Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: UFC 146 Predictions

Michigan And Ohio State Must Be In Separate Divisions To Protect The Rivalry


When the announcement was made in June that Nebraska would be joining the Big Ten for the 2011 season, everyone's attention immediately turned toward how the divisions would be split. When asked at the time, Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany insisted that Big Ten divisions would be determined through the following criteria.

1. Competitive balance

2. Protecting traditional rivalries

3. Geography

Now, somewhere in the process of this information getting from Jim Delany's lips through the ears and eyes of Michigan and Ohio State fans and into their tiny brains where they had to process this, they heard the following.

1. Michigan and Ohio State will still play every year

2. Michigan and Ohio State will still play on the last week of the regular season.

3. Michigan and Ohio State will get to be in the same division so they don't have to play a rematch in the Big Ten championship game.

4. Everything else be damned, and if that means shipping Penn State out west to maintain competitive balance, so be it.

For two months everybody operated under the assumption that all of this was a given. Everybody assumed that the entire conference would bend over backwards to the wishes and demands of Michigan and Ohio State. But this isn't your grand daddy's Big Ten anymore. The days are gone where whatever was good for the big two was good for the little eight as well. Now there are two other national powers sitting at the table with just as money and just as much influence. And the explosion of revenue from the Big Ten Network has created a business venture where everyone is considered an equal partner. Suddenly, the Buckeye's and Wolverines see their iron grip rusting away, and it scares them to death.

Star-divide

But believe it or not, I'm not here to gloat about it. My interest is what's good for the Big Ten first, and what's good for Penn State second. I understand the 75 year tradition of The Game and all that it means to the fans of those schools. Traditions are hard to give up, but sometimes it is necessary to do so. This is coming from a fan whose school took a major leap of faith to join the Big Ten nearly 20 years ago. But then, they also wear the same uniforms they have worn since the Hoover administration, so I digress.

If you've ever read the book Who Moved My Cheese, you know it's a story about two mice whose enormous pile of cheese one day runs out. One mouse decides to sit and wait for his cheese to come back, while the other mouse gets tired of waiting and one day decides he's going to venture out to look for new cheese. He wanders through the maze for a long time, he hits some dead ends along the way, and he finds some rooms where it looks like there used to be cheese but it had been gone for a long time. Then finally he stumbles across a room full of the greatest cheeses he has ever seen, and he lives happily ever after while his buddy sticks around in the old room still waiting for his cheese to come back.

The moral of the story is, you can't sit around waiting for things to come back. The Old Big Ten is gone. Simply by adding a Big Ten championship game, the importance of Michigan-Ohio State regular season game is diminished. It will no longer determine the conference champion every year like it did 30 years ago. Frankly, I think this is sad. I want to see the Michigan-Ohio State rivalry mean something. I want to see them play when something is on the line. Playing for a division championship is okay, but who is going to hang a banner in the stadium that says "Eastern Division Champions"?

The answer is nobody. Well, okay, Indiana probably would. I wouldn't put it past Purdue either. But Michigan and Ohio State would definitely not, and they should not.

For my money, I want to see Michigan and Ohio State playing each other when all of the chips are on the table in the Big Ten Championship game (When Penn State is going through one of their rare rebuilding years, of course.) Admittedly, this may only happen once or twice per decade, but what a game for the ages that would be. And what if Michigan returned to their usual self and the two schools had a stretch where they met three or four times in a row? We're talking college football armageddon here, folks.

Would the regular season game be diminished if they played it in October? Hardly. They still hate each other. The fans would still get up for the game. Could you imagine the post game handshakes accompanied with "See you in December"? The drive to finish out the season strong to gain retribution for the wrongs of October? Do you think Michigan players wouldn't show up to practice on Monday foaming at the mouth and busting their asses to win the division so they could get even for a loss in October? Do you think Ohio State players wouldn't do the same?

Would the second game be a letdown after the two teams had already met in the regular season? I don't think so. The revenge factor would be huge, and imagine if the first game was a close one with a controversial ending and heated comments afterward. You could put the SEC and Big XII championship games up directly against it on television, and Ohio State and Michigan in the Big Ten Championship is going to win in the ratings every single time. I don't care who else is playing. It is the game everyone in America wants to see. And Buckeye and Wolverine fans seriously want to give that up just so they can kick off at noon on ESPN's made up marketing ploy they call "Rivalry Week"?

Please. If you really want to kill the rivalry, put Michigan and Ohio State in the same division and let them play at noon in November. If you want to take the rivalry to the next level, separate them so we all get the game we really want to see.

Comment 209 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Hate to say it, until Harbaugh takes over at UM they are irrelevant.

OSU is a top notch program, gets the best recruits in the Big10, and is the standard.

After tOSU the next level is PSU/Whiskey/Iowa and maybe UM. That being said, UM will not be down for long.

http://www.fletcforum.com/2010/08/09/using-crossfit-to-train-for-physical-efficiency-battery-peb/

by SweepTheLeg on Aug 24, 2010 2:39 PM EDT reply actions  

I don't give a crap about Michigan and Ohio State playing on the highest level or whatever.

I despise both teams, I think the Iron Bowl is much, much better. I’m glad they both got crushed in 2006 instead of having their little rematch.

That being said, geography is the right and proper way to do this and that means UM and OSU should be in the same division.

Turn your crank to Frank!

by ReadingRambler on Aug 24, 2010 2:40 PM EDT reply actions  

Agree with not caring

I only care if Penn State (or any other Big 10 team) suffers just so those two are satisfied. 10 other teams shouldn’t be held hostage by the whims of two, especially when one is pretty insignificant at this point. It just smacks of arrogance to me that they both feel that doing whatever they demand is best for everyone in the conference.

As for the divisions, I dont care how they are set up as long as they are as fair as possible and no one has a cake walk to the championship game every year.

by skarocksoi on Aug 24, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Disagree: Geography

Geography may be the right way, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re in the same division. Take the southeastern string of four states, and you get PSU, OSU, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, and Northwestern.

"I want to eat some dessert." - Brandon Ware

by The Man with One Black Shoe on Aug 24, 2010 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't care about scUM and tOSU..

and they should be in the same division. Period.

by mook1525 on Aug 24, 2010 2:56 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

My new idea

Awesome Division
Michigan
Ohio State

We’re With Stupid Division
Everyone Else

Top two teams from each division go to the championship game, and four teams compete in Royal Rumble format with Big Ten trophy suspended on overhead cam line.

Everyone’s happy.

Bloggin' at joepasdoghouse.com

by Cairo on Aug 24, 2010 2:59 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Keep 'em in the same division and let 'em play.

The Ohio State and Michigan people need to make a choice:

- Be in the same division, play their game at noon in November.

- Be in different divisions, hope that they meet in the Big Ten Championship Game

- Be in different divisions with a protected rivalry, play in October, maybe meet again in the BTCG.

Now, which of those choices guarantees what most of the UM/OSU fans want? I would think that they’d be more concerned about making sure the game is guaranteed to be played every year.

I’m not ready for all of the crying that’ll occur with the announcement of the divisions.

--
@scrappled
Slow States - Lacking SEC speed since, like, a month ago.

by Run Up The Score on Aug 24, 2010 3:00 PM EDT reply actions  

The second scenario is impossible

as long as Michigan is running the 119th ranked defense in the country, and running the 1-1-9 defensive scheme.

My kingdom for a spellchecker. Or Devin Harris. Hopefully both.
"What's your formula for the corner?" -Doctor Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory
"Ah gravity, thou art a heartless b*tch." --Doctor Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Aug 24, 2010 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

No offense

But I didn’t write this post for you guys.

by BSD on Aug 24, 2010 3:05 PM EDT reply actions  

Okay there, Machiavelli...

I see how this works. You bait the trolls, then sit back and say ‘dance, monkeys’.

"Nothing turns me on like doe estrus." - ReadingRambler

by leeharvey418 on Aug 24, 2010 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm crushed.

