I like the idea of each team playing each team over the years. It could be a good recruiting tool for both conferences.

And I don't understand why people are wanting it tobe the SEC instead of the Pac-12. The SEC is in an up-cycle... it happens. The B1G and Pac-12 have a lot more in common including a rich history and quality academic institutions.

This is not some random pairing but one forged through the years.

Schools in the B10 like Indiana, Purdue, Minnesota and Illinois got to be hating this. if not for their OOC games of an FCS and three MAC schools they likely would never be bowl eligible.

Ditto for the lesser P12 teams (which means everyone but USC, Oregon and (for now but not soon) Stanford).

ccrunner609;1029829 wrote:Why would the SEC schools do this? THat means they would likely have to drop their week 11 games with DII schools. I think its a good idea though. AQ schools it should be mandatory that they play 1-2 games against other OOC AQ schools to be eligible for a BCS games.

Yes, that requirement would really make Mississippi and Mississippi State earn all those BCS trips they've been getting. Since the top teams already play that one game you're looking for, just like virtually every other top team in the country, I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

Little Danny;1029807 wrote:Schools in the B10 like Indiana, Purdue, Minnesota and Illinois got to be hating this. if not for their OOC games of an FCS and three MAC schools they likely would never be bowl eligible.

Ditto for the lesser P12 teams (which means everyone but USC, Oregon and (for now but not soon) Stanford).

Too bad. You play in the B1G. If you can't handle playing other good teams, then you don't deserve to be in the conference.

I guess the years that the elite schools get a lower school from the other conference they can schedule up with the Big 12 or ACC.

Sonofanump;1029866 wrote:I guess the years that the elite schools get a lower school from the other conference they can schedule up with the Big 12 or ACC.

The biggest problem with that is the desire by most schools to play seven or eight home games in year. If OSU is forced to go out to Pullman to play Washington State, they will have to ensure they don't play a B12 or ACC school on the road either. The problem is that the B12 and ACC schools are also trying to play seven or eight home games too.

LJ;1029610 wrote:Its going to be a full round robin.

Sonofanump;1029627 wrote:Not sure how I feel about that.

I read alot on Twitter that said the matchups would be based on competitive equity, as much as they could be.

se-alum;1031060 wrote:I read alot on Twitter that said the matchups would be based on competitive equity, as much as they could be.

Delany was on BTN and said it would be a full round robin with as equal of matchups as they could make it. I am guessing that when teams are going into what would be considered an up season for them, they will get the big dogs.

LJ;1031062 wrote:Delany was on BTN and said it would be a full round robin with as equal of matchups as they could make it. I am guessing that when teams are going into what would be considered an up season for them, they will get the big dogs.

Gotcha. I was reading as the info was released, and really haven't had a chance to read up on the final product.

Little Danny;1029807 wrote:Schools in the B10 like Indiana, Purdue, Minnesota and Illinois got to be hating this. if not for their OOC games of an FCS and three MAC schools they likely would never be bowl eligible.

Ditto for the lesser P12 teams (which means everyone but USC, Oregon and (for now but not soon) Stanford).

Minnesota already has Oregon State on their schedule for later this decade, played Cal in the mid/late-00s and just finished up a two-game set with USC.

ccrunner609;1031128 wrote:After watching Baylor put up 67 on Washington...........

Please go on. This thought has great potential.

ccrunner609;1031169 wrote:I would love to see any B1G team rack up 50. Illinois could win this game

ccrunner609;1031169 wrote:I would love to see any B1G team rack up 50. Illinois could win this game

I'm disappointed that's all you came up with.

Heretic;1029089 wrote:Yankee Stadium? **** THAT. Because nothing says west coast vs. midwest like motherfucking New York City...

People are bashing it, but it makes sense for both conferences for exactly what was said "why play the game where nobody cares?" Becaue very few kids were playing at OSU or other Big 10 schools from Philadelphia, Virginia, Maryland, DC before Penn State joined. The conference reach grew dramatically, not just in sports but in the overall student body. Playing games in NYC will expose kids in that area to the Big 10 even more and could increase the interest. People like you will watch your team play wherever, people from NYC aren't travelling to Chivago to watch OSU-USC, but they will go to Yankee Stadium. Neither conference is playing the game to please their current fan base, they have enough games at home for that. Each will benefit from the exposure.

If they want to play in NY, then play at the Meadowlands(or whatever it is called now).

If they want to pay in Chicago, play at Soldier Field.

ccrunner609;1031683 wrote:playing in NYC is merely a chance to test the TV market. DOnt know why since they failed to get a team like Rutgers to bite.

What makes you think the B1G wanted Rutgers or any weak team/college from that area?

Fly4Fun;1031688 wrote:What makes you think the B1G wanted Rutgers or any weak team/college from that area?

S&L told us so.