I think it's more likely that Nebraska gets the cakewalk every year
I think it's more likely that Nebraska gets the cakewalk every year
Yeah, I'm not getting the Wisco love. Nebraska is the only historic power in the West and is the team most likely to dominate that division. Wisco has been good for about 15 years under Alvarez/Bielema and could go back to being a thoroughly "meh" team quite soon.
While the East has more of the historic powers (UM, OSU and PSU to just Nebraska in the West), I still prefer this alignment to the current configuration. I just hope that there are NO protected cross-over games and that includes Purdue-Indiana because, seriously, who outside of the Hoosier state gives a sh*t if those two play annually.
Basically, each division has two or three teams who are the realistic contenders to win their divisions each year, a team or two squarley in the middle of the pack and a couple of bottom feeders. The only real imbalance is that the winner of the East will probably be the better team in the championship game and will likely win the CG a majority of the time.
Wisconsin won the Big Ten in 2010, 2011 and 2012. That would explain the love for them.
What's the real knock on Wisconsin? That 20+ years ago, they weren't good? Yeah, but that's ancient history now. They've been consistently good for two decades. They're the only program in Wisconsin, have a great homefield advantage, and have easy access to the Chicago talent pool.
At this point I think we can consider them a conference power. I do think they made a strange hire with Gary Andersen - it could be another RR/Michigan type awkward fit - but in the long run I think they'll be good most of the time.
If Wisconsin drops someone else will rise. Not sure how old you are but 20 years ago Iowa was Wisconsin. There is always the "meh" program that rises to be "pretty darn good" just by the nature of someone has to fill that void. Also Illinois I consider the great lost wasteland - impressive school, great recruiting base, but a program that does not match what it should be. Maybe in 10 years they are the one that fills that void. Or it could be Wisconsin.
"Yeah, I'm not getting the Wisco love."
Uhh 3 straight Big 10 championships. Michigan's last 3 in a row were 90-92. I don't give a flying frack what the circumstances were, they did it, and a lot of other programs have not. Only OSU and Wiscy have run 3 off in a row in the past 20 years.
Yeah, Illinois seems to come out of nowhere to win the Big Ten once a decade, only to inexplicably return to crappiness. Their lack of staying power is one of the great CFB mysteries.
Your Burger face is "crazy stacked"...I mean, it's got eyes for goodness sake.
As for the East, you're taking names over recent success. MSU is on the decline, PSU is done for the next 10 years, and right now Maryland and Rutgers are pretty trash.
The B1G isn't a "stacked" conference to begin with, so unless they put Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin and Nebraska all in the same division...it's not unbalanced. They split those 4 and then also split the next tier of MSU/N'Western.
If I am in the West - I am happy.
I don't have to get beatup by MSU, Ohio, Michigan every year. I just need to pull some great upset in the championship game.
"...have to get beat up by MSU..."?
Really? MSU is a middle-of-the-pack Big Ten program who happens to be coming off a couple of good years after a decade or so of mediocrity. Nebraska and Wisconsin are much better programs, and are in the west division.
I dunno, I think MSU is exactly the type of team nobody wants to play. Great defense, ground and pound offense, games against them are gonna be shitty. They're not gonna have Alabama success, but they're still a tough draw
Before: "which division are we in again?" uh... "lalala leaders and best!" right. We're in the Legends.
Now: "which division are we in again?" uh... "lalala champions of the west!" right. We're in the East.
I had a great idea. Something I'd really like to see, as a season ticket holder. A ten-team division, with Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Iowa, Ohio State and Michigan State. We'd play all of them every year (nine games) plus some quality out of conference teams like Stanford, Baylor and Missouri.
What a great idea that would be. Wait. I think we did that. Like, in 1975 (less Iowa):
That East division is STACKED for basketball. BTW, how are the basketball divisions going to work? Do they have a championship game between East/West divisions also? Or does this apply to football only?
The (now former) big east had more teams than this for basketball and had no divisions.
Ahh I see. Well my comment looks pretty damn stupid now, but the East is still stacked for football. I'm glad we have Ohio in our division now though.
Pretty sure there are no divisons for basketball (like the past two seasons), just one league
Nice naming, but conference balance seems a bit lopsided. I mean, unless you think Wiscy and Nebraska will defy recruiting rankings and be able to keep pace with UM/OSU/PSU (post sanctions). I have my doubts, espeically given how Wisconsin is apparently unwilling to put down good money for coaches and assistants.
And the ultimate loser in all of this is, as always, Indiana. Have fun playing MSU/UM/OSU/PSU every year.
I don't think it is crazy lopsided. West has more balance within its division, East is more top-heavy.
Plus, think of it this way: Between Wisconsin, NU, Iowa one of those will be in the B10 championship just about every year. That's a lot of exposure and opportunity to build a program to the next level. I wouldn't be surprised to see those schools have some major success over the next 5 years.
You'll only have one of Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State (when they get their shit back together) in your championship game every year. That's going to hurt whoever's left on the outside's shot of getting into a playoff. Like it or not, the Big Ten ain't getting the same love that the SEC gets in that regard.
But if we didn't make this move, it would never happen.
(referring to your last sentence)
Wow, this whole time I thought you were referring to Michigan St. as the team that makes the east so unfair.
