East-West is the preferred option, I believe.
Ed-S: VOTE FOR THE EYE!!!
East-West is the preferred option, I believe.
Ed-S: VOTE FOR THE EYE!!!
I feel like inner/outer might be most competitvely balanced.
Balanced, yes, but I find it really unfair to the "outer" schools. Basically the newest 4 teams to the conference plus Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa - essentially the rejects division. Traveling would be miserable for those teams.
But OTOH it would preserve all rivalries within the divisions. By doing so, this would allow for more games against teams in the other division. And while travel would be long for half of the intradivision games, the others would be relatively close.
Agree, I just think that we would be singing a different tune if Michigan was geographically alligned in the "outer" division. I want the divisions to be set up for sustainability. I feel like the popular suggestion on this board will just end up being redone in the future.
But there are benefits to the schools in the Outer division, too. The four western schools get guaranteed East Coast exposure every year, which they wouldn't get in an East-West split. For recruiting, that's a big deal.
I would prefer East-West even with the competitive imbalance due to being able to play games in the DC-Virginia corridor (and NJ to a lesser extent).
Probably helps recruiting too to show up in those markets more frequently.
Personally, I'd love to be able to travel to see the games @Maryland.
Yes, but I'm saying that this is where Inner-Outer benefits the Nebraska/Minn/Iowa/Wisc quartet. In the Inner-Outer setup, they get guaranteed East Coast games. In the East/West one, they don't.
As far as Michigan is concerned, as long as we're playing OSU annually, we're in good shape recruitingwise. Ohio is a bigger deal to us than NJ or Maryland.
Posted this on Brian's thread too:
I'm wondering if a stacked Eastern division is better. Recruits know they are guaranteed a number of big games each year. Also, playing at Maryland and Rutgers every other year probalbly helps recruiting.
I think the odds of winning the division are a bit lower in the East/West format, but it also makes for a great number of big games and might help recruiting in some hotbed areas. I'm going east-west.
Personally, I prefer the Inner-Outer division in terms of teams. But I'll take anything with OSU and Michigan in the same division.
Inner-Outer? How the hell does that even make sense?
Edit: I suppose I jumped the gun a bit. Didn't really look at the balance. Just baffled by that map.
The Iris Division and the Sclera Division. BRILLIANT!
(In reference to Inner/Outer)
Inner and outer.....isn't that in reference to belly buttons?
I believe that is "innie" and "outtie" with regards to belly-buttons. Maybe those should be the two names instead of "inner" and "outer" (which sounds stupid).
Michigan and Ohio in same division.
Inner outer by far the best
Inner-Outer seems to be the best solution. In East/West, I feel the West is too weak, Penn State helps the strength of that side in the Outer division.
div. 1- UM and OSU
div. 2- everyone else
AKA Seth's Idea is the consensus preferred option here.
Yeah, I agree. Inner-Outer seems to be the most competitively-balanced. Do schools care about travel distance? I'm sure Rutgers would probably get tired of having to travel to Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa, and Minnesota every year.
It only applies to football, so it's not that big of a deal. Rutgers is going to be flying to most destinations anyway.
Maryland, Penn St, and Rutgers get 2 home games and 2 away games each year vs. Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa, and Minnesota, that way the traveling is more balanced.
You assume Rutgers and Maryland have fans. There is no evidence these people exist.
This is what I left in the comment box:
"Add Occidental College and Misericordia University to get the LA and Dallas tv footprints."
I live in the chicago area, so I am much in favor of the inner/outer arrangement. I drive to Michigan for football games, but I don't really want to go much further for a game.
I'd much rather keep beating up on Illinois than a post-sanctions Penn State.
Option #1: Existing says names to be determined. Are Legends and Leaders on the way out?
Say it ain't so! /s
I dont ever want to play Rutgers and Maryland. EVER!
my first choice
East West sounds the best as far as division names go, but teams rewritinging their preferred historic rivalries for the sake of division names is......aww hell, anything to get rid of Ledgers and Leadins.
whichever division will give us the most WOW moments.
