Nebraska-Colorado is a no-brainer. It's actually looks really weird to see that on a list of Big Ten-Pac-12 matchups.
here's one vote for "John Beilein's head in a Futurama jar"
Nebraska-Colorado is a no-brainer. It's actually looks really weird to see that on a list of Big Ten-Pac-12 matchups.
to be fair the Pac 12 might be worse than the ACC at this point in time. maybe dave brandon can use his influence to get the games played in ann arbor?
No way. Oregon is a national championship caliber team. Stanford is almost there, and anyone think longterm USC will be held down? Arizona State and Cal are decent, the rest of the conference...meh. But the ACC? They pretty much suck all the way down. No championship caliber teams, decent Clemson, Va Tech and Florida State...and after that, nothing much...I know I am missing someone, but still doesn't matter.
Huh? Perhaps the mediocre teams in each conference are roughly the same, but I don't think the top quarter of the ACC is in any way comparable to Oregon, Stanford, and USC.
ehhh...this appears to not excite me so much as others....
where the Rose Bowl no longer is tied to the two conferences so as a pre-emptive move, the two conferences "align" themselves to keep pace with the ever-growing SEC and media biases toward them and the Big 12.
And as stated many times earlier, if it shuts out ND all the better.
The Rose Bowl's B1G-PAC tie-in has always impeded CFB from implementing a system that would rightfully crown a national champion. This move will help traditionalists let go of that tie-in, as we make way for the highly-anticipated playoff system.
This setup trumps conference expansion, which spiraled out of control this year. Playing certain teams only twice every 7+ years? No thank you.
Well 1 more thing of my "college football would be insanely awesome if they did these 10 things list". At this rate they will implement Brian's playoff system in 2030 and I'll drop dead 2 months later.
2017? I know scheduling is tricky and planned well in advance but for fucks sake move this shit up faster and do more of it.
I cant see how this doesnt force ND's hand. There's no way USC is going to want to play ND and a Big10 team every year and likewise for Michigan, MSU & Purdue via the Pac whatever number they are now.
ND better hope the Coast Guard, the Merchant Marines and the US Forrestry Service field footballs teams between now and 2017 or their schedule will have some serious holes in it.
Now they will be able to schedule 10 home games.
USC actually tends to be pretty ambitious with its scheduling. They usually play at least two non-conference games against real BCS opponents every year. In '02, they played Auburn, Colorado, Kansas State, and Notre Dame. In '06, they played Arkansas, Nebraska, and ND. Even when they play non-BCS opponents, they're usually from the Mountain West or the WAC. There are a lot of reasons to criticize USC, but one thing I have to give them credit for is their willingness to schedule tough non-conference games.
Might be true for the Big 10 teams, but USC has, admirably, never had a problem with scheduling other BCS teams in addition to ND. In the last 10 years, they've played K State, Auburn, Colorado, VA Tech, Arkansas, Nebraska, Virginia, Ohio State, Minnesota, and Syracuse OOC. They kind of have everyone's dream scheduling philosophy of playing ND and one additional BCS team. Also helps that they won every one of those games except for one game against K. State.
Cue 10,000 NDNation posts:
But college football NEEDS Notre Dame! We are important! Things must stay the same forever and always on our eternal return to glory!
ND just needs to drop down a couple of levels to play the Coast Guard:
Coast Guard snaps a five-game losing streak and finishes 2-7 overall and 2-5 in the Bogan Division. The Bears lost five games this season by seven points or less, four of those in the final minute of play.
And the Merchant Marine was even on the USCGA schedule. The Golden Domers would fit right in with the Mariners and the Bears.
I know they aren't very good right now (and may not be in 5 years), but I'm really hoping for the 'Public Ivy' Bowl: UM vs. Cal. Road trip to Berkeley would be *awesome*.
Increase revenue without conference expansion
"Together, the Big Ten and Pac-12 encompass 15 states holding 43% of the nation's population and 22 of its top 50 television markets.