Bloggin' at joepasdoghouse.com

by Cairo on Aug 24, 2010 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

Oh?

Then why’d you post it on a Penn State blog? And don’t give me that “bigger platform” bullcrap.

Turn your crank to Frank!

by ReadingRambler on Aug 24, 2010 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

No offense

But this tGame crap is getting about as tiresome as the Joe’s old columns.

by Frank O'Brien on Aug 24, 2010 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

tGame

Weird-I randomly decided to call it that over on slow states. Great minds?

by speedomike on Aug 24, 2010 10:29 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

I disagree

Rivalries are built and maintained partially on geography, but moreso on the other team standing in the way of what you want. Playing for a division title vs the con championship won’t diminish it one bit when the winner moves on the the CCG and the loser is left jockeying for the Outback Bowl. Or better yet, the team cruising to a title gets tripped up by the team whose season is going nowhere. This can’t happen the first game in October when everything is still shaking itself out.

If they want to protect “The game” you have to put them in the same division and play the last game of the year. Anything else, including this pipe dream of seeing them play twice in a year, will take the luster off the imprtance of the matchup to the two teams.

by PSU Mudder on Aug 24, 2010 3:19 PM EDT reply actions  

OK

now upon the re-read and seeing Mike’s comments, I agree. Make it Labor Day Weekend.

by PSU Mudder on Aug 24, 2010 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

By the way

Can we get a caption contest going for that picture?

by BSD on Aug 24, 2010 3:22 PM EDT reply actions  

Caption

As Tressel tried to explain to Rodriguez why the 3-3-5 will never work in the Big Ten, all Rodriguez could think about was bacon.

by BSD on Aug 24, 2010 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

"Why should I change? He's the one who sucks." Division

How can we be lovers if we can’t be friends
How can we start over when the fighting never ends
Baby, how can we make love if we can’t make amends
Tell me how we can be lovers if we can’t be, can’t be friends?

by Aaron PSU on Aug 24, 2010 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Easy Rec

All I can think of now is:

“There was nothing wrong with it… until I was about twelve years old and that no-talent a** clown became famous and started winning Grammys. "

by nylyst on Aug 24, 2010 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

"You see, and you should probably write this down,

we have a really big compliance department that handles those sorts of things. You should really look into that. You know, at your new job."

by skarocksoi on Aug 24, 2010 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Caption

So I said, “hey, Delaney, pull my finger.”

Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.

by 06Lion on Aug 24, 2010 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

Caption

“Don’t look now, but I think one of your cornerback’s tibia just flew by.”

Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.

by 06Lion on Aug 24, 2010 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

"You think your prostate is giving you trouble?"

“Here, let me take a quick peek before the game starts”

by PSU Mudder on Aug 24, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions   2 recs

Caption

“Everything will be ok. Just pray to the Almighty Zug in the sky, and He will carry you through these dark times.”

Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.

by 06Lion on Aug 24, 2010 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Caption...

Can you tell me from your days at WVU.. how do you beat an SEC team?

If only I had an enemy bigger than my apathy. . .

by Esteban d' Amur on Aug 24, 2010 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions   2 recs

Caption

“If you had Pryor you would still suck but at least you would have an exciting quarterback to run your beloved spread offense.”

Looking forward to the Kevin Kolb era.
5-8-10...the day the Purdue Boilermakers basketball team won the 2011 NCAA Championship!!

by EREX21 on Aug 24, 2010 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

You don't think Tate Forcier's blooper-style play is exciting?

My kingdom for a spellchecker. Or Devin Harris. Hopefully both.
"What's your formula for the corner?" -Doctor Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory
"Ah gravity, thou art a heartless b*tch." --Doctor Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Aug 24, 2010 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

Only a little.

Looking forward to the Kevin Kolb era.
5-8-10...the day the Purdue Boilermakers basketball team won the 2011 NCAA Championship!!

by EREX21 on Aug 24, 2010 8:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Caption

I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on ‘em. “Give me five bees for a quarter,” you’d say. Now where were we? Oh yeah – the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones..

by BSD on Aug 24, 2010 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Wait, that’s not a JoePa quote?

by PSUmob on Aug 24, 2010 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

Simpsons

Sadly, The Simpsons have faded so much to the point of non-relevance that such great lines as that one just don’t register anymore.

Awesome stuff though.

by stonewall435 on Aug 24, 2010 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

this is my favorite

Joe Paterno - Not Unlike Hugh Hefner

by letsgopsu on Aug 24, 2010 9:32 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

Caption: "SO dickrod do you have one of those wrist bands in pink"

"It was fun. It really was, ... People say to me, 'Why don't you give it up?' I don't want to miss out on this stuff, because I'm having a good team. I've never had a bad season when I didn't have a good time." JVP

by psu in the w-b on Aug 24, 2010 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

Caption

Jim Tressel passionately explains, “My pregame ritual is to pound two or three wine coolers. Fuzzy navel is far and away my favorite flavor” to Michigan coach Rich Rodriguez who is anxious to try anything for a win.

by psuphysicist on Aug 25, 2010 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

Thanks...

…for the Cliff Notes version of Who Moved My Cheese, since I never did ever bother to read it like I should have.

by IndianaLion on Aug 24, 2010 3:26 PM EDT reply actions  

It's a good read

You can breeze through it in about an hour.

by BSD on Aug 24, 2010 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

funny

the version I had, the mouse that went off to find new cheese got stuck in a mousetrap

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 25, 2010 1:07 AM EDT up reply actions  

How very allegorical!

The mouse: Juggernitt
New cheese: a quality post-graduate education
The mousetrap: MSU / East Lansing

Until our defense proves otherwise, it should be presumed they will be excellent.

by jtothep on Aug 25, 2010 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions   2 recs

This quote is priceless.
“It’s Michigan! It’s some team that’s been within a game of .500 every year since SEC schools started recruiting black kids! On ABC!”

Maybe the funniest thing Brian Cook ever wrote.

What would Joe Paterno do?

by jesse. on Aug 24, 2010 3:27 PM EDT reply actions  

Do we really know that things are different?

One thing that’s surprised me about expansion, and the discussion around expansion, is how perspective seems limited to the last couple years only. We’re only 3 years removed from OSU and Mich almost playing again in the NC game. Yes, Mich is down and doesn’t look like it’s on it’s way up, but what would you have said about USC, Texas or Oklahoma in 1998? Can we really say “The Old Big 10 is dead?”
I’ve heard idiot Greenstein from the Trib say that Wisconsin, Iowa and Nebraska are equal programs to OSU, Mich, and PSU. What?? How many NC contending (or winning) seasons have W, I & N had over the past 40 years, compared to PSU, OSU and Mich.
Further, what happened to the Nebraska/Oklahoma rivalry pretty much disproves that placing teams in opposite divisions enhances the rivalry.

by InScoresOfOtherGames on Aug 24, 2010 6:01 PM EDT reply actions  

Further, what happened to the Nebraska/Oklahoma rivalry pretty much disproves that placing teams in opposite divisions enhances the rivalry.

While I think this is absolutely correct and I agree that placing Michigan and Ohio State in different divisions would devalue their rivalry, it’s also safe to point out that Neb/OU did not play every season (only 2 out of 4) and everyone has said that UM/tOSU would continue as a permanent game every year. So, it might not suffer the same fate.

That said, I still think a pure geographic split is ideal with UM/tOSU/PSU all in the East which would allow them to maintain their end of season game without a problem. However, if they are determined to avoid grouping 3 of the “big 4” together, splitting them Neb/UM in one division and PSU/tOSU in the other actually makes more sense than any other split IMHO.

