Why East-West is the best divisional format

by Ski U Mah Gopher on Jun 16, 2010 11:36 PM CDT Comment 10 comments

As the Big Ten tries to figure out how the divisions are going to be set, it is time for give to give my two cents.

The only logical way to divide the conference is to use Lake Michigan as the dividing line and go East-West. Why? Rivalries is the first reason . Minnesota-Iowa, Minnesota-Wisconsin, Iowa-Wisconsin, and with Nebraska coming into the conference, the rivalry between Minnesota and Nebraska (they have met 51 times) and Iowa and Nebraska (41 times) will be renewed. Let's not forget the rivalry between the states of Illinois and Wisconsin (Bears-Packers, Cubs-Brewers).

The second reason is the fans of the northernmost team (Minnesota) and the westernmost team (Nebraska) should be able to easily travel to at least in-division road games. The longest in-division trip for Gopher fans would be 422 to Champaign, easily traveled in 8 hours. For Nebraska, it is Evanston at 529 miles, or about a 10 hour drive.

So, for the sake of rivalries and fan friendliness, make it East-West for the Big Ten.

Editors of The Daily Gopher retain the right to remove posts deemed excessively offensive or grossly inappropriate. Keep it clean and don't be mean.

0 recs | Comment 10 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

There seems to be concern that the West would

not have strong enough teams in football, although it seems that the last couple decades Nebraska, Iowa, and Wisconsin have been about as successful as OSU, Michigan, and Penn State.

by Rumblebee on Jun 17, 2010 3:23 PM CDT reply actions

maybe

but the thing is that what killed the Big 12 North was not letting Nebraska play OU every year. Rivalries draw attendance and ratings which creates value. If you make PSU, OSU and UM fight for it every year, their fans will f-ing hate each other…but in a good way.

No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.

by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 17, 2010 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions

I agree

I’ve seen some examples that would separate Michigan and OSU, which would be crazy. As a Gopher football season ticket holder, I can assure anybody that it would also be crazy to split MN from either Iowa or Wisconsin. Without those teams coming to town, there would have been years where average attendance was about 25,000.

by Rumblebee on Jun 17, 2010 7:00 PM CDT up reply actions

rivalries drive attendance and ratings

they always have and always will. If you are trying to maintain and grow the BTN, you need those games every year. You can’t lose sight of the impact that each regular season game has on conference profitability by focusing on the one and only championship game.

I think if you get a WI, IA or Neb western conference contender, your attendance will be just fine for the championship game. I understand the dream lineup of a OSU and UM or PSU game, but it is only one game. This is a case where you bat for average, not for a grand slam.

No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.

by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 18, 2010 8:22 AM CDT up reply actions

Totally agree

and as much as they might desire the BIG championship game, it won’t happen more than about every five years no matter how they align the divisions. The fact is, with Michigan, OSU, and PSU in one division, they know that one of those teams will be in the championship game about 4 out of 5 years. That means the game will always be relevant. Even the once a decade the Gophers might sneak in, this is a top-15 TV market, so ratings should be pretty good.

by Rumblebee on Jun 18, 2010 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions

at most

I expect a west-east split with maybe swapping Northwestern (separate the NU’s) and adding PSU instead. But I put together a chart of biggest fan rivalries and PSU really only comes down to OSU and UM. I don’t see why their fans would want to give that up. Plus, whoever makes it through the UM, OSU and PSU deathmatch is a surefire NC candidate if they win both games in almost any year.

No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.

by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 18, 2010 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions

My opinion

You have to create the divisions based on geography. This, for the most part, keeps the natural rivalries intact. A geographical split also lowers travel costs because the other teams in the division are your next door neighbors. I dont buy the arguement that if the east-west split were to happen, the eastern division would hold all the power and would dominate the big 10 for the next x amount of years. You can’t predict with reasonably surety how teams will be over the long term. For example, did anyone predict that Michigan would have back to back winless seasons 5 or 10 years ago? Nobody did. That is why a geographical split makes the most sense.

by MinnesotaCatFan on Jun 18, 2010 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions

I wonder if they might skip the divisions

for a couple years, and just make the title game between the top two teams? I think everybody expects the Big Ten to add 2-4 more teams in the next few years…maybe best just to wait?
It seems this whole process played out perfectly for the Big Ten. They got better, the Big Twelve got weaker, and the Pac-10 added teams that aren’t going to add much financially, and maybe not competitively. If the other conferences hadn’t gone into panic mode, this is about what the Big Ten was hoping to accomplish. Adding Nebraska will increase the value of BTN and their other TV contracts, and Notre Dame has to be sweating just a little more, knowing they are one or two moves away from having the Big East disappear. Even Lou Holtz is now in favor of joining the Big Ten. As the older Notre Dame boosters lose influence, the younger guys who know the Big Ten is a benefit will get their way.

by Rumblebee on Jun 18, 2010 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions

they can't

you can’t have a title game without divisions. Apparently that is a rule. Plus I think we are forgetting that part of the North vs South power inequality in the Big 12 had to do with the unequal revenue sharing. Other than Nebraska in the North, all of the other schools usually averaged less than the South Schools in revenue. This tends to exentuate the down and up swings wheras the Big Ten has even revenue distribution and that should help mitigate the natural swings.

No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.

by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 18, 2010 9:34 PM CDT up reply actions

Split the conferences geographically by north/south

Big Ten North: MN, Wi, Mich., Mich St., Iowa & Northwestern
Big Ten South: Penn St. Ohio St., Ind., Pur., Ill. & Neb.

Of course this makes about as much sense, logistically and logically, as splitting the divisions on a perceived competitive basis. (Do you change the divisions if the preseason polls indicate one division is stacked in 2014?)

If we let Ohio St. & Mich. dictate their irrational divisions for the conference, you will create a “Big 12 like” animosity that exists between Texas and the rest of the Big 12. Eventually that type of relationship is doomed to fail.

Note: I hesitated to post this mythical North/South division in fear that the Big Ten would see validity in the proposal. With their caveat, of course, that the Ohio St/Michigan rivalry be protected. (probably in a “non-conference” game. They wouldn’t want a potential conference loss on the schedule to jeopardize their “right” to play in the conference championship game.)

by Odin on Jun 21, 2010 2:03 PM CDT reply actions