Annual Rivalry with Iowa Dead?
by Jeffrick on Aug 26, 2010 11:43 AM CDT
Email
PrintIf E!SPN.com Big Ten blogger is correct (and he usually is), then it looks like one of college football's oldest rivalries, as well as one of the best trophies in sports, may no longer be an annual tradition. Rittenberg received confirmation this morning from Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez that the Badgers and Iowa Hawkeyes will be in separate divisions starting in 2011 when Nebraska joins the Big Ten. Logical thinking says that those two teams will continue their annual rivalry in a crossover game which means Minnesota is likely to lose their annual Floyd of Rosedale rivalry with Iowa. Rittenberg's best educated guess at divisions looks like this:
Division 1
Michigan
Michigan State
Iowa
Nebraska
Illinois
Northwestern
Division 2
Ohio State
Penn State
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Purdue
Indiana
When it comes to divisional alignment as a Gopher fan I've always supported a simple geographic split that would have kept Minnesota with Wisconsin, Iowa, and Nebraska. This maintains not just our rivalries but everybody's in the conference, and I still believe it maintains competitve balance (there's no guarantee Michigan makes it all the way back, or that Iowa, Wisconsin or Nebraska will fade into what Mike Tyson would call "Boliva"). However, the Big Ten is looking to split up the top four schools of Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, and Nebraska, and it sounds like just never seriously considered a straight geographic split. Minnesota has two of the oldest rivalries in college football with the Badgers and Hawkeyes, and while I've been bracing for us to not be in the same division as both schools, I had still believed we'd maintain annual games with both schools.
Looks like that may not be the case. If the Big Ten is looking to maximize TV dollars, then an annual crossover game of Wisconsin and Iowa is going to draw a lot more eyeballs to television screens than Minnesota vs. Iowa. The Gophers have noone but themselves to blame since they've lost eight of the last nine meetings, and most have been in gruesome fashion. People outside the two states don't really care about this game, and quite frankly even the Iowa fans are caring less, especially because they'll get an annual game with Nebraska in its place.
Still, I'm going to be angry if we lose this one because while I understand the dollars and cents of it for the Big Ten, this is one of our biggest rivarlies and I don't want to lose it. I have a Wes Mantooth feeling towards Wisconsin- I hate them but dangit do I respect them- but I have nothing but pure hatred for Iowa. Their fans, their players, their fans who have sex in the Metrodome bathroom. I loathe them more than any other, and because of that, even though they've been stabbing us in the heart with a trident for the last decade, I still want them on our schedule every year, and I look forward to the day when we'll take Floyd back to Minnesota.
52 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I will hold a huge grudge
Terrible. Especially if we get NWU or Illinois as a replacement “rivalry” AND no renewal of the Jug game.
Seriously awful.
by InflectionPoint on Aug 26, 2010 12:20 PM CDT reply actions
either we get a renewal of the jug game
or a matchup with Nebraska at the very least. This is complete and utter BS. Delaney just messed up.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 26, 2010 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions
we won't get Michigan
they’ll match up with OSU as protected game.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Aug 26, 2010 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Forgot that Re: Nebraska
If we don’t get Nebraska either, we were jobbed beyond belief.
That could be a shred of silver lining… shred.
by InflectionPoint on Aug 26, 2010 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions
how does MN get stuck with
OSU, PSU, Wisconsin when the other conference has historically down Mich and Nebraska, IA. Great, we get two perennial powers and Iowa gets a free pass to match up with Nebraska for division supremacy.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 26, 2010 12:36 PM CDT reply actions
MAYBE
Wisconsin and Nebraska is the new protected rivalry for the Badgers and then Iowa/Minn stays intact.
OR
if Wis/Iowa is protected then maybe we get an annual game with Nebraska. Not the same, but it would be fun to renew that rivalry that has something like 50 all time games between the two.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
Nebraska and Penn State is a virtual certainty
Remember, in the shiny new Big Ten tradition apparently means nothing. Penn State and Nebraska resonates nationally more than any other matchup besides Ohio State and Michigan, so I’ll go ahead and guarantee those two will have a protected cross over game.
what would protected rivalries be?
I believe each team would have one protected game against the other division.
Mich – OSU
Mich St – PSU for the ugliest trophy in all of sports
Iowa – Wis or Minn
Neb – Wis or Minn?
Illinois – Pur or Ind?
Northwestern – Pur or Ind?
Something like that. Maybe this will be a blessing in disguise. We’ll get Illinois as protected and have an extra win on the schedule most years.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
OK, so in light of Jeff thinking Neb/PSU is a guarantee...
