What I think our Divisions should look like

huskerinacaveman

huskerinacaveman

Well-known member
With the addition of Rutgers and Maryland next year the divisions are obviously going to change.

But I don't think we have to remain standard in their formations and how they play out.

I believe that the B1G looking to take the conference to another level, and here is how I'd like to see it play out.

2 Divisions (East/West) Legends and Leaders, I don't really care anymore.

4 sub divisions of three teams a piece

2 float teams (last years division winners)

West 1

Wisconsin

Iowa

Minnesota

West 2

Northwestern

Michigan State

Illinois

Nebraska Floats (assuming 2012 division winners)

East 1

Michigan

Rutgers

Purdue

East 2

Maryland

Penn State

Indiana

Ohio State Floats (already determined 2012 division winners)

The way I would like to see it. Is the Division winners should play each other week 1 a "true" neutral site, and then would play all teams who finished 3-10 during the last season.

Each conference schedule should be created just prior to the season starts. Non-con remains the same.

The bottom feeders will have the easiest schedules to play to promote the most teams possible making them bowl eligible.

Each team play the two teams in their sub division first, two in each of the other sub divisions totaling 8 conference games.

The home and away games would be determined only by where you played that team last.

There are obviously lots of other issues with doing it this way, but its a thought

 
huskerinacaveman said:
With the addition of Rutgers and Maryland next year the divisions are obviously going to change.

But I don't think we have to remain standard in their formations and how they play out.

I believe that the B1G looking to take the conference to another level, and here is how I'd like to see it play out.

2 Divisions (East/West) Legends and Leaders, I don't really care anymore.

4 sub divisions of three teams a piece

2 float teams (last years division winners)

West 1

Wisconsin

Iowa

Minnesota

West 2

Northwestern

Michigan State

Illinois

Nebraska Floats (assuming 2012 division winners)

East 1

Michigan

Rutgers

Purdue

East 2

Maryland

Penn State

Indiana

Ohio State Floats (already determined 2012 division winners)

The way I would like to see it. Is the Division winners should play each other week 1 a "true" neutral site, and then would play all teams who finished 3-10 during the last season.

Each conference schedule should be created just prior to the season starts. Non-con remains the same.

The bottom feeders will have the easiest schedules to play to promote the most teams possible making them bowl eligible.

Each team play the two teams in their sub division first, two in each of the other sub divisions totaling 8 conference games.

The home and away games would be determined only by where you played that team last.

There are obviously lots of other issues with doing it this way, but its a thought
Click to expand...
I like the notion of the two division winners squaring off. But I think the bolded part would cause all sorts of logistics problems. Probably insurmountable logistics problems.

 
NUance said:
huskerinacaveman said:
With the addition of Rutgers and Maryland next year the divisions are obviously going to change.

But I don't think we have to remain standard in their formations and how they play out.

I believe that the B1G looking to take the conference to another level, and here is how I'd like to see it play out.

2 Divisions (East/West) Legends and Leaders, I don't really care anymore.

4 sub divisions of three teams a piece

2 float teams (last years division winners)

West 1

Wisconsin

Iowa

Minnesota

West 2

Northwestern

Michigan State

Illinois

Nebraska Floats (assuming 2012 division winners)

East 1

Michigan

Rutgers

Purdue

East 2

Maryland

Penn State

Indiana

Ohio State Floats (already determined 2012 division winners)

The way I would like to see it. Is the Division winners should play each other week 1 a "true" neutral site, and then would play all teams who finished 3-10 during the last season.

Each conference schedule should be created just prior to the season starts. Non-con remains the same.

The bottom feeders will have the easiest schedules to play to promote the most teams possible making them bowl eligible.

Each team play the two teams in their sub division first, two in each of the other sub divisions totaling 8 conference games.

The home and away games would be determined only by where you played that team last.

There are obviously lots of other issues with doing it this way, but its a thought
Click to expand...
I like the notion of the two division winners squaring off. But I think the bolded part would cause all sorts of logistics problems. Probably insurmountable logistics problems.
Click to expand...
Just slide Wisconsin over to the Legends division. Add Maryland and Rutgers to Leaders. Stop the cross rivalry game with PSU. Done.

 
here is my thoughts on it.

BEST DIVISION: 1) tosu

2)Nebraska

3) Michigan

4) MSU

5) Penn St. ( Will be moved to other side once Scholarships start taking affect and they nose dive.)

6)Wisconsin

7) Iowa

Everyone gets a chance for a Trophy Division: Northwestern

Purdue

Rutgers

Indiana

Maryland

Minnasota

Illinois.