Looks like an assault on the SEC,with a potentially higher profile OCC schedule, marque match ups that effectively make the SEC OCC scheduling cupcakes look really bad for the SEC.
Some potential great match ups I look forward to seeing.
AU vs Michigan
USC vs Michigan
OU vs Michigan
Standford vs Michigan
Cal vs Michigan
Notre Dame vs Youngstown State.
Hey man, leave my Penguins outta this.
I like it a lot. I would rather see Michigan play any Pac-12 school (home or away) than any MAC or FCS team. I would love to go see Michigan play in Boulder, Salt Lake City, Corvallis, Tucson, Tempe, Los Angeles, Seattle, Eugene, the Bay Area, and Pullman. How cool!
How does playing a Pac-12 team mean we won't play and FCS or MAC team?
IMO it just means we won't play TWO MAC teams and an FCS.
This year we played EMU, WMU, SDSU and ND...this game would just replace one of the MAC games or the SDSU game. I don't get why people think it has an affect on ND or BOTH MAC games?
Sparty should schedule UCLA so they can actually see the Rose Bowl.
You win the Internet.
And if they win, they can claim themselves 'Rose Bowl Champions'..perfect
about this arrangment being similar to what other conferences are doing appears to be a slight towards the over-expansion/realignment of the other major conferences. It's as if Delany and Scott are saying "Go ahead and have your 14 team mega-conferences and country-wide Big East. Grab all the middling programs you want. We're going to stick with our traditions while moving forward at the same time."
Love this move because it doesn't leave the two conferences stuck in the past, but doesn't entirely do away with it at the same time.
if this concept expands, can this be the end of the bcs? Why do the major conferences need them or the ncaa for that matter?
I know many people are saying they would've rather seen a B1G vs SEC scheduling pact, but that is just unrealistic because I highly doubt the SEC wants to travel north of Kentucky on a regular basis. As is noted in every single bowl game they play being in their own backyard.
Just another step in the progression towards Jim Delaney & Larry Scott's master plan: a coast -to-coast partnership of dominance in college football.
-Expansion to 16 teams each
-Add major media markets
-Corner the market on traditional powers
Major targets for expansion include Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame and maybe Kansas? Okla State? Texas Tech? Rutgers? Uconn? That would give the B1G/Pac partnership:
-at least 8 of the 10 winningest all-time programs
-a coherent coast-to-coast geographic footprint
-a very formidable mini-playoff with the B1G/Pac championship games leading into a restored New Year's grand finale Rose Bowl matchup.
-and lastly a giant "FU" to the BCS and a "suck it" to the SEC
Just imagine the two conferences featuring four equally weighted division champions (for example, Texas vs. USC and Notre Dame vs Nebraska) with a Rose Bowl finale. Now campare that with the farce that is the current BCS championship featuring two teams from the SEC west. Which is more likely to provide a winning team with a resume that AP voters would declare as "national" champion?
And if the B1G/Pac really wanted to stick it to the SEC, they could try to entice Alabama and Tennessee into the fold (i.e., the only 2 SEC amongst the top 10 all time winningest programs).
Call me crazy...but something like this is probably more likely the endgame of college football over the next 10-20 years rather than any NCAA sanctioned Division II style or BCS plus-one playoff.
I absolutely love this.. Great moves by both conferences. Should make college football even more exciting.
This is awesome, and I heartily approve. It will cost some amount of revenue to Michigan and Ohio State, but it provides a great out of conference game every year. If we alternate Pac 10 & ND schedules, you have a marquee out of conference game yearly.
Especially if you cycle through the entire conferences, you will end up facing a very strong team 25% of the time (once every four years, Oregon, USC, & Stanford this year,) a middle of the road team 50% of the time (once every two years,) and a bottom dweller 25% of the time (once every four years, Arizona, Washington State, and Colorado this year.)
With 12 teams in each conference, it will take 24 years for Michigan to cycle through having a home game and an away game with every team in the Pac 10.
