DOOM for Leaders & Legends?

Submitted by rayfrom19 on July 22nd, 2012 at 2:23 PM


With "unprecedented" mentalities coming tomorrow for PSU, I can't see how Jim Delany has any other choice but to disband the 2-division set-up for football.  Once PSU is banned from the post-season, in 2012 the Leaders division will have have 1/3 of its teams ineligible for the Championship game (OSU & PSU).  With only 10 teams eligible and 3 of the best teams (UM, Nebraska & M$U) in the Legends division, it only makes sense to move (back) to a 10 team division where the top 2 eligible teams represent the conference in the championship.



July 22nd, 2012 at 2:27 PM ^

I honestly wouldnt be shocked if they did change it a bit. The divisions were slightly imbalanced to begin with, and if the punishments are as bad as they are rumored to be, PSU wont be a challenger for a solid decade, at least. But it would be a lot of work, so I think they would only change them as a last resort. If PSU only gets a year or two off the postseason, I cant see them changing it.


July 22nd, 2012 at 2:28 PM ^

Doom for the divisional structure? No, probably not.

Doom for the absurd division names "Legends" and "Leaders"? Potentially and yes please. 

Besides, Wisconsin is probably winning the Leaders anyways so OSU/PSU's ineligibility could be moot. 


July 22nd, 2012 at 5:41 PM ^

conference will be restructured to some degree.  This will change the whole look of the conference.  This came at the worst possible time for the conference with recent reallignments and playoff developments.  I don't know how this is going to affect the conference specifically other than to say it ain't good, at all.  They can either beg for Notre Dame and try to snag another of try to "change out" Penn State for a Big East immigrant, but this will certainly have an impact on the conference if the penalties are as debilitating as thought right now, and long term.


July 22nd, 2012 at 2:29 PM ^

its not a sprint...PSU, no matter what sanctions come their way, will be able to rebound. Loyal following, large financial resources, and fertile recruiting ground

Leaders And Best

July 22nd, 2012 at 2:30 PM ^

Seriously though, I doubt it will change anything. Ohio's ban is only one year. Even if PSU's ban is multiyear, there is no other team to balance out with in other division. It does mean Ohio will have a cakewalk to the championship game for the foreseeable future if PSU is hammered.

Silly Goose

July 22nd, 2012 at 2:29 PM ^

Also, are you suggesting we ban both OSU and PSU from playing football, because that is what a 10 team league would be. It is just one year, and there is no reason why PSU couldn't play in the Big 10 championship game even with a bowl ban. All it does is make selecting who goes where a little awkward.


July 22nd, 2012 at 3:00 PM ^

Not sure if there is an official NCAA rule that conference championship games are considered equivalent to bowls, but generally teams are banned from "post-season play," which includes the conference championship game. Look at the Pac-12 last season, for instance, UCLA went to the championship game because USC was serving their bowl ban.


July 22nd, 2012 at 3:03 PM ^

i believe that when the B1G championship game was conveived, the conference had to establish rules for tiebreaker type situations.  as part of that process, they also included the rule that a Big Ten program who is banned from playing in a bowl game will not be allowed to participate in the Big Ten title game.

turd ferguson

July 22nd, 2012 at 2:35 PM ^

Personally, I don't really care about the division names (they're division names), but the protected inter-divisional rivalries thing pisses me off.  It creates strength-of-schedule imbalance that tends to give the same teams advantages/disadvantages every season.  Realistically, the only reason that they needed those protected rivalries was because they put Michigan and OSU in opposite divisions. 

I'd love to see the Big Ten swallow its pride on this, put Michigan & OSU together, and drop the protected rivalry thing.  They could name the divisions "Piss" and "Shit" for all I care.


July 22nd, 2012 at 2:38 PM ^

Really, doom? You think that Delany will switch back to a single division? What does he do when Ohio comes back eligible next year? Do we switch back to the two divisions then? The divisions are staying exactly the way they currently are

Six Zero

July 22nd, 2012 at 2:39 PM ^

I can't see how Jim Delany has any other choice but to postpone the season so we can have the necessary time to celebrate this epic thread.

