Yet Another 16 Team Big Ten

Submitted by Kilgore Trout on

As the title indicates, this is yet another interesting way to make a 16 team Big Ten work.  It has some similarities to Brian's backwards plan, but adds a few new elements and works to protect some old ones.

Protected rivalries have to stay.  There is just too much tradition in college football and shifting to a 16 team league is such a big change to begin with, I just don’t see people being ok with ditching the rivalries.  Schedule variability is pretty cool, but it has to be done in a controlled manner.  The logistical challenges of bringing 100,000 people to a city on such little notice would be pretty overwhelming.  I’m no expert in the area, but I have to imagine that the city of Ann Arbor has to plan for OT for a lot of people to make that happen.  Something like that might work in basketball when you’re bringing in 15,000 people, but I think it’s a pretty tall hurdle for football.

 

So, here’s how I’d do it.

 

Step one, split the sixteen teams into four permanent “pods” or “groups” or whatever you want to call them.  The goal here is to protect as many rivalries as possible.  Obviously you will play the other three teams in your pod every year, rotating home and away.  Every year two pods are paired together to form a division.  You play everyone in your division.  This rotates on a three year, set basis (year one AB-CD, year two AC-BD, year three AD-BC).  This gives you seven conference games per year that you can schedule ahead of time into eternity. 

 

There seem to be two “most likely” 16 team scenarios.  Both assume Pitt, Rutgers, Missouri, and ND are in.  One gives another east coast team (UConn or Syracuse) while the other gives Nebraska.  Here’s how I’d break down the pods in each scenario.

 

Nebraska Scenario

 

Pod A    Pod B  Pod C Pod D

Penn State    Michigan    Illinois    Iowa

Notre Dame  Michigan State Northwestern Minnesota

Rutgers Ohio State  Nebraska    Indiana

Pittsburgh Wisconsin Missouri    Purdue

 

 

East Coast Scenario

 

Pod A Pod B Pod C Pod D

Penn State Michigan Illinois  Iowa

Pittsburgh    Michigan State  Northwestern   Minnesota

Rutgers Ohio State     Missouri     Indiana

UConn   Notre Dame Wisconsin Purdue

 

The scheduled Big Ten season would run from the last weekend in September to the second weekend in November, straight through.  The third weekend in November would be open.  This would allow the teams to fit their three non-conference games into the first three weekends of September or into the third weekend of November, whatever they think is best. 

 

Now you have to allow for some flexibility.  At the end of the seven game schedule, the league would be split into four new pods.  Championship pod, second, third, and fourth.  Top two in each division into the championship, third and fourth into second and so forth.  The bottom three pods just play a home game and an away game against the two teams from the other division.  One game on Thanksgiving weekend and one on the first weekend of December.  This ends in a 9 game Big Ten season with zero chance for rematch among 12 of the 16 teams.  The championship flight is a simple “final four” type situation.  The two division champs host the second place teams from the opposite division on Thanksgiving weekend and the winners play in the Big Ten Championship game at a predetermined neutral site on the first weekend in December.  I guess the two losers would play each other on someone’s campus on the first weekend of December too.  While that game would certainly be a downer in a lot of ways, it would almost certainly affect the bowl destinations of the two teams, so they’d have something to play for. 

 

I think this really is the best of both worlds.  Some bullet points…

 

-   10 of a team’s 12 games are prescheduled.

-   Obviously seven games is unbalanced home and away.  I recognize this flaw.  The way to even this out would be that in each pod, two teams are “even” and two teams are “odd.”  The even teams get four home games in even years, and the odds get them in odd years.  If you don’t make the championship pod, you’re getting another home game there.  If you make the championship pod and lose out on a home game, I think you’d be ok with that. 

-   I think this is the best way to mitigate the whole UM / OSU last game of the season thing.  They will always play on the second Saturday in November and it will be the last game of the regular season.  Assuming UM gets it together, there’s probably even a better likelihood that something will be at stake.  They could be playing for a spot in the championship pod, playing to keep one of them out, or playing for seeding.  Since the difference between winning the division and second place is huge (home or away in the final four would be significant), it would be a big deal even if they were locked into the first two spots in the division.  The same obviously applies for any other season ending rivalry.  If there was a rematch, it would be three weeks later with a game in between, so it would be “better” than just playing the next weekend.

-   You could always just play the seven division games and then do a 1vs1, 2vs2 and so on weekend, but I think this is a lot more awesome.  Imagine the hype of Thanksgiving weekend, Big Ten semis…  Nebraska at Michigan followed by Ohio State at Notre Dame...

