Big Ten decision on divisions expected by August

N

Nexus

All-American
Note the very last paragraph.

It's still unclear how a 12-team Big Ten would be divided, but at least we have a better feel for the time frame.
ESPN.com reports that Big Ten athletic directors received a memo this week from commissioner Jim Delany outlining its priorities and process for determining divisions. A decision is expected by late August.

Delany said after introducing Nebraska on June 11 that the league's top priority will be "competitive fairness." Second is maintaining rivalries. Third is geography. Based on that, this proposal from SI.com's Stewart Mandel makes a ton of sense. It uses recent conference records to balance the big shots and weaklings, avoids putting Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State in the same division (by shifting Penn State to the West Division) and preserves most key rivalries.

Joining Penn State in the West would be Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Nebraska. This proposal would split the Illini away from Northwestern, which would be in the East along with Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Indiana and Purdue.

Big Ten associate commissioner Mark Rudner will spearhead the project and present data to the ADs when they gather in Chicago for the Big Ten's media days Aug. 2-3, according to ESPN.com. A resolution is expected by September.

League ADs also will continue to explore adding a conference game to its current eight-game league schedule.

Meanwhile, sources indirectly involved in the expansion talks tell the Tribune that they expect the Big Ten to remain at 12 schools. League presidents, they say, have little or no appetite to expand to 14 or 16.

LINK
Click to expand...
 
I say just split it east/west, sure the divisions will be unbalanced but at least traveling will be fair for everyone.

 
I'm less concerned about divisions than I am about scheduling. I truly felt more estranged from the southern B12 schools...more so as time went by. It was like they were a different conference almost. I'd like to see a schedule rotation that allows us to play every team not less than once in two years, however it would work out. I just believe we need to see our conference mates on the field as frequently as possible. PLEASE! no 2 year layoffs!!!!

 
I agree with Bleeding Husker Red. Two year lapses are horrible. And I will take it a step farther. Conference divisions are horrible. It would be nice if we could get to a 9 game conference schedule with three non cons. It would be nice if as many rivalries are preserved as possible, and, lastly, it would be nice if the top two teams in the league met to determine the championship...not the winner of a weaker division vs. the winner of the stronger one. I suggested this in another thread, but I think it would be great to pair up teams based on rivalries and lock those in as guaranteed games to be played every year...then eight others on a rotating basis with no more than one year of lapse time in any conference series.

 
Bleeding Husker Red said:
I'm less concerned about divisions than I am about scheduling. I truly felt more estranged from the southern B12 schools...more so as time went by. It was like they were a different conference almost. I'd like to see a schedule rotation that allows us to play every team not less than once in two years, however it would work out. I just believe we need to see our conference mates on the field as frequently as possible. PLEASE! no 2 year layoffs!!!!
Click to expand...
Barry Alvarez is in favor of playing 9 conference games instead of the typical 8. T.O. said he'd be in favor of that also IF each team could get 7 home games out of it.

 
tmfr15 said:
I agree with Bleeding Husker Red. Two year lapses are horrible. And I will take it a step farther. Conference divisions are horrible. It would be nice if we could get to a 9 game conference schedule with three non cons. It would be nice if as many rivalries are preserved as possible, and, lastly, it would be nice if the top two teams in the league met to determine the championship...not the winner of a weaker division vs. the winner of the stronger one. I suggested this in another thread, but I think it would be great to pair up teams based on rivalries and lock those in as guaranteed games to be played every year...then eight others on a rotating basis with no more than one year of lapse time in any conference series.
Click to expand...
Except they would need a waiver: NCAA regulations only permit conferences with at least 12 members organized into two divisions to hold football championship games

 
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
Makes perfect sense that the eastern-most team is in the West division :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I don't think they will call them east or west. I think they will come up with colored divisions like red/blue, red/black(this would be sweet ;) ), or some other names like blood/gore, honor/hate, mish/mash, left/right, dem/rep, donkey/elephant, honor/dignity, etc.

 
Here's a revolutionary idea....nothing has been decided yet and all...so, apply for a waiver. What's the worst that could happen...the NCAA says no and we are right back in the division talk. Of course that won't happen cause divisions are almost guaranteed and it has nothing to do with what the NCAA might or might not say about a 12 team, one division conference having a title game.

 
C N Red said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
Makes perfect sense that the eastern-most team is in the West division :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I don't think they will call them east or west. I think they will come up with colored divisions like red/blue, red/black(this would be sweet ;) ), or some other names like blood/gore, honor/hate, mish/mash, left/right, dem/rep, donkey/elephant, honor/dignity, etc.
Click to expand...
split the teams into divisions east-west...have the divisions mean nothing to the scheduling of the games...and then have the best two teams conference records in the title game... :corndance

 
I would still like the most meaningful title game. The two teams most deserving of a BCS bowl game should be playing. I don't want to see 96 texas nebraska. I like the idea of scheduling teams around like that so you play a team at least every other year. It would keep the end of season games in proper perspective. Last year was ridiculous knowing we were going to the title game even if we lost to Colorado.

 
General Blackshirt said:
Sparker said:
Ringer02 said:
I say just split it east/west, sure the divisions will be unbalanced but at least traveling will be fair for everyone.
Click to expand...
North/South worked out great in B12... :sarcasm
Click to expand...
Oh yeah? It was just horrible, huh? North dominated beginning, South dominated end. What's wrong with that?
Click to expand...
Let's look at the Big 12 Champions:

Big 12 Championship Game

Season Big 12

Champion North Division

Representative South Division

Representative

1996 Texas

1997 Nebraska

1998 Texas A&M

1999 Nebraska

2000 Oklahoma

2001 Colorado

2002 Oklahoma

2003 Kansas State

2004 Oklahoma

2005 Texas

2006 Oklahoma

2007 Oklahoma

2008 Oklahoma

2009 Texas

You will note that the first ever champion was from the South! You should also note that never has the North won back to back Big 12 Championships. It should also be pointed out that the North has won 4 Big 12 Championships while the South has won 10. Exactly when did the North ever "dominate" since the Big 12 was formed? Less than 30% of the time has the North won the Big 12. I don't know about anyone else, but the only domination I see here is clearly Southern domination!

 
Neb, Iowa, Wiscy, NW, Minn, and Ill is a totally legit division IMO. I'd like to see us play PSU but don't think it's fair for PSU to have to be in the western division.

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