Crossover opponents (if drop divisions)

[ricko6543211]

I'm sure some people have seen the story from Gary Barta that the B1G is considering going back to 8 game conference schedule with no divisions in 2023, in part to allow for more inter-conference games with the Pac12 and potentially ACC alliance schools. The suggested structure is 3 protected opponents, you play the other 10 teams every other year.

Some of the matchups are pretty easy, some are tougher. We would almost certainly get IL, there's a decent chance we get one or both of Purdue or MSU. I'd prefer to keep one of Wisconsin or Nebraska as a 3rd alongside IL and MSU / Purdue. But there is a chance that they pair WI / IA / MN / Neb in a 4-way pod with themselves (or Minn vs Michigan mixed in) and then those 4 schools are all fully occupied. I'd like to retain one of our other West division rivals over Purdue personally. Thoughts?

In the East they need to find sufficient opponents for Maryland and Rutgers, and also maintain some competitive balance (not just have PSU MSU OSU Mich all play each other each year).

Illinois: Northwestern, Indiana, Nebraska
Indiana: Purdue, Illinois, Rutgers
Iowa: Nebraska, Minny, Wiscy
Maryland: OSU, Rutgers, Purdue
Michigan: MSU, Minny, OSU
MSU: Northwestern, Michigan, PSU
Minny: Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan
Nebraska: Iowa, Illinois, Purdue
Northwestern: Illinois, Wisconsin, MSU
Ohio St: Michigan, Penn St, Maryland
Penn St: Rutgers, Ohio St, MSU
Purdue: Indiana, Maryland, Nebraska
Rutgers: Maryland, Penn St, Indiana
Wisconsin: Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern

It's far from perfect - leaves Indiana with a glaringly easy schedule currently, Nebraska sort of gets the short end of the stick in terms of matchups in mine and the league probably would want to give them at least one higher profile opponent aside from Iowa. A lot hinges on what you do with Nebraska's 2 opponents aside from Iowa which I assume is assured, and whether you include the Michigan Minnesota jug game or let Mich play against MD / Rutgers instead for their 3rd choice.

Regardless I think the system would be a decent development - assuming the cross-conference matchups end up working out as planned with Pac12 and ACC.

 

[Sheffielder]

I don't mean to sound like a Debbie Downer here but straight up we will be an afterthought in this process. They'll book us with Illinois to start and then leave us on the table to fill in the holes...especially now that Phillips is gone, who would have brought political power to the conversation and would have been effective in locking down Wisconsin or Iowa. Under the circumstances I see both of those programs jockeying to bring Neb into their lovefest with Minnesota.

Honestly...I'll take it as a compliment - none of the programs we'd want to lock in wants to lock us in because it's a no-win situation for them - we'll win more often than they can stomach, and on the flipside, rarely will we be considered a "quality win" for them.

All that being said...only one of Iowa and Wisco can get Neb as their extra if Minny is in the mix...so I could honestly see us landing one of them and then, like, Rutgers, UMD, or one of the Indiana schools because they're also on the table at the end.

The other thing I'll say...I've always dreaded this format, which I believe does not favor a program like Northwestern at all. Don't believe me? Look no further than our two visits to Indy within a three-year span. It's not THAT difficult to beat out six other teams in a division - the status quo favors us. New system unequivocally requires you to beat out 12 programs and all but ensures no chance of an equally lucked-out opponent in the title game.

 

[ricko6543211]

I don't mean to sound like a Debbie Downer here but straight up we will be an afterthought in this process. They'll book us with Illinois to start and then leave us on the table to fill in the holes...especially now that Phillips is gone, who would have brought political power to the conversation and would have been effective in locking down Wisconsin or Iowa. Under the circumstances I see both of those programs jockeying to bring Neb into their lovefest with Minnesota.

Honestly...I'll take it as a compliment - none of the programs we'd want to lock in wants to lock us in because it's a no-win situation for them - we'll win more often than they can stomach, and on the flipside, rarely will we be considered a "quality win" for them.

All that being said...only one of Iowa and Wisco can get Neb as their extra if Minny is in the mix...so I could honestly see us landing one of them and then, like, Rutgers, UMD, or one of the Indiana schools because they're also on the table at the end.

The other thing I'll say...I've always dreaded this format, which I believe does not favor a program like Northwestern at all. Don't believe me? Look no further than our two visits to Indy within a three-year span. It's not THAT difficult to beat out six other teams in a division - the status quo favors us. New system unequivocally requires you to beat out 12 programs and all but ensures no chance of an equally lucked-out opponent in the title game.