Space Coyote

July 22nd, 2012 at 3:04 PM ^

it's hard seeing PSU ever becoming a doormat. They won't be Indiana. At worst they are like Illinois last year. At worst, they will probably be a decent, not great, team that you can't look past. It potentially makes that division much more mediocre and certainly without the top level teams that were expected when the divisions were set-up, but it still won't be how the Big 12 North/South were for about ten years.

Space Coyote

July 22nd, 2012 at 3:00 PM ^

1) $ in MSU

2) Lone upvote is done by the OP

3) Illogical reasoning: The B1G can't have a championship game without divisions; OSU will be able to be in it next year; PSU penalties haven't come down yet; etc.

4) DOOM (all caps)

5) the rest of the OP

Rough day for threads on the board. I wonder if "Urban Liar" is to blame for all this.


July 22nd, 2012 at 3:32 PM ^

1. You can pick apart any thread without being a rocket scientist.

2. I pray it is DOOM for the shitty title game held in Indianapolis.

3. ohio will walk into it every year after this. They gain Pennsylvania recruits and play nobody.

4. Don't be such an asshole, because the thread was correct.

5. If you want to critique writing on an entertainment thread your time would be better spent teaching 4th grade English. Yes the sentence was too long. I have better things to do than proofread my postings on MGoBlog.

6. Go Blue!


July 22nd, 2012 at 3:16 PM ^

The negs have came and I do agree the OP was less than ideal, but the Big Ten is going to have to do something if Penn State isn't going to a bowl this season. IMO other than getting creative with the division standings formula, the best option might be to swap Nebraska for Ohio. That removes a significant competitive advantage for Wisconsin/Iowa/Purdue/Indiana and satisfies Michigan and Ohio fans.


July 22nd, 2012 at 3:29 PM ^

Isn't the problem that the Legends division is much tougher compared to the Leaders? Wouldn't switching OSU and Nebraska just make the Legends division tougher (assuming OSU > Nebraska)? I'm not sure I follow your logic.

If it's got something to do with OSU's ban this fall, that's only one year. They won't make any changes to anything based on the OSU sanctions.


July 22nd, 2012 at 3:34 PM ^

For 2011, third place could be good enough for a championship game spot. I just can't imagine them allowing a team with four or five conference losses to play in the championship game while two of Michigan, MSU and Nebraska sit at home. It's more about evening out the banned teams, IMO.

Plus I most definitely have a dog in the race, as I want Ohio in our division.


July 22nd, 2012 at 3:43 PM ^

There's no way the conference changes anything based on the potential for one lop-sided title game this season. More than likely, Wisconsin will win enough to be a deserving representative in the championship. Even if they aren't, the Big10 will take their awful title game and won't make serious changes to the conference to address a very short-term problem.

This is just a confluence of very unlikely events that have created a one-year problem that may not even ben an issue, depending on Wisconsin's performance. Having two teams from the conference banned from post-season play at the same time is unusual enough. Having it be two teams from the top of the same division is even more unlikely.


July 22nd, 2012 at 3:25 PM ^

"With "unprecedented" mentalities coming tomorrow for PSU, I can't see how Jim Delany has any other choice but to disband the 2-division set-up for football. "- from the OP

You could, of course, keep the alignments and send the best team from the division not in deep sh*t with the NCAA to the conference championship game. That's how a 6-6 UCLA team managed to play Oregon in the Pac-12 Championship. I am pretty sure you can't declare a concept a failure because of something which was not caused by conference realignment. It is sort like blaming the demise of UPN on solar flares. 


July 22nd, 2012 at 3:30 PM ^

Whether it was caused by the realignment or not (like you say, it obviously wasn't) I do think something needs to be done if Penn State isn't going to a bowl this season. Wisconsin, Illinois, Purdue and IU have an insanely easy road to the title game, as they could finish third in their division and make the title game. Using the Pac last year as an example, you would have sent Arizona State to the title game if UCLA was banned, and they were below .500 in conference at 4-5.

turd ferguson

July 22nd, 2012 at 3:52 PM ^

Delany & co. will be praying that Wisconsin is dominant this year.  None of those other programs seems ready, and a .500 team in the second-ever BTCG - highlighting the wrongdoing of two Big Ten heavyweights - would be ugly.

I, too, doubt that much will be done given [1] how little time there is to do it and [2] the strong likelihood that OSU will be fine after this season.