42 0.991 9 4 0.633 -0.380 57.5 52.5
2010 25 38 10 0.818 10 4 0.618 -0.556 52.8 54.0
2009 18 75 1 1.043 10 4 0.487 -0.232 51.5 52.6
2008 23 17 82 0.975 9 4 0.400 -0.197 51.0 53.6
2007 53 28 115 0.197 5 7 0.330 -0.643 60.1 52.0
2006 30 17 25 0.831 9 5 0.428 -0.276 56.1 51.4
2005 31 67 25 0.631 8 4 0.510 -0.592 52.8 56.7
2004 67 58 71 -0.225 5 6 0.267 -0.975 54.4 54.4
2003 18 74 2 1.117 10 3 0.538 -0.269 48.4 53.5

As I said not bad but in the last ten years they are not automatically in the title game if they were in that division. Hypothetically.
Author:  RFDC [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
Any way you slice it Wisc and Nebraska are happy with this set up
Author:  pittmike [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
RFDC wrote:
Any way you slice it Wisc and Nebraska are happy with this set up



That is really what I was getting at.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
RFDC wrote:
Any way you slice it Wisc and Nebraska are happy with this set up
All the teams should be. Avoiding both Michigan and Ohio State is good no matter how much you suck.
Author:  pittmike [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
Have they ever figured out how many teams from other division you play each year and yearly rotation? With so many conference games not many chances to play non conference cupcakes.
Author:  Hawg Ass [ Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:25 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
pittmike wrote:
Have they ever figured out how many teams from other division you play each year and yearly rotation? With so many conference games not many chances to play non conference cupcakes.

I would think it would be 2 and they would rotate. That would leave 3 non-conference games. I know I heard Alvarez talk about the non-conference games and they want to step who they are can and can't play as a league in these non-conference games.
Author:  newper [ Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Big Ten Realignment
Well, it might be good to be in the east also since so many of them are not eligible for championship play. :)

I think they probably should have done a straight up geographic divide to begin with, and this just illustrates the point further. You really can't try to pick and choose to keep competitive balance the same (for now.) Whose to say what this will look like in even five years. 2018, come back to this thread. We'll probably have a dominant Minnesota and Maryland squad.

They definitely need to drop that Leaders and Legends thing.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/