There Now it is fair/lol. This years Big Ten Championship I announce TOSU against a 6-6 powerhouse Indiana.

 
West

Nebraska

Wisconsin

Iowa

Minnesota

Northwestern

Illinois

Sparty

East

Ohio State

Penn State

Maryland

Rutgers

Indiana

Turdue

skunkweasels

Delaney has to end this sick fascination of "The Game" being the B1G champ game. It should set up who gets to go to Indy.

 
I can't believe it. Now rescheduled beginning in 2014 season. NU vs.Rutgers or NU vs.Terps or both. My guess erased at least one non-conf cremepuffs.

 
WoodyHayes1951 said:
West

Nebraska

Wisconsin

Iowa

Minnesota

Northwestern

Illinois

Sparty

East

Ohio State

Penn State

Maryland

Rutgers

Indiana

Turdue

skunkweasels

Delaney has to end this sick fascination of "The Game" being the B1G champ game. It should set up who gets to go to Indy.
Click to expand...
Makes the most sense.

Nebraska - Wisconsin should absolutely be an annual game.

edit: my favorite part is where you called them "east" and "west".

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If Wisconsin doesn't play Nebraska, Iowa and Minnesota every year then there is something seriously wrong.

It's a lot easier for me because there is only one game I really care about(although the Illinois game has a special place in my heart)

 
LEADERS DIVISION

Nebraska

FOLLOWERS DIVISION

Michigan

Rutgers

Purdue

Maryland

Penn State

Indiana

Ohio State

Wisconsin

Iowa

Minnesota

Northwestern

Michigan State

Illinois

(Failing that…………Wisky/Huskers should be # 1 priority)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can you explain the floating concept a little bit more? Where would Nebraska and Ohio State go if they didnt win their division?

 
"East"

Maryland

Rutgers

Penn St

Ohio St

Indiana

Purdue

Michigan St

"West"

Northwestern

Illinois

Iowa

Wisconsin

Minnesota

Michigan

Nebraska

Keep the protected game. Plus 2 additional non-divisional games. Go get Louisville and UConn while we are at it.

 
If you are gonna trade two teams in the Leaders division for the one team in the Legends division, it might as well be a territorial as possible. Meaning, you swap Illinois and Wisconsin for Michigan, and add Maryland and Rutgers to the Leaders division.

Big East looks grim right now, because if the ACC really grabs UConn, Boise St. San Diego St. and BYU are already talking to the MWC about coming back to that conference. So that leaves Louisville, Cincinnati, South Florida, Temple, Central Florida, SMU, and Houston.

Anyway, the ACC will pick a team out of the Big East, either UConn, Louisville, Cincinnati or South Florida (though I think South Florida is a long shot).

If you are gonna pick two teams out of the Big East, you can pick two decent teams, like Louisville and Cincinnati. Your also adding another rivalry (Keg of Nails) between Louisville and Cincinnati.

 
Fuzzy said:
If you are gonna trade two teams in the Leaders division for the one team in the Legends division, it might as well be a territorial as possible. Meaning, you swap Illinois and Wisconsin for Michigan, and add Maryland and Rutgers to the Leaders division.

Big East looks grim right now, because if the ACC really grabs UConn, Boise St. San Diego St. and BYU are already talking to the MWC about coming back to that conference. So that leaves Louisville, Cincinnati, South Florida, Temple, Central Florida, SMU, and Houston.

Anyway, the ACC will pick a team out of the Big East, either UConn, Louisville, Cincinnati or South Florida (though I think South Florida is a long shot).

If you are gonna pick two teams out of the Big East, you can pick two decent teams, like Louisville and Cincinnati. Your also adding another rivalry (Keg of Nails) between Louisville and Cincinnati.
Click to expand...

This is the scenario that I think "should happen".... It keeps Mich-OSU in tact, adds Neb-Wiscy... and if we keep the same concept of playing the "annual" game vs the opposite side, it would keep the Mich-Sparty in-state battle alive...along with Neb-PSU... This would make the most sense (without putting a lot of thought)..... but if it truly makes the most sense, then there is ZERO CHANCE that it happens.

 
Yes. East/West is the way to go now here.

East:

Ohio State

Michigan

Penn State

Purdue

Indiana

Rutgers

Maryland

West:

Nebraska

Wisconsin

Michigan State

Iowa

Northwestern

Illinois

Minnesota

 
What are the chances they change the names of the divisions?

I know a lot of people despise the names. I don't think they're terrible, but would they consider a change?

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