Big Ten Conference Divisions

[jimotis4heisman]

1. Penn State has two certified NCs in 82 - 86 and been in the hunt several other times.

2. Last time I saw Wisconsin and the words NC in the same breath Ron Vanderkellen was tossing the ball to Pat Richter.

3. If they're not in the sma e class os the Buckeyes why has OSU not run away with the series?
Ohio State
Ohio State and Penn State first played in 1912, but until 1993 when Penn State joined the Big Ten conference, the meetings were infrequent. Including their last non-conference meeting in the 1980 Fiesta Bowl, the series was 6-2 in favor of Penn State before the Big Ten established the two teams as designated conference rivals playing annually starting in 1993.[15] Penn State trails the overall series by a slim 13-12 margin and is 6-11 in conference play.[16]
Penn State is 5-8 at Ohio Stadium (the 1912 game was played at its predecessor, Ohio Field) after a 13-6 win in 2008, breaking a seven-game away losing streak at Ohio Stadium. Penn State is 5-5 against Ohio State in Beaver Stadium, including a memorable come-from-behind win in 2001 to give Joe Paterno his 324th win, passing Bear Bryant for the lead in career victories among major college coaches.[16][17]
At least two meetings have determined the conference champion.[citation needed] Of the 24 games they played, 9 have been determined by 7 points or less, 14 games by 14 points or less. Penn State has shut out Ohio State three times but all occurred prior to Penn State joining the Big Ten, while Ohio State has never held Penn State below six points.[16] Due to the nature of the rivalry, a large number of games between the two teams are night games.

I have no problem with stating that Penn State is the weaker of the top 3 B10 programs, but they represent a serious up grade in football talent to the overall league as does Nebraska. Their problem, as I see it, is that Iowa and Michigan have had their number and no one has the political strength to fire Paterno. Once they are free of Joe Pa they can be a real threat to the rest of the Big 10.

maybe, maybe not. reality is they had virtually no success prior to joe pa. 35 of 41 bowl games have been on the guys watch. sure they had some success under rip engle, but nothing close to what they have had with the old man from brooklyn...

Penn State Nittany Lions football - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




to me splitting the big four up is easier (you really can slice and dice that nearly anyway possible with two a side) than dividing up the rest of the conference to provide both short and long term equality. whoever it was who suggested some sort of "rotational" alliances i think may hit a very interesting thing. is it confusing? sure, but im not convinced it may not provide for some flexibility to ensure that you have two balance conferences (unlike the current b12) and that folks get the opportunity to see all the teams.

 

[BigJim]

So bye-bye to the OSU-PSU matchups (yes I consider 2-3x a decade to be 'bye bye'), which was arguably the best series in the big ten for the last decade? (note: there's a difference between biggest & best)

Where do you get the '2-3x a decade' from?

 

[jwinslow]

Where do you get the '2-3x a decade' from?

They are not done expanding. Unless they use a rotating pod system, putting psu in the other division risks missing them quite often when you have 7 division foes to play per year.

 

[BigJim]

They are not done expanding. Unless they use a rotating pod system, putting psu in the other division risks missing them quite often when you have 7 division foes to play per year.

The talk was about splitting up the 12 team conference evenly. It's a whole new ball game in terms of potentially being able to keep PSU/scUM/OSU in the same division when you're throwing in 2-4 more teams that are not currently in the Big Ten.

 

[exhawg]

I'll go with JT on the East-West breakdown. Nebraska hasn't exactly been world beaters in recent history. The only Big 10 team that has really been near the top almost every year in the past decade is tOSU. Who knows what will happen to PSU after JoPa leaves. Scum will get better in the next 3-5 years. You usually have one good team from the west that could give anyone a run for their money. Between Nebraska, Iowa, Wisky, and the others you will probably have a couple good teams a year, but probably not the same two. At least for the next 5 years or so tOSU will be the top team in the east with another team rising to challenge every year. In 10 years who knows who the best teams are going to be? You add 2 more and put Notre Dame in the west and this whole thing is moot.

