Big Ten considering eliminating football divisions, among other changes as early as 2023

Submitted by redwings8831 on January 26th, 2022 at 1:18 PM

Iowa AD Gary Barta tells @ScottDochterman that there are serious discussions happening about both the Big Ten ending divisional play and also dropping down to eight conference games starting in 2023 (to schedule games against the Pac-12 & ACC): https://t.co/6vNiCOva1f

— Nicole Auerbach (@NicoleAuerbach) January 26, 2022

"There also are serious discussions about the Big Ten ending divisional play with schools playing three opponents annually and cycling through the other 10 teams either every other year or two years on, two years off."

https://theathletic.com/news/big-ten-discussing-potential-elimination-of-divisions-as-part-of-future-football-scheduling-plans/g0LD4tO9pYmP/

ak47

January 26th, 2022 at 2:25 PM ^

Why? Its bad for Michigan. You are still going to be guaranteed to play OSU/MSU every year and while PSU isn't every year its going to include Wisconsin/Iowa more frequently. This structure basically guarantees that over every 4 year period Michigan will have the most difficult schedule in the conference.

Not to mention the possibility that you could have a situation where Michigan/OSU are locked into the championship game going into the last week of the regular season, ensuring a rematch in back to back weeks which would be bad for making the playoffs and take a ton of steam out of the on campus game.

The schools most excited about this switch would be PSU/MD/Indiana/Rutgers. Michigan is probably the school with the least to gain from this switch.

NittanyFan

January 26th, 2022 at 2:48 PM ^

They've played every single year since PSU joined the conference in 1993 (OSU was one of Penn State's 2 "protected annual games" back during the 11-team, 8-game era), they're geographically close to each other, and the people with $$$ (the TV networks) would probably like this game to exist annually because it's virtually guaranteed to get a solid rating.

Honestly, I'd be shocked if the Big Ten goes to a 14-team, 8-game, 3-protected-teams-annually model and OSU isn't one of the 3 protected games for PSU.  For some teams it's more difficult to populate their 3 annual foes, but for PSU it's rather easy: OSU, Rutgers, Maryland.

NittanyFan

January 26th, 2022 at 3:02 PM ^

I'm not trying to make things easier for PSU, I'm just being realistic.

Look at it this way: "If the B1G goes to the 3-annual-games protected model, who the hell else are Maryland & Rutgers going to play every year?  Yes, they can play each other, but then where do their other 2 slots go?"

Also, those 2 schools will want PSU to be one of their protected games, because of the fact that PSU fans will help fill their own stadiums.  They'll be advocating for this, and like it or not, they are conference members and get a vote on these things.

Anyway, if both schools get PSU, that virtually guarantees OSU/PSU as the Buckeyes will then act as a competitive counter-balance.

Cock D

January 26th, 2022 at 10:12 PM ^

As a PSU Grad, lifelong M fan, and Season Ticket Holder at both schools - yes: this is the correct analysis.  FWIW, PSU (for all the "unrivaled" crap) would lose their shit if OSU wasn't protected.  As would / should we in the interest of competitive balance.  

 

Personally, I'd protect PSU as our third, after OSU and MSU, but know it will wind up being Jug (and that's cool - I like that game).

jmblue

January 26th, 2022 at 2:56 PM ^

PSU will play OSU and MSU for sure.  Those were their protected rivalries before divisions came into play.  The question is whether Michigan will be the third.  I could see Rutgers or Maryland taking that spot, which would make geographical sense (and someone's got to play those teams).

I could see this happening:

Michigan - OSU, MSU, Minnesota

OSU - UM, PSU, Illinois

PSU - OSU, MSU, Rutgers/Maryland

MSU - UM, PSU, Rutgers/Indiana

swan flu

January 26th, 2022 at 3:01 PM ^

If Michigan had MSU/OSU, OSU had Mich/PSU, PSU had Wisco/OSU, and Wisconsin had PSU/MSU then this would be probably okay.

 

More likely, MSU will get us and fucking Indiana, and Wisconsin will get Iowa/Minnesota.

 

These changes will ensure Wisco and MSU have a systematic advantage because no one wants to be their rivals.

ak47

January 26th, 2022 at 3:18 PM ^

I mean sure but that would still leave Michigan at a relative disadvantage to MSU/PSU, unless they also get locked in to each other at which point you just have the east division in a pod at a scheduling disadvantage to the rest of the conference.

The point being that this isn't a good thing for Michigan. The best case scenario is Michigan/OSU/PSU/MSU get equally screwed in scheduling relative to Iowa and Wisconsin and the rest of the conference with the worst case scenario being Michigan has easily the hardest set up in the conference.