Mich – OSU
Mich St – Minn? for no apparent reason
Iowa – Wis
Neb – PSU
Illinois – Pur or Ind?
Northwestern – Pur or Ind?
I don’t know but this is an ugly mess.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Aug 26, 2010 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions
I'd relax...
…by 2015, when the league goes to 9 conference games, you’ll get the Iowa-Minnesota game back, thanks to each team getting 2 protected cross-division rivals (with the other four schools rotating around every other year, so you play at least a home and home with each team every 4 years….
do you really think so?
outside of Minn / Iowa there is no reason that any other school should have a second protected “rivalry” game. There is no reason to believe that they’ll do that just for Gopher/Hawkeye fans. With a 9 game schedule we’d play them more often but other than wishing and hoping I see no reason the Big Ten would do that.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Aug 26, 2010 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions
I Bet We Get Northwestern
Ok so I checked wikipedia (because if it’s on wiki it has to be fact, right?) and found out Indiana and Michigan State play for the “Old Brass Spitoon” and Illinois and Purdue play for the “Purdue Cannon”. So I’m betting we get the Wildcats. Where’s Arnie Carlson to make a new trophy for us?
No...
…speaking as a Northwestern fan, we’ll probably get Purdue (close geographically, currently a protected rivalry), meaning Minnesota likely ends up with Michigan State (since Indiana-Illinois makes far too much sense)….
a thought just occurred to me
what if the MSU-MN trophy was a brass rock’m sock’m game with a spartan and goldy duking it out?
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 26, 2010 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions
HEY
if we are getting screwed losing Iowa then you and Purdue can go to…
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Aug 26, 2010 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions
even the guys over at Corn Nation
think with this breakdown that WI-IA and MN-Neb would be the pairings. I could go for that. But I will be damned If I let WI keep us from getting Nebraska.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 26, 2010 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions
thanks for commenting on this guys
Jeff may have been fired if he would have had his first two posts not hit double-digits in comments! :)
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
Division Alignment
The only thing that I have cared about during this entire process is that we are placed in the same division as Wis. and Iowa. Or at the very least play both of those teams every year through a protected rivalry game. Looks like my dreams are dead.
by MinnesotaCatFan on Aug 26, 2010 1:15 PM CDT reply actions
100% agreed
the division could be OSU, Mich, PSU and then MN/Iowa/Wis as long as we got those two with us.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Aug 26, 2010 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions
Its almost disgusting....
…what the Big Ten is becoming.
We used to be the conference deeply seeped in tradition. Now, the people no longer care about treasured rivalries. Honestly, I hate that the Ohio State-Michigan game is always put on such a tall pedestal. However, I do think that the rivalry is degraded if they play more than once a year. I understand the money and the ratings that will come from POSSIBLY having two of these games. But I think having them in different divisions is ridiculous.
Don’t even get me started with how much they are screwing us over in the realignment. If it ends up like the above plan, we are getting hosed so bad. Honestly, I don’t think those above divisions are balanced competitively, which is what they claim is so important.
I agree with MinnesotaCatFan. When conference change seemed inevitable, I only hoped that the realignment would still hold our rivalries dear. But they don’t care about the coolest trophy in football. They don’t care about border battles. They care about money and pampering Nebraska, the new member.
mostly agree
some have said that if OSU/Mich are in the same division then their game on the last Sat of B10 football isn’t as meaningful. But I think that is 100% wrong. If they are in the same division then their game has a TON of meaning. Winner likely goes to B10 Champ game with a shot at BCS title game. Loser has not shot at either, with a slim chance at BCS game.
Under current scenario they’ll play in late Sep in an important game that often will have no bearing on the outcome of their season. Obviously there is a chance they meet in B10 Championship game in what would be incredibly huge but that happens every several years. This game is going to lose it’s national luster while maintaining it’s intensity among the fans of OSU and Mich.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Aug 26, 2010 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions
You cant guarantee that Mich-Ohio St. both make it to the B10 title game
That is why they should both be put in the same division for the reasons that Gopher Nation just mentioned.
by MinnesotaCatFan on Aug 26, 2010 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Doesn't mean anything
Miami and Florida State play each other every year even though they are not in the same division. If the conference thinks the rivalry is important, they will preserve it.
