Big Ten sticking with divisions in 2023

redwingillini11 · Oct 24, 2022

Big Ten sticking with divisions in 2023: Sources

The Big Ten plans to play one more time with the East-West divisions and configure a new model when USC and UCLA come in 2024, per sources.

theathletic.com

The Big Ten is planning to run it back one more time with the East-West divisions and then configure a new model when USC and UCLA arrive in 2024, multiple sources confirmed to The Athletic on Monday. The league also plans to introduce the 2023 schedule this week.

Maybe we can make it to Indy in back to back years!

Joel Goodson · Oct 24, 2022

redwingillini11 said:
Big Ten sticking with divisions in 2023: Sources

The Big Ten plans to play one more time with the East-West divisions and configure a new model when USC and UCLA come in 2024, per sources.

theathletic.com

Maybe we can make it to Indy in back to back years!

Big break. Could be huge for recruiting momentum.

BZuppke · Oct 24, 2022

Instead of trying to balance the power by reconfiguring the league why not attack the real problem: The permanent blue blood class? For example, years ago an 85 scholarship limit was introduced which did help spread talent around. But here we are in 2022 with the same schools at the top of each league for the most part. If we are going towards 12 team playoffs and NFL light, then we need to regulate how talent gets spread around and recruiting. I for one couldn’t care less about whether Alabama, Georgia or tOSU claims a playoff title. How about a year where none of those teams are in it?

Fighter of the Nightman · Oct 24, 2022

BZuppke said:
Instead of trying to balance the power by reconfiguring the league why not attack the real problem: The permanent blue blood class? For example, years ago an 85 scholarship limit was introduced which did help spread talent around. But here we are in 2022 with the same schools at the top of each league for the most part. If we are going towards 12 team playoffs and NFL light, then we need to regulate how talent gets spread around and recruiting. I for one couldn’t care less about whether Alabama, Georgia or tOSU claims a playoff title. How about a year where none of those teams are in it?

Well, I think the only answer here is to heavily restrict NIL, and I am sure the NCAA either (A) lacks the power to do that or (B) it would be too much of a headache to solve a problem that they honestly don't really see as a problem. Looking on the bright side, I would argue that Illinois is set to prosper compared to our fellow "second class programs" in an NIL era, especially if we continue to foster this success. I know people think of us as "lower revenue" than programs like Auburn, Iowa, Wisconsin, etc .... but that is only because we have been bad. If Memorial Stadium keeps getting fuller and our fan base (both "crazy" and casual segments) get engaged, we have a bigger alumni base with more potential donor money than any of those schools, we have better instate recruiting, we - believe it or not - have better facilities ATM, etc. NIL is far from the worst thing to happen to Illinois, IMO, even though I do think it will have an overall negative impact on the college football landscape.

It will be very interesting to see how long it takes for the TV folks to start to see big enough declines in interest from the nation as a whole being sick of Clemson/Ohio State/Georgia/Alabama that they would actually want something done about it...

On the topic at hand, though, I don't think the following divisions are that inbalanced:

East
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Michigan State
Maryland
Purdue
Rutgers
Indiana

West
USC
Nebraska
UCLA
Illinois
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa
Northwestern

In a world where Bret keeps the Illini rolling, USC/UCLA receive a bit of an "interest boost" from joining the Big Ten and Nebraska makes even a semi-competent hire, all while MSU takes a bit of a step back and Purdue gets shipped east, I don't see these being so unbalanced as to continue the current uproar. Long term, I think it's reasonable to expect USC to be competing with the likes of Michigan and PSU ... so you pretty much have a more balanced West with an East that is better at the top (by virtue of having OSU, which one division has to have...) and actually worse at the bottom...

redwingillini11 · Oct 24, 2022

Fighter of the Nightman said:
Well, I think the only answer here is to heavily restrict NIL, and I am sure the NCAA either (A) lacks the power to do that or (B) it would be too much of a headache to solve a problem that they honestly don't really see as a problem. Looking on the bright side, I would argue that Illinois is set to prosper compared to our fellow "second class programs" in an NIL era, especially if we continue to foster this success. I know people think of us as "lower revenue" than programs like Auburn, Iowa, Wisconsin, etc .... but that is only because we have been bad. If Memorial Stadium keeps getting fuller and our fan base (both "crazy" and casual segments) get engaged, we have a bigger alumni base with more potential donor money than any of those schools, we have better instate recruiting, we - believe it or not - have better facilities ATM, etc. NIL is far from the worst thing to happen to Illinois, IMO, even though I do think it will have an overall negative impact on the college football landscape.

