B1G Reverting to Eight Conference Games per Year?

NW should be in our pod. We would sell out their stadium every year for them moving forward. 
 

I kinda miss PSU being our crossover. Felt it was really good for us and they can be a team we could beat w a name. Iowa and Wisc are natural so that’s okay. Minn is really boring to me. Neither here or there on them. 
After 10yrs in the B1G we can start to realize how bad they screwed us in sched, yet…if we were competent or could compete coulda been awesome for us. Not their fault we sucked a$$ 

dear lord in heaven, please allow us to win 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am I said:
NW should be in our pod. We would sell out their stadium every year for them moving forward. 
 

I kinda miss PSU being our crossover. Felt it was really good for us and they can be a team we could beat w a name. Iowa and Wisc are natural so that’s okay. Minn is really boring to me. Neither here or there on them. 
After 10yrs in the B1G we can start to realize how bad they screwed us in sched, yet…if we were competent or could compete coulda been awesome for us. Not their fault we sucked a$$ 

dear lord in heaven, please allow us to win 
Click to expand...


Well in 2012 Ohio State was ineligible and all Nebraska had to do was beat an 8-5 Wisconsin team we'd previously beaten to get a Rose Bowl invite and Top Ten ranking. 

In 2016, Mike Riley's Husker's were undefeated at home in Big 10 play, almost beat Wisconsin at Camp Randall, and was still nationally relevant in Week 13. 

Indiana, Purdue, Minnesota, and Northwestern have all had their moments in the same conference, and Iowa has somehow emerged as a powerhouse. Are we aspiring to be them, now?

Looking at the Big 12, I'm not seeing enough gimmes to think these Nebraska teams would be thriving had they stayed. 

It's not the conference or a conspiracy.  Nebraska is going to have to step up and play big boy football with any given schedule. 

 


This feels like going backwards and moving away from a common freaking sense national championship. 

A conference should be 2 divisions of 8 you play seven games against everyone in your division. If you win your division, you play in the conference championship from the winner of the other division. If you win the conference championship, you play for the regional title (consisting of 2 conferences.) If you win the regional title you go on to the National championship semi-final, if you win the semi final, you play for the national title.  If my math is right, this would allow for 

16 8 team divisions which comes out to 128 teams total. There are currently 130 Div. 1 football teams. Teams that fail to win their division can schedule 5 extra games against other teams that do not win their division or lose before the semi-final game. Then you have a true national champion in 11 games. Each team can play 11 games annually. 

But god forbid anything is ever done logically. 

 
Born N Bled Red said:
This feels like going backwards and moving away from a common freaking sense national championship. 

A conference should be 2 divisions of 8 you play seven games against everyone in your division. If you win your division, you play in the conference championship from the winner of the other division. If you win the conference championship, you play for the regional title (consisting of 2 conferences.) If you win the regional title you go on to the National championship semi-final, if you win the semi final, you play for the national title.  If my math is right, this would allow for 

16 8 team divisions which comes out to 128 teams total. There are currently 130 Div. 1 football teams. Teams that fail to win their division can schedule 5 extra games against other teams that do not win their division or lose before the semi-final game. Then you have a true national champion in 11 games. Each team can play 11 games annually. 

But god forbid anything is ever done logically. 
Click to expand...
I agree.  It doesn't make sense.

 
JJ Husker said:
The goal isn’t to end up, in any logical fashion, with the best team remaining as champion. The goal is one thing, $$$$. It’s the only explanation for anything they’ve been doing anymore.
Click to expand...
Exactly... but I do think the best team has won more often than not the last 10 years.

 
Reading between the lines it sounds like most ADs are in favor of a no division B1G (top 2 teams would meet in Champ game), 3 or 4 protected rivalries per team, and more rotation between the non-rivalry teams (so in 4 years you would get a home and home with every B1G team).

Changes would occur in conjunction with the new expanded CFP.

And 8 games is not happening.  It will continue to be 9.


 
I don't like it.  I prefer divisions.  9 games is a must IMO.  This is how last season ended (regular).  There is no room for making the champ game for the west teams.  I get why they want to change it up, but the truth is ugly.  We are way at the bottom.  A good year going 6-3 gets you nothing.  With divisions, it could put you in a championship game tho.  If you don't go 7-2 you really don't have much hope.

Michigan    8-1    11-1
Ohio St.      8-1    10-2
Mich St.     7-2    10-2
Iowa           7-2    10-2
Purdu         6-3    8-4
Minnesot    6-3    8-4
Wisconsi     6-3    8-4
Penn St.      4-5    7-5
Illinois         4-5    5-7
Maryland    3-6    6-6
Rutgers        2-7    5-7
Nebraska    1-8    3-9
Nwestern    1-8    3-9
Indiana        0-9    2-10

 
admo said:
I don't like it.  I prefer divisions.  9 games is a must IMO.  This is how last season ended (regular).  There is no room for making the champ game for the west teams.  I get why they want to change it up, but the truth is ugly.  We are way at the bottom.  A good year going 6-3 gets you nothing.  With divisions, it could put you in a championship game tho.  If you don't go 7-2 you really don't have much hope.
Click to expand...


Counter point:  Win more games.  Why should going 6-3 be rewarded when there are other teams that 8-1 or 7-2?

 
Red Five said:
Counter point:  Win more games.  Why should going 6-3 be rewarded when there are other teams that 8-1 or 7-2?
Click to expand...
Agreed, they really shouldn't if having the third best record in the league (or worse).  It just makes it exciting for that team and fan base though.

Counter point:  Michigan just beat Ohio State.  They have the same best records at 8-1.  They play again in the championship game.  Now they have to beat them twice to win the conference?  Brutal.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top