Richard75

January 26th, 2022 at 3:05 PM ^

Agreed, although MSU seems like the team with the most to gain here. Sure, Md/IU/RU would avoid playing OSU and Mich annually, but realistically, all that does is strengthen their shot at bowl eligibility.

MSU’s dream has been to move to the West (to avoid playing OSU every year) while keeping an annual game with U-M. The proposed idea accomplishes both. (Although they’d play OSU less if they moved to the West.)

Penn State, however, would likely have to keep an annual game with OSU. The B1G wouldn’t let them have no marquee annual opponent, and the conference wouldn’t stick Michigan with having to play all three of MSU/OSU/PSU every year.

Creedence Tapes

January 26th, 2022 at 4:23 PM ^

Why? Its bad for Michigan. You are still going to be guaranteed to play OSU/MSU every year and while PSU isn't every year its going to include Wisconsin/Iowa more frequently. This structure basically guarantees that over every 4 year period Michigan will have the most difficult schedule in the conference.

As a fan, it would make for much more interesting games. I don't know about you, but my level of f*cks given about playing Rutgers or Maryland is very low. I want to see us play (and beat) the best teams in the conference, not get as many tomato can games as we can possibly get. I would also prefer the BIG to go back to 12 teams (just keep Nebraska so we can continue to laugh at Scott Frost), with each team playing everyone else in the conference every year, and only one non-conference game on the schedule with it preferably being Notre Dame.  

WalterWhite_88

January 26th, 2022 at 4:43 PM ^

I would be all for this, IF there was a way to avoid a rematch in the championship game. The thought that some years, Mich and OSU would already be locked into a rematch during the B1G championship game is awful to think about. Is it realistic to put a clause that says that a rematch is not allowed, meaning that, say Mich beats OSU, and so both teams end up in the top two spots with 7-1 B1G records, that Mich would go to the B1G champ game since they beat OSU, and OSU would be left out, and so Mich's opponent would then go be the next highest B1G record team that Mich hasn't already played that year? I guess that could get complicated/ridiculous if the 3rd, 4th and 5th placed B1G teams were teams that Mich already also played. 

Gulogulo37

January 26th, 2022 at 7:39 PM ^

You could just require that you win your pod to be in the championship game to avoid a back to back rematch. Best conference records among pod winners with all the tiebreakers that follow. Michigan already plays a tough schedule anyway with OSU, MSU, and PSU. I still think this would be better. It doesn't screw Michigan anymore than usual. MSU, OSU, Minnesota.

skegemogpoint

January 26th, 2022 at 3:45 PM ^

I believe I was the first person to call for disbanding of Divisions several years ago. Total anachronism.  Serves no purpose where teams travel by air and only play up to 6 road games per year. Geographical divisions make a ton of sense in many other sports, just not D1 football.

Wolverine 73

January 26th, 2022 at 1:26 PM ^

Would this eliminate the championship game?  If so, does it suggest possible playoff expansion (by eliminating one game for any potential playoff bound team)?

Vasav

January 26th, 2022 at 2:17 PM ^

I'm guessing it'll be Northwestern.

Back in the pre-Nebraska days, Iowa-Minnesota-Wisconsin were each others protected games. If they add Nebraska as the third, we wouldn't get Minnesota.

They may, however, want to spread the 4 largest fanbases around - PSU, OSU, Nebraska and us. They'd probably try to make sure the other 10 get at least one of us. If RU-Maryland get PSU annually, and the western 3 get Nebraska, I figure our third game is still likely to be a school from Illinois or Indiana.

One hiccup tho - since we're guaranteed for 2 protected rivals to be MSU and OSU, and OSU probably has their 2nd as PSU (which fills up PSU's schedule) - that means both us and OSU have only one more game each to give to those 4 schools - so 2 of them may get left hanging. If Wisconsin is also included as a school that travels well, then the Nebraska-Wisconsin game almost certainly doesn't become annual, and Minnesota-Nebraska and Iowa-Wisconsin may also be cut to spread the Huskers and Badgers around. But in that case, we MAY get Minnesota.

Kilgore Trout

January 26th, 2022 at 1:46 PM ^

I think the math works out really well in a 14 team conference to have three annual matchups, especially if you're going to 8 games. It would get pretty tricky to keep any sort of balance if you had no consistent rivalry matchups.

I also do not think UM will get OSU, MSU, and PSU. That is unfair to Michigan. I think more likely is OSU, MSU, and Rutgers. Rutgers isn't going to be exciting or popular, but it balances having to play OSU and MSU every year and brings Michigan to the east coast every other year.

I've seen Minnesota mentioned, but I would guess that they will take the foursome of Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Minnesota and have them all each play the other three every year.