Big Ten Divisions

My_name_1s_MUD · **Posted:** Fri Aug 06, 2010 8:30 am

Interesting article from Teddy G.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-100806-big-ten-divisions,0,5281145.story

In terms of competitiveness, is it a little arbitrary to choose 1993 as a starting point? Answer, I guess so... but I think it probably benefits my team!

There's no debating that 1993 is the starting point for analyzing data. That's Penn State's first Big Ten football season and the beginning of the "modern Big Ten," in Delany parlance. Using overall victories, Wisconsin (145) barely trails Michigan (146) and Penn State (147). Ohio State (170) and Nebraska (165) are tops.

Going by victories in conference games, it's fairly easy to divide the teams into four "clusters," as Alvarez called them:

Group 1: Ohio State (106), Nebraska (98), Michigan (94);

Group 2: Penn State (86), Wisconsin (79), Io_a (71);

Group 3: Purdue (63), Michigan State (63), Northwestern (59);

Group 4: Illinois (45), Minnesota (44), Indiana (33).

Hawkeye Vince · **Posted:** Fri Aug 06, 2010 9:29 am

Hard to use Nebraska in that formula since they were able to beat up on the Kansas, Iowa State, kansas state year after year.

Brick · **Posted:** Fri Aug 06, 2010 9:36 am

Wisconsin is just trying to avoid being in the same division as Michigan in a North/South setup designed to allow Michigan/OSU to be a Big Ten title game(while also protecting the rivalry by playing every year).

Here is what I would do.
9 conference games.

North Division:
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Michigan
Michigan State
Iowa
Nebraska

South Division:
Ohio State
Penn State
Purdue
Indiana
Illinois
Northwestern

You play everyone in your division(5 games)
You have two protected rivals(2 games) in the other division(Michigan/Ohio State would be one of them).

That leaves two games left a season and four other teams remaining. For two years, you play a home and home with two of those teams, and then switch to the others.

I think it's the most balanced and you really only miss out on a few teams a year that probably aren't big rivals anyways.

My_name_1s_MUD · **Posted:** Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:59 pm

If you break it down by conference championships (including ties) you get four groups with slightly different composition:

Group 1: Ohio State (9), Nebraska (5), Michigan (5);

Group 2: Penn State (3), Wisconsin (3), NU (3);

Group 3: Purdue (1), Illinois (1), Io_a (1);

Group 4: Michigan State (0), Minnesota (0), Indiana (0).

Still seems to support the East-West divisions.

Hawkeye Vince · **Posted:** Fri Aug 06, 2010 8:00 pm

My_name_1s_MUD wrote:

If you break it down by conference championships (including ties) you get four groups with slightly different composition:

Group 1: Ohio State (9), Nebraska (5), Michigan (5);

Group 2: Penn State (3), Wisconsin (3), NU (3);

Group 3: Purdue (1), Illinois (1), Io_a (1);

Group 4: Michigan State (0), Minnesota (0), Indiana (0).

Still seems to support the East-West divisions.

Iowa has shared conference titles in 2002 and 2004. Please correct your numbers up there.

newper · **Posted:** Fri Aug 06, 2010 8:26 pm

North: Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
South: Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue

You'd play each team in your division, and there would be one cross division opponent that would be constant each year: Michigan/Ohio State; Michigan State/Penn State; Nebraska/Indiana; Iowa/Illinois; Minnesota/Northwestern; Wisconsin/Purdue. The other three opponents would rotate from the other five available on a yearly basis.

This would eliminate only two rivalry games: Minnesota/Penn State - Governor's Victory Bell; and Indiana/Michigan State - Ol' Brass Spittoon. The Victory Bell hasn't been around very long, and neither of these have traditionally been very competitive matchups. In any event, the longest the teams wouldn't meet would be one year, so they'll still be able to have the award.

Edit: Boilermaker Rick also has these divisions, but I proposed it before him

http://www.score670.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=101&t=47245

Brick · **Posted:** Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:10 am

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5498692

I expect that Michigan and Ohio State are going to be in separate divisions with this news. They are slowly breaking the story and waiting for the outcry. They know that the only thing better than one Michigan-Ohio State game is two Michigan-Ohio State games. I'd expect that the protected rivalry games including Michigan-Ohio State would no longer be the last game of the season to compensate for the possibility of playing two weeks in a row. If you play that in one or two weekends in October you have sufficient time for things to play out before they play again in December.

