• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

B1G removes conference schedules from 2023-24 seasons

DuckTownHusker

Blackshirt Sith Lord
10 Year Member
Mods, this relates to the thread in Other Teams about the Pac-12 and Mountain West removing divisions. Both of those conferences are moving to a "best two teams" model for their conference championship game.

It looks like the B1G may be following suit, as Nebraska, Iowa, Ohio State and Illinois have each removed their conference schedules from their official AD websites.

The other potential options necessitating a conference schedule rewrite could be either conference expansion or just a reconfiguration of the divisions. Swapping around the divisions seems highly unlikely, though, given all the rapid changes around the country. Why mix up your divisions when other conferences are eliminating them, or expanding, such as the SEC with OU+UT?

Big Ten expansion might be possible, but I'd think you'd probably target your teams and sign those deals first. Just like Nebraska, Maryland and Rutgers joined before the new divisions were announced. So unless they've gotten some backroom deal already inked, mixing up the schedules seems way too presumptuous. Not to mention, that's literally next year. We know from these conference moves that they often take 4-5 seasons, especially when another team is subject to their old conference's contracts. Maaaaybe a long shot for Notre Dame, though? Since they'd only have to negotiate with themselves and have enough Screw You Money from football to tell the ACC to kiss their rumps on Olympics sports.

I'm guessing the most likely path here is that the B1G eliminates divisions entirely, which also preps the soil for future expansion. You don't have to worry about rebalancing divisions at that point, just add more teams. Heck, without divisions, you could just field a 15-team Big Ten with Notre Dame. Odd numbered teams work just fine when you only take the top two for a CCG.

========================

Here's the Reddit thread:

========================




 
Last edited:

cthusker

You talken to me?
5 Year Member
Wonder how many times over the past 20 years a team from the West Division would have played in BIG CCG using the 2nd best team standard?
 

weaver75

Special Counsel
5 Year Member
I think scrapping divisions is the most likely reason, but just moving to 8 conference games is also a possibility.
 

DuckTownHusker

Blackshirt Sith Lord
10 Year Member
I like that it makes the conference more agile, from an expansion standpoint. Let's say we added Notre Dame and Kansas (pipe dream, right?). That scenario "works" because you could easily add the Irish to the East and the Jayhawks to the West, and you largely preserve the balance, etc.

But what about adding KU+ISU? Or Notre Dame + Pitt? Do you swing Purdue to the East? Flip Indiana to the West? What about a pod model?

There's a lot of unanswered questions, and you sort of pre-think your selection based on keeping divisions intact. It's like trying to hire your next employee to fit the XL polo shirt uniform you already have in the back closet. Instead, you go get the best candidate and then figure out the uniforms and team shift schedule.

Same principle here. By de-emphasizing the divisions, the B1G is free to pursue whoever - and it needn't be in pairs. Who says we can't have a 15-team Big Ten by simply adding Kansas? Or a 17-team conference by adding KU, KSU and ISU? When you're simply ensuring each team gets 2-3-4 protected rival games per year, you're really freed up to add conference members without too much problem.

Also, by fielding a #1 vs #2 CCG, you give your eventual champion A LOT more momentum in the post season. Often times, you'll have two (or three) much better teams in one division, playing against the "champion" from the other division. Here's several examples:

1996 Big XII: #6 NU vs #8 Colorado (instead of #23 Texas)
1997 Big XII: #2 NU vs #8 KState (instead of #20 A&M)
1999 Big XII: #3 NU vs #6 KState (instead of #21 Texas)
2001 Big XII: #5 Texas vs #6 Oklahoma (instead of #9 Colorado [champ] or #8 Nebraska)
2007 Big XII: #4 Mizzou vs #7 Kansas (instead of #8 Oklahoma)
2010 Big XII: #6 Oklahoma vs #13 OkState (instead of #20 Nebraska)