Also, I just fine it funny that a bunch of UM/tOSU types were saying (essentially) that putting PSU in a division with a bunch of western teams was perfectly sensible for “the sake of the conference” and balancing power, but are crying foul about splitting tOSU and UM because it’s so important. I guess being willing to sacrifice only is a fine quality when it’s not your team being screwed.

by Laaaaazzz on Aug 24, 2010 9:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

Nebraska and Oklahoma

Was moved by the Big XIII because OU had gone into the toilet with probabtion and the UNL/Colo. game was the more important game.

What would Joe Paterno do?

by jesse. on Aug 25, 2010 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

Geographic divisions

As a Michigan fan, I would just like to ask: would Penn St. fans have a problem with geographic divisions? Solves this problem, keeps all the other rivalries together, and Penn St. doesn’t get shipped out west. And Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Iowa are still out west to keep things relatively balanced.

I’m pretty sure this whole “competitively balanced” thing is a red herring anyways, since it’s impossible to keep the divisions balanced as different teams go through up and down swings. It’s just sounds better than “TV execs looked at the ratings for The Game and jizzed in their pants at the thought of having that twice.”

by wile_e8 on Aug 24, 2010 6:03 PM EDT reply actions  

Speaking for myself

I would be perfectly happy with a simple geographic split. What irks me about all of the proposed alignments is the fact that no one seems to have a problem with shipping Penn State out west, which just makes no sense to me. I’m definitely a fan of tradition, and would love to see Ohio State-Michigan stay on the last week of the season, but not if it interferes with anything else (aka Penn State out west just to keep The Game alive).

Competitively-speaking, an east-west split would be perfectly fair. Last season, the Big Ten standings were Ohio State – Iowa – Penn State – Wisconsin. Coming into this season, we have Ohio State – Iowa – Wisconsin – Penn State. So an east-west split would split the top 4 teams pretty well. Add in Nebraska and Michigan, who will be back sooner rather than later, and it will continue to be balanced.

by PSUmob on Aug 24, 2010 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

East and West divisions

I’ve 100% supported a simple East/West split through all of this. It makes the most sense and the competitive balance issues that are brought up are just silly given how much team strength rise and fall over time.

by Laaaaazzz on Aug 24, 2010 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

Nice.

Turn your crank to Frank!

by ReadingRambler on Aug 24, 2010 8:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

maize n brew

acreaming for tOSU and UM to stay last game of season to see who goes to B10 champ game…… Interesting write up on his site regarding the percentages of this matchup, with who wins theconf. anyway all you guys should check it out. The longer this goes ion with the divisions the longer I think PSU gets screwed

by SMAN on Aug 24, 2010 7:44 PM EDT reply actions  

Six time Eastern Division Co Champs.....your THE ohio state university.
who is going to hang a banner in the stadium that says “Eastern Division Champions”?

by F G Dreadnought on Aug 24, 2010 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

That's absurb.

The stats include such great clashes as 2009 as “having a role” in determining b10 champion. The basis is that if the other team won (i.e. Michigan in 2009) then the title would have been shared with different teams or won by another team. You know what other rivalry games you could say that about? ANY RIVALRY THAT IS CONSISTENTLY PLAYED AS THE LAST GAME OF THE SEASON. absurd.

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 24, 2010 8:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ok...

How about the Old Oaken Bucket then, you’ll have to look the numbers up though.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Haha, won't do.

Yes, the point was hyperbole.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m ok with preserving the game by a pure geographic split. But trumping up the significance by showing games where only one team had a chance at a title feels . . . dishonest. If the point is that any impact on the b10 title is noteworthy, then what does it matter what time of year it is?

If the preservation of a rivalry game is supported by some of these stack the deck conference suggestions with PSU, Iowa, Wisco, and Nebraska in one division, then I of course would not be ok with trying to keep that game in tact. Why would 10 other schools completely sell out the competitive balance for 2 teams to have their way?

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 24, 2010 9:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

My point was

That it’s different when you know what you’re playing for. While it’s true that from a statistical point of view every game equally impacts the chase for a league title, the simple fact is that it’s a lot different when you know what the stakes are when you get ready to kick-off. That’s what the whole point of my reference to that Bentley Library page really was about. 22 times the big 10 title has awaited whoever won the game, the others mentioned have had title implications for at least one of the teams heading into it, with no other games left behind to act as a safety net.

The splitting of the conference isn’t something I won’t pretend to have a good answer for, in fact I’m not sure anyone does.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 9:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

One thing.

I wonder why we can’t split up the Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin triad in these divisions… I mean if we’re going to go for competitive balance as the utmost priority (which is at least how it was listed when Delany brought it up) then we ought to be able to move those teams as needed too. Just a thought.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well,

if they are considering not keeping M-OSU in a division, why would they insist on keeping UNL, Iowa, and Wisco together? If that’s what you mean. Those three are certainly a formidable trio. Maybe formidable enough to say that a pure geographical split is ok. But if not, certainly enough quality teams there to balance things out. At least as long as it’s not an East/West and you trade us for one of those teams, that’s where my opposition skyrockets.

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 24, 2010 9:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Splits

Well, you can’t split up Neb and Iowa, because Iowa is the only Big Ten state that Nebraska borders. Oh, wait, does Pennsylvania only border one Big Ten state?

"I want to eat some dessert." - Brandon Ware

by The Man with One Black Shoe on Aug 24, 2010 9:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

If the splits were going to be geographically decided...

Then you have a point, but I get the impression that geography is not the key factor driving the formation of these divisions.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 9:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Right

But what if it also makes the most sense for competitive balance etc?

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 24, 2010 10:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

Then that'd be a win-win

But I have yet to see that setup at this point.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

Simple: East/West, which is competitively balanced. That’s the irony of it, in that really the East – even when/if Michigan returns to prominence – wouldn’t be that much better than the West. And, really, competitive balance matters only to the degree that the champion of one division is a quality team and would be a good rep for the CCG.

by Laaaaazzz on Aug 24, 2010 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

I lol'd

+1

Adam
Black Shoe Diaries, SB Nation Pittsburgh
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...

by Adam Bittner on Aug 25, 2010 1:28 AM EDT up reply actions  

yeah, and the 22 times is pretty damn amazing.

I just thought the impact of that point was diminished by then roping in such games (as 2009).

Yeah, it’s difficult. I am still a believer that you wouldn’t need division if the NCAA would let you play a CCG without them.

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 24, 2010 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

It may be absurb...

…but from the fan perspective, it is also true.

Being played the last game of the season increases the perception of the significance of the game. It may not be accurate, but it is valid.

Being in the same division increases the real likelihood the game plays a determining role in the conference title.

Being in different divisions increases the significance of the game only id the meet again in the title game, otherwise the game is less significant.

There is no debate here – having the game at the end of the season with both teams provides the most significance over time (unless you think the Big Ten is headed back to being the Big 2).

by ProveIt on Aug 25, 2010 5:56 AM EDT up reply actions  

wasn't the point.

You are twisting around what I was calling absurd.

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 25, 2010 9:01 AM EDT up reply actions  

There were two posts on it at MnB

One in favor of keeping it the same, written by SCM found here:

One in favor of change and progress, written by Dave found here:

Bonus on the Dave-written post; Brian from Mgoblog being a douche in the comments…

http://maizenbrew.com
Get it?

by Beauford on Aug 24, 2010 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Wow

Didn’t see the comments on that one earlier. Brian is really starting to go off the rails, isn’t he?

That’ll just make it all the more satisfying to hang a third straight loss on Michigan this year.

Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.

by 06Lion on Aug 24, 2010 8:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

I love it

Brian is an ass

by speedomike on Aug 24, 2010 9:22 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

HAHA

I love Dave’s response to Brian’s comment. Gold.