I don't fully know the financial repercussions, but it seems to me that TV could have a strong interest in ponying up more cash for this set up, alleviating the lost revenue from scheduling more home game tomato cans every year.
Win your Divison (duh)
Round 1: Win your Conference (B1G)
Round 2: Win the Rose Bowl (Super Conference)
Round 3: Win the +1 game against other TBD Super Conference (Sec vs ACC, etc)
That's essentially a sixteen team playoff.
We might add a couple teams to the B1G (ND etc), but won't rehash that here.
that is an 8-team playoff. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But compared with what exists now, it's a 4-team playoff (Round 2 and Round 3). There are no playoff games in winning your division - that's called the regular season.
Also a report of potentially holding a new bowl game between the conferences and hosting it on the Big Ten and Pac-12 Networks. Awesome....
Plus, from a Michigan perspective, a new team to play a night game against when Notre Dame is away.
unless we play USC or Oregon every year I really have no wishes to play the rest of their conference when we could be scheduling home and homes with Texas, Oklahoma, LSU, or Georgia.
we always schedule home and homes with those guys.....
Sounds like it could be good, but hmmm.... playing both Ohio State and USC (or Oregon) twice in one season? Crazy.
Just when I think you couldn't possibly be any dumber, you go and do something like this…and totally redeem yourself!
This is brilliant on multiple levels.
First, there's traditional cooperation between the two leagues that makes them comfortable with each other. In my prehistoric era, Michigan often played then-PAC-8 schools instead of MAC teams OOC, so this is really not all that new.
Second, who would the B1G or PAC12 add for expansion that would meet their academic and athletic standards? There really aren't any good candidates except for Notre Dame. We're not going to be poaching a school from another league any time soon.
Now think about the CIC and the potential academic cooperation between the Midwest Ivies and Stanford, Cal, and UCLA, and how that impacts the academics of the two leagues. It's a natural fit.
Now that the SEC has added a couple of schools with good academics, they'll probably find the ACC a natural partner.
I'll bet Nebraska is feeling like they hit the lottery. The Big 12 is back to being the SWC plus Oklahoma.
I don't see why we have to get rid of ND...
Play 8 conference games a year.
Always play the ND home and home OPPOSITE the Pac-12 home and home.
You can still schedule a cupcake, you can still schedule a Michigan directional.
...am I missing something? How does this really change anything?
Our schedule could now look like this:
vs. Notre Dame
...8 B1G Games.
@ Notre Dame
...8 B1G Games.
How is that so much different from what we do now?
Harvard won't play Michigan.
I've been wondering why we don't schedule IVYs as the FCS school...
I want to play Harvard, Yale and Princeton if we HAVE to play these schools. Just a good institutional matchup.
i think this is a fantastic move by both conferences. even if we give up notre dame, the prospect of playing the likes of usc, oregon or stanford every year are amazing. delany has a smart way of sitting back and only making moves when he can hit a grand slam deal. acquiring nebraska and getting this deal done are perfect examples.
2017 college football season opener, usc vs michigan, either jerry world or at the rose bowl.
This is what I was going to come say when I was trying to put this into perspective for when this will be starting.
Pretty cool idea but can't they get this started earlier? I know football schedules a few years out but if teams are able to up and switch conferences in a 2 year span I see no reason this has to take 5-6 years to implement.
I hope that means that Michigan will come out to CA more often. Would love to catch a game at the Coliseum or the Rose Bowl.
You mean the Spartans might actually get to play in the Rose Bowl? Ridiculous, I say.
I would love to see the B1G Ten teams get to play the home games later in the year to get the home field advantage with the weather. We have to play the Rose Bowl on their turf..time for UCLA to play Wisconsin, Arizona State to play ohio, and Stanford to play Michigan in some crappy cold weather.
I want another crack at the duckies
So how long does this agreement go for ? Is this just a 5-10 year agreement or forever ?
I hope we have 1 year breaks in the agreement so we can play other teams as well otherwise the schedule gets handcuffed with the Pac 12/ Big 10 deal and the Notre Dame series.