It will be very interesting to see how long it takes for the TV folks to start to see big enough declines in interest from the nation as a whole being sick of Clemson/Ohio State/Georgia/Alabama that they would actually want something done about it...

On the topic at hand, though, I don't think the following divisions are that inbalanced:

East
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Michigan State
Maryland
Purdue
Rutgers
Indiana

West
USC
Nebraska
UCLA
Illinois
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa
Northwestern

In a world where Bret keeps the Illini rolling, USC/UCLA receive a bit of an "interest boost" from joining the Big Ten and Nebraska makes even a semi-competent hire, all while MSU takes a bit of a step back and Purdue gets shipped east, I don't see these being so unbalanced as to continue the current uproar. Long term, I think it's reasonable to expect USC to be competing with the likes of Michigan and PSU ... so you pretty much have a more balanced West with an East that is better at the top (by virtue of having OSU, which one division has to have...) and actually worse at the bottom...

This divisions are decently balanced, but I think that would be getting to the point of you are so rarely playing teams from the other division it barely feels like you are in the same conference. If you have 9 conference games, that means that Ohio State is only playing at USC once every 8 years? I think part of selling USC and UCLA to the B1G is having those prime matchups, and the first three prime matchups that come to mind are probably USC-Michigan, USC-Ohio State, and USC-Penn State. That doesn't mean there wouldn't be good games or a competitive division in that B1G West. But this whole expansion is about building up the brand and you do that with big brand games. Plus USC isn't going to want to convince people to buy season tickets for a home slate that consists of Nebraska, Minnesota, us, Northwestern, and Maryland.

For this reason I think we are destined for a few protected rivalries or pods so that we cycle teams through the schedule much more frequently.

Fighter of the Nightman · Oct 24, 2022

^ Yeah, I think you are right ... which sucks, IMO, because ours will be like Northwestern, Indiana and Purdue, lol. That's what we get for being bad historically, I guess ... but with Bielema's new era of a resurgent Illinois, there is so much potential for rivalries with programs like Wisconsin and Iowa to blossom once again.

redwingillini11 · Oct 24, 2022

Regarding pods vs. protected rivalries, I know protected rivalries are talked about more frequently for the B1G, and perhaps it is better to match up all the rivalries that you wish to keep permanent. But I just did the math on how a pods system would work for us.

Four pods of four teams each.
You play your fellow teams from your pod every year (3 games).
You rotate and play an entire other pod every three years (4 games).
From the remaining two pods you rotate through and play one team from each respective pod (2 games).

So with a 9 conference game schedule with four pods of four, you are guaranteed to play every school at least three times every six years.

What would a pod look like for Illinois? Unless geography doesn't matter AT ALL, I see three possibilities:

Option A: Illinois, Northwestern, USC, UCLA (This option keeps the other west schools together that seem to have a quad rivalry together, and can be justified as travel for the LA schools as easiest coming through Chicago.)

Option B: Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota (This potion pairs "rivals" Iowa and Nebraska as a westernmost midwest duo to pair with the LA schools, and it wouldn't take much to sell the Illinois schools as being perfect rivals for Wisconsin given the competition for Chicago-area high school graduates.)

Option C: Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana (Perfect pairing of teams from the region, but really makes it difficult to make pods on either side of us because the math just doesn't work out.)

Ultimately we probably won't have pods because it will just be impossible to have balanced pods that puts Michigan, Michigan State, and Ohio State in one pod, especially without separating the Indiana schools. So we will probably be left with some number of protected rivals and putting together a fair schedule rotation will require a PhD in math.

DeonThomas · Oct 24, 2022

redwingillini11 said:
Regarding pods vs. protected rivalries, I know protected rivalries are talked about more frequently for the B1G, and perhaps it is better to match up all the rivalries that you wish to keep permanent. But I just did the math on how a pods system would work for us.

Four pods of four teams each.
You play your fellow teams from your pod every year (3 games).
You rotate and play an entire other pod every three years (4 games).
From the remaining two pods you rotate through and play one team from each respective pod (2 games).

So with a 9 conference game schedule with four pods of four, you are guaranteed to play every school at least three times every six years.