2012 B1G: #24 Michigan vs #25 Nebraska (both from Legends division. OSU and PSU on probation)
2014 B1G: #1 Ohio State vs, #5 MSU (instead of #13 Wisconsin)
2015 B1G: #6 MSU vs #4 Ohio State (instead of #9 Iowa)
2016 B1G: #7 PSU vs #6 Ohio State (instead of #9 Wisconsin)
2021 B1G: #3 Michigan vs #6 Ohio State (instead of #23 Iowa)

Note how in many cases, the drop between Team #2 and Team #3 is very large. Last year we got a lopsided beatdown of Iowa by the Wolverines, but the Buckeyes still managed to get into the CFP. Imagine if the B1G CCG was Michigan-Ohio State instead. The winner of that game would likely have been a #1 or #2 seed in the CFP, instead of Ohio State getting clobbered by Alabama. Getting two high level teams into your CCG provides a massive boost for the conference in terms of CFP and Bowl Selection. Even if your individual team loses, you still want the B1G represented in the CFP, Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl, etc.
 

DuckTownHusker

Blackshirt Sith Lord
10 Year Member
Wonder how many times over the past 20 years a team from the West Division would have played in BIG CCG using the 2nd best team standard?

See my post above. The West teams simply haven't been as good as Ohio State, Michigan, MSU and PSU.

Hilariously, though, the Big XII South would have gotten screwed, too. There would have been SEVERAL CCGs between Nebraska, Colorado, KState, Mizzou and Kansas. When you look at it on paper, 1990s-2000s Texas was a good (but not great) team most of the time. They just managed to cruise to like 8-4 seasons and then turn on the gas in the big games. You can argue that's a solid strategy for winning a season, but they were absolutely not as consistent as KState or Colorado, let alone Nebraska.

Evolve or die, I guess.
 
Last edited:

Cornjob

Recruit
Every single example in the OP resulted in a rematch game. I don’t love that consequence. I realize that should happen less frequently without divisions, but it will still be more likely than the frequency WITH divisions.

Scrapping divisions means teams will have less guaranteed common opponents. It becomes possible for teams with unbalanced schedules to have a quirky year where they play a weak schedule and sneak into the championship game.

So, the no-divisions needs to pair with 9 game (at least) conference schedule. But I think we’ll still see arguments that a team got in as the #2 when there are a couple better teams that played tougher schedules.
 

cthusker

You talken to me?
5 Year Member
Unless something changes looks like we'll probably get a steady diet of the former East Division playing the East Division for CCG? Guess we can say teams from the West need to improve but it sure gut shoots a lot of teams from the West who will really need to forget about getting to the CCG or the Rose Bowl? Obviously conference schedules would play a major part of teams chances to make the CCG. As it is now I don't see any advantage for say Meechicken or PSU playing OSU every season. :Lol:

I suspect we well might see many rematch games!
 
Last edited:

wcbsas

All Big 10
15 Year Member
Interesting. Bring on the scrapping of divisions. Heck, we haven't had 'em in basketball or baseball.
They play 19 games in volleyball, 20 games in basketball and 24 games in baseball with at least SOME head-to-head built into those schedules.
Can't happen with football (especially if they were to go to an 8-game conference schedule).

What happens when tOSU wins outright with an undefeated conference schedule and Nebraska & Michigan tie for second (with no head-to-head) where one team has played tOSU, PSU and Wisconsin and the other gets Rutgers, Indiana and Maryland?

In most years these things tend to take care of themselves but it will never be as clean as it is with those other two sports.
 

Cisco

Recruit
5 Year Member
They play 19 games in volleyball, 20 games in basketball and 24 games in baseball with at least SOME head-to-head built into those schedules.
Can't happen with football (especially if they were to go to an 8-game conference schedule).

What happens when tOSU wins outright with an undefeated conference schedule and Nebraska & Michigan tie for second (with no head-to-head) where one team has played tOSU, PSU and Wisconsin and the other gets Rutgers, Indiana and Maryland?

In most years these things tend to take care of themselves but it will never be as clean as it is with those other two sports.
Saw a couple recent quotes from Big Ten AD's. Never say never but the idea of going away from 9 conference games appears to be a no go.

