B1G Parity

34 posts / 0 new
Login or register to post comments
Last post
November 29th, 2011 at 5:25 PM
#1
GoBlogSparty
GoBlogSparty's picture
Joined: 02/19/2010
MGoPoints: 1191
B1G Parity

It was a hell of a year in the B1G.

We added a new team and (ridiculously named) divisions.

We saw OSU lose to Purdue but beat Wisky.

Wisky loses to MSU and OSU while thrashing Nebraska

Nebraska pounds MSU but gets squashed by UM

UM loses to Iowa and MSU but destroys Nebraska

Iowa loses to PSU, gets trounced by MSU, and eeks out a win against UM

In the span of 1 year, we will be introducing 6 new coaches in a league of 12 (Michigan, Indiana, Minn, Illinois, PSU, OSU).

We saw scandals that will scar 2 of the conference's perennial powers.

(hate to say it) We saw the resurgence of Michigan certainly as a conference power, if not a national power just yet.

The longest tenured coaches in the B1G are now Ferentz, Bielema, and Dantonio.

Every week brings something new. Who knows what things will be like this time next year....but I'm def. excited for it.

How does everybody feel about the new B1G? Fast-forward to this time last year, I wouldn't have imagined half of the bullet points I named above.The only constant was that Indiana lost just about every week.

I, personally, am all in favor. There was a stretch of about 3-4 weeks when 4 different teams were in control of the Legends Division. The Leaders Division was not decided until the last week of the season.
 

I pose this question as an opposing fan. As UM fans would you guys prefer the days of "Big 2, Little 8" or do you like the way the conference is set up now with the additions of PSU, and Nebraska and the improvement of Wisc, Iowa, and MSU with the wildcards of NU, and Illinois tossed in?

Your friendly neighborhood Sparty

Top
Tags:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:29 PM | I like some things but I (Score:3 Normal)
Hokemania
Hokemania's picture
Joined: 03/11/2011
MGoPoints: 2139

I like some things but I really wish Ohio St was in our division to a point it blinds me to some of the other benefits. It really bothers me...

I do prefer parity though.

Whatcha gonna do, little brother?

November 29th, 2011 at 5:30 PM | Completely agree. (Score:0 Overrated)
November 29th, 2011 at 5:34 PM | First - you forgot Minny over (Score:3 Normal)
sheepdog
sheepdog's picture
Joined: 06/15/2011
MGoPoints: 805

First - you forgot Minny over Iowa

Second - i like it that the conference is as strong as possible (as long as we beat everyone)

November 29th, 2011 at 5:38 PM | I don't like parity.   I (Score:5 Normal)
Carcajous
Carcajous's picture
Joined: 07/05/2009
MGoPoints: 1577

I don't like parity.

 

I like Michigan winning every game, all the time.

November 29th, 2011 at 5:39 PM | I'm also still annoyed that (Score:5 Normal)
unWavering
unWavering's picture
Joined: 01/13/2011
MGoPoints: 1766

I'm also still annoyed that MSU gets a free pass every year with Indiana.

November 29th, 2011 at 6:11 PM | (Score:3 Normal)
yostlovesme
yostlovesme's picture
Joined: 01/13/2010
MGoPoints: 5518

Seriously worst so called protected cross over rivalry in the BIG.

November 29th, 2011 at 6:12 PM | If you want to be the best, (Score:1)
joeyb
joeyb's picture
Joined: 10/12/2008
MGoPoints: 11302

If you want to be the best, you have to beat the best. 

November 29th, 2011 at 6:15 PM | Don't hate on the Old Brass (Score:1)
GoBlogSparty
GoBlogSparty's picture
Joined: 02/19/2010
MGoPoints: 1191

Don't hate on the Old Brass Spittoon.

Your friendly neighborhood Sparty

November 29th, 2011 at 6:40 PM | That wasn't necessarily a dig (Score:1)
joeyb
joeyb's picture
Joined: 10/12/2008
MGoPoints: 11302

That wasn't necessarily a dig at MSU or Indiana, but I get tired of people complaining about us having a tougher conference schedule than MSU (MSU actually had the tougher schedule this year because of Wisconsin/Indiana vs. Purdue/Illinois). (1) It will even out or only be slightly in our favor over time and (2) people rip on Wisconsin for having an easy schedule year in and year out, but they don't stop to consider that the better schedule helps with rankings and picks later on.

