The rich get richer, the poor get....

[psuro]

....the left overs.

Top 7 teams in Big Ten recruiting are the East teams.
Bottom 7 are the West teams

Signing day latest example Big Ten's East-West divisions are too lopsided, need a rethink

Big Ten’s recruiting rankings were split along divisional lines on signing day. The entire top half belonged to the East, bottom half to the West.

www.yahoo.com

 

[PSUFTG]

....the left overs.

Top 7 teams in Big Ten recruiting are the East teams.
Bottom 7 are the West teams

Signing day latest example Big Ten's East-West divisions are too lopsided, need a rethink

Big Ten’s recruiting rankings were split along divisional lines on signing day. The entire top half belonged to the East, bottom half to the West.

www.yahoo.com

I guess it depends on who is ranking them, but I think I would take Wisconsin and Iowa's classes - at least - ahead of the likes of Maryland, Michigan State, and probably Rutgers and Indiana. They are small classes, as of right now, but better prospects, I would think, and the small signing class thus far will of course even out.
Certainly, overall, having Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State - the three teams with the strongest recruiting base, all on one side makes a difference though, no doubt. But over four years of coaching and development those differences could certainly mute, if not even flip.

 

[BobPSU92]

 

[StamfordBridgeVikingatLeftOffensiveTackle]

 

[Nits74]

This is why I want Penn State to remain in an unaltered East division. The alure is much greater and that ultimately is a major recruiting advantage.

 

[Quint526]

Per 247 - The East has 3 of the top 10, and all 7 are in the top 30. The Blue Blood addition to the West (Nebraska) is near 60. The East-West imbalance will continue until the divisions are realigned. Go get 'em James.

 

[Quint526]

This is why I want Penn State to remain in an unaltered East division. The alure is much greater and that ultimately is a major recruiting advantage.

You may be right, but PSU frequently winning the west and playing in the CCG (most often against OSU) would also be pretty alluring. You would think that a compelling CCG would motivate the BIG to consider realigning the divisions, but here we sit.

 

[Woodpecker]

Per 247 - The East has 3 of the top 10, and all 7 are in the top 30. The Blue Blood addition to the West (Nebraska) is near 60. The East-West imbalance will continue until the divisions are realigned. Go get 'em James.

On what would you base realignment? How frequently would you realign divisions based on that criteria?

 

[Quint526]

I am not advocating for a set periodic analysis of equity between the divisions. Why would even say that?

It was a commentary that the current divisions are terribly imbalanced (in particular grouping PSU-OSU-UM on the same side), and I do not see that changing. How many times has the West won the BIG? How many times has the CCG been competitive? What is the record of the top teams in the East versus the West? Ultimately, that is a detriment to the conference.

There were geographic, logistical and historical factors used to develop the current divisions, but sometimes it just doesn't work.

Do you disagree that the imbalance will continue for the foreseeable future?

 

[doctornick]

There's been some scuttlebutt that with the scheduling alliance with the ACC and Pac-12 that the Big Ten might go back to 8 conference teams in the future. As part of that, the conference would drop divisions altogether and go to something else (maybe something like 3 fixed opponents and a rotation among all the other teams for the other 5 opponents). The top two conference teams then just meet in the championship game.

I think that would be better than the current divisions and more even.

 

[Nits74]

You may be right, but PSU frequently winning the West and playing in the CCG (most often against OSU) would also be pretty alluring. You would think that a compelling CCG would motivate the BIG to consider realigning the divisions, but here we sit.

The question is would we win the West with regularity. I think such a move would negatively impact recruiting and the schedule would be boring. Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska and the like just don't generate the excitement that Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State do on a yearly basis. Bottom line is, Penn State needs to step up and start beating Ohio State, not run away from them.

 

[Quint526]

The question is would we win the West with regularity. I think such a move would negatively impact recruiting and the schedule would be boring. Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska and the like just don't generate the excitement that Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State do on a yearly basis. Bottom line is, Penn State needs to step up and start beating Ohio State, not run away from

We can debate each side, but nothing is likely changing in the near term. I don’t think that elite recruiting for PSU is contingent on being in the east. Otherwise, we are in agreement.

The west teams are terribly boring. The only one with potential is Nebraska, but they are a coach or two away from being someone again. Finally, the moral victories of playing OSU close are garbage. That needs to change.

 

[BobPSU92]

On what would you base realignment? How frequently would you realign divisions based on that criteria?

Every year. Relegation like soccer.

 

[Woodpecker]

Every year. Relegation like soccer.

While I think that would be cool, scheduling would be a nightmare.

 

[Shadow99]

There's been some scuttlebutt that with the scheduling alliance with the ACC and Pac-12 that the Big Ten might go back to 8 conference teams in the future. As part of that, the conference would drop divisions altogether and go to something else (maybe something like 3 fixed opponents and a rotation among all the other teams for the other 5 opponents). The top two conference teams then just meet in the championship game.

I think that would be better than the current divisions and more even.

***EDITED per a correct observation expressed by CyphaPSU below


In that scenario. Penn State's 3 "fixed" opponents: Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State, with 2 of the PSU "rotating" opponents always being Iowa & Wisconsin (meaning that they would essentially also be fixed)

Ohio State's 3 "fixed opponents": Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State

Michigan's 3 "fixed opponents": Illinois, Northwestern, Penn State

...thereby creating the greatest odds that "the game" could be the conference championship game...that's why they wouldn't need to be a fixed opponent for one another LOL

 

[CyphaPSU]

In that scenario. Penn State's 3 "fixed" opponents: Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State, with 2 of the PSU "rotating" opponents always being Iowa & Wisconsin (meaning that they would essentially also be fixed)

Ohio State's 3 "fixed opponents": Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana

Michigan's 3 "fixed opponents": Illinois, Northwestern, Michigan State (had to throw in at least 1 challenge)

...thereby creating the greatest odds that "the game" could be the conference championship game...that's why they wouldn't need to be a fixed opponent for one another LOL

I get that you are saying this in jest, but you just gave Ohio State and Michigan four fixed opponents (which would include us).

 

[laKavosiey-st lion]

I’m heartbroken to be banned from the Iowa board.

 

[JoeLion]

Would not OSU and Michy be fixed on each teams schedule?