 

[cjmik_75]

Eastern Division:

OSU
PSU
Purdue
Indiana
MSU
tsun

Western Division:

Illinios
Iowa
Minnesota
Nebraska
Northwestern
Wisconsin

The 4 non-divisional rivalries could still be protected (I think this may have already been posted)

Illibuck (OSU-Illini)
Purdue Cannon (Illini-Purdue)
Little Brown Jug (Minnesota-tsun)
Governor's Victory Bell (Minnesota-PSU)

This would leave Minnesota and Illinios with 1 or 2 non-divisional spots to fill each year depending on the 8 or 9 game conference schedule (5 divisional games and 1/2 non divisional games)

This would also leave OSU, PSU, Purdue and tsun with 2 or 3 non-divisional spots to fill each year depending on the 8 or 9 game conference schedule (5 divisional games and 2/3 non divisional games)

The remainig 10 intra-divisional rivalries would still be intact.

Western Divison Rivalries:

Sweet Sioux Tomahawk/Land of Lincoln Trophy (Illini-Northwestern)
Heartland Trophy (Iowa-Wisconsin)
Paul Bunyan's Axe (Minnesota-Wisconsin)
Floyd of Rosedale (Iowa-Minnesota)

Eastern Divison Rivalries:

THE GAME
Old Oaken Bucket (Indiana-Purdue)
Old Brass Spitton (Indiana-MSU)
Paul Bunyan Trophy (MSU-tsun)
Land Grant Trophy (MSU-PSU)
The Ohio State-Penn State Rivalry


There will be some interesting intra-divisional rivalries in the west that should evolve as well. (Neb-Iowa and Neb-Wisc)

I am really looking forward to this 2010 season as the Buckeyes make another run at a NC. Having said that, the 2011 has me quite intrigued as I am secretly pulling for a Nebraska_OSU matchup.

Not trying to oversimplify things but it doesn't seem to be the enigma some have made it out to be.

 

[cincibuck]

Eastern Division:

OSU - 102,000
PSU- 107,000
Purdue 62,500
Indiana 52,000
MSU 75,000
tsun 109,000

Divsion avg = 84,500

Western Division:

Illinios 70,000
Iowa 71,000
Minnesota 51,000
Nebraska 81,000
Northwestern 49,000
Wisconsin 80,000

Division avg = 67,000

Lets assume for the sake of argument that all teams sell out all games (something that is all but guaranteed at OSU, PSU and Mich) and that the average ticket price at all schools is $35 -- which we know is not the case -- but we need a figure we can work with -- That's a $612,350 offset between divisions in each game X 6 games that works out to $3,650,000 and a good deal of money difference. I think you have to consider something that divides the money more evenly.

Working on the notion that stadium capacity = income potential + need + past success and that these factors are predictors of future performance I think your alignment is skewed in favor of Nebraska to win and lose money at the same time.

 

[buckeyesin07]

And now you've stacked the west division.

Who else can truly compete with OSU besides UM? Sparty? Purdue? I don't mean win a random game, but be a true competitor. If you moved either of those to the west, they'd be the 6th best squad.

I guess I don't hold Iowa, Nebraska and Wisconsin in as high esteem as you. To me, the top 7 teams in the Big Ten are as follows, in terms of performance in the past 25 or so years, etc.:

1. OSU
2. UM
3. Nebraska
4. PSU
5. Wisconsin
6. Iowa
7. MSU

It seems odd to put 1,2,4, and 7 all in one division while only putting 3,5, and 6 in the other. To me, a fairer split would be OSU, UM, Iowa; Nebraska, PSU, Wisconsin, MSU.

 

[cjmik_75]

Working on the notion that stadium capacity = income potential + need + past success and that these factors are predictors of future performance I think your alignment is skewed in favor of Nebraska to win and lose money at the same time.



Ticket dollars is a point, however irrelevant it may be. ie OSU, PSU and tsun will always be making more $ at the gate as their stadiums hold more fans.

Who's fault is that? Build a bigger stadium or never play OOC road games or something but since when is equal ticket $ ever going to be possible, sir? Is the Big Ten going to enforce a revenue sharing like MLB?


What do you suggest they do...stop selling tickets because it's unfair to the rest of the Big Ten or Nebraska? Explain something to me, how is this or any alignment skewed because Nebraska, or any team for that matter, not being treated equally or fairly on the field or at the gates?