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 24, 2010 9:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

Brian is also against installing lights and piping rock music through the speakers at Michigan Stadium. You can only live like it’s 1975 for so long.

by BSD on Aug 24, 2010 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Nearly everyone who attends games at Michigan Stadium

Is against those things, but that’s a whole other soapbox that we need not get into here…

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

it is one thing if they're going to be against lights at all

but when they will bring in those portable lights for some games…it is just pretty tacky.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 25, 2010 1:26 AM EDT up reply actions  

From what I understand...

the neighbors around the stadium like to be able to pretend the stadium isnt there all but 8 days a year. The stadium blends in better without a tall structure (since the bowl is dug into the ground, I believe) and adding light standards to it would just exasperate the problem of having the largest stadium in football around. I think this is the genesis for the temporary lights.

by bconway6 on Aug 25, 2010 1:32 AM EDT up reply actions  

and that argument would be pretty valid

until they just added that huge stack of luxury boxes. Before, you would be driving past the stadium and possibly not even know it was there if you weren’t looking for it (it really does just look like a 1 story building…maybe a high school stadium or something), but now with the one side all built up, there is no mistaking it.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 25, 2010 8:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

Well...

This wasn’t supposed to become commentary on Brian – I just figured since we were discussing it I’d go ahead and link it…

But yeah – my general view is that change (modernization, if you want to look at it from that perspective) is a good thing, but unfortunately that changes some things that some fans hold very close to their hearts, in this case, the Michigan vs. Ohio State rivalry. I think, no matter the outcome, the fanbase will adjust. It’s just that there’s going to be some noise headed into that change from both camps – and IMO rightfully so. The Game is special to the fans of both of those teams; one of those things that is unique about being a UM or OSU fan. It’s something that’s worthy of bitching about, honestly. I doubt it will change anything from a “divisional planning” standpoint, but worth bitching about all the same.

http://maizenbrew.com
Get it?

by Beauford on Aug 24, 2010 9:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

Here's a thought.

Are M and OSU fans actually selling the value of the rivalry short? Won’t interest and passion of the fanbases and nation be just as strong no matter when it is?

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 24, 2010 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

This is mostly my view

but having it at the end was always just kind of cool, you know?

http://maizenbrew.com
Get it?

by Beauford on Aug 24, 2010 9:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

This is what I tried to address

In the view that I wrote on our site, that part of what elevates The Game above the others (at least from our standpoint) is not only the interest/passion, but the weight and finality that the match-up carries at the end of the year. The timing of it matters in this case if you ask me.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 9:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

I guess

playing MSU at the end of every season, that point is lost on me. Logically, I can understand it. But I have trouble on the empathy end, being that we play MSU in that slot.

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 24, 2010 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

True

But you’re talking about something that the Big Ten tried to manufacture in the case of the Land Grant trophy, rather than something that’s had over 100 meetings to develop. I think one of the things I often forget is that even though you guys have been in the conference for nearly 20 years, the independent history has really kind of prevented you guys from having a similar type of set-up to what M and OSU have had for a rivalry like it to develop.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

I wasn't bringing that up to diminish your experience.

My point is only that, while I can read and understand your point, I will probably never be able to truly understand. I hope for your sake you never end up closing the season with MSU and understanding where I come from (although you at least have to share a state with them, which might inspire more hate, I don’t know).

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 24, 2010 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

No worries

I didn’t think you were, just was trying to point out that I think the timing plays a key role.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 10:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

Timing is a big deal

Also the simple fact that this particular rivalry involves the two most historically winning programs in the conference also helps. I don’t mean to belittle Iowa or Wisconsin, but they are a level below mich, osu and PSU as programs. Since the addition of a program in the same strata as both teams participating in “The Game” (psu), “The Game” has decided the conference champion 4 times, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2007.

In that same time frame, the osu-PSU game (should the matchup have been played at the end of the season) could also have been deemed the conference championship game at least 3 times 2005, 2008 and 2009. I was able to look back as far as 2002 on espn and couldn’t find older end of season standings, however I could guess at possibly 1994 as another year.

This isn’t to compare the michigan-ohio state rivalry to the psu-osu one, they are entirely different. It is meant to show 2 things. First, being the top two programs in the conference was a crucial part of this rivalry’s development. Second, being at the end of the season the games is allowed to have the “championship game” feel.

The addition of another heavyweight program to the conference alters the balance yet again. What was for a long time a conference of the big 2 and little 8 is now the historic 4 (um, osu, psu, neb), relevant 2 or 3 of 6 in any given year (mn, wi, iowa, jnw, msu, pur) and the bottom 2 (ill,ind). The more great teams involved in the conference the less important any given pair can be.

by bconway6 on Aug 25, 2010 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions   2 recs

I dunno

After a few years of Guido’s assault on my ears, I could be easily be persuaded to getting on the no-piped-rock bandwagon.

Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.

by 06Lion on Aug 24, 2010 9:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

Lights are one thing.

Why they don’t want to do a night game is beyond me.

On the other hand, I applaud any school who says “Go away” to piped in music.

Turn your crank to Frank!

by ReadingRambler on Aug 24, 2010 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I never got the hatred of night games. And the not having lights in the stadium thing.

I mean, a night game every week I could see as annoying. But 1-2 times a season? That’s just fun.

by Laaaaazzz on Aug 24, 2010 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

The Night Game thing

Ends in ‘11, the ND game that season will be the stadium’s first night game.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

Good.

Turn your crank to Frank!

by ReadingRambler on Aug 24, 2010 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

By the by

They lost to Ohio State in 1975.

Turn your crank to Frank!

by ReadingRambler on Aug 24, 2010 11:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm bored. 1975 Michigan:

8-2-2, ties to Stanford and Baylor, losses to Ohio State and Oklahoma (Orange Bowl).

Meanwhile, in Columbus, the Buckeyes went undefeated only to lose to UCLA in the Rose Bowl by two touchdowns.

During the famous Ten Year War period, Ohio State went to the Rose Bowl five times. Their record was 1-4. Michigan went to the Rose Bowl five times and did not win once.

FWIW, I guess.

Turn your crank to Frank!

by ReadingRambler on Aug 24, 2010 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

Why do Mich. and tOSU always suck in bowl games?

Are they content with a win in their annual circle jerk or maybe Woody and Bo just liked going to Pasadena to enjoy the parade and work on their tans? Surely their teams could do better than this.

by Frank O'Brien on Aug 24, 2010 11:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

They CANNOT handle Pasadena

They just can’t.

Ohio State got a matchup with a team it had NEVER lost to (Oregon). Aside from that game, there’s a reasonable argument to be made that neither OSU nor Michigan should go to a Rose Bowl ever again.

My kingdom for a spellchecker. Or Devin Harris. Hopefully both.
"What's your formula for the corner?" -Doctor Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory
"Ah gravity, thou art a heartless b*tch." --Doctor Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Aug 25, 2010 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions  

If John Cooper can win a Rose Bowl...

anyone can.

It doesn’t matter how many football games the SEC wins. We will always look down on you.

by devidee33 on Aug 25, 2010 8:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

My memory may be playing tricks on me...

… but I thought Cooper was pretty good at beating everyone but Michigan.

by drothgery on Aug 25, 2010 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions  

This was always my problem...

with “The Game”. It so often was/is a battle for the right to lose to USC, which I think diminishes “The Game”. I guess it is because I am a PSU fan and PSU doesn’t have that historic rival that is a top 10 program of all time.

If only I had an enemy bigger than my apathy. . .

by Esteban d' Amur on Aug 25, 2010 7:54 AM EDT up reply actions  

Count those chickens, man

I’ll count functional quarterbacks for Penn State…

http://maizenbrew.com
Get it?

by Beauford on Aug 24, 2010 9:03 PM EDT reply actions  

I'll get to the chickens...

…once I’m done counting members of Michigan’s secondary that have two functioning legs and haven’t used them to run away from the program.

Ok, now onto the chickens.

Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.

by 06Lion on Aug 24, 2010 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions   2 recs

Chickens?

And I thought WE were too country..

by swiggy04 on Aug 25, 2010 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions  

fair enough...haha

http://maizenbrew.com
Get it?

by Beauford on Aug 24, 2010 9:06 PM EDT reply actions  

“See, you pay the kid in cash. That way they can’t trace the money.”