November 29th, 2011 at 6:51 PM | lol. I am kidding. I'm not (Score:1)
GoBlogSparty
GoBlogSparty's picture
Joined: 02/19/2010
MGoPoints: 1191

lol. I am kidding. I'm not complaining but it's laughable that IU is one of our cross-division rivalries. I'll take it over having PSU every year

Your friendly neighborhood Sparty

November 29th, 2011 at 6:54 PM | I knew you were kidding, but (Score:1 Overrated)
joeyb
joeyb's picture
Joined: 10/12/2008
MGoPoints: 11302

I knew you were kidding, but I thought I'd clarify my stance on it.

November 29th, 2011 at 10:11 PM | If Wisconsin.... (Score:1)
steviebrownforh...
Joined: 02/01/2009
MGoPoints: 2548

If Wisconsin played a non-conference opponent that was even at the level of a Cincinnati I would be happy.  But instead, EVERY YEAR, they play 2 1-AA schools and the WORST 2 1-A schools they can find that will come to Madison.

November 29th, 2011 at 6:42 PM | And no one... (Score:2 Normal)
wolpherine2000
wolpherine2000's picture
Joined: 07/10/2009
MGoPoints: 918

...in East Lansing considers it to be a rivalry.  I can't think of anyone that thought that replacing Pennsylvania State by Indiana was a good idea - it's just one more dumb consequence of these damn divisions.

As a matter of fact I like beer.

November 29th, 2011 at 6:53 PM | wait until (Score:2 Normal)
BlueinLansing
BlueinLansing's picture
Joined: 09/01/2009
MGoPoints: 4197

2013 and 2014 when the Spartans miss Wisconsin, Ohio State AND Penn State at the same time.  That is unbelievable bullcrap

November 29th, 2011 at 5:53 PM | Good post (Score:1)
profitgoblue
Joined: 09/01/2009
MGoPoints: 19415

I've wondered all year what the B1G's parity means with respect to the rest of college football.  Does B1G teams beating up on each other mean that all of the teams suck (read: all would lose to the good SEC teams)?  Or does it mean that its just a very competitve conference that was arranged extremely well (read: any one of the better B1G teams could go toe-to-toe with the nation's best)?  At this point, I'm still not sure what I think about the divisions and parity.

Disgruntled former moderator.  I got a lot of problems with you people!

November 29th, 2011 at 10:59 PM | I think it's cyclic. OSU (Score:2 Normal)
Zone Left
Zone Left's picture
Joined: 07/03/2008
MGoPoints: 13967

I think it's cyclic. OSU hammered the conference for basically a whole decade, had 3(?) national title appearances, and appeared in BCS bowls 8 of 9 years. To me, that's dominance, not parity.

This year, there just wasn't a really good Big 10 team.

It's all John Navarre's fault.

 

November 29th, 2011 at 6:04 PM | I like parity.... (Score:1)
Bosch
Bosch's picture
Joined: 04/03/2009
MGoPoints: 4277

...but I hate the uneven protected rivalries on the cross over.

All right Lemmings. Bring the heat.

November 29th, 2011 at 6:06 PM | I have to confess, though, (Score:1)
SC Wolverine
SC Wolverine's picture
Joined: 08/18/2010
MGoPoints: 1511

I have to confess, though, that the division titles are growing on me...

 

"Football is happening at Michigan... we have that savoir faire."  Dhani Jones

November 29th, 2011 at 9:16 PM | Stockholm Syndrome (Score:2 Normal)
Two Hearted Ale
Two Hearted Ale's picture
Joined: 06/10/2011
MGoPoints: 445

What you are experiencing is called Stockholm Syndrome. Try to stay strong my friend!