I do believe the revenue sharing comes from TV dollars. Ticket dollars are for each individual University to make and pay OOC teams to come in and play.

Help me out here because I'm pretty sure I'm missing your point. A ratio of equal ticket dollars to wins for each and every team may never be attainable.

 

[Mac]

Eastern Division:

OSU
PSU
Purdue
Indiana
MSU
tsun

Western Division:

Illinios
Iowa
Minnesota
Nebraska
Northwestern
Wisconsin

This. I'd be a betting man if they did E/W scenario, this is the only way they can make this as even as possible.

 

[cincibuck]

Working on the notion that stadium capacity = income potential + need + past success and that these factors are predictors of future performance I think your alignment is skewed in favor of Nebraska to win and lose money at the same time.



Ticket dollars is a point, however irrelevant it may be. ie OSU, PSU and tsun will always be making more $ at the gate as their stadiums hold more fans.

Who's fault is that? Build a bigger stadium or never play OOC road games or something but since when is equal ticket $ ever going to be possible, sir? Is the Big Ten going to enforce a revenue sharing like MLB?


What do you suggest they do...stop selling tickets because it's unfair to the rest of the Big Ten or Nebraska? Explain something to me, how is this or any alignment skewed because Nebraska, or any team for that matter, not being treated equally or fairly on the field or at the gates?

I do believe the revenue sharing comes from TV dollars. Ticket dollars are for each individual University to make and pay OOC teams to come in and play.

Help me out here because I'm pretty sure I'm missing your point. A ratio of equal ticket dollars to wins for each and every team may never be attainable.

Why did OSU, Mich, PSU build 100K stadiums? Because they could and because they could fill them. Indiana and NW can't fill 50K stadiums and their tickets fetch half of what a top 4 ticket bring in. That represents history, facilities, fan base. If you put all of that power -- historically proven power -- on one side of the ledger you have created a conference within a conference. Look at the relative balance in the SEC -- it works because the big programs are carefully split. And then look at what happened to the Big XII -- because there wasn't an equitable split in income, history, potential.

 

[CHU]

Records since 1993

This is hard to do since Nebraska played in the Big 12, so it's not a clear comparison and who knows how they'll balance everything.

Using the starting date mentioned by Jim Delany Monday of the 1993 season (and I didn't see it previously mentioned in the thread):

Since 1993

Conference-Only Games
1) Ohio State 106-29-1 (.783)
2) Michigan 94-42 (.691)
3) Nebraska* 76-36 (.679)
4) Penn State 86-50 (.632)
5) Wisconsin 80-53-3 (.599)
6) Iowa 71-64-1 (.526)
7) Purdue 63-70-3 (.474)
8) Michigan State 59-76-1 (.438)
9) Northwestern 59-77 (.434)
10) Illinois 45-90-1 (.335)
11) Minnesota 44-92 (.324)
12) Indiana 33-103 (.243)

Overall Games
1) Ohio State 170-43-1 (.797)
2) Nebraska* 129-51 (.717)
3) Penn State 147-62 (.703)
4) Michigan 146-64 (.695)
5) Wisconsin 145-65-4 (.687)
6) Iowa 119-86-1 (.580)
7) Purdue 105-97-3 (.520)
8) Michigan State 101-103-1 (.495)
9) Northwestern 96-105-1 (.478)
10) Minnesota 92-111 (.453)
11) Illinois 75-121-1 (.383)
12) Indiana 68-127 (.349)

*Big 12 Conference

 

[jlb1705]

The Big Ten has four historical powers - Ohio State, M*ch*g*n, Penn State & Nebraska. These are the only schools in the conference that will really control their own destiny on a year-in-year-out basis. When any of these schools have their shit together, hire the right people and use the full power of their infrastructure and cachet, they win - A LOT. When these teams don't win (or come close) it's usually because they messed something up within their own program rather than one of the second-tier programs actually rising to the highest level (GBYBM,YMSOB). For that reason alone, I think that merits those schools being split up - two in each division.

Of those four, there is only one pairing of schools that will be done irreparable harm based on how they are aligned with respect to each other. Ohio State and M*ch*g*n have to be in the same division, or one of sport's premier rivalries will be destroyed. That will sound smug to fans of other programs, but it's the truth.