"We are not normal. We are legends. We are Penn State." - Deon Butler

by Stately NOVA Lion on Aug 24, 2010 9:31 PM EDT reply actions  

Caption

“They make my toupee out of the same material as my sweater vest. That way the program saves money.”

"I want to eat some dessert." - Brandon Ware

by The Man with One Black Shoe on Aug 24, 2010 9:51 PM EDT reply actions  

I support UM/UNL and tOSU/PSU divisions

Yeah, sure. Let’s play “the game” in October. While we’re at it let’s have tOSU/PSU replace it as the last game of the season. Not having to play in Happy Valley at night - I’m OK with that. :)

Nice safe afternoon game. We might be able to start a “days since PSU last won” counter for you guys too.

by NC_Buckeye on Aug 24, 2010 9:53 PM EDT reply actions  

Well, to be fair, the playing tOSU in a night game at home factor hasn’t actually worked that well for PSU — we lost in both 2009 and 2007 under those conditions. And, ironically, won in Columbus at night in 2008. So, that’s probably not something for you Buckeye fans to get to worked up about.

That being said, pitting Ohio St versus Penn St to end the season and putting Michigan with Michigan St actually likes up pretty well for every team ending with a real “rival” — along with Iowa/Nebraska, Wisconsin/Minnesota, Indiana/Purdue and Illinois/Northwestern. Every team would play an in-state or border state team and all would be meaningful for those teams.

by Laaaaazzz on Aug 24, 2010 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'd honestly

Rather play Nebraska to end the year than Michigan State, but that’s just me.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Aug 24, 2010 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

That would be one hell of a weekend

I bet the Big Ten Network would love for this to happen. They might be able to actually broadcast a signature game.

Seriously, this buckeye is ready to embrace change. If it’s best for the league, I’m on board. I think it’d be fun to play PSU on the final weekend. Plus, "the game" is still "the game" regardless of which weekend it’s played.

by NC_Buckeye on Aug 25, 2010 9:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

A few more snippets

Just found a couple more quotes from AD’s.

Purdue’s AD, Morgan Burke reiterates competitive balance. Also says that the decision on a 9-game conference schedule won’t come for awhile.

Wisconsin’s Barry Alveraz notes that each school will get to protect one rivalry.

by Aaron Musfeldt on Aug 24, 2010 10:37 PM EDT reply actions  

Awesome sauce

Now let’s see the Nittany Lions protect that rivalry with Minnesota should they get put in seperate divisions…

My kingdom for a spellchecker. Or Devin Harris. Hopefully both.
"What's your formula for the corner?" -Doctor Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory
"Ah gravity, thou art a heartless b*tch." --Doctor Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Aug 25, 2010 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions  

Zip it!

Does Delany support zipper divisions?

If you have them in the same division, one of those teams is going to the playoff and one of them is not. If you split teams, whether it’s Purdue and Indiana, or Illinois and Northwestern, or Michigan-Ohio State, or Nebraska and Penn State, if you split them, they can both go. If you don’t split them, only one can go.

by Aaron Musfeldt on Aug 25, 2010 7:39 AM EDT up reply actions  

It should clearly be Nebraska PSU to end the season

OSU-Michigan have their bromance, so whatever. I know Penn State Alums, from the ’90s to present day (like myself) loathe the Suckeyes like no other. I mean, their from OHIO!

But, Nebraska and Penn State may not be the worst thing ever. Both are the “step children” of the Big Ten, with no natural rivals. They have a history, Penn State whipping their ass in the ’81 and ’82 season, Nebraska returning the favor and thumping PSU in the ’83 opener. But of course, who could forget the 1994 SCREW OF THE CENTURY, when they gave Nebraska that UNANIMOUS National Title “for Osbourne” BULLSH!T that I will NEVER get over. I have never seen a Penn State team so dominant in my life, and had the privilege of not missing a home game that season from the student section. Beating Ohio State 63-14? PRICELESS!

So, I for one am all in for a Penn State-Nebraska rivalry!

We're going to get the ball, and we're gonna score...

by DeonButler_WE ARE_PENN STATE on Aug 25, 2010 12:56 AM EDT reply actions  

Does PSU really want this?

Nebraska fans already list Iowa over PSU as their preferred rival by a landslide.

PSU views tOSU as their main rival while tOSU fans view PSU as just a big game.

Does PSU want another rivalry with a lopsided view from the fan’s perspective?

by ProveIt on Aug 25, 2010 6:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

well it appears no matter who our rival is

the other team just won’t care about us, so we might as well have it be with someone WE care about.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 25, 2010 8:07 AM EDT up reply actions  

Not necessarily...
the other team just won’t care about us

After the husker faithful get past playing Iowa a few times, I can easily see Nebraska-PSU becoming a huge game garnering national attention as well as the primary rivalty for both teams.

Unlike the rest of the Big Ten, PSU isn’t entering this match up with their opponents having established rivalries based on several decades of previous experience.

They aren’t overcoming a previous reivalry for the opposing fan base, they are facing a team looking for a new rival.

by ProveIt on Aug 26, 2010 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions  

Depends on who you talk to. Many PSU fans are dying to end the season with Nebraska. Personally, I don’t care – it would be nice, but it’s hardly something I get worked up about. I’m more concerned about being in a division with other “eastern” (relatively nearby) schools in the Big Ten as opposed to ones in the central time zone that are far away. Or, more to the point, I want to be in a division with Ohio State because they are the only school remotely close to PSU, only school in a border state, and we’ve developed a nice rivalry. Any breakdown of divisions that puts PSU in a different division from them (and I’d prefer a nice helpinf of the schools in Michigan and Indiana as well in our division) would be blasted by me.

I say just go East/West and we continue to play MSU to end the season. That seems like the ideal setup to me, which preserves rivalries, cuts on on travel and is actually fairly well balanced in terms of team strengths. But it seems like something that the conference doesn’t want to do.

by Laaaaazzz on Aug 25, 2010 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

Give me Sparty...

…and I don’t care what happens.

Adam
Black Shoe Diaries, SB Nation Pittsburgh
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...

by Adam Bittner on Aug 25, 2010 1:36 AM EDT reply actions  

The last thing anyone wants here

is to devalue The Land Grant Trophy

Because it's a Bowl Game!!
-My wife when asked why she didn't tell me she was having contractions Jan. 1 2007

by Grainey on Aug 25, 2010 8:00 AM EDT up reply actions   2 recs

The Land Grant Trophy

What would Joe Paterno do?

by jesse. on Aug 25, 2010 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions  

THE Land Grant Trophy

Joe Paterno - Not Unlike Hugh Hefner

by letsgopsu on Aug 25, 2010 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions   2 recs

tLGT

"I want to eat some dessert." - Brandon Ware

by The Man with One Black Shoe on Aug 25, 2010 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

jtLGT?

Joe Paterno - Not Unlike Hugh Hefner

by letsgopsu on Aug 25, 2010 9:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

NNTAWWT???

"I have my Joe Paterno autograph already, but I don’t know that I’d begrudge anybody else from getting theirs no matter their age. That’s kind of like meeting Winston Churchill." jesse. @ BSD

by bconway6 on Aug 26, 2010 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

Is....

this THE same Trophy that goes to THE winner of THE Football contast between THE Pennsylvania University and THE Michigan State University.

"It was fun. It really was, ... People say to me, 'Why don't you give it up?' I don't want to miss out on this stuff, because I'm having a good team. I've never had a bad season when I didn't have a good time." JVP

by psu in the w-b on Aug 25, 2010 6:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

The most overstated consideration in the divisions discussions...
Everything else be damned, and if that means shipping Penn State out west to maintain competitive balance, so be it.

…or any other reference to travel and regional affiliation is rediculous.

