Locked due to no posts in 60 days. Report 1st post if need unlocked Maryland and Rutgers

[Cardinal]

No question. The shine is off the apple to a degree. That said, you are a college football fan. Would you rather see Nebraska vs. Michigan or Nebraska vs. Maryland?

Point taken.

But I would rather see NU v. Wisky or Iowa than NU v. Michigan or Penn State (or even v. OSU).

Edit: And I will be rooting for the Big Ten West team 9 times out of 10 in the CCG, I predict. If I were an NU fan, I would embrace the West and the solid football programs and institutions that are a part of it. I think the West reflects the old Big Ten I grew up with much better than does the East.

 

[The Big Red Lebowski]

I think in time you will see that it was a good thing. It definitely paves a more managable path to the Big 10 title game...which pays huge dividends. To me its more about where you finish than just a few great regular season match-ups. I think being in the West gives us a better chance for that. Not to mention it is easier on fans traveling to and from away games.

We couldn't possibly view this any more differently. I'm excited for the 4-team playoffs, but I'd just as soon ditch the CCG entirely. An indoor game in December is not appealing to me. I like my college football on fall Saturdays.

 

[Cardinal]

In the end, money rules the day. So long as Maryland has a significantly higher revenue by being a part of the Big Ten, it's probably in their best interest to stay. I cannot imagine them returning to the ACC. Now, if and when the day comes that conferences continue to merge and grow, they may very well leave. But the ACC as it is now, I don't see it. I guess we'll see.

Out of curiosity, I checked the academic ratings by conference.... http://collegespun.com/national/whi...onferences-has-the-best-schools-academically#

With all due respect, HW, the U.S. News is only a ranking of institutions' undergraduate programs. That is like ranking college football team by their punting statistics. World university rankings that take into account graduate and research programs is the true ranking of universities that academia itself pays attention to. That changes the conference rankings considerably, I am quite certain.

 

[HuskerWeatherman]

With all due respect, HW, the U.S. News is only a ranking of undergraduate programs. That is like ranking college football team by their punting statistics. World university ranking that take into account graduate and research programs is the true ranking of univerities that academia itself pays attention to. That changes the conference rankings considerably, I am quite certain.

Fair enough -- but when you are considering the vast majority of collegiate athletes, it's the undergrad programs that mostly matter. Though I do understand how they all tie together.

I didn't think to take the time to research rankings based on the full body of academia. It was really a very quick, basic search -- as I was interested to see if or how Maryland might (or might not) benefit academically by leaving the ACC for the Big Ten. Granted, if you have a source to share, I'd be interested. Anyhow, that was just a little nugget I was throwing out there -- not really a significant part of my discussion on this thread.

 

[The Big Red Lebowski]

Point taken.

But I would rather see NU v. Wisky or Iowa than NU v. Michigan or Penn State (or even v. OSU).

Edit: And I will be rooting for the Big Ten West team 9 times out of 10 in the CCG, I predict. If I were an NU fan, I would embrace the West and the solid football programs and instituions that are a part of it. I think the West reflects the old Big Ten I grew up with much better than does the East.

I have no problem with Wiscy and Iowa. Iowa is the natural choice for a rival and already an annual game. Imagine if you woke up tomorrow and found out that Stanford would play be playing USC and UCLA once each in the next 6 years. In their place, you'd have annual games with Fresno St. and UTEP. Excited?

My ideal scenario would have been for the Big Ten to stay at 12 teams and for Nebraska to swap Wiscy and PSU as the protected rival. Then, simply alternate home and homes with TOSU and PSU every 4 years. This results in Nebraska vs. Michigan, MSU, Wiscy, Iowa and either PSU or TOSU every single year. To me, that's an awesome schedule.

 

[HuskerWeatherman]

Point taken.

But I would rather see NU v. Wisky or Iowa than NU v. Michigan or Penn State (or even v. OSU).

Edit: And I will be rooting for the Big Ten West team 9 times out of 10 in the CCG, I predict. If I were an NU fan, I would embrace the West and the solid football programs and institutions that are a part of it. I think the West reflects the old Big Ten I grew up with much better than does the East.

That's interesting. Which teams from the West seem to reflect more of the old Big Ten (at least to you) than from the selection of East teams?

 

[Cardinal]

That's interesting. Which teams from the West seem to reflect more of the old Big Ten (at least to you) than from the selection of East teams?

It really is just a matter of numbers from when the Big Ten had ten teams: six Big Ten teams in the West (IA, MN, WI, NW, IL, Purdue) to only four Big Ten teams in the East (IN, MI, MSU, OSU). I also think Nebraska as an institution and a people fit in better with the western schools, particularly IA, MN and WI. I guess this is like a lot of occasions on this board when I am looking at a lot of non-football factors and the Nebraska folks on here just kind of focus on football as the end all, be all.

