Solution to Big Ten dilemma

Submitted by Nonnair on

 

THE BIG 20 CONFERENCE
 
Comprising two "sub-conferences":
 
The Traditional Ten  ............................. The Super Ten (to make them feel special and all)
Michigan                                                    Notre Dame
Ohio State                                                  Pitt
MSU                                                            Penn State
Wisconsin                                                  Nebraska
Minnesota                                                 Syracuse
Northwestern                                            Rutgers
Purdue                                                       Kansas
Indiana                                                       Kansas State
Iowa                                                            Iowa State
Illinois                                                         Missouri
 
Big Ten could get those other eight teams in a week. First invite Mizzou and Iowa State, who say yes before you finish asking the question. That kills the BIg 12, and Kansas and Kansas State jump at the invite, cash-throwing alums and all. Then invite Pitt, which compels subsequent invitees Rutgers and Syracuse to say yes. That's 19 teams. Goodbye Big East, hello Notre Dame.  Twenty and done.
 
How to schedule now? With a few radical wrinkles, I think it all works -- and eliminates all current bones of contention:
 
1. Each "sub-conference" plays 8 games against other teams in their sub-conference. As now.
 
2. Rather than add one additional (9th) conference game as is being discussed now, instead add TWO, for 10 total. To allow for balanced, if infrequent, full conference play. Thus:
        • RIVALRY GAME: Each team in one sub-conference will pair up and play annually against a team in the other. Just as in same-line pairings above, with M-ND, OSU-Pitt, MSU-PSU, etc. I guessed on a few, but tried to match up traditional dog with traditional dog, power with power, academicians with academicians, rivals with rivals. Some are naturals (eg, M-ND, Iowa-Iowa St, Illinois-Mizzou).
        • ROTATING GAME: Play the other 9 teams in the opposite sub-conference in home-and-homes over 18 years. Don't want to wait every 18 years to see Nebraska visit your stadium? Fine. Then the Big 20 Conference suggests you....
 
3. Teams can schedule a conference opponent but as a NON-CONFERENCE game. Schedule such a game any time you want, but NOT have it count as a conference game.
 
This format gives each Big 20 team 8 sub-conference games, 1 opposite-subconference annual rivalry game, and 1 random opposite-conference game per season. Ten total. With only two other non-conference games to slot, Big 20 teams can play Alabamas if they like, or Alabama A&Ms. Or Western and Eastern Michigan but no need anymore for Northern Michigan. Or Delaware State. Or any other I-AA team. Additionally, the "non-conference conference game" option is there, too, if that's more attractive than two MAC teams, etc.
 
Of course, the sub-conference champions play in the Big 20 title game on the first Saturday in December wherever the hell Delaney wants to play it.
 
But M-OSU can still play the third Saturday in November because it still means very much to win what is no longer a division of six teams, but a sub-conference comprising the same 10 teams the Big Ten had from the early '50s to 1992.
 
RESULT? EVERYONE'S HAPPY:
 
-- Big Ten conference rules the universe, Delaney's wettest dream.
 
-- Speaking of which, Big Ten traditionalists have a Million Man Circle-Jerk.
 
-- Big Ten Network eclipses Al Jazeera as most picked-up station on the world's cable systems.
 
-- Raiding of and resultant destruction of the Big East forces ND's hand and compels them to round out the 20 teams. Texas goes west to Pac 16, or whatever, but Big Ten still holds the most power with TV execs, now and forever more.
 
-- ***All current Big Ten concerns, re divisions and rivalries, go straight out the window. Seeya. Because the old Big Ten in essence returns, pre-PSU even.
 
-- Worries of the unbalanced 9-game conference schedule go poof, too.
 
-- Even MSU and PSU will be happy: MSU because the Land Grant Trophy lives, baby, and PSU because Rutgers goes back on its schedule annually. Happy Valley becomes even happier.
 
-- Even works for basketball, competitively-balanced speaking. And what a conference for hoops.
 
What am I missing here?

Comments

KSmooth

August 26th, 2010 at 3:00 PM ^

The solution has been right there staring them in the face and nothing short of insane stubbornness is preventing them from implementing it.

Get out a map of the US.  Mark out where the 12 schools are located.  Now look at the Indiana-Illinois border.  Everything to the east of that is one division, everything to the west is another.

What you get are two roughly competitive divisions and most of your rivalries preserved -- add in a couple of protected crossovers and they're almost all preserved.

Yeah, it's been written before and you're probably sick of hearing it even if you agree.  But it's the truth -- If Delany could adopt some humility and look at a map on a wall the whole PR mess is cleaned up by lunchtime tomorrow.

But Delany & Co. think they're too clever for that.  Which is why they're steaming buns and barbecuing turds and trying to act like its gonna be yummy.

TennesseeBlue

August 26th, 2010 at 9:48 PM ^

I don't think that I ever wanted more than 10. Though, I'm glad about PSU, and I think that Nebraska is a good fit too. And, I have to admit Adding Pitt, ND, Missouri, and Syracuse makes sense - none of the others do - if we're trying to protect the conference and maintain rivalries too. I hate to say it, Yet, I do agree with you that adding a few more teams does grant for more flexiblity, and could minimize some of the tension.