 Scott DochtermanI'm originally from Burlington, and I'm a 1997 Western Illinois University graduate. I've worked in Burlington, Muscatine, Fort Dodge and [...] |
|
Email the author
Rivalries at risk in Big Ten’s new division shuffle (with poll)
Wisconsin Coach Barry Alvarez, right, is congratulated by Iowa Coach Hayden Fry after Wisconsin upset 12th-ranked Iowa 13-10 Saturday, Nov. 8, 1997, in Madison, Wis. Wisconsin hadn't beaten Iowa since 1976. Alvarez worked for Fry at Iowa as an assistant before coming to Wisconsin. (AP Photo/Morry Gash)
IOWA CITY — Long-standing Big Ten football rivalries are at stake when league officials meet Aug. 2 in Chicago to discuss — and potentially decide — the league’s future divisional structure.
Nebraska joins the league in 2011 as its 12th member and it seems likely the league will divide into two, six-team football divisions. Commissioner Jim Delany told reporters in June that competitive balance, rivalries and geography — in order — are the principles he will apply when dividing the league.
The Big Ten’s competitive balance — based on historical prowess — likely would split traditional powers Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and Nebraska equally into two divisions. Rivalries and geography then would play a primary role in reshaping the league.
“I think one thing that all of us have said consistently is we’ll all have to give a little bit to make this work,” Minnesota Athletics Director Joel Maturi said. “The reality of it is there’s now 12 institutions in the Big Ten, and we want to look at competitive equity, we want to look at traditional rivalries, we want to look at geography. There’s some decisions to be made here, but we also want to do what’s best in the long-term interest of the Big Ten.”
What’s best for the league might leave tradition-rich rivalries vulnerable to progress. The Iowa-Wisconsin series ranks among the nation’s tightest, long-enduring rivalries with Iowa holding a 42-41-2 series lead all-time. It also slipped off the conference radar in the 1990s.
When Penn State joined the Big Ten in 1993, the league rotated Iowa-Wisconsin off the schedule for the first time since 1936. After heavy discussion, each school preserved two annual rivalry opponents on its schedule and agreed to play the other league schools six times over an eight-year period.
[poll id="19"]
“We thought it was important to maintain two natural rivals on our schedule,” Wisconsin Athletics Director Barry Alvarez said. “We protected Minnesota and Iowa, and Iowa protected us and Minnesota. Then right down the line we made sure those two were protected. They were never eliminated from the schedule. I hope we continue to do that.
“I think in sitting down and discussing our priorities and the things that were important as we move forward, maintaining rivalries was one of the important things. I would be surprised if we don’t do that. I’d like to think that we’d be able to preserve at least two.”
Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin have competed against one another 307 times. Minnesota and Wisconsin enjoy the oldest, most continuously played rivalry in Division I football with 119 meetings. Both Maturi and Alvarez recognize the rivalry’s roots as integral to college football. The schools play for Paul Bunyan’s Axe, perhaps the most recognizable traveling trophy in college sports.
“We’ve played each other more consecutively than any two college institutions in America,” Maturi said, “so I would hope that that continues.”
If Paul Bunyan’s Axe isn’t the most famous traveling trophy, perhaps Floyd of Rosedale is. Iowa and Minnesota have played for the 98-pound bronze pig every year since 1935. The schools have met 103 times and every year since 1930.
Nebraska’s arrival adds another element to the discussion. Wisconsin Coach Bret Bielema — a former Iowa team captain — posted a Twitter update that he wants to conclude the regular season against Nebraska for an annual trophy. Nebraska-Penn State games have national appeal, and Iowa and Nebraska share a border with passionate fan bases.
“I’ve said many times in the past I think rivalries are an exciting part of college athletics,” Iowa Athletics Director Gary Barta wrote in an e-mailed response. “We have an in-state rival in Iowa State, and we have long-time border state rivals with Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Illinois. There’s no doubt in my mind, that the tradition, geography, and strong fan base support of Nebraska will immediately add to our rivalry list. Again, I can’t yet speculate how that will translate in scheduling moving forward. I do think it will be exciting regardless of how it shakes out.”
Nebraska dealt with divisional realignment when its former conference, the Big Eight, joined four Southwest Conference schools to form the Big 12 in 1996. Two Big Eight schools — Oklahoma and Oklahoma State — merged with Texas, Texas A&M, Baylor and Texas Tech to form the league’s South Division. Nebraska’s annual historic rivalry with Oklahoma was shelved, causing lingering bitterness.