-   The trio of Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota caused me issues in making the pods.  They seem to need to go together, but there’s no obvious fourth member and no “singles” really out there.  In my mind, Wisconsin seemed to be the one who could stand on their own the best, so I moved them.

-   In the east coast scenario, Michigan’s pod looks unbalanced (as in too tough), but those are teams that they schedule every year now, so it wouldn’t be any worse than they already have it.

-   I like ND in the east coast pod.  I think it would make them feel better about coming and would help to make sure the BTN gets into those markets.

-   The basketball regular season is kind of tough.  I don’t know what you do.  I love what the Big East did with the double and single byes in the tournament though.  That would be nice.

 

  

Here’s some potential standings and how it would play out as an example for the Nebraska Scenario.

 

Division AB Division CD

 

1.     Michigan 7-0   Nebraska 7-0

2.    Ohio State 6-1 Iowa 6-1

3.    Penn State 5-2    Purdue 5-2

4.    Notre Dame 4-3  Missouri 4-3

5.    Wisconsin 3-4 Northwestern 3-4

6.    Pittsburgh 2-5 Illinois 2-5

7.    Rutgers 1-6 Minnesota 1-6

8.    Michigan State 0-7     Indiana 0-7

 

Championship Pod

    Semi: Iowa at Michigan, Ohio State at Nebraska

 

Second Pod:

    Week  1:  Missouri at Penn State, Purdue at Notre Dame

    Week 2:  Penn State at Purdue, Notre Dame at Missouri

 

Third Pod:

    Week 1: Wisconsin at Illinois, Pittsburgh at Northwestern

    Week 2: Illinois at Pittsburgh, Northwestern at Wisconsin

 

Fourth Pod:

    Week 1: Minnesota at Michigan State, Indiana at Rutgers

    Week 2: Michigan State at Indiana, Rutgers at Minnesota

 

As a bonus, an example of Michigan’s conference schedule in a six year block under the Nebraska scenario.

 

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

@Wisconsin   Wisconsin @Wisconsin

Penn State  @ Illinois    Iowa

@Notre Dame   Northwestern     @Minnesota

Michigan State @ Michigan State   Michigan State

Rutgers  @Nebraska Indiana

@ Pittsburgh  Missouri @Purdue

@ Ohio State Ohio State     @Ohio State

 

Year 4 Year 5 Year 6

Wisconsin @Wisconsin Wisconsin

@Penn State  Illinois     @Iowa

Notre Dame    @Northwestern    Minnesota

@Michigan State Michigan State   @Michigan State

@Rutgers    Nebraska  @Indiana

Pittsburgh    @Missouri   Purdue

Ohio State    @Ohio State     Ohio State

Football

Comments

Vasav

April 25th, 2010 at 12:37 AM ^

One caveat: I think it's very important to keep Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota together and not too hard to do in your scenarios. In the East Coast scenario, I'd switch NW and Wisco with IU and Purdue. In the West Coast scenario, move Wisco and Nebraska to Pod D, move NW to Pod B, and move IU and Purdue to Pod C. Northwestern has no real rivalry game, and is therefore one of the more flexible teams in the Big Ten for expansion's sake. But otherwise, the best idea yet.