I don't think we will get Rutgers, MD - I think Purdue and MSU are more likely as the options after IL if we don't get one of our preferred West rivals. MSU seems to like playing us (although that was under prior leadership of theirs), and Purdue was our other protected opponent back before the B1G had two divisions. Rutgers MD I think will end up with the current East schools. Indiana is possible instead of Purdue, but I think it used to be Indiana IL and Purdue NU - if we get paired with an Indiana school I think Purdue is more likely.

So my base case guess is we draw IL Purdue MSU, but I'm hoping we swap one of those out to grab Wiscy or Nebraska (I think Iowa will be pretty much locked in with Neb Minn Wiscy - maybe they get us instead of Wiscy but hard to see the B1G letting that UW Iowa matchup go).

 

[AdamOnFirst]

We would almost certainly lose at least Iowa. They have significant historical trophies with MN and WI and their modern trophy with UNL makes too much sense. We COULD get the last spot with Wisconsin or Mn, but I sort of doubt it.

It’s not impossible we’d get Michigan for the GJ trophy. Michigan would definitely have MSU and OSU, but there’s no particular reason anybody else needs to be #3.

I’ll be honest, I hate the concept of it, so I’m very hopeful it never comes about.

 

[bringbacktherantboard]

If it drops the 9th conference game, it's automatically an immediate improvement. I miss playing interesting nonconference opponents and I'm sad we had to drop all those Stanford games from our schedule. I was looking forward to the Army game.

That being said, it still sounds like a mess. I wish the Big Ten had just stayed at 12.

 

[NUCat320]

I haven’t through all the machinations, but I’d prefer protecting one, and randomizing it from there.

Iowa-Nebraska
Illinois-Northwestern
Michigan-Ohio State
Penn State-Michigan State
Indiana-Purdue
Wisconsin-Minnesota
Rutgers-Maryland

Iowa is a loser in this scenario, as that Minny game is meaningful (FLOYD!), and Michigan State loses big brother. Those are probably the only two teams who lose their *top* rival (Penn State?).

What is the advantage of protecting 3 versus 1?

Realistically, it’s not worth projecting a schedule out so far, because it’ll all change again soon.

I like the idea of an 8 game schedule, at least two games with the partner leagues, a MAC opponent, and a random opponent. (I’d love NU to play the Sunbelt, but I presume it’ll be FCS if we go that way.)

 

[Ryanfield124]

Oh no don't forget we now have a rivalry trophy with Michigan. Ann Arbor will BEG to have NU locked in each year as this new 'traditional' rivalry be codified.

 

[Alvious]

Our 3 permanent opponents will be Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio State. Book it.

 

[ricko6543211]

I haven’t through all the machinations, but I’d prefer protecting one, and randomizing it from there.

Iowa-Nebraska
Illinois-Northwestern
Michigan-Ohio State
Penn State-Michigan State
Indiana-Purdue
Wisconsin-Minnesota
Rutgers-Maryland

Iowa is a loser in this scenario, as that Minny game is meaningful (FLOYD!), and Michigan State loses big brother. Those are probably the only two teams who lose their *top* rival (Penn State?).

What is the advantage of protecting 3 versus 1?

Realistically, it’s not worth projecting a schedule out so far, because it’ll all change again soon.

I like the idea of an 8 game schedule, at least two games with the partner leagues, a MAC opponent, and a random opponent. (I’d love NU to play the Sunbelt, but I presume it’ll be FCS if we go that way.)

I think protect 3 instead of 1 to allow it to cover more rivalries first, and secondly that it leaves an evenly divisible number on the remainder (10 teams for 5 games, so every other year). I probably prefer current divisions too because I like our set of matchups with the West teams, but I don't think this is a bad idea if it means we get 1 Pac12 and 1 ACC game each year- still minimum 10 P5 opponents.

 

[phatcat_rivals223240]

If it drops the 9th conference game, it's automatically an immediate improvement. I miss playing interesting nonconference opponents and I'm sad we had to drop all those Stanford games from our schedule. I was looking forward to the Army game.

That being said, it still sounds like a mess. I wish the Big Ten had just stayed at 12.

I feel differently. I'd prefer a 12 game conference schedule because I'd prefer to play the current East teams more often than, I don't know, say DUKE 14 years in a row. Also, I assure you that this Alliance will pit us against Duke and Stanford and play the nerd bowl card. Like any of us give a sh1te about our alleged rivalries with either team.

