B
Benito
Posts: 59
Dec 19, 2009 10:44am
So what happens to the rivalry game if the conference goes to 2 divisions. I think it would be sweet for The Game to be in the conference championship, but then there would probably be plenty of years that they wouldn't even play. Thoughts?
ytownfootball
Posts: 6,978
Dec 19, 2009 10:49am
Nothing would happen to jeopardize the greatest rivalry in all of sports. Whatever evolves out of conference re-allignment will preserve the rivalry gauranteed.
A
Al Bundy
Posts: 4,180
Dec 19, 2009 10:49am
They would put OSU/Mich in the same division if they split into divisions.
Writerbuckeye
Posts: 4,745
Dec 19, 2009 10:52am
No way.Benito wrote: So what happens to the rivalry game if the conference goes to 2 divisions. I think it would be sweet for The Game to be in the conference championship, but then there would probably be plenty of years that they wouldn't even play. Thoughts?
If the Big Ten expands to 20 teams, OSU-UM will continue to be the last game of the regular season.
Period.
That will not be changing. Nor should it.
If another team is added, say Missouri, then you simply put OSU and UM in differing divisions. If they happen to still meet up again in the title game a week after playing their rivalry -- so be it.
If you put them in the same division, you will weight the power of the conference to that division. They need to be in different ones.
N
Nate
Posts: 3,949
Dec 19, 2009 11:16am
OSU vs. Michigan will never change.
krambman
Posts: 3,606
Dec 19, 2009 11:26am
You simply could not put them in different divisions and still have them play in the final game of the season. Look at every other conference with divisions and a title game, everyone plays a team from their own division in their final game. You cannot have two teams potentially playing in back-to-back weeks. And what would happen if one team has clinched their division and the other hasn't? You may see one team resting players, or not fighting so hard because they know they are going to rematch the next week. If they are in separate divisions they would have to move The Game to be earlier in the season. The only way this would work would be to have them both in the same division.Writerbuckeye wrote:No way.Benito wrote: So what happens to the rivalry game if the conference goes to 2 divisions. I think it would be sweet for The Game to be in the conference championship, but then there would probably be plenty of years that they wouldn't even play. Thoughts?
If the Big Ten expands to 20 teams, OSU-UM will continue to be the last game of the regular season.
Period.
That will not be changing. Nor should it.
If another team is added, say Missouri, then you simply put OSU and UM in differing divisions. If they happen to still meet up again in the title game a week after playing their rivalry -- so be it.
If you put them in the same division, you will weight the power of the conference to that division. They need to be in different ones.
redfalcon
Posts: 1,088
Dec 19, 2009 11:49am
This will never happen. I don't think the big ten would risk going to divisions.
Cleveland Buck
Posts: 5,126
Dec 19, 2009 1:28pm
Ohio State and Michigan would be in the same division.
Laley23
Posts: 29,506
Dec 19, 2009 1:54pm
Id put them in separate conferences and have them play the week before their last game.
N
NOL fan
Posts: 376
Dec 19, 2009 5:12pm
Writerbuckeye wrote: If they happen to still meet up again in the title game a week after playing their rivalry -- so be it.
Classyposter58
Posts: 6,321
Dec 19, 2009 7:27pm
The SEC kept Georgia and Florida in the same division, The Big 12 South is basically a rivalry game every week and the Big 10 will follow suit if they expand and put OSU and UM in the same division. There is no way school presidents will allow both teams to play twice in a year
Writerbuckeye
Posts: 4,745
Dec 19, 2009 7:34pm
Then you're going to have to have PSU, OSU and UM in the same division.Classyposter58 wrote: The SEC kept Georgia and Florida in the same division, The Big 12 South is basically a rivalry game every week and the Big 10 will follow suit if they expand and put OSU and UM in the same division. There is no way school presidents will allow both teams to play twice in a year
That will make the other division an absolute joke.
So let's not bother doing it.
Okay?
If people are worried about 11 teams and the name "ten" how about we drop a school? I vote for PSU (they do nothing but whine, anyway) or Northwestern?
ytownfootball
Posts: 6,978
Dec 19, 2009 7:47pm
OSU and UM will be in the same division. Period.
They wouldn't want the two to meet twice certainly but the other choice of not pitting them against each other at all trumps, and it's not even close.
The rest of the Big10 is going to take a back seat and accept it, it is what it is.
They wouldn't want the two to meet twice certainly but the other choice of not pitting them against each other at all trumps, and it's not even close.
The rest of the Big10 is going to take a back seat and accept it, it is what it is.
Laley23
Posts: 29,506
Dec 19, 2009 8:03pm
The other thing to consider here is basketball. Sure football is the big money maker, but it isnt as if the "joke" of a division would be so in basketball.
Indiana, Michigan State, and Purdue, and Wisconsin are 3 great teams to have in the other division from a basketball standpoint. But that also means the football power division will blow in basketball.
You take what you can get. Adding a 12th team will make the conference more money and thats all that really matters.