What would a pod look like for Illinois? Unless geography doesn't matter AT ALL, I see three possibilities:

Option A: Illinois, Northwestern, USC, UCLA (This option keeps the other west schools together that seem to have a quad rivalry together, and can be justified as travel for the LA schools as easiest coming through Chicago.)

Option B: Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota (This potion pairs "rivals" Iowa and Nebraska as a westernmost midwest duo to pair with the LA schools, and it wouldn't take much to sell the Illinois schools as being perfect rivals for Wisconsin given the competition for Chicago-area high school graduates.)

Option C: Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana (Perfect pairing of teams from the region, but really makes it difficult to make pods on either side of us because the math just doesn't work out.)

Ultimately we probably won't have pods because it will just be impossible to have balanced pods that puts Michigan, Michigan State, and Ohio State in one pod, especially without separating the Indiana schools. So we will probably be left with some number of protected rivals and putting together a fair schedule rotation will require a PhD in math.

Very logical. I agree.

the juiceman cometh · Oct 24, 2022

Fighter of the Nightman said:
Well, I think the only answer here is to heavily restrict NIL, and I am sure the NCAA either (A) lacks the power to do that or (B) it would be too much of a headache to solve a problem that they honestly don't really see as a problem.

Lack of parity is not an NIL problem. This issue predates NIL by several years. Parity was at a all-time low before NIL.

In fact, I'd argue NIL is the best realistic hope we have for introducing some parity.

Fighter of the Nightman · Oct 24, 2022

the juiceman cometh said:
Lack of parity is not an NIL problem. This issue predates NIL by several years. Parity was at a all-time low before NIL.

In fact, I'd argue NIL is the best realistic hope we have for introducing some parity.

You may be right, and I hope you are ... but man, programs like OSU and Texas are just in leagues of their own right now with the money that their donors can and/or are willing to pony up. As I said, I think a resurgent Illinois - the only prominent public school in a massive state, with a huge and relatively wealthy alumni base, great instate recruiting and brand new/great facilities - can be a major player. However, I do wonder if your OSUs of the world created such a huge gap as to not be "catchable" 90% of the time.

the juiceman cometh · Oct 24, 2022

Fighter of the Nightman said:
You may be right, and I hope you are ... but man, programs like OSU and Texas are just in leagues of their own right now with the money that their donors can and/or are willing to pony up. As I said, I think a resurgent Illinois - the only prominent public school in a massive state, with a huge and relatively wealthy alumni base, great instate recruiting and brand new/great facilities - can be a major player. However, I do wonder if your OSUs of the world created such a huge gap as to not be "catchable" 90% of the time.

Sure there are some programs that have more money than others, last season was the 1st season of NIL. It was the 8th season of the CFP. The 32 total playoff spots ever have been filled by only 13 teams. Of those, 7 have only made one appearance. Alabama, Clemson, OSU, and Oklahoma account for 21 appearances. That means those 4 teams represent 66% of all teams to ever play in the playoff. Alabama has played in 6/8 championship games and Clemson has played in 4/8.

If Texas becomes a contender that actually will mean more parity, not less. Same for teams who've traditionally had tons of support like Tennessee, USC, Florida, FSU, Miami, Michigan. If the list of true contenders grows from 3 or 4 to even just 10 that would be a massive improvement for the sport.

RML · Oct 24, 2022

redwingillini11 said:
Regarding pods vs. protected rivalries, I know protected rivalries are talked about more frequently for the B1G, and perhaps it is better to match up all the rivalries that you wish to keep permanent. But I just did the math on how a pods system would work for us.

Four pods of four teams each.
You play your fellow teams from your pod every year (3 games).
You rotate and play an entire other pod every three years (4 games).
From the remaining two pods you rotate through and play one team from each respective pod (2 games).

So with a 9 conference game schedule with four pods of four, you are guaranteed to play every school at least three times every six years.

What would a pod look like for Illinois? Unless geography doesn't matter AT ALL, I see three possibilities:

Option A: Illinois, Northwestern, USC, UCLA (This option keeps the other west schools together that seem to have a quad rivalry together, and can be justified as travel for the LA schools as easiest coming through Chicago.)

Option B: Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota (This potion pairs "rivals" Iowa and Nebraska as a westernmost midwest duo to pair with the LA schools, and it wouldn't take much to sell the Illinois schools as being perfect rivals for Wisconsin given the competition for Chicago-area high school graduates.)