Joined: 12/13/2009

MGoPoints: 19203

cutter

April 25th, 2010 at 4:09 AM ^

I like the pod idea as well, but I'd organize things a bit differently than what you're putting forward here. I do agree with you that you want to maintain rivalries between the existing B10 schools and to acknowledge the Illinois-Missouri rivalry as well. Among the existing B10 rivalries I can think of, there's: Iowa-Minnesota-Wisconsin Michigan-Ohio State Michigan-Michigan State Illinois-Northwestern Indiana-Purdue I know that Michigan State-Penn State is supposed to be a rivalry, but its somewhat contrived. And while I do acknowledge Michigan-Minnesota and the Little Brown Jug, I think the series can stand not being played every season. My setup assumes nine conference games per year along with three non-conference contests. The obvious problems with that setup are twofold: (1) uneven number of home and away conference games each year and (2) a slight reduction in home games for each of the programs, i.e., this system essentially caps it to seven home games per season. Assuming the five teams added are Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh and Rutgers, here's how I'd organize the pods: Pod A - Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin Pod B - Missouri, Illinois, Northwestern, Notre Dame Pod C - Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Rutgers Pod D - Indiana, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Purdue The organization isn't "geographically perfect", but it does keep most of the rivalries intact plus it spreads the five marquee programs (Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State and Penn State) into the four different pods. It also means either Michigan or Ohio State are playing at Rutgers each year and I think that's a game Paul Tagliabue and his tennis buddies on Long Island might actually watch (or to be more serious, it helps get the Big Ten Network onto basic tiers in the NYC market). Using Michigan as an example, each team would play the three in its own pod (for UM,that MSU, OSU and RU) plus two each from the three other pods in Years 1 & 2. In Years 3 & 4, Michigan would play the other two teams in the other pods plus the three in its own pod. Here's an example: Years 1 & 2 Michigan State Ohio State Rutgers Iowa Minnesota Missouri Illinois Indiana Penn State Years 3 & 4 Michigan State Ohio State Rutgers Nebraska Wisconsin Northwestern Notre Dame Pittsburgh Purdue At the season's end, the pod winners could be put into organized into two conference championship semi-final games. The winners then go to the Big Ten Conference championship game. In your eastern scenario (let's substitute Syracuse for Nebraska), you might have the following: Pod A - Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Wisconsin Pod B - Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, Purdue Pod C - Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State Pod D - Penn State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse This set up makes more sense in terms of geography, but it also puts three of the four major programs in one pod--a different approach from the first example. Again using Michigan as an example, here's what UM's conference schedules would look like: Years 1 & 2 Michigan State Notre Dame Ohio State Iowa Minnesota Illinois Indiana Penn State Pittsburgh Years 3 & 4 Michigan State Notre Dame Ohio State Missouri Wisconsin Northwestern Purdue Rutgers Syracuse As I mentioned above, that would leave Michigan with three non-conference games per years--probably with alternating years of two and three out of conference (OOC) games per year assuming two MAC opponents and one home-and-home series. IRT the home-and-home, Michigan could look for a Tier 1 opponent from all other the country (Texas, LSU, etc.) or go with a Tier 2 opponent (Arizona, Arkansas, etc.) depending on how difficult the home schedule is looking, etc. A couple of things I like about this system is that it does a pretty good job of crowning a "true" B10 champion. It also means that each team will have played all the other programs in the Big Ten at least twice over four seasons. For the record, this kind of setup is what the Western Athletic Conference did when it was a 16-team league, so there is precedent to it. Obviously, you can play around with this and substitute one team for another, but the structure is pretty much the same. For example, if the five additional schools were Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Rutgers and Syracuse, the pods might to like this: Pod A - Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin Pod B - Kansas, Illinois, Missouri, Northwestern Pod C - Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Rutgers Pod D - Indiana, Penn State, Purdue, Syracuse Again, this isn't geographically perfect, but it does protect the B10 rivalries and keeps intact the Kansas-Missouri hatred to go along with the Illinois-Missouri feud.

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 815

Toledo Tornado

April 25th, 2010 at 1:54 PM ^

It would be great if it happens... I do not here much talk about how this format can be used for national championship implications. 16 team conferences, with 1/4 final battles, semi-finals, then championship game would be interesting... have 8 divisions all conferences with the same format; then you would have 25% participation in a national championship. (if you had the 8 conference winners playoff... this would eliminate alot of the bias with present system... I just hope Delany and company read some of the stuff printed on this blog. Something going to happen... too late to back out... if we dont do it, some other conference will...

Joined: 07/05/2009

MGoPoints: 1

Kilgore Trout

April 26th, 2010 at 11:29 AM ^

It looks like we're both on the same page in the structure department. Four pods of four teams each that don't change, seven game regular season, two game "playoff round" in one way or the other. You didn't mention what would happen to the 12 teams that didn't make the tournament. They would need to get more games in. Also, your pods are better than mine, good work. The biggest issue I see with your set up is that the teams in each pod don't play the same schedule. If my thinking is correct, two of the teams in the pod play the same schedule and the other two would play a different "out of pod" schedule. I think this potentially sets up to be pretty unfair depending on how it shakes out. My solution was to group two pods together to form a division so then you have 8 teams together that all play the exact same schedule (obviously with the home / away issue still in place). I think this lends to a more fair situation and an even more "true" champion. It also allows big rivals to be in the same pod and still have a chance to both make the "championship flight" of the playoff. I think we're close to the same page though.

Joined: 02/20/2009

MGoPoints: 13155

joeyb

April 26th, 2010 at 1:55 PM ^

My idea was very similar to yours, except that I made the assumption that Michigan and OSU would be in different divisions, so I added 1 out-of-division rivalry game. Every year you would play your 3 division rivals and the 1 OOD rival. In the other 2 divisions you rotate games just as you mentioned. In the division where your rival is you would rotate through the three teams, making for a 6-year rotation in that one division and a 12-year overall rotation before achieving the same schedule.

Joined: 10/12/2008

MGoPoints: 16845