“We haven’t even talked about how it’s being divided,” Alvarez said. “All of us have an idea, but the one thing our commissioner has talked about is being competitively balanced. I think if you take a look at the Big 12, I know (Nebraska Athletics Director and former football coach) Tom Osborne was adamant about not making it a North-South division. It would sway things in favor of Texas in recruiting and everything else. I think Tom would tell you that’s exactly what’s happened.
“I don’t think (the Big Ten divide) would be a straight-up split. I’d be shocked if it was a geographical split.”
There are plenty of other questions related to realignment, such as future scheduling, the location and date for a likely championship game and the potential for adding a ninth league game. Right now, the 2011 schedule is “void” Alvarez said.
“There’s a lot of things,” Maturi said. “Are those two permanent divisions? Are they divisions that are evaluated every five, 10 years and then you switch? I don’t know, there’s a lot of things that have to have to be finalized, and I’m sure will be.
“My guess in the end it will be a consensus. I don’t know what the process is; that’s up to Commissioner (Jim) Delany obviously. My guess is there will be some recommended conference alignments. I don’t think we’ll come out and say ‘This is it, let’s vote on it.’ My guess is it may be A, B, C and D.”
Maturi and Alvarez said they hope to continue their annual rivalries with Iowa, but there are no guarantees.
“I know Minnesota’s rivalries and challenges,” Maturi said. “Whether it can work, whether we all get ours the way we want it remains to be seen. I do know all of us would like us to continue our rivalry games. Whether that’s going to be able to be done remains to be seen.”
2 Trackbacks
Football practices sizzle under the sun | DoIt Sports Lounge
on July 18, 2010Live: Roscommon 0-08 Sligo 0-04 | DoIt Sports Lounge
on July 18, 2010
-u20042.png?1366232523)
The League should be aligned as layed out in the BTN graph above. Iowa's rivals should be Wisconsin and Nebraska. An Iowa-Nebraska rivalry is pure and natural and both schools have mis*sed out on this for decades. The programs have uncanny similarities and a perfect geographic fit. Cross conference games should be played each year and rotated while leaving room for non-league scheduling of probably three games/year.
I just don't see the conference putting OSU, PSU, and Michigan in the same division. Regardless of how strong Iowa and Wisconsin are now, we do not garner national attention. If we want to get to that point we have to beat the "national" powers on a consistent basis.
PSU needs to be in a division with Iowa and Nebraska. Swap Wisconsin and PSU in the above graph and I think we have a division that is fairly balanced, with 2 "powers" in each division, 1 "contender" in each division (Iowa/Wisconsin), and 4 "sometimes competitors" in each division (Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, and Michigan St), and 1 gimme game in each division (Minnesota and Indiana).
Protect the rivalries by playing Wisconsin and maybe Michigan St every year. Wisconsin would want a crossover with Iowa/MN each year. Play a rotational game with the other 4 schools. And face OSU in the championship game every year.
It should be a no brainier that Iowa and Nebraska end the year playing each other. Have OSU/Michigan, Penn St./ Michigan St. and Nebraska/ Iowa the last day of Conference play. Wisconsin? Please, nice job Bielema trying to “make” a rivalry
Somehow, it has to be figured out how to keep OSU, UM, and PSU out of the same division. That's the new Big 12 South if it happens. Michigan won't be down for long, with or without Rodriguez. Personally, I'd rather be lumped in with UM because we normally stand a fighting chance where as with OSU, KF has only beaten them once and that was during a down year for them. The current name, Big Ten has eleven members so having PSU in the western division would keep some of that goofiness in tact.
The three team divisions is the only one that fits Delaney's standard of balance, geography, and keeps the rivalries. It also keeps a lot of flexibility. It would be especially good for the non-revenue sports where most of travel costs occur. A tiebreaker would decide which of the 3 divisions would not be in the Big Ten Championship game, this is only one game of thousands
played by all the men and womens non revenue and revenue sports. A tiebreaker set-up may also create more interest.
Travel costs for non-revenue sports will be completely unaffected by a divisional realignment. Divisions will only exist for football. Every other sport plays a conference schedule and has a tournament at the end of the year to decide the conference champion.
The only added cost for travel for the non-revenue sports will be the expense to travel to Lincoln every year. But that was done the minute Nebraska joined the conference.
But divisions will *not* affect the other sports. It only affects football because football does not have an end of season tournament.