 

[Cardinal]

Imagine if you woke up tomorrow and found out that Stanford would play be playing USC and UCLA once each in the next 6 years. In their place, you'd have annual games with Fresno St. and UTEP. Excited?

That is not a very good comparison. Stanford has been in the same conference with USC for over 90 years and with UCLA for just under 90 years. That is why those three institutions, plus Cal, insisted on annual cross-overs against each other when the Pac 10 expanded. Nebraska's history with OSU and UM is comparatively de minimus.

 

[Cardinal]

I think that statement is a bit unfair. I embraced the move to the Big Ten for one reason - academics. Nebraska's academic profile was raised significantly, and you have quality students from all over the Big Ten footprint now viewing Nebraska as a viable destination. From a football standpoint, I'd have rather stayed in the Big 12.

Good post. My apologies.

 

[The Big Red Lebowski]

It really is just a matter of numbers from when the Big Ten had ten teams: six Big Ten teams in the West (IA, MN, WI, NW, IL, Purdue) to only four Big Ten teams in the East (IN, MI, MSU, OSU). I also think Nebraska as an institution and a people fit in better with the western schools, particularly IA, MN and WI. I guess this is like a lot of occasions on this board when I am looking at a lot of non-football factors and the Nebraska folks on here just kind of focus on football as the end all, be all.

I think that statement is a bit unfair. I embraced the move to the Big Ten for one reason - academics. Nebraska's academic profile was raised significantly, and you have quality students from all over the Big Ten footprint now viewing Nebraska as a viable destination. From a football standpoint, I'd have rather stayed in the Big 12.

 

[The Big Red Lebowski]

That is not a very good comparison. Stanford has been in the same conference with USC for over 90 years and with UCLA for just under 90 years. That is why those three institutions, plus Cal, insisted on annual cross-overs against each other when the Pac 10 expanded. Nebraska's history with OSU and UM is comparatively de minimus.

It's not a great analogy, but I think the broad point is still valid. If the Pac 12 added two more teams, you'd have to give up annual games with some teams you'd probably prefer to keep playing. If the Big Ten had simply decided to realign east and west, I'd be fine with it. With 12 teams and a 9-game schedule, you'd still play everyone enough to make it feel like a cohesive conference. 14 is just too many.

 

[Cardinal]

It's not a great analogy, but I think the broad point is still valid. If the Pac 12 added two more teams, you'd have to give up annual games with some teams you'd probably prefer to keep playing. If the Big Ten had simply decided to realign east and west, I'd be fine with it. With 12 teams and a 9-game schedule, you'd still play everyone enough to make it feel like a cohesive conference. 14 is just too many.

Agree completely. Hope that the Pac never feels required to expand beyond 12.

Just my personal opinion, but if the fans don't get to see another conference member team at home at least once every three years or so, it doesn't feel that those two teams are part of the same conference. More like a scheduling arrangement only.

Excuse me for not knowing this off the top of my head, but is the Big Ten still planning to go to a 9-game conference schedule? That would help get other division teams into your house a little more frequently.

 

[The Big Red Lebowski]

Agree completely. Hope that the Pac never feels required to expand beyond 12.

Just my personal opinion, but if the fans don't get to see another conference member team at home at least once every three years or so, it doesn't feel that those two teams are part of the same conference. More like a scheduling arrangement only.

Excuse me for not knowing this off the top of my head, but is the Big Ten still planning to go to a 9-game conference schedule? That would help get other division teams into your house a little more frequently.

Agree on the once every three years. I would probably say once every three and two of every four is ideal. Yep, the Big Ten goes to 9 games in 2016. It helps a little. The problem is that everyone wants 7 home games, so you have to schedule all 3 non-cons at home in years when you have only 4 conference home games.

It jacks everything up. Nebraska plays TOSU 4 consecutive years (2015 to 2018) but Michigan and PSU just once during the same stretch. Nebraska has yet to play Indiana and is only scheduled to play them twice before the end of the decade.

 

[CombatTargeteer]

We could always meet them in the CCG.

 

[HuskerWeatherman]

It really is just a matter of numbers from when the Big Ten had ten teams: six Big Ten teams in the West (IA, MN, WI, NW, IL, Purdue) to only four Big Ten teams in the East (IN, MI, MSU, OSU). I also think Nebraska as an institution and a people fit in better with the western schools, particularly IA, MN and WI. I guess this is like a lot of occasions on this board when I am looking at a lot of non-football factors and the Nebraska folks on here just kind of focus on football as the end all, be all.

Okay.