They are going to a 9 game conference schedule – 5 games in their division, 4 games in the other division.

This difference of travel to 1 game every 2 years means absolutely nothing.

Suddenly, the Buckeye’s and Wolverines see their iron grip rusting away, and it scares them to death.

…and now we are in the world of hater fantasy. The Vest noted that during a visit, he realized Osborne was considering the move as they discussed various issues, and he was in favor of it and did his best to indirectly promote the move to Osborne.

The Big Ten believes they have 4 of the top 8 national brands – that’s a bonus (and the drive behind a 9 game conference schedule), not something they fear.

but who is going to hang a banner in the stadium that says “Eastern Division Champions”?

Every AD whose program accompolishes the feat.

by ProveIt on Aug 25, 2010 5:39 AM EDT reply actions  

"Every AD whose program accompolishes the feat."

Uh no. We recognize National Championships, undefeated seasons, and conference titles. Indiana may hang than banner, but not Penn State.

And frankly I don’t think we should recognize conference titles, either.

by PSU Mudder on Aug 25, 2010 8:35 AM EDT up reply actions  

correct
The Big Ten believes they have 4 of the top 8 national brands – that’s a bonus (and the drive behind a 9 game conference schedule), not something they fear.

The big ten doesnt fear it. but thats not who we are talking about here, is it? I believe we are talking specifically about osu and michigan.

by swiggy04 on Aug 25, 2010 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

The big ten doesnt fear it. but thats not who we are talking about here, is it?

And like the rest of the Big Ten… tOSU and tSUN see the expansion as an opportunity, not something to be feared (an opinion I consider more fantasy than reality).

I see no difference between these 2 fan bases and the rest of the Big Ten in this respect.

by ProveIt on Aug 26, 2010 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions  

Actually your other comment is nonsense also
They are going to a 9 game conference schedule – 5 games in their division, 4 games in the other division.

This difference of travel to 1 game every 2 years means absolutely nothing

It actually means quite a bit to fans who travel to games. You do understand that PSU is the EASTERNMOST school by like 330 miles? Its a 5 hour drive to our closest Big Ten school to begin with.

But aside from the sheer illogical nature of putting a school closer to the Atlantic Ocean than to its closest Western geographical counterpart in the West, Its rough on the fans who want to see Penn State. If Penn State is in the west, that means the teams in the east rotate off our schedule, which means 2 teams a year that are geographically closer to us (and hence easier to travel to) are not on the schedule. Yet every year we would have Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Minnesota etc., which means every year there would be at least a few trips of 600 miles at least (in MN/NE, over 1000 miles). Ohio State on the other hand, in the east, would rotate two teams out west off the schedule, and always play Michigan, MSU, Indiana, Purdue. Those are four games with 250 miles every year.

So yea, PSU in the east, allowing us to play teams within a 6 hour drive or bustrip every year works out a lot better than playing 5 teams in the west forcing us to drive 1000 miles or fly. Its always been hard to travel with our team, but putting us out west is just a kick in the narddog.

by swiggy04 on Aug 25, 2010 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions  

Terrible idea

Don’t you realize if PSU and Nebraska played in the last game we might get a rematch in the conference championship?

by BSD on Aug 25, 2010 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm against rematches of a 1 game series at all.

But I guess I’m going to have to eat it.

Here’s a proposal:

1- split into divisions
2- play the regular season
3- see what teams WOULD meet in the CCG
4- if they’ve already played, award the title to the team that won
DONE

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 25, 2010 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

and allow the next set of teams to play in the "CCG"?

perhaps giving another quality win to a team trying to get a BCS slot?

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 27, 2010 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

Exactly. Which is why we shouldn’t play Nebraska the last game of the season (assuming the Big Ten were to do the sensible thing and split the divisions East/West).

Penn State should not be in a division composed primarily/exclusively of teams in the weatern half of the conference. IMHO, it’s not about travel (for fans or the team) but much more about connections – PSU should play every year against teams that are closest to them and where there is more interaction. We are already “on an island” being the easternmost team and not particularly close to anyone. It already creates a sense of PSU being isolated and “different” or “not a full member” of the conference – but at least that is mitigated by playing teams from relatively close places like Ohio and Michigan. but it’s completely unfair to put PSU in a division where they are competing with teams that are a time zone and multiple states away.

by Laaaaazzz on Aug 25, 2010 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

Put some numbers to it.

You can start with the worse case scenario.

Catered to PSU travel (in division with 5 closest teams)
vs.
Set to give PSU the longest travel (in division with the 5 furthest teams)

Take the distance to teams in their division
plus 4 x the average distance to teams outside their divisions.
This will be the average travel.

Take the difference between the 2 formats, and you have the max. effect of travel.
I would guess it is about 300 miles a year total.
This isn’t only exaggerated by extreme formats the conference wouldn’t follow, it is exaggerated by not taking into account PSUs ability to decrease this difference by who they select as their preserved rival.

Now compare this travel for those it effects against the downsides of those formats.

Unless you exaggerate (we aren’t talking about millions hitting the road here) (we are taking extreme differences the conference wouldn’t follow) (we aren’t taking into account the preserved rivalry with a nearby team) this difference isn’t a lot at the extreme, negligible when reasonable formats are compared.

by ProveIt on Aug 28, 2010 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

I did do the math a while ago

and depending on if we are doing 8 or 9 conference games, it works out to, on average for every away game an extra 120 miles each direction, or 240 miles round trip (though for a 9 game conference schedule this changes to 70/140 difference, because of the greater overlap of schedules). For every game.

So in the most extreme case of differences, (PSU in the west, vs PSU in the east), it amounts to an extra 950 miles of travel a year for someone going to all the away games (5665 miles instead of 4711 miles, round trip by car), which amounts to a 20% increase in travel. That’s pretty significant. (In comparison, for a 9 game schedule, on average it would be an extra 640 miles of travel per year, 6150 vs 5513, for about a 12% increase…still fairly significant). Basically it is like adding a whole extra game’s worth of travel.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 30, 2010 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

So, in the worse case scenario,

With PSU grouped with the furthest 5 schools in 1 division (a format that won’t be followed by the conference)

The average extra travel for a fan in 1 year 1 way is
70 × 4.5 = 315 miles, 630 both ways.
(I am using the 9 game conference schedule because this looks like the most likely result)

Aside from being very close by eyeballing it

PSU can drop this by selecting the closest school as their preserved rival. This alone might eliminate the added average distance on several trips.

Go to a more realistic conference split than PSU with the 5 furthest and the difference drops even more. If the max difference is 70 miles 1 way, I am guessing the average would be around 35 miles 1 way with a reasonable setup. Pump it up all you want, 35 more miles of driving on a 500+ mile trip isn’t squat, and you aren’t going to get anyone to buy into it being notable. By your own numbers, it will probably be around 6%.

Then consider how many people we are talking about – it isn’t hundreds of thousands every game, it is those traveling by auto from PSU.

This drops further when you consider net travel for fans from the west (I suspect a substantial percentage of the visiting team fan base on road trips).

Pump it up all you want, this isn’t significant considering the other aspects of how the conference is divided - the most you can come up with is about an hour in an unrealistic worse case scenario.

by ProveIt on Aug 30, 2010 6:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

I understand the 75 year tradition of The Game and all that it means to the fans of those schools.

If you think tOSU and tSUN fans would be happy not being in the same division and not playing each other at the end of the season, then…
No, you don’t get it – you don’t even begin to comprehend the rivalry. By this blog alone, I doubt you understand the Big Ten landscape.
It mat be a result of being relatively new to the conference.
It may be a result of not finding a rival who hates you as much as you hate them.
It may just be a search to find support for a conclusion you’ve already reached.
We will check back in 20 to 50 years – maybe then you will get it.

by ProveIt on Aug 25, 2010 6:11 AM EDT reply actions  

You are right

We bow down to you oh wise one. Please enlighten us because we truly care so much.

by speedomike on Aug 25, 2010 7:38 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

we understand it the same way we understand that couple in high school.

you know the one, they are always fighting, breaking up, and getting back together, and then making out way too much in the hallway, and always make sure everyone else knows exactly the status of their relationship. Sure, there once may have been true passion, but now they often just crave the attention and drama more than any true feelings towards each other.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 25, 2010 8:12 AM EDT up reply actions  

If I were to use the HS relationship analogy...

