Swapping wisco and um just makes too much sense for the clowns running this conference.
Like NU, UM will always rise again. Same for OSU and, before the sanctions, PSU. The same can't be said for Wisconsin. What happens when Alvarez retires? They don't have a fanbase that will ensure they maintain excellence quite like the big four. Besides that, while I would like to play Wisconsin annually, I'd much rather play Michigan. Better team, bigger game, better history, better brand.
Yay. We will get to play osu 2 out of 6 years. Meanwhile we have a stupid "rival" game with a team that can never be a rival.
Let's send Iowa to the Leaders Division.
9 conference games makes more sense now I think. 6 against your division and 3 against crossover. 1 protected and the other 6 teams you play 2 of every 6 years. That's the only way it makes sense to me unless you go to 10 conference games which doesn't do much for me.
I agree eight games isnt going to cut it. Even nine games, just like now, will leave some players finishing their college careers without ever playing all the teams in their conference. I think that stinks. It's not so terrible if you miss out on Indiana or Purdue, but who want's to go their whole career and never get to play OSU or Michigan?
With ten conference games, you could have 6 division games, 3 crossover games, and 1 protected crossover. Players would then play a home and away with every team during their four year career. Not sure how to make that work, as it would mean a school's 11th and 12th games would need to be home games to give the AD's the seven home games they require, and that means FCS-type exhibitions.
Champaign is about 4 hours south of chicago. Much closer to Indianapolis. How about an indy trip every year?
I have an aunt and uncle that live in Champaign. I was hoping we'd get a game there sooner.