Great PDF of the possible divisions. Lots of good info here. Only question is how you come to the Purdue vs Iowa rivalry option.
I think you could flip Purdue for Indiana or Michigan State. Once you get past Minnesota, Wisconsin and Nebraska (and maybe Illinois/Northwestern), I think most of the others are fairly similar.
Initially your pdf had me excited because I thought it was leaked options from the B10 office. Based on Maturi's comments about each team giving a little I hope the true decision makers won't expect Penn State to bear all the brunt of the division alignments.
Below are a few alternatives I think should be on your pdf….you can have 2 of the 3 occur(competitive balance\\fairness, rivalry preservation, geography), not all three. And sorry Wisconsin & Iowa fans, you two likely stop seeing each other each year.
Option #1: Zipper Approach (permanent rival on same line)….promotes balance and virtually all rivalries with the exception of WiskyIowa (but you both get to play Nebraska each year now), all of the end-of-year rivalries remain the same except Nebraska-Iowa added and Wisky play Minnesota then
Hayes Division…. Stagg Division
OSU…………………..Penn State
Michigan…………… Michigan State
Wisconsin………… Nebraska
Minnesota………….Iowa
Illinois………………..Northwestern
Indiana………………Purdue
Option #2: modified North & South split, does more damage to end of year games than needed but this is a good option if B10 still has hopes of adding Notre Dame in the future (in which case OSU & a other new member go to the Plains while ND & Purdue are placed in the Lakes division)….again, permanent rival on same line.
Lakes Division……Plains Division
OSU……………………PSU
Michigan…………….Nebraska
Minnesota………….Iowa
Wisconsin………….Purdue
Michigan State……Indiana
Northwestern……..Illinois
We need to remember that there are a considerable number of other sports that also would be affect by a division set up. I believe we realize that the revenue sports of football, basketball, wrestling & ice hockey support the non-revenue sports. Do you realize that the number of teams and probably players in non-revenue sports is more than revenue sports? These sports and related cost need to be considered in any Big Ten division set up.
Actually, the divisions will only be used for football. Other sports will be completely unaffected.
Remember also, that "rivalries" only need to be protected if the teams are in separate divisions.
If Iowa and Minnesota are in the Dochterman division and Wisconsin is in the Morehouse division, then Iowa and Minnesota will play every year regardless. They can maintain their rivalry game and their trophy, but it doesn't need to be "protected" since they are already going to play every year. In the above scenario, we'd want to declare Wisconsin as our protected game so that we'd be guaranteed to play them every year even though they are not in our division.
The problem is, the Big Ten will protect Minnesota-Wisconsin at all costs, just behind Michigan-Ohio State and just ahead of Purdue-Indiana. Minnesota-Wisky is the longest-standing rivalry in D-I, and I think Minny-Iowa gets protected, too, because of the pig. Wisconsin-Iowa is the better game but with the weakest (albeit the newest) trophy.
The B10 needs to consider that there is not even a need to make divisions! No matter how drawn up, one division will always be viewed better than the other, which is a bad thing for the conference. Divisions will merely pit one division vs the other, rather than B10 vs the rest. To date, nearly every division proposal put out there has also been a geographical division of east and west, again which there is no need for it to be. And, with so many traditional power schools in the east it will hurt the power ratings of the west teams. Just look at how well the North – South divisions worked out for the Big 12!
Solution. Merely take one non-conference game off everyone's schedules, like Iowa State for Iowa, and add a 9th conference game on a rotational basis, as is currently. A rotation means there is equity in that the match ups change every year. Then add a single conference championship game after Thanksgiving, the attendees based on 1st W-L record, then head-to-head matchups, then points allowed, etc.. Remember, NCAA rules merely say a conference must have a minimum of 12 teams to have a conference championship game, not that divisions are a must.
Divisions will be nothing but bad news for the Big ten, no doubt about it.
The problem with a lack of division means the very real probability of a rematch. Or worse, a rematch in the next week.
The other problem is either revenue loss or strength of schedule reduction. Teams schedule non-conference opponents for 1 of 2 reasons:
1. Against a weaker opponent which generates higher revenues due to it always being a home game.
2. Against a BCS opponent to increase their strength of schedule, but at a loss of revenue due to a home and away agreement with said team.
If teams have to drop a non-conference opponent, they will be forced to choose between money (losing a home game every year and thus the revenues they provide) or quality opponents. I expect that when all is said and done, most teams will choose money and drop the additional BCS team from their non-conference schedule.