November 29th, 2011 at 6:12 PM | to an extent (Score:1)
masterkaw
masterkaw's picture
Joined: 10/04/2011
MGoPoints: 236

I like parity to a certain extent.  It's not good if the conference is perceived as weak, which right or wrong, the B1G is.  It's good when there is a certain amount of pariy within the conference, but bad when those teams don't perform well out of conference.  The "experts" say the SEC is the best because it is so tough to win week-in-week-out.  But, when you think about it, the SEC is extremely top-heavy.  LSU, BAMA, and ARK are the best teams by far.  Then there is the next level if decent teams like S. Car, AUB, and GA (most years you can throw FLA in this group).  Occasionally FLA and ARK will flip tiers.  The rest are perrennial bottom feeders.  Vandy, MISS, MSU, and KY always are terrible, and TN has been for a little while now.  

I would like to see three/four top teams (MICH, OSU, WIS, NEB), then a solid middle tier (MSU, PSU, Iowa, ILL) and the bottom feeders (IU, MN, NW, Purdue),

So, a certain amount of parity is good, but I would rather the conference as a whole be strong.  

- The Team, The Team, The Team.

November 29th, 2011 at 7:20 PM | Arkansas (Score:2 Normal)
SoFlaWolverine
SoFlaWolverine's picture
Joined: 07/08/2011
MGoPoints: 366

Has no business in that top group of yours. What have they done worth noting? Their only win over a team that's won over 7 games was home against SC and it's not like they gave LSU or Bama a game. When they lose that receiving core and Wilson they'll be back to mediocre.

Denard is my homeboy.

University of Michigan Class of 2014

November 29th, 2011 at 7:57 PM | perception (Score:1)
masterkaw
masterkaw's picture
Joined: 10/04/2011
MGoPoints: 236

It's all about perception.  I don't think that ARK is actually there right now either, but the "experts" seem to think so for some strange reason.  That's why i have them in there.  

- The Team, The Team, The Team.

November 29th, 2011 at 6:18 PM | I like things now, but ... (Score:2)
Blue in Dallas
Blue in Dallas's picture
Joined: 10/20/2011
MGoPoints: 127

I really hate that we are not in the same division as Ohio.  I wish they would swap us for Wisky and then make Sparty our protected cross-over game.

"He has no idea that Charles Woodson can jump fifteen feet in the air, come down acrobatically, and get his foot inside this football field.  Folks, you can watch football a long, long time before you see another play like that."

November 29th, 2011 at 6:20 PM | If they swap us, it'd be for (Score:0 Overrated)
November 29th, 2011 at 6:19 PM | Think back to our spring game (Score:1)
artds
artds's picture
Joined: 09/04/2009
MGoPoints: 2790

Think back to our spring game and the things people were saying then.

 

Every time an MGoBoard poster complains about a thread topic, God kills a baby panda.

November 29th, 2011 at 6:34 PM | I like parity between teams, (Score:1)
joeyb
joeyb's picture
Joined: 10/12/2008
MGoPoints: 11302

I like parity between teams, but not divisions. I would rather play the other top 5 teams in the conference and go 3-2 than play 3 of the other top 5 with 2 bottom dwellers and go 4-1 or 5-0. I like big games. That's partially why I like LSU so much this year. Yes, they cheat within the rules, but they beat  3 probable BCS teams and face a 4th potential one on Saturday. If they lose on Saturday, there is still a good chance that they are #2, whereas, if they had played a normal OOC schedule, there is a good chance they drop out of the NCG.

In NCAA 12, I rearranged and paired conferences to have a 4-team playoff with conference championship games and then a bowl game. The top 8 teams and bottom 8 teams are in divisions in the same conference and the middle 16 are in the other conference. Every year, I will move the top 2 teams in the bottom 3 divisions up and the bottom 2 teams in the top 3 divisions down to keep the best teams playing each other.

I really wish we could do something like this so that next year Michigan, MSU, Nebraska, Wisconsin, PSU, and OSU Purdue (!?) would be all play each other and really decide who the best team is and there could be no argument (aside from 3-way ties, but in that case, they are all deserving). Then, when Purdue goes 0-5 in the division, MSU goes 1-4 (:P), OSU goes 5-0, and Iowa goes 4-1, they could swap out the teams and give everyone a shot in the upper division.

November 29th, 2011 at 6:44 PM | B1G (Score:5 Normal)
83tilinfinity
83tilinfinity's picture
Joined: 06/30/2008
MGoPoints: 453

November 29th, 2011 at 10:14 PM | I feel really dumb but (Score:1)
steviebrownforh...
Joined: 02/01/2009
MGoPoints: 2548

I don't get it...