I'm out West now, so I'd prefer to get to some other locations like Oregon State, The Arizona teams, etc. Also Utah is 3 hours from me. ACC, even when I move back, not very many close or interesting locations, and I hate hot weather.

 

[willycat]

I'm sure some people have seen the story from Gary Barta that the B1G is considering going back to 8 game conference schedule with no divisions in 2023, in part to allow for more inter-conference games with the Pac12 and potentially ACC alliance schools. The suggested structure is 3 protected opponents, you play the other 10 teams every other year.

Some of the matchups are pretty easy, some are tougher. We would almost certainly get IL, there's a decent chance we get one or both of Purdue or MSU. I'd prefer to keep one of Wisconsin or Nebraska as a 3rd alongside IL and MSU / Purdue. But there is a chance that they pair WI / IA / MN / Neb in a 4-way pod with themselves (or Minn vs Michigan mixed in) and then those 4 schools are all fully occupied. I'd like to retain one of our other West division rivals over Purdue personally. Thoughts?

In the East they need to find sufficient opponents for Maryland and Rutgers, and also maintain some competitive balance (not just have PSU MSU OSU Mich all play each other each year).

Illinois: Northwestern, Indiana, Nebraska
Indiana: Purdue, Illinois, Rutgers
Iowa: Nebraska, Minny, Wiscy
Maryland: OSU, Rutgers, Purdue
Michigan: MSU, Minny, OSU
MSU: Northwestern, Michigan, PSU
Minny: Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan
Nebraska: Iowa, Illinois, Purdue
Northwestern: Illinois, Wisconsin, MSU
Ohio St: Michigan, Penn St, Maryland
Penn St: Rutgers, Ohio St, MSU
Purdue: Indiana, Maryland, Nebraska
Rutgers: Maryland, Penn St, Indiana
Wisconsin: Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern

It's far from perfect - leaves Indiana with a glaringly easy schedule currently, Nebraska sort of gets the short end of the stick in terms of matchups in mine and the league probably would want to give them at least one higher profile opponent aside from Iowa. A lot hinges on what you do with Nebraska's 2 opponents aside from Iowa which I assume is assured, and whether you include the Michigan Minnesota jug game or let Mich play against MD / Rutgers instead for their 3rd choice.

Regardless I think the system would be a decent development - assuming the cross-conference matchups end up working out as planned with Pac12 and ACC.

Substitute Purdue for MSU and think you have got it.

 

[bringbacktherantboard]

I'd prefer a 12 game conference schedule

Was that a typo?

 

[ricko6543211]

Substitute Purdue for MSU and think you have got it.

Yeah that could work. And then MSU vs Maryland swaps in to balance the rest out. If we get to keep Wisconsin (or Nebraska) then I'm fine with either Purdue or MSU being the 3rd team along with IL.

 

[Sheffielder]

What is the advantage of protecting 3 versus 1?

My perception is that it's all about symmetry and divisibility. Three fixed every year and then 10 left...split them and you never go more than two years without seeing anyone, period.

As for ACC/Pac-12 opponents...I'm not personally too worried about landing Duke and Stanford a lot; I'd imagine there'd be some Big Ten-ACC Challenge scheduling princples involved. More than anything I'd like us to play in fun destination cities, which has always been my desire - LA, Denver, Tempe, Miami, Boston, Louisville, Atlanta - all sounds great to me for weekend trips in the fall.

Of course this also means the lineup could be Syracuse, wherever NC State is located, Corvallis OR, and Pullman WA.

 

[cattul]

I feel differently. I'd prefer a 12 game conference schedule because I'd prefer to play the current East teams more often than, I don't know, say DUKE 14 years in a row. Also, I assure you that this Alliance will pit us against Duke and Stanford and play the nerd bowl card. Like any of us give a sh1te about our alleged rivalries with either team.

I'm out West now, so I'd prefer to get to some other locations like Oregon State, The Arizona teams, etc. Also Utah is 3 hours from me. ACC, even when I move back, not very many close or interesting locations, and I hate hot weather.

A resumed series vs Duke would begin to seem like a dream outcome after living through a home and away with NC State (or any other random school with which NU has no natural or historical basis for even a hint of rivalry.) This scheduling plan sounds like a recipe for a lot of boring, emotionless football, as unfamiliar middleweights bludgeon each other into oblivion.