The quote by Delany at the end is very interesting. I especially enjoyed the part where he says that Purdue and Indiana could meet in the championship game. :lol:

It will take 10 years for even one of those teams to ever see it.

Gloopan Kuratz · **Posted:** Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:54 am

The sad part is that Indiana looks closer than Purdue

Brick · **Posted:** Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:55 am

Gloopan Kuratz wrote:

The sad part is that Indiana looks closer than Purdue

This can't be a real thought.

Hawkeye Vince · **Posted:** Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:59 am

My big question is will the Big Ten pay the buyouts to all these little schools that will get dumped by the new 9 game schedule? For example, in 2011, Iowa has Iowa State, Tennessee Tech, Pitt and Louisiana Monroe on the non conference schedule. Say you have to dump ULM to accomodate the new schedule, does Iowa have to pay them the 300K or whatever to make them go away or will the big ten give the school that money to do it?

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 1:59 pm

Big Ten will announce 2011 football alignment tonight at 6pm on the Big Ten Network.

I predict -

Black: Penn St., Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Indiana, Ohio St.
Blue: Illinois, Northwestern, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Purdue

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:01 pm

ESPN.COM wrote:

The Big Ten will announce its much-anticipated, two six-team divisional setup for the 2011-12 season later Wednesday, with traditional football powers Ohio State and Michigan in opposing divisions and new member Nebraska aligned with the Wolverines.

Multiple sources told ESPN.com that the two divisions in the Big Ten will look like:

• Michigan, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan State, Northwestern and Minnesota.

• Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana and Illinois.

The Big Ten issued a press release saying it would announce its divisional alignment at 7 p.m. ET Wednesday. According to sources, the divisions were decided upon Monday.

According to multiple sources, the Big Ten wanted to preserve a number of traditional rivalries such as Michigan-Michigan State, Iowa-Minnesota, Purdue-Indiana and Indiana-Illinois.

The Big Ten is also expected to announce a consistent crossover game in football similar to Ohio State-Michigan that will be played each year. Expect to see longtime rivals Wisconsin and Minnesota playing every season.

In men's basketball, according to sources, the Big Ten could play a 16-game conference schedule by taking a model similar to those used by the Big 12 and Southeastern conferences. In those leagues, teams play each division opponent twice and then single games -- three at home and three on the road -- against teams in the opposing division.

However, the Big Ten has not had complaints with its current 18-game conference schedule and could stick with that format and have one 12-team division in basketball.

The Big 12 will finish such a format this season after it loses Nebraska -- the Cornhuskers are joining the Big Ten as its 12th member -- and possibly Colorado, if the Buffaloes can leave the Big 12 for the Pac-10 while paying its exit fee.

If the Big 12 goes to a 10-team conference then it will play a true round-robin schedule of 18 games in 2011-12. The new Pac-12, with the additions of Colorado and Utah, also will likely use this new format of 16 games after playing a true-round robin of 18 games as a 10-team league. The Big Ten played an 18-game conference season and will finish with that unbalanced schedule this season.

I didn't realize Illinois-Indiana was a traditional football rivalry?

Gloopan Kuratz · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:03 pm

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:

Multiple sources told ESPN.com that the two divisions in the Big Ten will look like:

• Michigan, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan State, Northwestern and Minnesota.

• Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana and Illinois.

Swap Northwestern and Wisconsin

My_name_1s_MUD · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:12 pm

This was posted on our Rivals site:

The divisions have been agreed upon and will be announced later today or tomorrow. It breaks down as follows:

Michigan
Michigan State
Nebraska
Iowa
Minnesota
Northwestern

Ohio State
Penn State
Wisconsin
Purdue
Indiana
Illinois

The game between Michigan and Ohio State will remain intact despite the fact each team now plays in a different division of the conference. This game falls under the "protected rivalry" category, and will be contested on the final Saturday of the regular season. Potentially, Michigan and Ohio State could play in back to back weeks if both teams win their respective divisions.

2 other "protected rivalry" games are known at this time:

Iowa vs. Wisconsin
Northwestern vs. Illinois

That leaves 6 teams without a slam dunk rivalry, so to speak. The speculation is it will end up as follows:

Nebraska vs. Penn State
Michigan State vs. Purdue
Minnesota vs. Indiana

sjboyd0137 · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:16 pm

My_name_1s_MUD wrote:

Nebraska vs. Penn State = The New Guy Game
Michigan State vs. Purdue = The Remember the 90's Game
Minnesota vs. Indiana = The Basketball starts soon game

spanky · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:19 pm

My_name_1s_MUD wrote:

Nebraska vs. Penn State
Michigan State vs. Purdue
Minnesota vs. Indiana

Why wouldn't it be Purdue/Indiana?