A 9th conference game is more valuable to the Big Ten than a game against the ACC or Pac 12 as part of an Alliance scheduling agreement.
 

wcbsas

All Big 10
15 Year Member
Mods, this relates to the thread in Other Teams about the Pac-12 and Mountain West removing divisions. Both of those conferences are moving to a "best two teams" model for their conference championship game.

It looks like the B1G may be following suit, as Nebraska, Iowa, Ohio State and Illinois have each removed their conference schedules from their official AD websites.

The other potential options necessitating a conference schedule rewrite could be either conference expansion or just a reconfiguration of the divisions. Swapping around the divisions seems highly unlikely, though, given all the rapid changes around the country. Why mix up your divisions when other conferences are eliminating them, or expanding, such as the SEC with OU+UT?

Big Ten expansion might be possible, but I'd think you'd probably target your teams and sign those deals first. Just like Nebraska, Maryland and Rutgers joined before the new divisions were announced. So unless they've gotten some backroom deal already inked, mixing up the schedules seems way too presumptuous. Not to mention, that's literally next year. We know from these conference moves that they often take 4-5 seasons, especially when another team is subject to their old conference's contracts. Maaaaybe a long shot for Notre Dame, though? Since they'd only have to negotiate with themselves and have enough F** You Money from football to tell the ACC to kiss their rumps on Olympics sports.

I'm guessing the most likely path here is that the B1G eliminates divisions entirely, which also preps the soil for future expansion. You don't have to worry about rebalancing divisions at that point, just add more teams. Heck, without divisions, you could just field a 15-team Big Ten with Notre Dame. Odd numbered teams work just fine when you only take the top two for a CCG.

========================

Here's the Reddit thread:

========================




The other aspect is that the 2024 conference schedule WAS brutal ... tOSU, @Michigan and @Penn State as the cross-overs with @Wisconsin and @Iowa as well.
 

DuckTownHusker

Blackshirt Sith Lord
10 Year Member
I suspect we well might see many rematch games!

We'll probably see more, but it's impossible to say. As it stands historically, about 30% of the Big XII and Big Ten CCGs were rematch games, so it's not like we never saw rematches.

I'd bet if you pull the data for the PAC, SEC and ACC you'll probably see the same thing happening.

ChampionRunner-UpRematch
1996
UTNEBNo
1997
NEBA&MNo
1998
A&MKSUNo
1999
NEBUTYes
2000
OUKSUYes
2001
CUUTNo
2002
OUCUYes
2003
KSUOUNo
2004
OUCUNo
2005
UTCUYes
2006
OUNEBNo
2007
OUMIZZYes
2008
OUMIZZNo
2009
UTNEBNo
2010
OUNEBNo
2011
WISCMSUYes
2012
WISCNEBYes
2013
MSUOSUNo
2014
OSUWISCNo
2015
MSUIOWANo
2016
PSUWISCNo
2017
OSUWISCNo
2018
OSUNWNo
2019
OSUWISCYes
2020
OSUNWNo
2021
MICHIOWANo
 
Last edited:

HuskerWeatherman

Feral Cat
20 Year Member
They play 19 games in volleyball, 20 games in basketball and 24 games in baseball with at least SOME head-to-head built into those schedules.
Can't happen with football (especially if they were to go to an 8-game conference schedule).

What happens when tOSU wins outright with an undefeated conference schedule and Nebraska & Michigan tie for second (with no head-to-head) where one team has played tOSU, PSU and Wisconsin and the other gets Rutgers, Indiana and Maryland?

In most years these things tend to take care of themselves but it will never be as clean as it is with those other two sports.

In basketball, you do play every team -- but only some twice. In baseball, you don't play every team.

Certainly there will be a list of tiebreaker scenarios for football.

Doesn't really matter to me if football has divisions or not. But I think the Big Ten has to follow suit with where the other conferences are heading in regards to dumping divisions. Otherwise, you risk having your 3rd or 4th best team as the conference champ while the conferences with no divisions will have one of their top two.
 
Top