Let's pretend that this happened this year. Would you really rather see PSU vs. Purdue instead of PSU vs. Alabama? I don't.
i am sure the big ten will screw it up and place ohio state and michigan in different divisions, that way if michigan can get back to its glory, we can look forward to seeing them play two weeks in a row
I hope Big Ten officials don't do that. Michigan-Ohio State should play once a season, not twice. I'd like to see them in the same division, play the final Saturday in November. Chances are, 8 of 10 times the winner would play in the Big Ten title game.
If MI and OSU is a 2 team combination that can't be broken up, then there also is a 3 team combination that can't be broken up. Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. They all should be in the same division.
I disagree, kinda sorta.
Wisconsin and Iowa *should* be together, given that they are adjacent, they are similar programs, and they are also roughly equal as far as competition level goes.
However, that latter argument is what will, in my opinion, ultimately force them apart. Iowa and Wisconsin have become the "next tier" of Big Ten football programs. Year in and year out, Wisconsin and Iowa are the teams that are either challenging for the Big Ten championship (which is different than winning it, unfortunately), or dictating the winner by knocking out a competitor.
There are teams like Purdue, Illinois and Michigan State that have had some success, but nothing consistent like Iowa and Wisconsin.
If you accept the premise that OSU and Michigan will be in one division, and PSU and Nebraska will be in the other, then Iowa and Wisconsin *have* to be split up. If not, then you throw off division balance. A division with Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, PSU, Nebraska and someone else (probably Illinois) would be loaded, and would ensure that OSU gets a free trip to the title game every year until Michigan stops contending with Minnesota for bottom feeder status, and when Michigan is restored it will simply be between those 2 schools. With Wisconsin in that division, they will keep OSU/Michigan honest and, in many years, contend for the title themselves.
I believe this is the only way to get parity in the division. Wisconsin and Minnesota will have a protected rivalry so they will continue to play every year despite being in separate divisions. Iowa and Minnesota will be in the same division so they will continue to play every year. Iowa and Wisconsin will likely cease being a regular every year game. That is bad, but Iowa will pick up every year games against PSU (a fun new rivalry that has been developing) and Nebraska which has all the components to be a great rivalry game.
It is nice to definitely locate a blog where the blogger is sensible. Thanks for creating your blog.
Considerably, the post is actually the freshest on this worthw hile topic. I concur with your conclusions and will thirstily look forward to your next updates. Just saying thanks will not just be adequate, for the wonderful lucidity in your writing. I will immediately grab your rss feed to stay privy of any updates. De lightful work and much success in your business dealings Stocks Forum is the best place to find Stock Market Forum news.
Took me time to read all of the comments, but I truly loved the article. It proved to be Really helpful to me and I am sure to all the commenters here! It is usually nice when you cannot only be informed, but also entertained! I’m sure you experienced fun writing this post.
We are a group of volunteers and starting a brand new initiative in a community. Your blog provided us important information to work on. You’ve done a marvellous job!
Hoeveel kan ik lenen? (hypotheek). Wat worden mijn maandlasten? (hypotheek) … Hoeveel hypotheek heb ik nodig? Hoe hoog is de boete die ik nu zou moeten
Wow You did a truly beneficial employment on this thing.
Fathers concerned with this case ought to get a child custody lawyer to make sure that all his rights are covered by the household law. Even though there is an inherent prejudice with fathers in the court, the court system have turn out to bemore balanced of their custody appointments with child attorneys
Over de voor- en nadelen van het afsluiten van een lening zonder BKR-toetsing.
Over de voor- en nadelen van het afsluiten van een lening zonder BKR-toetsing.
I am as obscessed with poker as anyone can be.
I’ve got a fan page over on Facebook. If you wanted to see: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Poker-Players-Only/136818223026737
Migraine is een ernstige vorm van hoofdpijn. Het treedt in aanvallen op en gaat vaak gepaard met visuele stoornissen en misselijkheid.
Hoewel migraine op elke leeftijd voor het eerst kan optreden, begint dit type hoofdpijn meestal tussen de tien en veertig jaar. Bij de meeste mensen treedt
I looked by way of your earlier posts. Nice work there….
Very interesting read. I am a blogger myself and of lately I have found that managing my own site has been a pain in the neck, especially for those technical jargon i have to solve. I recently found a new blogging community where you can just setup a blog and forget about it. Check it out, might be useful later