Examining the stupidity of the B1G schedule

Submitted by DISCUSS Man on

http://www.bigten.org/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/021915aaa.html

 

Rivalry games that will only happen once next basketball season.

Michigan at Ohio State

Michigan vs Indiana

Michigan vs MSU

Purdue at Indiana

Iowa at Minnesota

Wisconsin at Iowa

Nebraska at Iowa

Minnesota at Wisconsin

Illinois at Northwestern

Penn State at Rutgers*

Penn State at Maryland*

 

 

*The last two are extra funny because BTN tried so hard to make a huge deal of the non-existent RU and PSU rivalry during football season. Same goes for Maryland.

does this seem wrong to anybody else?

 

MGoBoard
Basketball

Alton

February 20th, 2015 at 3:33 PM ^

Yeah, Michigan-Indiana basketball is a rivalry the same way that Illinois-Michigan football is a rivalry.

As to the point in the OP, of course it's ridiculous, but it is an obvious consequence of a 14-team conference.  Once we added Rutgers as a conference opponent, we had to drop 1 or 2 games a year against a real Big Ten team:  that's the way the math works.

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 13273

Alton

February 20th, 2015 at 5:03 PM ^

I remember those games.  I went to the 1976 Indiana game in Crisler, and probably every home game against Indiana from 1976-1992.  That was often some great basketball, and was without a doubt the highlight of the schedule every year.  But we are not talking about intensely competitive games a quarter of a century ago, we are talking about a current "rivalry."  Which does not exist with Indiana, and probably never did in Indiana's mind.

Illinois thinks they have a rivalry with Michigan in football, going back to Mike White and Bo Schembechler.  Of course, the only problem is that Michigan fans respond, essentially, "Who the hell was Mike White?"  I think Indiana fans, even the ones as old as I am, would respond the same when thinking about Michigan--sure there were some great games, but our rivals were always Purdue and Kentucky, and Illinois to a lesser extent.  Michigan might be fourth on their list, or maybe Ohio State is.

I think the Michigan-Penn State football comparison is fair--great games, but the "rivalry" was seen much more by one side than it was the other.

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 13273

MC5-95

February 20th, 2015 at 3:42 PM ^

It is silly for the fans I agree, but next season it actually benefits Michigan seeing as our home-and-aways are with the mid-level to basement dwelling B1G teams: Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, Penn State, Purdue. That's a very manageable schedule to make the Dance with a team that may only be slightly better than this year's. 

Joined: 02/26/2014

MGoPoints: 4985

MC5-95

February 20th, 2015 at 4:12 PM ^

That's why I said "may". I would guess that it will mostly depend on how much Walton, Irvin, and Chapman improve. Doyle will definitely be better. I'm kind of stumped about Donnal's progression--could go either way.

Joined: 02/26/2014

MGoPoints: 4985

WolverineHistorian

February 20th, 2015 at 3:54 PM ^

So, let's see if I have this right. Last years BB team traveled to Columbus but OSU didn't have to go to Crisler...where I am confident we would have swept them. The common trend when this happens in basketball is if two B1G teams play once, they will play again only once the following year at the opposite location. Meaning Michigan should have had one game this year with OSU and it should be at Crisler. That didn't happen as two meetings are on the schedule. Lame but I assumed the conference schedule got messed with because of the additions of Rutgers and Maryland....the same reason we played at East Lansing in football the last two years. Now flash forward to next year and once again, there's only one meeting with OSU and once again, they do not have to go to Crisler? Why do the villains keep getting rewarded for the schedule quirks? When is OSU going to have to come to Crisler with no return trip?

Joined: 08/10/2009

MGoPoints: 55464

Old Lax Wolve

February 20th, 2015 at 4:09 PM ^

Only once during the regular season: There's that B1G playoff thing, and that other tournament thing we won't be playing in this year, and that other one too. 

Plus who cares if we don't have exactly equal home-and-home series in any given year? Or that because of scheduling quirks that arise when adding new teams to a conference the nice smooth balance year-to-year isn't there? Shit happens. It all balances out in the end. Which is all that matters is you are really a life-long fan. 

Also, if absence makes the heart grow fonder doesn't it also make each rivalry game that much more intense and desireable to win?

Indiana rivalry: sure under a strict interpretation of rivalary we don't have one with Indiana, and he "heat meter" graphic (IIRC) isn't red between us and them Hoosiers. But they're good at basketball and we like to be good at basketball. Beating Indiana in basketball is something we need to do to be good.

Joined: 01/30/2015

MGoPoints: 148

Sambojangles

February 20th, 2015 at 4:54 PM ^

Proposal - adopt football divisions for basketball. Yes it would be imbalanced, but it would keep rivalries intense. The East would be stacked, Wisco would have an easy schedule. I'm willing to play the West only once per year if it means guaranteed H/H with MSU, OSU, IU (and PSU, Maryland and Rutgers I guess).

Here's what I think should happen:

20 game schedule, home and home vs other 6 teams in your division (12 games) plus one game vs. each team in opposite division (7 more games). The last game can be (A) a protected crossover rivalry (IU and Purdue would probably want this); (B) a strict rotation (14 year cycle, and you play each crossover 8 times at home over the 14 years; or (C) a matchup determined by previous year ranking in the division (1v1, 2v2, etc.) for competitive balance. 

You could even design the BTT so that teams play at least the first game against the opposite division. 

Joined: 12/15/2008

MGoPoints: 10985