B1G Looking to Change CCG Criteria?

[Redux]

37 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

We'd likely get Northwestern or Illinois in ours and Iowa in their place. Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota would not be broken up imo.

 

Both sets of pods still make up a division, they aren't really being broken up.  But I think the Big Ten would be more interested in keeping Nebraska vs Iowa.

[Enhance]

18 hours ago, Dewiz said:

If they get rid of the divisions (which  would be stupid) than what are they going to do with the rivalry games when planing everyone’s schedules? 

 

You have some teams that have rivals with 1 team, others with 2 teams and some teams with 3 rivals. 

 

So with no divisions how do you decided what rival games get to be played every year, which ones you kick to the curb or do you keep every rival game played every year which I would think would screw up a “balanced” schedule within the whole conference

I think the answer to this is, unfortunately, pretty easy - the conference would prioritize the rivalries they feel matter and sacrifice the others. Case in point - the Big 12 prioritized the Texas/OU rivalry vs. the NU/OU one.

[Red Five]

The problem with 14 (and even 12) team conferences is that if you are not playing a round robin schedule, then there are going to be unbalanced schedules.  The Big 12 (and the old Pac 10) had it perfect with a round robin to determine the best team, but the Big 12 got $ hungry (and missed a playoff) so they decided to add a CCG when it is not needed.

 

I have always thought that if you are doing divisions, you should only count your inter-division record.  Why should team Nebraska be penalized for playing #1, #2, and #4 in the East when Iowa plays #3, #5, and #6?

 

[Redux]

My favorite will always be the old Big 12 model.  Your 3 cross foes alternate every 2 years after a home and home.  Yeah we didn't play OU anymore, but the balance was solid.

 

I would hate to get rid of conference title games.  Unless you have 10 teams and play the other 9, they are a necessity.  Unless we add the divisional championship meetups as round 1 of a larger playoff field, which I have suggested, title games matter.

[GSG]

3 minutes ago, Redux said:

My favorite will always be the old Big 12 model.  Your 3 cross foes alternate every 2 years after a home and home.  Yeah we didn't play OU anymore, but the balance was solid.

 

 

 

This x100000

[TGHusker]

20 hours ago, Moiraine said:

Can we get rid of Rutgers and Maryland and then move MSU to the west?

AGREE,  besides TV sets, R & M added nothing to the conference except for Maryland's upset of Texas this year.

 

Perhaps is in a few years, OU will end up in the West Division wt Nebraska after the Big 12 folds.  We get our real rival game and the West Div

gets added respectability. 

[brophog]

It's a band-aid solution to a problem that doesn't even exist.

 

You can't ignore divisions in a 14 team conference. It's too big with divisions, but nobody is going to come to their senses on that, so patchwork divisions it is.

 

The "problem" with not getting into the CFP is your second best team got annihilated by your best team whom lost by 29 to a 6-6 team. The problem the year before was your best team got upset by 31. 

 

This "weak division" isn't a problem for Clemson. They went into their title game basically in the CFP. They also didn't lose by 30 to teams they were heavily favored against.

[junior4949]

1 hour ago, Enhance said:

Outlined this above (probably while you were typing), but you're forgetting this year - NW wouldn't have played in the 2018 CCG game if it was the two best teams. So, a minimum of 3/7 (~43%) of the match ups being different is fairly significant if you think about it.

 

Just to reiterate, I'm not pining for the 'two best teams' system. I'm only pointing out possible discrepancies based on what happened vs. what may have happened.

 

Two best teams, two best records; there is a difference.  Northwestern only had one conference loss heading into the title game which was to Michigan.  They beat the same Purdue team that blasted Ohio State.  Michigan is the same team that got drilled by Ohio State one week before the conference title game.  I didn't forget about 2018.  Northwestern had the same conference record as Michigan.  Northwestern hadn't played Ohio State.  I'm not sure why anyone would want to watch a rematch of Ohio State and Michigan when they just played the week before.  This is why I think it would be dumb to change things from how they currently are.

[ColoradoHusk]

Maybe Jim Delaney can create a Big Ten Championship committee to determine who the "best 2 teams" are in the conference, and they can play each other in Indianapolis.

[Crusader Husker]

I don't think that the B1G is truly about NC's.  They act as if $, prestige, and "doing things the right way" are the most important things.  They don't want to "roll in the mud with they pigs" (SEC).  If the did worry about NC's in FB they would balance the cross overs and go back to 8 game schedules.  The old division also was much better.  To do nothing means it is not important.  We have not had our conference champ in for 3 years.

[Saunders]

 

 

Sign me up.

[tmfr15]

The conference championship game acts as a national eliminator and yet teams are selected for the conference title game based on league record only. It's sad when Northwestern 8-4 has the best conference record and would have even got to Indy based on an overall of 8-4, but nothing chaps my rear more than seeing conference title game representation determined by a head-to-head win when overall decides the outcome. For instance, if Northwestern had one conference loss this year, but three out of conference losses and played Wisconsin, which had one conference loss and was perfect out of conference, and then took the lead in the division with four overall losses compared to two overall losses for the Wisconsin team.

[Landlord]

1 hour ago, junior4949 said:

 

Two best teams, two best records; there is a difference.  Northwestern only had one conference loss heading into the title game which was to Michigan.  They beat the same Purdue team that blasted Ohio State.  Michigan is the same team that got drilled by Ohio State one week before the conference title game.  I didn't forget about 2018.  Northwestern had the same conference record as Michigan.  Northwestern hadn't played Ohio State.  I'm not sure why anyone would want to watch a rematch of Ohio State and Michigan when they just played the week before.  This is why I think it would be dumb to change things from how they currently are.

 

 

You're all over the place with your argument.

 

Yes, Northwestern had the same conference record as Michigan. But, as you say, Northwestern hadn't played Ohio State. They also hadn't played Penn State. So they had the same conference record but they got it playing a schedule that didn't involve the two other best teams in the conference, so...

 

Regardless, why anyone would WANT a rematch of OSU/Michigan is irrelevant if OSU/Michigan were the two best teams.

[jager]

The BIG could force the CFP committee's hand if they pulled out of it. The criteria for getting in should be the same for everyone. Equal number of conference/P5 games and conference champs get to go. That would make the CCGs the first round like most people agree. It would also force ND to join a conference.

[ColoradoHusk]

34 minutes ago, Crusader Husker said:

I don't think that the B1G is truly about NC's.  They act as if $, prestige, and "doing things the right way" are the most important things.  They don't want to "roll in the mud with the pigs" (SEC).  If the did worry about NC's in FB they would balance the cross overs and go back to 8 game schedules.  The old division also was much better.  To do nothing means it is not important.  We have not had our conference champ in for 3 years.

The Big Ten has always been about themselves rather than the rest of the college football landscape.  Before Nebraska joined the Big Ten, the conference valued conference championships and the Rose Bowl over National Championships.  Like you point out, they think the conference is "better" than the other conferences in terms of $, prestige, academics, and the overall student-athlete experience.  They make decisions with an internal point of view, rather than looking how their decisions impacts things with the rest of the NCAA.