For how many years an 18-team league without divisions?

[Some guy]

B1G Premier Division and B1G pathetic Division. Best team in the Premier division is crowned champion and gets auto playoff birth. 2nd and 3rd place play for the second playoff spot. Best team in Pathetic gets to play in some sort of Rose bowl type game. Bottom two teams in premier get relegated to pathetic division next year. Top two teams in pathetic division get promoted to premier division next year. 2 Protected rivalry games for each team. Add in Notre Dame eventually.


Premier:

Michigan
Penn State
Washington
Ohio State
Oregon
(Notre Dame)
USC
Iowa
UCLA


Pathetic:

Minnesota
Wisconsin
Maryland
Rutgers
Purdue
Illinois
MSU
Nebraska
Indiana
Northwestern

Why would the teams in the premier want to set up a model like this? It guarantees 4 or 5 of those teams are 6-6 or 7-5 at best

It subsidizes the bottom teams financially without the benefit of beating them


If it went to a model like that there would be a full split

 

[TurfGopher]

Why would the teams in the premier want to set up a model like this? It guarantees 4 or 5 of those teams are 6-6 or 7-5 at best

It subsidizes the bottom teams financially without the benefit of beating them


If it went to a model like that there would be a full split

It give us lots of good TV match ups all season long. Not much different than the current B1G except promotion bit. East (premier) is stacked, West (pathetic) has no hope of playoff. Also provides even more parity per division. If top premier teams are guaranteed playoff spots their record doesn't matter as much.

 

[MplsGopher]

What makes "good" TV can sometimes be a bit fickle. Such is the nature of the casual fans who make up the bulk of the ratings for the high-ratings games. Yeah, I know, it sucks that basically these are the people driving the way it is working today. But TV is paying for it all, and TV makes money by selling advertising and the higher the ratings the more than can charge (not quite that simple, but a big part of it).

My point is: just because it's USC vs Penn State doesn't guarantee it will be a "good matchup" for TV. Because, to Some Guy's point: casual folks are a lot less likely to tune into 6-4 USC vs 7-3 Penn State as they are 9-2 USC vs 9-2 Penn State.

He correctly pegged it: the "value" that the smaller/lower programs bring to the overall system is providing losses to the bigger/higher programs in order to pump up (the appearance of) their records.

 

[btowngopher]

I don’t know, but I’m not watching games in an 18 team divisionless conference. Zero entertainment value to be playing for nothing.

 

[Ope3]

I don’t know, but I’m not watching games in an 18 team divisionless conference. Zero entertainment value to be playing for nothing.

Is it better or worse than from 1993 - 2010 that the Gophers were essentially "playing for nothing" in an 11 team conference where only 1 team was Champion? Co-champs were also possible, but only 1 got the Rose Bowl or automatic New Year's Bowl bid.

Before that it was 10 teams, with the Gophers rarely in contention by November after 1967.

 

[howeda7]

It seems logical to add two teams and go to four 5-team divisions. Add Stanford (or OSU/WSU) and Missouri (or ND).

West: USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, Stanford

Midwest: Nebraska, Mizzou, MN, IA, WI

South: IL, NW, Indiana, Purdue, Penn State

East: Michigan, Michigan State, OSU, Maryland, Rutgers

You play your division and one other division on a rotating schedule so everyone plays the same teams. Add a 10th conference game where you play the same place team from one of the other divisions you didn't play. This would serve as essentially semi-finals for the B1G title game except 2nd-5th place would also play. You'd still get semi-finals of say USC-Penn State and Iowa-Michigan with a USC-Michigan title game so I don't see the networks objecting.

For basketball/other sports, you play your division teams twice and everyone else once.

 

[btowngopher]

Is it better or worse than from 1993 - 2010 that the Gophers were essentially "playing for nothing" in an 11 team conference where only 1 team was Champion? Co-champs were also possible, but only 1 got the Rose Bowl or automatic New Year's Bowl bid.

Before that it was 10 teams, with the Gophers rarely in contention by November after 1967.

Its 7-8 worse. The sport would be much better if they didn’t allow conferences to have more than 10 or 12 teams.