 

[NUCat320]

A resumed series vs Duke would begin to seem like a dream outcome after living through a home and away with NC State (or any other random school with which NU has no natural or historical basis for even a hint of rivalry.) This scheduling plan sounds like a recipe for a lot of boring, emotionless football, as unfamiliar middleweights bludgeon each other into oblivion.

I don’t know…a boring game against different colors sounds pretty cool. Duke games are universally boring.

(NC State is in Raleigh, very airport-accessible.)

 

[BarefootCat]

Illinois: Northwestern, Indiana, Nebraska
Indiana: Purdue, Illinois, Rutgers
Iowa: Nebraska, Minny, Wiscy
Maryland: OSU, Rutgers, Purdue
Michigan: MSU, Minny, OSU
MSU: Northwestern, Michigan, PSU
Minny: Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan
Nebraska: Iowa, Illinois, Purdue
Northwestern: Illinois, Wisconsin, MSU
Ohio St: Michigan, Penn St, Maryland
Penn St: Rutgers, Ohio St, MSU
Purdue: Indiana, Maryland, Nebraska
Rutgers: Maryland, Penn St, Indiana
Wisconsin: Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern

My thoughts:
Nebraska: Iowa, Minnesota, Purdue
Minnesota: Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Iowa: Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern
Wisconsin: Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota
Northwestern: Illinois, Iowa, Purdue
Illinois: Indiana, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Purdue: Indiana, Northwestern, Nebraska

Indiana: Illinois, Michigan State, Purdue
Michigan State: Indiana, Michigan, Penn State
Michigan: Michigan State, Ohio State, Wisconsin (Too Tough?)
Ohio State: Rutgers, Maryland, Michigan
Penn State: Rutgers, Maryland, Michigan State
Rutgers: Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State
Maryland: Rutgers, Ohio State, Penn State

 

[ricko6543211]

I don’t know…a boring game against different colors sounds pretty cool. Duke games are universally boring.

(NC State is in Raleigh, very airport-accessible.)

My biggest problem with the Dook games isn't that they are boring, it's that we keep getting smoked!

 

[ricko6543211]

My thoughts:
Nebraska: Iowa, Minnesota, Purdue
Minnesota: Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Iowa: Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern
Wisconsin: Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota
Northwestern: Illinois, Iowa, Purdue
Illinois: Indiana, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Purdue: Indiana, Northwestern, Nebraska

Indiana: Illinois, Michigan State, Purdue
Michigan State: Indiana, Michigan, Penn State
Michigan: Michigan State, Ohio State, Wisconsin (Too Tough?)
Ohio State: Rutgers, Maryland, Michigan
Penn State: Rutgers, Maryland, Michigan State
Rutgers: Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State
Maryland: Rutgers, Ohio State, Penn State

I don't think they will give up Iowa-Wisconsin, and yes that Michigan lineup is pretty brutal. That's why I think we are more likely to draw Wisconsin or Nebraska out of that pod (WI IA MN NE) than Iowa. And I think Rutgers and MD will each get one out of OSU / PSU rather than both - they will want to maximize those marquee matchups and make it better for competitive balance (ie I think OSU-PSU is being played every year). Otherwise though, a fair amount of overlap with mine, nice work.

 

[BarefootCat]

I don't think they will give up Iowa-Wisconsin, and yes that Michigan lineup is pretty brutal. That's why I think we are more likely to draw Wisconsin or Nebraska out of that pod (WI IA MN NE) than Iowa. And I think Rutgers and MD will each get one out of OSU / PSU rather than both - they will want to maximize those marquee matchups and make it better for competitive balance (ie I think OSU-PSU is being played every year). Otherwise though, a fair amount of overlap with mine, nice work.

@ricko654321

Being slow time of year for football news, I try again:

First, I started with what I want for NU. Illinois game has no meaning, so not relevant. Wisconsin rivalry is great, so we keep. I'd like to establish a more consistent Michigan rivalry, so that's in. "Spread far the fame of our fair name" so I invent a Maryland rivalry so NU gets more awareness in the DC metro area (Plus it's a great WLax rivalry). Only sad thing is that the Iowa rivalry is dropped.

Second, Rutgers and Nebraska each are tough to schedule, so I invent the "Big Red Rivalry from Coast to Corn" and have them play each other. I like the Illini-buck trophy, so we keep OSU-Illinois.

Third, by having NU-Maryland, and Nebraska-Rutgers, all the rest of the rivalries can be very tight geographically. And try to take into account your thoughts on Wisc-Iowa, and marquee match-ups.

