Archive

OSU/UM if the conference gets bigger

  • Benito
    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
    Nothing would happen to jeopardize the greatest rivalry in all of sports. Whatever evolves out of conference re-allignment will preserve the rivalry gauranteed.
  • Al Bundy
    They would put OSU/Mich in the same division if they split into divisions.
  • Writerbuckeye
    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?
    No way.

    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.
  • Nate
    OSU vs. Michigan will never change.
  • krambman
    Writerbuckeye 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?
    No way.

    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.
    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.
  • redfalcon
    This will never happen. I don't think the big ten would risk going to divisions.
  • Cleveland Buck
    Ohio State and Michigan would be in the same division.
  • Laley23
    Id put them in separate conferences and have them play the week before their last game.
  • NOL fan
    Writerbuckeye wrote: If they happen to still meet up again in the title game a week after playing their rivalry -- so be it.
  • Classyposter58
    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
    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
    Then you're going to have to have PSU, OSU and UM in the same division.

    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
    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.
  • Laley23
    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.
  • georgemc80
    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.
    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.

    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.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    I don't see why you have to separate the divisions geographically, the ACC doesn't and people don't gripe much.
  • Writerbuckeye
    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.
    You don't, and they won't if it ever happens.

    The Big Ten is not that spread out geographically.
  • Sonofanump
    georgemc80 wrote:...you have to consider the other 34 varsity sports at OSU or at least the ones that compete in the Big 10.
    Why not have different divisions for football then you do for volleyball or crew or gymnastics?

    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.
  • NOL fan
    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?
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    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.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    Just checked, the ACC doesn't do that now. The SEC does.
  • NNN
    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.
  • dwccrew
    georgemc80 wrote:
    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.
    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.

    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.
    I wouldn't say Colorado is historically better than Oklahoma and Texas. Historically; Nebraska, Texas and Oklahoma are much better than Colorado.

    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
    We play GT every year from the opposite division. It is a rivalry game for us.
  • derek bomar
    Writerbuckeye 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.
    Wow you are so wrong