 

[stocker08]

The entire argument against divisions (based on the relative weakness of the West teams) is destroyed when we’ll be adding 4 West coast teams that are all ranked in the top 25 this week. Shuffle NW and Illinois to the East and the West lineup stacks up nicely.

Nine team east/west divisions means eight division games and only one crossover. Would never happen. And you don't stick with divisions if you can't cycle through every team. We'll go without divisions until two more teams are added and it'll be broken into four "pods". The pods will cycle through each of the other three on a yearly basis. The two pods matched up for the year (since each team will play each of the other nine.....leading to a balanced schedule) will combined standings to determine champion that goes to the championship game.

It's simple and logical.

 

[Ope3]

Its 7-8 worse. The sport would be much better if they didn’t allow conferences to have more than 10 or 12 teams.

I don't disagree with the 10-12 team max statement. I loathe the SuperSized conferences. They aren't really "conferences" in my opinion, just a conglomerate association of teams.

Having said that, I am not sure if it is "worse". Yes, 7-8 more teams but double the opportunity to get into the Conference Championship game. It could be worse (perhaps likely), but have to see how it plays out.

Lots of seasons the Gophers have been done by November, which means Big 10 conference games with nothing to very little on the line. Still I have been engaged. I suspect some mitigation can be putting the Trophy-Rivalry games all or for the most part in the final weeks of the season.

 

[Ope3]

Nine team east/west divisions means eight division games and only one crossover. Would never happen. And you don't stick with divisions if you can't cycle through every team. We'll go without divisions until two more teams are added and it'll be broken into four "pods". The pods will cycle through each of the other three on a yearly basis. The two pods matched up for the year (since each team will play each of the other nine.....leading to a balanced schedule) will combined standings to determine champion that goes to the championship game.

It's simple and logical.

Simple and logical, but is that really a benefit? Some travel savings I suppose, but for football a once a week sport, that appears so far removed from a concern.

What school will ever agree to be in a "pod" with Ohio State other than Michigan or both?

The schedule the Big 10 came out with before Wash & Ore joined seems to bear they out.

The recent 5 year schedule that was released, teams play a few rivals every year, some others 3 times and the rest twice. That's simple enough for me. It's also as equitable of a system I can think of.

If there is no "pod" championship banner on the line, I do not see the point. The Conference also does not appear to care about the potential for 3 Unbeatens or ties without head-to-head matchups.

 

[stocker08]

Simple and logical, but is that really a benefit? Some travel savings I suppose, but for football a once a week sport, that appears so far removed from a concern.

What school will ever agree to be in a "pod" with Ohio State other than Michigan or both?

The schedule the Big 10 came out with before Wash & Ore joined seems to bear they out.

The recent 5 year schedule that was released, teams play a few rivals every year, some others 3 times and the rest twice. That's simple enough for me. It's also as equitable of a system I can think of.

If there is no "pod" championship banner on the line, I do not see the point. The Conference also does not appear to care about the potential for 3 Unbeatens or ties without head-to-head matchups.

A) There couldn't be more than two unbeatens under my proposed system.
B) Every year the pods would converge to create two, ten team divisions. Rotating the pod of five with the other three. With 20 teams.....I could see the Big Ten going to a 10 game conference schedule. That could protect an OSU/Michigan game even if they weren't in the same "pod".

 

[Ope3]

A) There couldn't be more than two unbeatens under my proposed system.
B) Every year the pods would converge to create two, ten team divisions. Rotating the pod of five with the other three. With 20 teams.....I could see the Big Ten going to a 10 game conference schedule. That could protect an OSU/Michigan game even if they weren't in the same "pod".

As for point A, the conference just doesn't seem to care about. If they get burned or if there's a close call, perhaps that would change.

As for B, I don't think there's 4 schools with a desire to be in the same pod with either Michigan or Ohio St.

 

[RememberMurray]

Is it better or worse than from 1993 - 2010 that the Gophers were essentially "playing for nothing" in an 11 team conference where only 1 team was Champion? Co-champs were also possible, but only 1 got the Rose Bowl or automatic New Year's Bowl bid.

Before that it was 10 teams, with the Gophers rarely in contention by November after 1967.