That leaves MSU/Minnesota, which seems just as awkward/"un-natural" as the other remaining match-ups that are listed.

RFDC · **Joined:** Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm **Posts:** 57230

spanky wrote:

Why wouldn't it be Purdue/Indiana?

Because they are in the same division.

spanky · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:28 pm

RFDC wrote:

spanky wrote:

Why wouldn't it be Purdue/Indiana?

Because they are in the same division.

Oh, ok, well there's that....... :oops:

My_name_1s_MUD · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:31 pm

spanky wrote:

My_name_1s_MUD wrote:

Nebraska vs. Penn State
Michigan State vs. Purdue
Minnesota vs. Indiana

Why wouldn't it be Purdue/Indiana?

That leaves MSU/Minnesota, which seems just as awkward/"un-natural" as the other remaining match-ups that are listed.

That was what some other dude posted on the Rivals site... I wouldn't necessarily "protect" any other rivalries. In fact, I like the NU-Illini rivalry, but if I wasn't a NU fan, I could understand that would be "stretching" the term rivalry

Brick · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 4:02 pm

Hopefully those divisions are football only. That would be incredibly imbalanced in basketball. Michigan State would basically be handed the division #1 seed every year.

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 4:05 pm

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Hopefully those divisions are football only. That would be incredibly imbalanced in basketball. Michigan State would basically be handed the division #1 seed every year.

Football only.

Brick · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 4:08 pm

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Hopefully those divisions are football only. That would be incredibly imbalanced in basketball. Michigan State would basically be handed the division #1 seed every year.

Football only.

Some rumors are stating that they may go back to a 16 game conference basketball season with divisions where each division team would play twice and you'd play the opposite division once.

I don't think it will though. I doubt Michigan State would be happy with the RPI when they get to play Illinois, Purdue, Indiana, Ohio State, and Wisconsin a total of one time each season.

Bucky Chris · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 4:08 pm

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Hopefully those divisions are football only. That would be incredibly imbalanced in basketball. Michigan State would basically be handed the division #1 seed every year.

Football only.

Yea, it's not decided yet:

From ESPN:

In men's basketball, according to sources, the Big Ten could play a 16-game conference schedule by taking a model similar to those used by the Big 12 and Southeastern conferences. In those leagues, teams play each division opponent twice and then single games -- three at home and three on the road -- against teams in the opposing division.

However, the Big Ten has not had complaints with its current 18-game conference schedule and could stick with that format and have one 12-team division in basketball.

NSJ · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 4:11 pm

My_name_1s_MUD wrote:

In fact, I like the NU-Illini rivalry, but if I wasn't a NU fan, I could understand that would be "stretching" the term rivalry

Agreed. Not much of a rivalry. :wink:

My_name_1s_MUD · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 4:51 pm

Here's a good nugget from Lindsey Wilhite's twitter
"Proposed divisions have the EXACT same winning percentage since 1993"

you ask why 1993? It's the year Penn State joined the Big 10.

Irish Boy · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 6:27 pm

The new divisions blow in all sorts of ways. Completely short-sighted. Rare slip up by Delany.

Hawkeye Vince · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 8:37 pm

I'm trying to figure out Iowa/Purdue interdivisional rivalry - it makes little sense to me with Wisconsin out there.

My_name_1s_MUD · **Posted:** Wed Sep 01, 2010 10:43 pm

I officially miss the good ole days. I'm old.

Brick · **Posted:** Thu Sep 02, 2010 8:12 am

Hawkeye Vince wrote:

I'm trying to figure out Iowa/Purdue interdivisional rivalry - it makes little sense to me with Wisconsin out there.

Maybe Delany reads this board and knows just how much we hate each other.

The divisions do seem a little strange. I'm just glad that the Purdue/Indiana rivalry won't be "ruined" by possibly meeting twice in a season like a certain other rivalry has been "ruined".

My_name_1s_MUD · **Posted:** Thu Sep 02, 2010 8:43 am

I'm having a hard time seeing many flaws with the new Divisions. All in all, I kinda think they did the best they could. If I'm a Wisconsin fan, I might be a little disappointed, but other than that, I think it looks pretty good.

Big Ten Divisions

Who is online