This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!
    Dismiss Notice

Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

Discussion in 'College Football' started by Mike80, Jul 26, 2007.


Which Teams Should the Big Ten Add? (please limit to four selections)

  1. Boston College

    29 vote(s)
  2. Cincinnati

    17 vote(s)
  3. Connecticut

    6 vote(s)
  4. Duke

    17 vote(s)
  5. Georgia Tech

    52 vote(s)
  6. Kansas

    44 vote(s)
  7. Maryland

    68 vote(s)
  8. Missouri

    91 vote(s)
  9. North Carolina

    29 vote(s)
  10. Notre Dame

    200 vote(s)
  11. Oklahoma

    76 vote(s)
  12. Pittsburgh

    42 vote(s)
  13. Rutgers

    38 vote(s)
  14. Syracuse

    17 vote(s)
  15. Texas

    122 vote(s)
  16. Vanderbilt

    13 vote(s)
  17. Virginia

    40 vote(s)
  18. Virginia Tech

    58 vote(s)
  19. Stay at 12 teams and don't expand

    25 vote(s)
  20. Add some other school(s) not listed

    16 vote(s)
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Buckeye513

    Buckeye513 Legend

    12, 16, 24, whatever. The most important thing here is preventing the Big Ten from coming up with more dumb division names.
  2. Muck

    Muck Enjoy Every Sandwich Staff Member

    Virginia Tech - If this were 2003 folks would be arguing for Kansas St for the same reasons (an ahistorical level of football success under a single coach). Virginia is much stronger academically, is a research monster, has an overall stronger athletic department and has a ceiling far beyond what VPI will ever achieve.

    Boston College? Seriously WTF is wrong with you people?!

    2/3 of the time you are going to have unbalanced divisions:

    Year 1:
    a: Ohio State, Penn St, Indiana, Purdue, TSUN, Sparty, Indiana, Northwestern
    b: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, North Carolina, Virginia, Duke, MD/GT

    Year 2:
    a: Ohio State, Penn St, Indiana, Purdue, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska
    b: TSUN, Sparty, Indiana, Northwestern, North Carolina, Virginia, Duke, MD/GT

    Year 3:
    a: Ohio State, Penn St, Indiana, Purdue, North Carolina, Virginia, Duke, MD/GT
    b: TSUN, Sparty, Indiana, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska

    Penn St. would have be swapped with one of the new members.

    There is also the issue of whether pods will be too confusing for fans (the WAC is the only actual real world example we have so far...and it was a dismal failure).
    Last edited: May 23, 2012
  3. rampageripster

    rampageripster Freshman

    I don't think you need to create divisions out of the "pods". Each is there own division and you just take the top two out of the four.

    The key is getting creative and understanding the limitations of a 16 team conference.
  4. ScriptOhio

    ScriptOhio Everybody is somebody else's weirdo.


    I like the term "subdivision" better.

  5. rampageripster

    rampageripster Freshman

    So do I... unfortunately basically everyone refers to them as pods... it's really a 4 division model
  6. Muck

    Muck Enjoy Every Sandwich Staff Member

    The way the rules are currently worded if you have at least twelve teams you have the option of having a conference championship game IF the teams are split into TWO divisions and play a full round robin schedule within their division (this also effectively sets an upper limit on how large conference can grow).

    If the system could work as you are suggesting your mini-divisions would work out to be even more unbalanced.

    You are locking together:

    Ohio State & Penn St
    TSUN & Sparty
    Nebraska & Wisky

    Then #4 is UNC & Maryland?

    Based on the past 10, 25, 50, 100 years one of those foursomes is going to provide a much easier path more often than not.

    It's still a two division model. The reason for pods is that by rotating half of each division annually you are able to play every team in your conference in a much shorter period of time than would be possible in a straight 8x8 split.
    Last edited: May 24, 2012
    BuckTwenty likes this.
  7. HorseshoeFetish

    HorseshoeFetish Silver Bullet Supporter

    Me too.

    [ame=""]Subdivisions - Rush - YouTube[/ame]
  8. OSU_D/

    OSU_D/ Intense Hater of Big Nut, Buck I Guy & Buckeye Man

    ORD gets a boner thinking about adding BC to the new Big 10 hockey conference.

    I kid. I kid. :biggrin:
  9. MaxBuck

    MaxBuck 2014 National Champions!

    too much information
  10. Nicknam4

    Nicknam4 Pootis

  11. Mike80

    Mike80 Done

    Now now the gay marriage thread is in the Political forum....
  12. broken24

    broken24 Rookie

    The creation of the pods system was not the main factor for the demise of the 16 team WAC. Most of it was culture and money.

    This is the same as not having divisions at all, just having conference standings and using the pod system for scheduling.

    The WAC used Quadrant not pod, division nor subdivision. The WAC also didn't have a total rotation of the pods (Quadrants). 2 pods switched between the 2 divisions every year.
  13. Muck

    Muck Enjoy Every Sandwich Staff Member

    Hey at least that is a legitimate point.
  14. FCollinsBuckeye

    FCollinsBuckeye Senior Former Game Champion

    Dude, what you are ORD are into is your own damned business, but can't you take it to PMs?

  15. Muck

    Muck Enjoy Every Sandwich Staff Member

    From everything I've seen the real killer it was set up so that '2' (UNLV, AF, CSU, Wyoming) was always in the opposite division from ''3' (BYU, Utah, New Mexico, UTEP).

    Those were the founding members of the conference and being split up really stuck in their craw. It's not a coincidence that of the 8 founding members of the MWC 7 of them came from those two groups.

    While that is entirely accurate I believe people are just referring to the WAC as the birthplace of the 'pod' idea (which it was) not the specific term.

Share This Page