Neither better nor worse; it's the same. A return to the bad, old days.

Yuck.

 

[MplsGopher]

The Big Ten has declared 12 rivalry games as being required to be played every year. So those pairs of teams would need to be in the same divisions. Thus, it would almost certainly require at least the following as the (partial) divisional setup:

i) Michigan-Mich State-Ohio State Rutgers-Maryland
ii) NW-ILL-Purdue-IU Penn State
iii) Minn-Wisc-Iowa-Neb
iv) USC-UCLA Oregon-Wash

The hyphens indicate the rivalries. Penn State has none, but for practicality they would need to be in the ii) division. They would also demand to not be in the Ohio State division, so it works out.

Missouri will never voluntarily leave the SEC for the Big Ten. I doubt it.

On the other hand, Kansas is contiguous to Neb and is AAU. They don't bring much market that isn't already covered decently well by Neb, so maybe not a great choice.

Obviously the ideal would be Notre Dame, but they aren't ready yet.

Stanford is a fine choice for the iv), in this kind of setup.


IF staying at 9 conf games for a while, then yes I agree, this makes a lot of sense. As mentioned already by others, you play your division every year (all rivalries covered), and then play everyone in another division, rotating over three years, thus playing everyone in the conf every three years.


"No teams will choose to be with Ohio State and Michigan". Except, check this out: Mich State, Rutgers, and Maryland don't have a possible leg to stand on .... they already do play both of those every year, now! In fact, they also play Penn State every year now! So this would drop that as a yearly game. An improvement. They have no argument.

 

[Goldmember]

Is it better or worse than from 1993 - 2010 that the Gophers were essentially "playing for nothing" in an 11 team conference where only 1 team was Champion? Co-champs were also possible, but only 1 got the Rose Bowl or automatic New Year's Bowl bid.

Before that it was 10 teams, with the Gophers rarely in contention by November after 1967.

You can trace virtually all of the significant growth of college football to just a few factors. And divisions/ conference championship games is definitely one of them.

Are the pro sports leagues caving to the largest markets and eliminating divisions too (and salary caps, etc.), just like college football has been doing lately? Why not?

 

[Ope3]

You can trace virtually all of the significant growth of college football to just a few factors. And divisions/ conference championship games is definitely one of them.

Are the pro sports leagues caving to the largest markets and eliminating divisions too (and salary caps, etc.), just like college football has been doing lately? Why not?

There's only 32 NFL teams, it's a closed club, has central leadership, don't have to fund other sports, have a labor agreement with their workforce with a salary cap, a Draft as opposed to recruiting, set up for parity...

 

[Ope3]

"No teams will choose to be with Ohio State and Michigan". Except, check this out: Mich State, Rutgers, and Maryland don't have a possible leg to stand on .... they already do play both of those every year, now! In fact, they also play Penn State every year now! So this would drop that as a yearly game. An improvement. They have no argument.

The "they already do" statement will be past tense at the end of next month and will be 5 years in the rearview mirror when this schedule is done.

I don't forsee them going back. Minnesota used to play Michigan every year. Now they don't and have no desire reinstate it as an annual event.

Again, if there's no "pod" championship, there's nothing really convincing to me of a need or desire to implement it, short of viewership ratings/subscriptions & attendence tanking throughout the conference.

 

[stocker08]

As for point A, the conference just doesn't seem to care about. If they get burned or if there's a close call, perhaps that would change.

As for B, I don't think there's 4 schools with a desire to be in the same pod with either Michigan or Ohio St.

With the additions (and probably ND in the next two).....every division would likely have a helmet school. And under this scenario....the pods that didn't have OSU or Michigan would end up having at least one in the combined divisions two out of three years. So it really isn't that much worse. Fact is.....no matter what pod you ended up in....teams that aren't traditional powers are going to have a super tough time winning the division.

 

[Goldmember]

There's only 32 NFL teams, it's a closed club, has central leadership, don't have to fund other sports, have a labor agreement with their workforce with a salary cap, a Draft as opposed to recruiting, set up for parity...

So, in summary, those leagues have their shit together while college football, on the other hand, is just projectile shitting feces all over America for the last 3-4 years.