| 01 September 2010
With the news coming today that the New Big 10 (err... 12) will be broken into divisions beginning next year, a furor whipped through the Midwest (and ESPN since there was nothing else to talk about aside from Matt Leinart sucking) about what the conference will look like in the years ahead. Competitive balance, geographies, and rivalries were reportedly taken into account with the reorganization of the conference with the big news being the split of Ohio St. and Michigan. So, are the divisions and their makeup good or bad? As natives of Big 10 country, Ryan and I have distinctly different opinions about the shakeup so let's sit down at the roundtable and settle it like brothers should... by silly namecalling and arguing!
The Divisions:
Schembechler - Michigan, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan State, Northwestern, Minnesota
Hayes - Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Purdue, Illinois, Indiana
*Are you happy with the divisional makeup?
Matt - For the most part, I think the Big 10 did the best job possible. Michigan and Ohio State need to be in different divisions to ensure the possibility of them playing in the Big Money Big 10 Title Game. It's really a no-brainer. As far as the competitive balance, both divisions have a clear upper, middle, and lower class. Going across the line, Nebraska/Iowa vs Penn St./Wisconsin is also an even split. Then, the divisions maintain most of the other rivalries (Mich-MSU, IU-Pur, OSU-PSU, etc) with one cross-divisional rivalry game preserved.
Ryan - To me the Big Ten did a horrible job of separating the divisions. There was a much easier geographical split which keeps in tact all of the rivalries the Big Ten is planning on keeping. If you'll indulge me...
West: Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern
East: Ohio St., Michigan, Michigan St., Penn St., Purdue, Indiana
Those divisions are split geographically, first (what a novel concept!). Their competitive balance is also just as good as the alignment the Big Ten proposes (especially looking at the state of Michigan football right now). You have 3 upper class teams in football on each side (OSU/PSU/Mich vs. Iowa/Wis/Neb) and 3 also rans (MSU/IU/Pur vs. Ill/NW/Minn). Finally, what about the rivalries the Big Ten claims to be protecting? Here's the list of Big Ten rivalries that award a trophy dating back past 1990 (basically excluding Penn St., who like Nebraska, doesn't have one rival they have to play every year:
Michigan vs. Michigan St.; Iowa vs. Minnesota; Iowa vs. Wisconsin; Illinois vs. Ohio St.; Michigan vs. Minnesota; Indiana vs. Michigan St.; Indiana vs. Purdue; Minnesota vs. Wisconsin; Illinois vs. Purdue; Illinois vs. Northwestern; Michigan vs. Ohio St.;
Are all of those proposed rivalries in tact within the current divisions +1 "crossover"? No, teams like Minnesota and Illinois won't be able to fit in all their rivals. Are they in tact in my proposed divisions? Yes. Is there even more flexibility for crossover games in my divisional alignment? You betcha! Is there any logic behind the grouping of these teams in the Big Ten's proposed divisions? No. So what was the real motivation behind this divisional alignment? The same thing that's been behind any and every decision involving NCAA Football in the last year...money!
Matt - Ok, I've indulged your divisional idea in this crazed Mad Dog Russo rant. While I like you're geographical-friendly lineup, that setup is completely imbalanced. The threesome of Iowa, Wisconsin, and Nebraska is nowhere near OSU, Penn St, and Michigan in terms of program quality. What's Iowa's ceiling as a program? Or Wisconsin for that matter. Sure, Michigan sucks now, but they won't be down long. The conference needs the Big 2 (OSU/Mich) and PSU/Nebraska split up for the respectability of their title game.
Ryan- My divisions aren't equal? Who's closer right now to a BCS berth, Iowa or Michigan? How about Wisconsin or Michigan? Where is it guaranteed that Michigan will rise back to the top of college football on a white cloud of glory while "Hail to the Victors" is played on angelic trumpets? I would be able to accept the current Big Ten arrangement if someone, anywhere, could logically explain them from top to bottom, not just the Top 2 in each division. This doesn't even touch how the Big Ten has butchered OSU/Michigan!
*Can the states of Ohio and Michigan breathe knowing the rivalry game will stay at season's end? Has the rivalry been butchered?
Matt - Ok, after a temporary panic swept over the Columbus area (of which we both reside), I think it's safe to say the OSU/Michigan rivalry has been anything but butchered. How anyone could think that the rivalry could actually be in some kind of jeopardy is beyond me. All these headlines about Ohio State and Michigan being "separated" like conjoined twins is crazy. If anything, this setup ensures that the rivalry maintains its importance, or even amps it up to new levels. My God, with the madness going on in recent days over the date of the sacred game, you would have thought LeBron James was leaving Ohio... again.
Ryan - What happens when Ohio St. and Michigan play in two consecutive weeks, both the Big Ten Championship and the last week of the season? The rest of the country will throw a temper tantrum. Not only that, what if circumstances make The Game a glorified preseason scrimmage if both teams are already assured of making it to the title game? Wouldn't it be wiser to have a 90% chance that the winner of that game will make the Big Ten Championship every season? The game would have meaning every season. Now, with the chance of playing twice in a season, it cheapens the rivalry and ensures we'll never see anything like we did in 2007 when the two played for something that wasn't contrived and manufactured for money.
Matt - Finally we agree, the thought of them playing 2 straight weeks is lunacy.. which is why OSU and Michigan should play in October! Wouldn't that be the best way to open the Big 10 season? It could be like the Red River Shootout and other early season rivalry games on steroids. Then, you give the loser of the game a chance to get back in the National Title picture if and when the rematch in the conference championship happens. And, let's face it, the 2007 1 vs 2 showdown is something that we'll never see again because of the conference superpowers expansion.
Ryan- Now that's the dumbest thing you've said in a long time. Let's be honest, Ohio State and Michigan is not the Red River Shootout. It's the most important rivalry in college football, and maybe all of sports. It's been played the last week of the season since FDR was in the Oval Office! That's a tradition you don't just toss around so that it can become "The Kroger Ohio State-Michigan Game" or "The Game, presented by Taco Bell" on some random Saturday in October? Is no tradition worth saving any more? Why even have Ohio St. and Michigan in the same conference? Why not move Ohio St. to the Big 12, that way they can play Michigan in a national championship game? It's ludicrous!
Matt - If the rivalry is the most important thing in the universe... shouldn't it transcend what date it's played on? Yes, I'm all for preserving tradition and history and 3 yards and a cloud of dust, but as Marcus Aurelius said, "the universe is change, life is understanding." It's not the 1940s anymore. We have a Big 10 title game. We have HD TV. We have a Taco Bell on every corner. Things change. Who cares what date the game is played? Let them play in the first week of October and the end of the year. This whole idea that the specific Saturday on which the Ohio State-Michigan game is played needs to be chiseled in stone and set aside as a national holiday befuddles me.
Final thoughts?
Matt - In a sense, the Big Ten was never going to get it 100% right with this whole divisional setup and title game. Somebody somewhere was going to be left out or upset with the alignment. In the end, as college football progresses, fans will move on and focus on the conference title games and whatever next big things come along.
Ryan - Things aren't going to be the same in the Big Ten. Say goodbye to an era of college football that we once knew. Oh well, I guess it won't matter in 3 years anyways, once Rutgers and Syracuse are added we'll have to have this inane conversation yet again.
Let us know what you think about the breakdown of the Big 10? Do you like it? Do you hate it? Do you not care? Do you just want the realignment/expansion nonsense to stop? Let us know what you think with a comment below and don't forget to check out the first edition of the Bloguin Heisman Poll only at RSS!
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
