88Husker1

upon further review....(Its funny how logic works after a six pack!) I agree three divisions may not be the best. I guess the same thing could be done with two divisions with a nine game schedule. The real questions in my opinion are...1. Do we have to continue with a FOUR game non con schedule...I mean is it necessary $$$ for the program? And 2. From the Big Ten boards I have been lurking at alot of folks want to continue on with the schools they are "locked" in permanently with...Do we establish permanent cross-divisional rivals? That may be one way to keep some percieved "competetive balance" with the traditional powers. I loved Dirks overall idea as well. Can't wait to see how it all shakes out! Later

I wrote this in another thread the other day...it preserves virtually every traditional Big 10 rivalry of relevance. It is based on a NINE game schedule... Actually THREE divisions would be great. If you have three divisions with a permanent "rival" in the other two divisions you could play nine conference games and only miss out on two teams every year...the next year they would each be back on the schedule. This would allow the geography, traditional Big 10 rivalry games, "strength of schedule," and a conference championship game to all be viable. It could look something like this... East Div; Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State Mid Div; Indiana, Illini, Northwestern, Perdue West Div; Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin. Permanent "rival teams" NEBRASKA (Penn St, NWU) - IOWA (OSU, Illini) - MINN (Michigan, Perdue) - WISC (Mich St, Indiana) You play each team in your division and your two "rivals" every year. You play four of the other six teams and only miss two teams each year but back on next year. This allows the student-athletes, families and fans the opportunity to visit opposing campuses in the athletic career. Championship game is decided by Big Ten tiebreaker rules...best record, common opponents, BCS rank, etc... Yes Vern, the Middle Div is weak..but they still have to go thru the other two divisions to do anything that matters. This is just for scheduling. Any thoughts? Not sure if NCAA only allows for two divisions?? Late

Actually THREE divisions would be great. If you have three divisions with a permanent "rival" in the other two divisions you could play nine conference games and only miss out on two teams every year...the next year they would each be back on the schedule. This would allow the geography, traditional Big 10 rivalry games and a conference championship game to all be viable. It could look something like this... East Div; Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State Mid Div; Indiana, Illini, Northwestern, Perdue West Div; Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin. Permanent "rival teams" NEBRASKA (Penn St, NWU) - IOWA (OSU, Illini) - MINN (Michigan, Perdue) - WISC (Mich St, Indiana) You play each team in your division and your two "rivals" every year. You play four of the other six teams and only miss two teams each year but back on next year. This allows the student-athletes, families and fans the opportunity to visit opposing campuses in the athletic career. Championship game is decided by Big Ten tiebreaker rules...best record, common opponents, BCS rank, etc... Yes Vern, the Middle Div is weak..but they still have to go thru the other two divisions to do anything that matters. This is just for scheduling. Any thoughts? Not sure if NCAA only allows for two divisions?? Late