Here we go:
Nebraska: Iowa, Minnesota, Rutgers (Big Red Rivalry)
Minnesota: Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Iowa: Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Wisconsin: Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern
Northwestern: Wisconsin, Michigan, Maryland
Illinois: Indiana, Purdue, Ohio State (Illi-buck)
Purdue: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan State

Indiana: Illinois, Michigan State, Purdue
Michigan State: Indiana, Purdue, Michigan
Michigan: Northwestern, Michigan State, Ohio State
Ohio State: Illinois, Michigan, Penn State
Penn State: Rutgers, Maryland, Ohio State
Rutgers: Maryland, Penn State, Nebraska
Maryland: Rutgers, Penn State, Northwestern

 

[jimmyNU]

We are fast approaching the day when I truly no longer care. That said, in the name of all that is just and holy, I hope we are not stuck with Rutgers or Maryland. It was a HUGE mistake (other than financially) to add those schools to the conference.

 

[BarefootCat]

We are fast approaching the day when I truly no longer care. That said, in the name of all that is just and holy, I hope we are not stuck with Rutgers or Maryland. It was a HUGE mistake (other than financially) to add those schools to the conference.

Adding Rutgers and Maryland has raised the B1G profile much higher in the Acela corridor (DC-NY-Boston), which helps on every dimension. Tons of east coast kids go to school at NU, Michigan, Wiscy, Indiana, Penn State, etc.

 

[NUCat320]

@ricko654321

Being slow time of year for football news, I try again:

First, I started with what I want for NU. Illinois game has no meaning, so not relevant. Wisconsin rivalry is great, so we keep. I'd like to establish a more consistent Michigan rivalry, so that's in. "Spread far the fame of our fair name" so I invent a Maryland rivalry so NU gets more awareness in the DC metro area (Plus it's a great WLax rivalry). Only sad thing is that the Iowa rivalry is dropped.

Second, Rutgers and Nebraska each are tough to schedule, so I invent the "Big Red Rivalry from Coast to Corn" and have them play each other. I like the Illini-buck trophy, so we keep OSU-Illinois.

Third, by having NU-Maryland, and Nebraska-Rutgers, all the rest of the rivalries can be very tight geographically. And try to take into account your thoughts on Wisc-Iowa, and marquee match-ups.

Here we go:
Nebraska: Iowa, Minnesota, Rutgers (Big Red Rivalry)
Minnesota: Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Iowa: Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Wisconsin: Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern
Northwestern: Wisconsin, Michigan, Maryland
Illinois: Indiana, Purdue, Ohio State (Illi-buck)
Purdue: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan State

Indiana: Illinois, Michigan State, Purdue
Michigan State: Indiana, Purdue, Michigan
Michigan: Northwestern, Michigan State, Ohio State
Ohio State: Illinois, Michigan, Penn State
Penn State: Rutgers, Maryland, Ohio State
Rutgers: Maryland, Penn State, Nebraska
Maryland: Rutgers, Penn State, Northwestern

“Invent a rivalry”? They did that before — it was called The Civil Conflict.

I love it! Let’s start playing for the TurtleCat trophy! Can we change it based on the most recent winner?

The TurtleCat? Or the WildTerp. I’ve never hated Mike Locksley so much as at this moment.

 

[cattul]

“Invent a rivalry”? They did that before — it was called The Civil Conflict.

I love it! Let’s start playing for the TurtleCat trophy! Can we change it based on the most recent winner?

The TurtleCat? Or the WildTerp. I’ve never hated Mike Locksley so much as at this moment.

On a trophy name basis, Rutgers’ candidacy wins, hands down. Who wouldn’t wish to possess the “Wild Knights” crown?

 

[AdamOnFirst]

We are fast approaching the day when I truly no longer care. That said, in the name of all that is just and holy, I hope we are not stuck with Rutgers or Maryland. It was a HUGE mistake (other than financially) to add those schools to the conference.

It made a ton of sense when it looked like it was the ACC that was the power 5 conference being cannibalized. The Big couldn’t get ND or UNC to commit, but we saw that geography between a struggling ACC and a dissolving Big East with all the big market schools available, so they made the decision to grab Atlantic seaboard geography and get some TV markets in the process.

Now with the ACC locked in, it’s led to a problem, because there aren’t any obvious schools left for the Big Ten to end up with. In retrospect a strategic mistake without a doubt, but one that made sense at the time.