As long as we are in the same division as OSU, I will be happy.
I voted for East/West, because it seems more realistic than Inner/Outer - though I'd take Inner/Outer in a heartbeat. It does seem to be the most balanced and for our division, anyway, the geography would be great.
strongly prefer inner-outer (after all, I had drawn that up as my prefered divisions even before I saw what Seth had done). I could live with East-West though. Anything but the +1
First 7 teams in the B1G in a division and last 7 in a division? I don't know much of the history when teams joined.
I don't know if we'd want that. We were a charter member in 1895, but then left in 1908 and didn't rejoin until 1917. If you count our rejoin date, we're the 9th member of the conference.
Don't know how I was six minutes behind you on that one.
The only upside of the old v. new alignment would be that MSU and OSU would be in our division. As much as I despise the LIttle Brotherness of so many Spartans I know, I do think they are our second biggest rival and should be in our division. But with that said, I would rather have them in the other division than OSU.
UM left the league from 1907-1916. Would our joining date be 1896 or 1916?
We were a founding member in 1896, but we technically are one of the last 7 to join if you use the 1916 date.
If the B1G used 1916, the last 7 would be: MD, Rutgers, Nebraska, PSU, MSU, OSU, Michigan (so it would essentially be East/West but swapping Nebraska for Indiana).
Anything that will put Michigan and Ohio in the same division. That being said, I voted for inner. More competitively balanced.
I voted for East/West. I think inner/outer would be better for Michigan (and everyone else in the "inner" division that never has to travel very far), but I think East/West is a better move from a conference standpoint, avoiding traveling between the East coast and Nebraska as much as possible.
I also don't think the competitive balance is too bad in East/West, especially if Penn State and MSU fall off a bit as expected in the coming years, and extra especially if Wisconsin can keep going as a perrenial conference contender.
The fall sports fly to farther locations, so it doesn't make that big of a difference. No other sports besides football has divisions so they have to drive the distance anyways. I would rather see Michigan play traditional Big Ten schools rather than Rutgers and Maryland. To hell with Nebraska and their Ohio State coach.
UofM-St.Louis... how do you not want the inner-outer?! I live in St Louis too. Do you have any clue how much this would potentially save on travel expenses for us? It would mean 4 out of the 7 teams would be roughly within a 4 and a half hour radius of StL. Why?
I'm a big supporter of inner-outer. I would rather Michigan play traditional Big Ten teams then Rutgers and Maryland every year.
I voted for "Inner-Outer" (although I first thought or orbital diagrams when I saw this - Rutgers' orbit is very eccentric and it could escape the conference at apogee from the inner conference) as well. The East-West arrangement, to me, seems a little top-heavy in the East and a little bottom-loaded in the West, if you will. The Inner-Outer arrangement disperses the good and "meh" better.
I would want to see expansion to 16 teams. With Four divisions.
Western Division: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Nebraska and Iowa
Northern Division: Michigan, MSU, Northwestern, Illinois
Central Division: Purdue, Indiana, OSU, PSU
Eastern Division: Maryland, Rutgers, Georgia Tech* (possibly), Add Good Coastal school*
With this you would rotate each year the divisions that play each other. (like the NFL), with one protected rivalry game.For the championship, Top teams from each division would advance, and there would be a four team playoff for the Big Ten championship.
Most of you will probably hate this, but I think it would be pretty sweet.
To me anything with Michigan and OSU in the same division is not balanced.
Is the current setup (where Michigan plays OSU every year while our division rivals only play them 40% of the time) balanced?
The protected cross-division games have got to go. The league needs to put all rivalries within the divisions.
Agree, moving forward, as long as the B1G maintains an 8 game conference schedule, as long as Michigan and OSU are in different divisions, they are at a significant strength of schedule disadvantage due to having to play eachother every year, while their divisional rivals play Michigan/OSU 2 out of every 12 years.
Nebraska, MSU played OSU this year. Yes the are not locked to playing them every year, but we dont have to play Wisconsin every year, like Nebraska. They are on our schedule, who cares who they play just beat them.