Option C: Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana (Perfect pairing of teams from the region, but really makes it difficult to make pods on either side of us because the math just doesn't work out.)

Ultimately we probably won't have pods because it will just be impossible to have balanced pods that puts Michigan, Michigan State, and Ohio State in one pod, especially without separating the Indiana schools. So we will probably be left with some number of protected rivals and putting together a fair schedule rotation will require a PhD in math.

Very nice proposal!

One option, to address the championship. As you suggested 3 games against the teams in your pod, and four games against teams in a different pad (I would suggest that, for fairness, everyone in your pod plays the same other pod).

Then straight to a two-round playoff series. In round 1, the no. 1s in each pod play another no. 1 that they didn't already play. Ditto the no. 2's, 3s, and 4s. All should be decent games.

In round 2, the two winning no. 1s obviously play for the conference title. I would have the losing no. 1s play the winning no. 2s, the losing no. 2s playing the winning no. 3s, the losing no. 3s playing the winning no. 4s. (Dealers choice whether the losing no. 4s face off in a toilet bowl.)

Mr. Tibbs · Oct 24, 2022

we will never get "parity" in FBS. it is what it is. the blue bloods are the blue bloods, because we dont have it, and never will because of them

you think they would do anything to ever level the playing field ?

ThunderousBear · Oct 24, 2022

I think they're going to have to scrap divisions now with a conference that spans 4 time zones. It's going to be a big challenge to make all these cross country flights every week work out in a fair way.

Not to mention of course pretending your athletes are still "students" when they spend 12 hours on planes every week lol.

Mr. Tibbs · Oct 24, 2022

ThunderousBear said:
I think they're going to have to scrap divisions now with a conference that spans 4 time zones. It's going to be a big challenge to make all these cross country flights every week work out in a fair way.

Not to mention of course pretending your athletes are still "students" when they spend 12 hours on planes every week lol.

I dunno

everything is done remote anyway , anymore

I have a niece going to Elon U in NC. she's going to Peru over Thanksgiving Break (its a whole week now) for some class to "study" ancient cultures. Travel for school was unheard of in the 1980s . Today, its as common as waiting in line for a $8.50 iced latte on campus

IlliniKrush · Oct 24, 2022

I just don’t think they will go with pods as they will struggle with competitive balance using geography.
The SEC is considering a 9 game schedule with 3 protected rivalries and playing every other team (12 teams) 2 times over a 4 year period (home and away)
I thought I would see what is possible to protect as many rivalry/trophy games as possible.
My next objective was to balance out the rest by trying to make them all competitively balanced.
The only missing rivalry/trophy games - remember they still play twice over 4 years
- Michigan vs Minnesota
- Minnesota vs Penn St - only played 15 times
Bolden are not trophy games

Illinois: NW, Ohio St, Purdue
Indiana: Michigan St, Purdue, UCLA
Iowa: Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Maryland: Penn St, Rutgers, UCLA
Michigan: Ohio St, Michigan St, NW
Michigan St: Indiana, Michigan, Penn St
Minnesota: Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Nebraska: Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota
NW: Illinois, Michigan, Rutgers
Ohio St: Illinois, Michigan, Penn St
Penn St: Maryland, Michigan St, Ohio St
Purdue: Illinois, Indiana, USC
Rutgers: Maryland, NW, USC
Wisconsin: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska
UCLA: USC, Indiana, Maryland
USC: UCLA, Rutgers, Purdue

Interesting notes:
Yes I know that this is a pod but that’s just the way it is: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Minnesota has 5 trophy games
Rutgers has no trophy games

Roundball Sage · Oct 24, 2022

Fighter of the Nightman said:
East
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Michigan State
Maryland
Purdue
Rutgers
Indiana

West
USC
Nebraska
UCLA
Illinois
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa
Northwestern

Sooner or later, The Big Ten is going to have to add some additional teams from the West to preserve some of the USC and UCLA legacy matchups. Adding Oregon and Washington will add value to the Conference as well as give the California additions some needed closer neighbors. Something like:

West: Iowa, Nebraska, Oregon, UCLA, USC, Washington

Central: Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan (for power balance), Minnesota, Northwestern

East: Maryland, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

This creates National balance and gets The Ten's footprint into the Pacific Northwest.

illini80 · Oct 25, 2022

Keeping the divisions for another year is great news for us. It keeps us highly relevant in the news cycle all year for one thing. It gives us a path to the CFP that would not likely be there otherwise at least until they get to 12 teams. Yesterday was a great news day for the Illini!!

