Big Ten Fans

[CJHawkeyes]

Would you like to see the conference do more to limit the possibility of top teams missing each other even at the possible expense of protected rivalries and/or rotating home and away games? For example, based on the previous year's standings, teams would miss the following opponents during the next season:

1-(10,11)
2-(9,11)
3-(8,10)
4-(7,9)
5-(6,8)
6-(5.7)
7-(4,6)
8-(3,5)
9-(2,4)
10-(1,3)
11-(1,2)

Except for #5 missing #6, the top six teams play a round robin. Also, during the BCS' nine years, the top three Big Ten teams have missed each other five times (5 of 27). OSU-Wisconsin missed each other three times. OSU-Iowa in 2002 and Michigan-Wisconsin in 2004 are the other instances. Of course, 2002 is the reason for most criticism brought by other conferences' fans. All five matchups would have occurred under this format. To protect rotating home and away schedules, this format could be applied on a two year basis. Thoughts?

[GopherGuy]

In theory, that would be great, but in practical terms, I don't think they'd ever go to that model because they want the conference games scheduled further in advance than that. With 12 games a year, most teams will play at least one OOC game during the conference season, so they need to know when their off week is years in advance.

[Hail to the Victors Valiant]

CJH raises a mindboggling question that I have often thought about but have yet to develop a lasting answer to. Unless the season is 16 games long as in the NFL, we have to deal with some inequity. Staggered schedules exist in almost every major sport including MLB with imbalanced interleague schedules, NFL with imbalanced non-divisional and non-conference schedules.

And having a conference title game is not a solution when it is really needed in only 5 of 27 years. Why should Michigan have to rematch Ohio State in every year when these 2 teams finish atop the standings as they did last year. For one, it gives the loser in the rivalry game an unnecessary opportunity for revenge and a BCS bowl invite. Secondly, it diminishes the importance of the first meeting between the 2 teams, which occurs more than 5 out of every 27 times. The same holds true for other conferences with title games but that's not at issue in this thread.

In sum, I'd leave everything the same and enjoy the regular season games.

[CJHawkeyes]

In theory, that would be great, but in practical terms, I don't think they'd ever go to that model because they want the conference games scheduled further in advance than that. With 12 games a year, most teams will play at least one OOC game during the conference season, so they need to know when their off week is years in advance.


That could certainly be a problem. Of course, they could still schedule OOC games and then schedule conference games around those games. The Big Ten usually takes the last Sat in Nov and first Sat in Dec off. A bigger objection might be that two teams could miss each other for years.

[PSUFan]

Secondly, it diminishes the importance of the first meeting between the 2 teams, which occurs more than 5 out of every 27 times. In sum, I'd leave everything the same and enjoy the regular season games.


Couldn't agree more.

But on the flip side...add a team like Pittsburgh or WVU, balance the conference and schedule a title game would be a shot in the arm to this conference

[GatorGrad]

I agree with PSUfan. The Big Ten needs to add a 12th team and stage a CCG in either Indianapolis or Chicago. That would be huge.