but the rumors
are that the conference doesn’t think it is important enough to preserve. Wis/Iowa is going to trump Minn/Iowa and it will not be a yearly game. One cross-division guarantee game is all you get.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Aug 26, 2010 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions
if Nebraska has it's way
they will play MN then. So at least we have that.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 26, 2010 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions
What Husker fans want and what the school and Big Ten want are unfortunately two different things. I just don’t see them passing up a yearly game with Penn State so they can plus. I hope I’m wrong because if we can’t have Iowa I’d obviously LOVE to see Nebraska every year, but with maximizing TV revenue the clear driving force in expansion and realignment, there’s just no way it happens.
the big ten should not want
every powerhouse to have cross division rivalry games with each other because 2 of the four will likely meet in the CCG anyways. watching a rematch isn’t as fun. If they are removing a rivalry and have a chance to restore an old rivalry, then they should…especially when it works out.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 26, 2010 7:54 PM CDT up reply actions
Something Fischy
I’m thinking Delany and the Big Ten AD’s brought in Jedd Fisch as a consultant on this process because they really really overthunk this whole realignment thing. And yes, I just wrote “overthunk.” It’s cool. I have a journalism major. I can get away with it. The divisions proposed above have absolutely zero advantage over a straight geographic split. I’ve read that they’re trying to split up the “four top programs.” Well guess what? There aren’t four top programs in Big Ten football… there are SIX (as of 2011).
Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska
Every one of those schools has been a regular contender for the Rose Bowl (or in Nebraska’s case, a BCS bowl) over the last 20 years. I realize that Michigan has been down since RichRod’s arrival and might stay there for a while. Let’s be honest, the Gophers are as likely to make it to a Jan. 1 bowl game in the next three years as Michigan. But Delany doesn’t buy that argument so we might as well go with it. So, Michigan makes the cut.
Without question, every other program in the conference is at best a middle-of-the-pack football team (Minnesota, Purdue, Michigan State, Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana). You can’t argue against that! So, all you have to do is split up those top six programs. Three in one division, three in the other. The proposed divisions actually do accomplish this, but the thought-process seems like the equivalent of calling a wide receiver screen on first-and-goal from the 1-yard-line when they could have just quarterbacked sneaked their way into the endzone. (Damn you Fisch!)
Plus, of course, this proposal will invariably cause numerous rivalries to be played less than once a year. And it just so happens that almost all of those rivalries were founded on geographic proximity. The solution was so damn simple and yet somehow these guys have managed to turn it into a complete mess. I wonder if the same people were the ones who drew up the schematics for the bathrooms behind the student section at The Bank.
Journalism. Enhanced.
Exactly!
Exactly the same people. And that’s exactly what they did. They input a bunch of facts and figures (i.e. average attendance, television ratings, win-loss records, mascots that begin with the letter ‘B’, etc.) and this is the solution the computers spit out. Like I said in the post… overthought and miscalculated.
Journalism. Enhanced.
Everything you write her makes sense from an “on the field” competitive standpoint. And I agree with all of it. But that’s not the sum of what “competitive balance” means to the Big Ten. When it comes to TV and marketing, there are 4 “national” brands. Iowa and Wisky don’t make the cut on that one. This is why the straight geographical model hasn’t been considered.
True, but so what?
You are 100% correct that Wisconsin and Iowa do not have the same national identity as the other four programs, but I still don’t understand why it’s better to split those four national brands, two in each division. The major TV networks will get the national brands in primetime games either way. And the Big Ten Network will get the rest. If the best six teams (from an “on the field” perspective) are split equally, then the two best teams will meet in the Big Ten championship game. So, what the hell kind of difference does it make?
Journalism. Enhanced.
better odds
that two of the four make it to the CCG. Plain and simple.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 27, 2010 7:40 AM CDT up reply actions
Because when you put 3 of the 4 in one division that means that they end up playing each other more, thus, there are fewer games overall headlined by a “major brand” team. That, and the improved odds of the top brand matchup in the CCG.
Look, I’m not saying I agree with it. I think its stupid. But I’m willing to admit this seems to be what the B10 is thinking and set my expectations accordingly.
MN just gets unlucky
in that we get put with three programs that are on good runs, whereas the other division looks like it will have IA and Nebraska with the others ranging from okay to poor. Braces yourself for a new coach in the next 2-3 years.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 27, 2010 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions
I was just giving myself some margin for error
I can’t remember off the top of my head how the “extension” for brewster was structured. I assume MN will go the “economical” route. Strong….
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 27, 2010 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions
Fall Saturdays just became
more irrelevant. Overthunk is the correct term for this travesty.
Your fantasy football expert since Jerry Rice's rookie year.