Indiana, Michigan State, and Purdue, and Wisconsin are 3 great teams to have in the other division from a basketball standpoint. But that also means the football power division will blow in basketball.
You take what you can get. Adding a 12th team will make the conference more money and thats all that really matters.
G
georgemc80
Posts: 983
Dec 20, 2009 8:53am
Really, see the Big 12 South...OU and UT are in the same division. But historically, Nebraska and Colorado have been on top of the college football world. You put OSU UM and PSU in the same division...because it makes sense geographically...you have to consider the other 34 varsity sports at OSU or at least the ones that compete in the Big 10.Writerbuckeye wrote:
If you put them in the same division, you will weight the power of the conference to that division. They need to be in different ones.
There will be a time when Nebraska and Colorado will be great again....Wisconsin and Iowa and say a Missouri have that potential as well.
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Dec 20, 2009 12:11pm
I don't see why you have to separate the divisions geographically, the ACC doesn't and people don't gripe much.
Writerbuckeye
Posts: 4,745
Dec 20, 2009 12:32pm
You don't, and they won't if it ever happens.Manhattan Buckeye wrote: I don't see why you have to separate the divisions geographically, the ACC doesn't and people don't gripe much.
The Big Ten is not that spread out geographically.
S
Sonofanump
Dec 20, 2009 12:55pm
Why not have different divisions for football then you do for volleyball or crew or gymnastics?georgemc80 wrote:...you have to consider the other 34 varsity sports at OSU or at least the ones that compete in the Big 10.
At this point OSU and PSU should be in separate divisions. I'd go:
OSU
UM
MSU or (Mizzo)
Iowa
Indy
Purdue
PSU
Pitt (or MSU)
Wisc
Minn
Illi
NW
MSU moves depending in the new school and plays either PSU or Iowa for their last game. All others would have decent rival to end the year.
N
NOL fan
Posts: 376
Dec 20, 2009 5:17pm
wouldn't the divisions just be for football?
don't most of the other sports have a regular season championship based on record and then a tournament championship as well?
don't most of the other sports have a regular season championship based on record and then a tournament championship as well?
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Dec 20, 2009 5:36pm
The SEC still has divisions in basketball, you play each team in your division twice (home and home) and each team in the other division once (alternating home games every year). I'm pretty sure the ACC is the same way, but that is DEFINITELY the way the SEC does it.
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Dec 20, 2009 5:40pm
Just checked, the ACC doesn't do that now. The SEC does.
NNN
Posts: 902
Dec 20, 2009 11:35pm
When the SEC split into divisions, there was thought that Alabama and Tennessee would remain in the same division to make sure that the rivalry game always took place. They split the two up anyway, but there was a clause that there could be a "permanent rivalry" game with a team of the opposing division.
So while most teams play their five division opponents and three cycling ones from the other division, both Alabama and Tennessee play the five in their own division, each other, and two cycling ones from the other side. The possibility does exist that they'll play each other in the SEC title game, but it hasn't happened yet.
So while most teams play their five division opponents and three cycling ones from the other division, both Alabama and Tennessee play the five in their own division, each other, and two cycling ones from the other side. The possibility does exist that they'll play each other in the SEC title game, but it hasn't happened yet.
dwccrew
Posts: 7,817
Dec 21, 2009 9:43am
I wouldn't say Colorado is historically better than Oklahoma and Texas. Historically; Nebraska, Texas and Oklahoma are much better than Colorado.georgemc80 wrote:Really, see the Big 12 South...OU and UT are in the same division. But historically, Nebraska and Colorado have been on top of the college football world. You put OSU UM and PSU in the same division...because it makes sense geographically...you have to consider the other 34 varsity sports at OSU or at least the ones that compete in the Big 10.Writerbuckeye wrote:
If you put them in the same division, you will weight the power of the conference to that division. They need to be in different ones.
There will be a time when Nebraska and Colorado will be great again....Wisconsin and Iowa and say a Missouri have that potential as well.
Colorado has one claimed national title ever. (1990)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Buffaloes_football
Oklahoma, Texas and Nebraska have many more than Colorado.
Nebraska has five claimed titles.
http://www.huskers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=100&ATCLID=606981
Oklahoma has 7 claimed titles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_Sooners_football
Texas has 4 claimed titles and are in the hunt for a fifth this season.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Longhorns#Championship_history
Not sure how you could even compare Colorado to OU and UT.
ohiotiger33
Posts: 1,500
Dec 21, 2009 10:49am
We play GT every year from the opposite division. It is a rivalry game for us.
derek bomar
Posts: 3,722
Dec 21, 2009 2:13pm
Wow you are so wrongWriterbuckeye wrote:Benito wrote: So what happens to the rivalry game if the conference goes to 2 divisions. I think it would be sweet for The Game to be in the conference championship, but then there would probably be plenty of years that they wouldn't even play. Thoughts?
If another team is added, say Missouri, then you simply put OSU and UM in differing divisions. If they happen to still meet up again in the title game a week after playing their rivalry -- so be it.
If you put them in the same division, you will weight the power of the conference to that division. They need to be in different ones.