November 29th, 2011 at 6:55 PM | I have no doubts (Score:1)
BlueinLansing
BlueinLansing's picture
Joined: 09/01/2009
MGoPoints: 4197

the Big Ten will have similar parity to the SEC every year.  The media just won't swoon over the 8-4 teams like they do down there.

November 29th, 2011 at 7:41 PM | Black Eye (Score:1)
ChillChet
ChillChet's picture
Joined: 11/29/2011
MGoPoints: 131

Does it bother anyone else that OSU and PSU brought a sort of black-eye upon the B1G?  I'm not saying we were perfect before that, but as a conference, the B1G no longer has the moral high ground on other conferences. 

What you see is the hard work he's put in. It's nature. It just all comes together.

-Craig James

November 29th, 2011 at 7:48 PM | Sparty, sadly, should have an (Score:1)
kehnonymous
kehnonymous's picture
Joined: 11/25/2011
MGoPoints: 644

Sparty, sadly, should have an arrow pointing to us, but we'll just call that artistic license.

@ the OP:  As one of the Big 2, I'd very selfishly prefer the days of the Big 2 and Little 8, but those days are likely gone forever.  Wisconsin's here to stay, Nebraska's going to be in the mix and - as much as it pains me to admit - Sparty is as well.  They've been a thorn in our side that we have to not let become a rusty saw blade.  (I would've thrown in Penn St. as another would-be perennial power, but suffice it to say that what's going on there is waaaaay beyond the realm of mere football)

Overall, though, the parity is good for the conference as a whole.  No denying that.  It's only good when we start representing better against other major conferences.  Otherwise parity just means 6 B1G teams getting waxed in bowl games instead of just 2. :p

The division names - Leaders and Legends - still blow monkey schlong.  On that, at least, every team's fans can agree.

Former Buckeye Antonio Pittman on being a poster child for compliance: "This osu tattoo stuff is silly. Cats been getting hookups on tatts since back in '01."

November 29th, 2011 at 11:58 PM | Well since you asked, I (Score:1)
Asgardian
Joined: 12/08/2010
MGoPoints: 585

Well since you asked, I like:

Biggest 1:   (us)

Big 4: OSU, Wisco, PSU, Neb

Parity 3 (one or two is always good): Iowa, MSU, Illinois

Little 4: NW, IU, Purdue, Minnesota

 

"I have a dream that someday Michigan will not have freshmen on the field. That day is 2013 at the earliest." - Brian, Defense vs MSU UFR 2011

November 30th, 2011 at 12:19 AM | Caveat (Score:1)
Asgardian
Joined: 12/08/2010
MGoPoints: 585

On second thought:

Purdue, Minnesota, and Indiana have 8 of the 13 B1G non-conference losses, which kills us in the computers for the BCS.  It wouldn't hurt if they were a little better.

 

All 13 B1G Losses:

Acceptable:

Minnesota @ USC: 17-19

Penn State vs Alabama: 11-27

Purdue vs ND: 10-38

MSU @ ND: 13-31

Iowa @ Iowa State: 41-44 OT (Acceptable due to ISU's win over OK State)

Indiana vs Virginia: 31-34 *Suspect "acceptable loss"

OSU @ Miami: 6-24  *Suspect "acceptable loss"

 

Not Acceptable:

Minnesota vs New Mexico State: 21-28

Minnesota vs North Dakota State: 24-37

Indiana vs Ball State: 20-27

Indiana vs North Texas: 21-24

Purdue @ Rice: 22-24

Northwestern @ Army: 14-21 

 

We as a conference should not be losing those six games.  (Unless you're one of those wackos that roots for Non-AQ parity.)

 

This also is demonstrative of how in the computers, your conference is only as strong as your weakest few links, and it doesn't matter if you have "quality" non-conference wins by your stronger teams either this year or in recent bowl history.

 

"I have a dream that someday Michigan will not have freshmen on the field. That day is 2013 at the earliest." - Brian, Defense vs MSU UFR 2011

Theme provided by Roopletheme; sidebars adapted from Chris Murphy.