The rest of the chips don't really matter. You shouldn't try to gerrymander programs like Wisconsin, M*ch*g*n State & Iowa because their standing comes and goes, and it will be affected by realignment because of the changes in scheduling. A historical example of this is Northwestern. Before Penn State joined the Big Ten, each team missed just one conference opponent a year, and they rotated every two years. After Penn State joined each team missed two conference opponents. It basically amounted to Northwestern being able to miss Ohio State twice as often, and they took full advantage of it in 1995, 1996 & 2000. The new divisional alignment is going to have positive or negative effects on those second-tier teams - perhaps in ways we can't necessarily forsee. I think for that reason you can't base the new alignment on the relative strength of those second-tier teams, because they may not remain strong in the new Big Ten. Meanwhile another team may have the opportunity to ascend into their place based on the new circumstances.

 

[cjmik_75]

The Big Ten has four historical powers - Ohio State, M*ch*g*n, Penn State & Nebraska.

Of those four, there is only one pairing of schools that will be done irreparable harm based on how they are aligned with respect to each other. Ohio State and M*ch*g*n have to be in the same division, or one of sport's premier rivalries will be destroyed. That will sound smug to fans of other programs, but it's the truth.

The rest of the chips don't really matter. You shouldn't try to gerrymander programs like Wisconsin, M*ch*g*n State & Iowa because their standing comes and goes, and it will be affected by realignment because of the changes in scheduling. A historical example of this is Northwestern. Before Penn State joined the Big Ten, each team missed just one conference opponent a year, and they rotated every two years. After Penn State joined each team missed two conference opponents. It basically amounted to Northwestern being able to miss Ohio State twice as often, and they took full advantage of it in 1995, 1996 & 2000.

I agree with this logic too...

So let's take a look at this set up swapping PSU for Northwestern because, well basically like jlb pointed out, they've benefitted the most by ducking Ohio State for long enough.


OSU 102,000 106-29-1 (.783)
Northwestern 49,000 59-77 (.434)
Purdue 62,500 63-70-3 (.474)
Indiana 52,000 33-103 (.243)
MSU 75,000 59-76-1 (.438)
tsun 109,000 94-42 (.691)

Divsion avg = 74,917 414-397-5(.514)

Western Division:

Illinios 70,000 45-90-1 (.335)
Iowa 71,000 71-64-1 (.526)
Minnesota 51,000 44-92 (.324)
Nebraska 81,000 97-37 (.724)
PSU 107,000 86-50 (.632)
Wisconsin 80,000 80-53-3 (.599)

Division avg = 76,667 423-386-5(.523)

This is passed on attendance assuming they all sell out. Still not sure The relative balance of stadium size power maters all that much but I like this set up splitting up the Big 4. The W_L_T records are conference play since 1993 not overall.

 

[SloopyHangOn]

Eastern Division:

OSU 102,000 106-29-1 (.783)
Northwestern 49,000 59-77 (.434)
Purdue 62,500 63-70-3 (.474)
Indiana 52,000 33-103 (.243)
MSU 75,000 59-76-1 (.438)
tsun 109,000 94-42 (.691)

Division avg = 74,917 414-397-5(.514)

Western Division:

Illinios 70,000 45-90-1 (.335)
Iowa 71,000 71-64-1 (.526)
Minnesota 51,000 44-92 (.324)
Nebraska 81,000 97-37 (.724)
PSU 107,000 86-50 (.632)
Wisconsin 80,000 80-53-3 (.599)

Division avg = 76,667 423-386-5(.523)

I don't think anyone can really assume balance in terms of success over the course of a decade or so because as others have mentioned there are only a few programs that truly control their destiny year in and year out. However, this division seems like it would be conducive (in the long run) to OSU and UM grappling for the Eastern Division each year while 4 maybe 5 teams have a pretty legitimate shot at taking the Western Division each year.

Think about what the Big XII has been like over the past 10 years and imagine trading Texas and OU for Nebraska and Kansas State. That's what this division seems like to me. Also, I don't know much about the renovations in Ann Arbor, but isn't their max capacity 110+ now?