SKane · Oct 25, 2022

redwingillini11 said:
Regarding pods vs. protected rivalries, I know protected rivalries are talked about more frequently for the B1G, and perhaps it is better to match up all the rivalries that you wish to keep permanent. But I just did the math on how a pods system would work for us.

Four pods of four teams each.
You play your fellow teams from your pod every year (3 games).
You rotate and play an entire other pod every three years (4 games).
From the remaining two pods you rotate through and play one team from each respective pod (2 games).

So with a 9 conference game schedule with four pods of four, you are guaranteed to play every school at least three times every six years.

What would a pod look like for Illinois? Unless geography doesn't matter AT ALL, I see three possibilities:

Option A: Illinois, Northwestern, USC, UCLA (This option keeps the other west schools together that seem to have a quad rivalry together, and can be justified as travel for the LA schools as easiest coming through Chicago.)

Option B: Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota (This potion pairs "rivals" Iowa and Nebraska as a westernmost midwest duo to pair with the LA schools, and it wouldn't take much to sell the Illinois schools as being perfect rivals for Wisconsin given the competition for Chicago-area high school graduates.)

Option C: Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana (Perfect pairing of teams from the region, but really makes it difficult to make pods on either side of us because the math just doesn't work out.)

Ultimately we probably won't have pods because it will just be impossible to have balanced pods that puts Michigan, Michigan State, and Ohio State in one pod, especially without separating the Indiana schools. So we will probably be left with some number of protected rivals and putting together a fair schedule rotation will require a PhD in math.

Option A is logical because of travel but I doubt that UCLA and USC joined to be in a pod with IL and NW. On the other hand, IL and NW would travel well to the games out west.

Option B is also logical but I doubt that UCLA and USC joined to be in a pod with Iowa or Nebraska.

We will see what sort of deal UCLA and USC made in return for joining the conference. I expect that they wanted regular games with MI, OSU and/or Penn State. As another poster stated, the conference really needs to add two - four more PAC schools. The bi-coastal arrangement is not workable.

Dan · Oct 25, 2022

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1584998714258718778

Mr. Tibbs · Oct 25, 2022

watch
they'll change all the cross divisional games and
we'll get Michigan on the road again, and they will make up for that be giving us tO$U at home

redwingillini11 · Oct 25, 2022

Its been 5 years since we have gone to Columbus, 7 years since they have come to Champaign. Its a guarantee we will be playing them.

Nonetheless, I'm very excited to see the schedule and planning on what games I'll be going to next fall!

illinistephen · Oct 25, 2022

SKane said:
We will see what sort of deal UCLA and USC made in return for joining the conference. I expect that they wanted regular games with MI, OSU and/or Penn State. As another poster stated, the conference really needs to add two - four more PAC schools. The bi-coastal arrangement is not workable.

I think that the bi-coastal arrangement is great for the current 14 teams. Illinois probably gets a road football game in LA every other year. I also really doubt that USC and UCLA struggle with the travel for football at all. It's only 4-5 conference road games a year and an extra hour or two for a flight compared to the Pacific NW. The distance between LA and Seattle is greater than the distance between Minneapolis and State College, so how Washington helps USC travel significantly, I don't know. And if they do struggle with the travel to the midwest, all the better since then Illinois has a greater chance to win against them.

If UCLA and USC cared about things like legacy matchups they wouldn't have left in the first place.

ptgrd23 · Oct 25, 2022

15 potential games
Assuming 9 conference games
3 rivalry games in your division (ours would be NW, Iowa and WI?)
Then rotate the other 6 games so we play everybody every other year.
Keep east and west divisions for B10 championship game

illini80 · Oct 25, 2022

redwingillini11 said:
Its been 5 years since we have gone to Columbus, 7 years since they have come to Champaign. Its a guarantee we will be playing them.

Nonetheless, I'm very excited to see the schedule and planning on what games I'll be going to next fall!

I don't see it as a bad thing. They are so dominant we will be a huge underdog with a chance to upset a top ranked team. I don't see Coach B shying away from them or anyone else.

Big Ten sticking with divisions in 2023

redwingillini11

White and Sixth