Based upon what the AD's are saying
I believe they will split the Neb/Wis/Iowa/Min grouping 2 and 2 with the intentions of having a second protected rivalry game when the conference moves to 9 games in 2015 (the year that we are suppose to have flying cars and the cubs will beat Miami for the world series).
Assuming they are split with Wisconsin and Minnesota on one side and Iowa and Nebraska on the other, you may see protected rivalries as follows in 2015:
Division 1
Michigan – OSU, Minnesota
Nebraska – PSU, Wisconsin
Iowa – Minnesota, Wisconsin
Michigan State – Penn State, Illinois
Indiana – OSU, Purdue
Northwestern – Illinois, Purdue
Division 2
OSU – UM, Indiana
PSU – Nebraska, Michigan State
Wisconsin – Nebraska, Iowa
Minnesota – Iowa, Michigan
Illinois – Northwestern, Michigan State
Purdue – Indiana, Northwestern
With that setup, you could have some really fun schedules for almost every school. Either way, I think it’s very important for the conference to come out and say what the long term plans are for the 9 game schedules so that people can see the big picture of what a permanent schedule will look like.
Horton
Okay, so this doesn’t have to do with the divisions, but after another mention of Jeff Horton’s ‘simplified’ offense, I thought I should ask this. Even though I’m sure our players will have a much better grasp of the offense, if it is so much more simplified, won’t defenses have a much easier job figuring out what we will do? Even if it does benefit us more than opposing defenses, I don’t think the change in offensive scheme should be used as such a big reason why our offense will produce better this year.
Think about what Wisconsin does. There isn’t anything tricky about it. You know what’s coming the majority of the time (handoff to Clay). Yet it works. The same was true of the Mason zone read. Nothing too tricky there. A smaller playbook executed very well will give you better results than a thick, trick filled playbook executed poorly.
football is all about execution
a well designed and executied play, even if you know it’s coming, will always outperform a masterfully designed and poorly executed play.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 27, 2010 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions
quick expansion on my thought…
This doesn’t mean you don’t mix up formations, etc whenever it is possible. Multiple formations don’t automatically have to mean more complex plays. If you teach basic principles of your O (formations, blocking assignments, etc) you can run similar plays from different formations. That’s one way to “spice up” a small playbook. The thing you want to avoid is the sort of thing Fisch pulled. Think of the MSU game when we needed a 1st down to run out the clock and he pulled that super unbalanced formation out of his hat when all we needed was 2 yards up the gut. Sometimes KISS is the right mantra.
ugh...correction
3rd sentence should read: "If you do a good job teaching and learning the basic principles of your O (routes, blocking assignments, etc) you can run similar plays from different formations.
Took the Words Right Out of My Mouth
Fisch came from the NFL where you need complex schemes because the talent level-even for the crappy teams- is just so good. In college, if you can do something well- like Sconnie running the ball or Brian Kelly’s passing offense- you’re going to be successful against just about everybody. Defenses like Ohio State’s will give you problems no matter what you do because of their talent and speed, but a well run simplified offense where your players are confident in what they’re doing will make a big difference. I hope it happens for us this year.
I find it very odd that Minnesota fans are assuming Iowa will be paired with Wisconsin since everbody down here is leaning in the opposite direction. If this is about how competitive the two teams are with each other then I think it is worth pointing out that since 1972 Iowa is 22-8-1 against the Badgers, better than any other Big Ten team. If this is only about competition then, from an Iowa perspective, it reall doesn’t matter since we haven’t had too many problems with either of them.
From a tradition standpoint Flyod is Iowa’s most important trophy and I don’t think Barta would be willing to just drop that because of what it means to the fans. Iowa and Wisconsin is always a lot of fun but the rivalry just doesn’t have the hate that typifies Iowa-Minnesota.
Put it this way, I was in the Iowa football complex the other day and all three rivalry trophies (along with a lot of other cool stuff) are sitting there (Godwilling they will remain there for a very long time). Floyd of Rosedale was sitting in a glass case in the middle of the room on a pedastal, better placement than the Orange Bowl trophy. The Heartland Trophy had no case and was sitting on a table between a pair of couches like an expensive arm rest. If the damn thing didn’t weigh 100+ pounds I probably could have picked it up and walked out with it without anyone noticing.
The point is that the Minnesota rivalry just means more to the fans than Iowa-Wisconsin does and I don’t think the rivalry will just disappear. Whether we are locked from the begining or we go to nine games and get a second protected rivalry, I just don’t see a game that means so much to the fans being trashed so easily.
http://victorypolka.blogspot.com/
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