They're 10 years away from being relevant again...you really want to worry about something 10 years from now when the world of college football changes every month an a half?
Get real. You (and a lot of the other posters on this site) are wrong about Penn State not being relevant for the next 10 years. Have you ever been to their campus or spoken with any of their students or graduates? Do you realize their 2013 recruiting class (which will probably be their worst in the next 10 years) was ranked 46th? (just behind Wisconsin at 37, Illinois at 42, Michigan State at 45, and ahead of Northwestern, Maryland, Indiana, Iowa, Purdue, and Minnesota). Most of those teams have been very relevant, at times, during the past 10 years.
" Like it or not, the Big Ten ain't getting the same love that the SEC gets in that regard."
The Big Ten does not DESERVE the same love that the SEC gets in football. It needs to be earned. It's been a ho hum conference for over a decade. Go win some national championships and respect will come. Sick of hearing the respect card. The SEC love annoys me as much as anyone but they do it on the field even if its "dirty" off the field. Until the NCAA cracks down / cares thats the way it is.
It's not like Indiana is playing for the Big ten championship every year as it is. I think they'd rather be in the division with those teams because it will help sell tickets.
Only took two years to come up with "East" and "West". I might have been less surprised with the "Rotel" and "Autoowners Insurance" divisions
What? Not "Barbasol" and "Rotel"?
"Red" and "Not Red"
("Red": IU, Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, ohio, Rutgers, and Wisconsin, "Not Red": everyone else)
Now The Game will still be The Game and most often the de facto B1G championship. Also, I'd much rather have to play MSU in division than as a protected cross-over.
Thank you! Finally common sense emerges. "Competitive balance" is not something that can easily be controlled, so do what's right, which are these divisions.
Also, lolSparty. Go back to your hole and never come out.
Are you counting Sparty as a top-5 program? Please.
The five best programs are Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Nebraska and PSU. That works out to three in one division and two in the other, which is the best you can do - and PSU is headed for a fall with the sanctions, so it'll basically be 2-2 for the next several years, which is fine.
Then it's Michigan, Ohio, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Sparty.
It's still no different.
Who cares if its unbalanced? We got in the same division as Ohio and we have the fertile NJ and Maryland recruiting grounds.
Also with a playoff looming, it will be very important to have a good strength of schedule. So we want a tough division.
and a great benefit to having Maryland and Rutgers in our division. I think you could also easily make the argument that it gets us further into the fertile Virginia recruiting grounds too. Big benefit to get to play with 3 or 4 hours of the state every year (PSU, Rutgers, Md)
I just hope it doesn't hurt us too much in Illinois. We've gotten some good guys out of that state.
Michigan is close enough to Illinois that I doubt missing 1 or 2 games in Illinois will matter to them or their families too much since we'll have a bunch of games in A2 and games in EL, Bloomington, and Columbus every year. All plenty close enough to Illinois...in my opinion
How many times will we miss Illinois AND Northwestern in the same year?
Wtf. Why couldn't they name it something awesome like "Leaders" and "Legends". Damn big ten.
Leaners & Legacys
Legions & Lenders
Lesions & Lemons
Clearly no one was thinking outside the box.
I consider us lucky that we're not in the MAC, they have Central & Eastern in the West division, couldn't they scrounge up a compass at their meeting?
We won, everyone! We won the war!
Kork Coupons helped them a ton on offense but now they're basically going to be a poor man's LSU from here on out: great defense, horrifying offense
I'm not sure they'll always even have a great defense. They're not recruiting all that well. If you've got to rely continually on 3-star guys to overachieve, at some point the well will run dry.
but I think as long as they have Narduzzi, he'll make those 3 stars into a respectable or better defense. When he goes, the wheels come off
I'm not a big Dantonio fan, but they will have a decent defense as long as he's still the head coach. For all his faults, the guy is still a solid defensive coach.
It makes it a lot easier to get to the Rose Bowl/NCG when we only have to play Ohio once and PSU will be down in the near future. It works out perfectly for us.
Way to get it right. I am happy with the names, simple.
Also, the SEC does just fine with perceived division imbalance:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss St, TAMU
Whole lot more balanced than the new Big Ten. Plus, everyone is overlooking the fact that we have to play Indiana, Maryland, and Rutgers every year now. Fuck. That.
I can live with playing them as long as we're also playing Ohio, MSU and PSU every year, and in the same division (so we're not handicapped by having a better cross-division rival than everyone else). Not to mention that Rutgers and Maryland give us good East Coast exposure for recruiting.
No it's not that balanced the past 10 years. Alabama and LSU are the class of the West. Florida the East. Those are the 3 current power programs of the SEC. Auburn had its one year. Georgia, for all its hype, is the perpetual bridesmaid. They are like the Clemson of the SEC - a bunch of preseason hype but never do it at the end. Tennessee has sucked for a decade. South Carolina has only risen due to the coach. I imagine when they made the divisions the thinking was South Carolina is garbage and Tennessee is the power in that conference with Florida. How things can change in a decade. It's been a 3 team conference at the top for well over a decade and they put a pretty darn good Texas A&M team in the stronger side to boot. And not that long ago Arkansas was a top 10 team.
And that's after having lost the last 4 and 5 of the last 6.
Everyone used to talk about how unbalanced it was in the East's favor. These things go back and forth.