…I would use the analogy it is time PSU moved on from their lopsided relationship with tOSU (which has more interest from 1 fan base than the other) and look for a healthier relationship viewed equally by both (possibly Nebraska-PSU).

As it is, PSU is stuck as tOSU’s fall back girl when their main interst isn’t putting out – the PSU fans deserve better.

by ProveIt on Aug 26, 2010 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions  

hey, I'm all for pairing up with Nebraska

but as it is, PSU’s options for rivals are, in this order:
OSU (border state, nearest in competitive value)
Michigan (next closest school, also nearest in competitive value)
MSU (fabricated rivalry, but next closest school after Michigan. Nowhere near competitive value)
um….Iowa? I guess next best in competitive value after the OSU/Michigan duo, but pretty far away, and until the past few seasons, not really anything interesting about them
Wisconsin? Bleh.

We realize we don’t have a true rival in the conference, and to that effect, our games/“rivalries” with OSU and Michigan are the best we have (until perhaps now with Nebraska).

And with all that said: “The Game” is perceived to be more important to OSU/Michigan fans than it really is. We don’t need the constant facebook relationship status updates and twitter posts about how great your guys relationship is, only to see how superficial it really is lately.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 27, 2010 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions  

And with all that said: "The Game" is perceived to be more important to OSU/Michigan fans than it really is.

The fans view it as one of the biggest rivalries in NCAAF, and frequently the last hurdle to the conference title.
This isn’t overstating its significance.

The fans would like to see it remain as the last regular season hurdle to the conference title as frequently as possible and remain among the biggest rivalries in the nation.
These 2 go hand in hand – the game draws more interest outside the conference because of its impact on the conference title.

As a fan of the conference as well, I would like to see the emergence of another conference rivalry drawing national attention.
Iowa, MSU, and Wisconsin don’t have the brand recognition of Iowa and Nebraska.
It isn’t a stretch to see PSU-Nebraska draw similar attention if it was placed at or near the end of the regular season and the 2 were in the same division.

…but PSU and Nebraska won’t likely be in the same division unless tOSU-tSUN are in the other, and these games won’t likely be at the end of the season unless they are in the same division.

only to see how superficial it really is lately.

Wanting 2 conference showdowns between top brands maximizing national attention isn’t being superficial, it is getting the most out of the conference regular season to the benefit of the entire conference.

by ProveIt on Aug 27, 2010 6:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

again

The fans view it as one of the biggest rivalries in NCAAF, and frequently the last hurdle to the conference title

Now the CCF game will be the last hurdle to the conference title.

The fans would like to see it remain as the last regular season hurdle to the conference title as frequently as possible and remain among the biggest rivalries in the nation.
These 2 go hand in hand – the game draws more interest outside the conference because of its impact on the conference title.

Maybe, but how many people will care if it is the second to last hurdle to the conference title? And why would it not remain amongst the biggest rivalries in the nation if it is earlier in the year? All those other big national rivalries seem to do just fine without it being the last game of the year. Is the OSU-Michigan rivalry not strong enough to do so as well?

As far as drawing more of a national audience, this has less to do with the rivalry factor, and more to do with the “deciding the conference championship” which would imply that it is between two good teams. I’ll watch Washington State play Stanford if it is to decide the Pac-10/12 title. The national ratings would be the same if it was OSU vs PSU in the regular season finale vs if it was OSU vs Michigan, if the game is that important. If the stakes aren’t that high, then it doesn’t really matter who the teams are, the only people really watching are the fans of those schools and gamblers.

You also have to stop confusing a game where one team has conference championship stakes, playing against a much weaker opponent as “having conference championship implications”. No one in their right mind believed that the OSU vs Michigan game meant anything the past few years. Sure, if Michigan won, it would have affected things, but that was 1) unlikely and 2) the same as saying Iowa’s rivalry game vs Minnesota had “conference title implications” and that PSU’s “rivalry” game with MSU had “conference title implications”. How interested were you in watching those latter 2 games? Probably as interested as the rest of the Big Ten/nation was interested in watching the OSU vs Michigan game.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 28, 2010 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions  

As far as drawing more of a national audience, this has less to do with the rivalry factor, and more to do with the "deciding the conference championship" which would imply that it is between two good teams.

This. People don’t watch games like tOSU/UM because they are “rivalries” – they watch them because they are between top teams. Outside of the fanbases of the respective teams, nobody cares if they hate each other. But when it’s two top 10 teams playing or it’s a battle for a conference title, people will watch. And that’s why tOSU/UM has garnered attention over the years.

If PSU/tOSU ends up as the season finale and has implication for the division title, then it will get attention regardless of whether it has a cute nickname or has had an HBO special. People watch big matchups.

No one flips on Colorado/Colorado St game and says “wow, these teams hate each other, I gotta watch it!”. They say “these teams are lame, I’m moving on to a better game.”

by Laaaaazzz on Aug 28, 2010 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

Now the CCF game will be the last hurdle to the conference title.

Moving the game from the last game of the season changes the context of the game.
Unless you believe the conference is still the Big2 and these teams are likely to meet again in the CCG, the context is decreased if the game is moved.

Maybe, but how many people will care if it is the second to last hurdle to the conference title?

Far more than will care if it is the 6th to last.

And why would it not remain amongst the biggest rivalries in the nation if it is earlier in the year?

Frequently cited reasons include the context of the game. The greater the perceived significance, the greater the interest.

All those other big national rivalries seem to do just fine without it being the last game of the year. Is the OSU-Michigan rivalry not strong enough to do so as well?

They would do better if the context in which they play was elevated. Moving them to the end of the season would elevate the context in which they are played.

As far as drawing more of a national audience, this has less to do with the rivalry factor, and more to do with the "deciding the conference championship" which would imply that it is between two good teams

Lost of things impact the context of games. Existing rivalries, the performance of the 2 teams that year, the brand recognition of the teams, when the game is played, the impact of the game’s results on advancing to the conference title game are just a few.
The greater the context of the game, the greater the fan interest.
What is your reason to cut the context?

The national ratings would be the same if it was OSU vs PSU in the regular season finale vs if it was OSU vs Michigan

All other things equal – no, it wouldn’t. The latter holds a greater context than the former.

You also have to stop confusing a game where one team has conference championship stakes, playing against a much weaker opponent as "having conference championship implications". No one in their right mind believed that the OSU vs Michigan game meant anything the past few years.

Divisions and schedules are set up over extended periods of time, not just a couple of years.
You need to recognize the greater the context of the game, the greater the interest.

 the same as saying Iowa’s rivalry game vs Minnesota had "conference title implications" and that PSU’s "rivalry" game with MSU had "conference title implications"

1. Iowa, Minnesota, and MSU are not national brands. All other things equal, the context of the game would not be the same.
2. Looking at 1 (or even a few) year’s performance to set up a conference’s divisions and schedule would be a mistake.

Probably as interested as the rest of the Big Ten/nation was interested in watching the OSU vs Michigan game.

If a loss by OSU would elevate your team to the Rose bowl, or in the new set up, elevate them to the conference title game, you would be very interested – certainly more interested than if the game was played earlier and the teams weren’t in the same division.

There is no escaping the context in which the game is played.

All of this aside,

the most you have been able to do is try to discount the reasons for keeping tOSU and tSUN in the same division and playing in the last week. Nothing here gives a reason to split them and move the game.

