http://sports.omaha.com/2011/12/28/big-ten-partners-with-pac-12/
The Big Ten has junked its plan to create a nine-game conference schedule in football.
The Big Ten has junked its plan to create a nine-game conference schedule in football.
davidubbenPrevailing thought in the wake of the Pac-12/Big Ten partnership? The SEC and Big 12 need to play nice and do something similar.
based on us being the 4th or 5th best team in conference that would match us up with ASU, Cal, UCLA, Az, Wash
after rereading the article....the scheduling is STOOPID. Everybody should play everybody. There be idgits running the B1G. Screw the Michigan/Ohio St rivalry, they need to drop the dedicated rival and go to the Big 12 scheduling model of 3 on and 3 off during conference play and if we're adding the Big 12 to the schedule then PLAY THEM ALL. Setting a schedule now, you have no idea how good or bad a team will be in 5 years let alone 10, 11, 12. STOOOPID, STOOOOPID STOOOOPID......
UNLESS....they're gonna split it into 2 groups of six from each conference then have a home and away series with each...that would be a little more palatable
after rereading the article....the scheduling is STOOPID. Everybody should play everybody. There be idgits running the B1G. Screw the Michigan/Ohio St rivalry, they need to drop the dedicated rival and go to the Big 12 scheduling model of 3 on and 3 off during conference play and if we're adding the Big 12 to the schedule then PLAY THEM ALL. Setting a schedule now, you have no idea how good or bad a team will be in 5 years let alone 10, 11, 12. STOOOPID, STOOOOPID STOOOOPID......
UNLESS....they're gonna split it into 2 groups of six from each conference then have a home and away series with each...that would be a little more palatable
There be idgits running the B1G. Screw the Michigan/Ohio St rivalry,
I've heard rumors about seeding teams from the previous season. In order to do this, there would need to be 1 week designated as Big/Pac week to accommodate all schedules.
But, if this agreement was put in place starting in 2012, it would look like this:
Obviously, you would get a Rose Bowl rematch almost every year (unless one team was in the National Title). You could either embrace this as a "kick-off" to the next season, or simply switch the Top 2 seeds so that Oregon would play MSU and Wisconsin takes on Stanford.
The large negative is that successful teams in the Top 4-5 of each conference have a tough game on the schedule. So basically, you're a victim of your own success since you'll be guaranteed a game against a top flight team from the other conference. Of course the flip side is that it provides a "marquee" moment on the schedule which could boost your team into the National Title game based on a strong non-conference schedule.
What are your thoughts?
I don't think seeding the teams would work unless the games were played at neutral sites. I would imagine you'd want home-and-home two-game series at a minimum for each matchup.
Somebody, maybe Tom Dienhart on the BTN site, talked about maybe making pods of four teams from each conference and pairing them up, etc.
I almost think you would need to simply cycle through all 12 teams. That way, some years you have tough games and some years you have easier ones. I like playing UM every year in our conference division, and I like having Penn State as an annual opponent. But I'm not sure it's "fair" for NU to have Penn State and Wisconsin to have Indiana, or whoever. Matching up the traditional powers makes for better games but also makes winning tougher.
I concur I do not like the 'dedicated' opponent plan at all...don't like it in conference play and like it even less in this Pac 12 scenario.....I would say STOOOOOPID a few times more if I were you !!!!
But it wouldn't be clean energy. As we'd see when clouds of smug simultaneously formed over both Palo Alto and Ann Arbor.At least the fans get something out of it. When Stanford plays Michigan in the non-con, the resulting sense of self-satisfaction among the two fan bases might just solve the world's energy problems.