For the change to make sense, the pros have to out weight the cons.

by ProveIt on Aug 28, 2010 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

it really seems like you are saying that the game is more important because it is the last game of the season

to which I say that ANY game that is at the end of the season will be elevated if there are conference championship implications. If OSU vs Michigan is elevated at the end of the season because of this, then so would OSU vs PSU, or OSU vs Indiana (ha, like THAT will ever have conference championship implications).

So maybe “the Game” becomes less important without the context of being at the end of the season, but that then allows for another game to GAIN context by being placed there.

The way it seems you are thinking is that these factors are OSU/Michigan specific, but the way I see it is that they are context specific. Sure, the magnitude of the game feels bigger for OSU and Michigan fans when the game is important and at the end of the year, but for pretty much every other fan in the nation, it doesn’t matter what the name of the team is, just their records, and the national/conference implications of that specific game. Flip back to 2006. I would have been just as likely to watch “the Game” were it to have featured undefeated Indiana vs undefeated Northwestern. It just happened that it was OSU and Michigan.

I watch a lot of college football. I haven’t watched the OSU vs Michigan game since 2007. I’ve generally been able to find much more intriguing games on TV.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 30, 2010 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

I am saying the context is higher.

The context of the game is based on a lot of factors, when it is played is 1 of them. No way around this.

to which I say that ANY game that is at the end of the season will be elevated if there are conference championship implications
So maybe "the Game" becomes less important without the context of being at the end of the season, but that then allows for another game to GAIN context by being placed there.

As you noted, elevating the context of an Indiaia-tOSU showdown doesn’t have much impact. There are limits to trying to elevate the context of games (reference attempts to make a rivalry out of MSU-PSU).

When you already have an established product (such as a nationally recognized top rivalry) it makes more sense to try to develop others than diminish it and hope a viable replacement forms.

The way it seems you are thinking is that these factors are OSU/Michigan specific,

This is false. I have noted room for some other rivalries to form drawing national attention.

by ProveIt on Aug 30, 2010 6:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

I am saying the context is higher.

Sorry – hit wrong button.

The way it seems you are thinking is that these factors are OSU/Michigan specific,

This is false. I have noted room for some other rivalries to form drawing national attention. I am looking to get the most from the conference brands for the best result of the conference.

There are other advantages to having tOSU-tSUN in the same division.

for pretty much every other fan in the nation, it doesn’t matter what the name of the team is, just their records, and the national/conference implications of that specific game.

…and having the game at the end of the year increases the implications of the game in the conference title hunt.

I watch a lot of college football. I haven’t watched the OSU vs Michigan game since 2007. I’ve generally been able to find much more intriguing games on TV.

You can’t schedule for teams every year, but you can try to schedule for long term trends with a strong historical trend.

The most you have been able to do is try to discount the reasons for keeping tOSU and tSUN in the same division and playing in the last week.
Nothing here gives a reason to split them and move the game unless you are going to float the idea it is good to break up a known commodity in the hope a replacement forms (and you get back to where you started), or the idea the conference is still the Big 2.

The pros of having them in the same division still outweigh the cons.
It is a question of is it better, much better, or much, much better?
not a question of is it better or worse?.

by ProveIt on Aug 30, 2010 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

The opinion of one man.

That’s what you’re talking about. I doubt everyone agrees with him here.

And at least he’s not a tool.

Turn your crank to Frank!

by ReadingRambler on Aug 25, 2010 8:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

"I doubt you understand the Big Ten landscape."

HAHA. It is pellucid from this comment that you are the one who no longer understands the b10 landscape. If you ever did.

You see, it’s not the 1970’s anymore. There are more than 10 teams, there are more than 2 teams of national concern. Twenty percent more total teams may not be a huge deal, but one hundred percent more national programs definitely is a huge deal. Yes, your rivalry game will always hold a special place in your heart, but it is no longer the game the b10 cares most about. That honor belongs to the CCG.

Please do check back in 20 to 50 years. You will see the fear that this comment demonstrates has been completely validated. You are so obviously afraid of change. I feel sad for you to some extent.

by PSUinBOSSton on Aug 25, 2010 9:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

To make the case for splitting the teams to get a rematch in the CCG game...

…is to make the case the conference remains the Big 2, something I don’t believe to be true.

Please enter 4 tokens and try again.

It is still the biggest rivalry in the Big Ten, on everyone’s list of the biggest rivalries in the nation, over time the biggest draw outside the conference (the RR regime aside), and its continued significance is a financial boost for the conference (via the Network contract).

Rather than diminishing the biggest draw, I hope more games can draw national attention. PSU is the 2nd most popular rival for the husker faithful – this could become the major rivalry for both fan bases if Iowa falters.

The Big Ten believes they now have 4 of the nations top 8 brands – I would like to see the most from each game, not moves that diminish them.

The character of the Big Ten is the tradition of long running rivalries – some on the national stage (tOSU-tSUN) and some on the local stage (Minn-Wisc). It comes from the long history and familiarity.

I sincerely hopes the comment is not validated – diminishing the rivalries would be a loss for the conference.

by ProveIt on Aug 26, 2010 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions  

Dude

I not that I don’t understand, I simply don’t care. There is a huge difference there.

Play in seperate divisions in October. Play the last week of the season in same division. Pick one, I don’t friggin’ care. It’s all the same to me.

What would Joe Paterno do?

by jesse. on Aug 25, 2010 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions  

Thank you for your comment, sir

It is possible to see another person’s point of view, and just not agree with it or think it is misguided.

by BSD on Aug 25, 2010 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions  

It is as if....
I see how this works. You bait the trolls, then sit back and say ‘dance, monkeys’.
But I have been known to do that You guys are such suckers sometimes. by BSD on Aug 24, 2010 12:19 PM PDT

Sorry, I couldn’t resist after reading this comments.

by ProveIt on Aug 26, 2010 1:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

two things here

1.

If you think tOSU and tSUN fans would be happy not being in the same division and not playing each other at the end of the season, then…

I would appreciate you showing me specifically where in this article that conclusion was drawn? I think the article was about how OSU and Michigan and their fans are too shortsighted to see that maintaining the tradition of playing at the end of the year as well as being in the same conference is actually bad for the rivalry, given the new landscape of the conference. This would mean that the conclusion of the article is actually precisely that OSU and Michigan and their fans want to be in the same division and play each other at the end of the year. So by your comment alone, i doubt you understand the english language.

and 2.

No, you don’t get it – you don’t even begin to comprehend the rivalry

Are you sure you’re not a Pitt fan?

by swiggy04 on Aug 25, 2010 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Move the game from the last game of the season and it loses its perceived significance. This holds true for any game – even if both teams aren’t in the running, as long as 1 team is at risk of losing an invite to the conference title game, the game has an impact.

Move the teams to different divisions and the chances of the outcome of the game having no impact on the conference title increases.

There is no way around these.

To put forth it would be better for the rivalry based on meeting in the title game is to embrace the concept of the Big 2 (otherwise it would be a rarity).

Someone looked up the history: tOSU-tSUN met for the conference title less than 25% of the time (likely less with the addition of PSU and Neb). Compare this to 1 team needing the win to claim the title over 50% of the time (perhaps more with the improved balance since the days of the Big 2).

Believing the game maintains more significance if they are in the same division is based on the changing conference landscape, the belief it is no longer the Big 2. It is based on the belief that improving the significance every year outweighs the few times they would meet in the conference title game.

This is opposite the article, which relies on meetings in the conference title game to be frequent enough to outweigh the decrease significance in other years.

by ProveIt on Aug 26, 2010 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

you said it yourself
perceived significance

its a perceived significance. The only people that would be affected by the move from the week before thanksgiving to October 5th are people in Ann Arbor and Columbus. To everyone else its just another game. I dont know anyone in Madison or Lincoln or Champaign or Minneapolis who is going to make a stink if the game is not at the end of the year. The game is going to mean the same amount to everyone no matter where its played. No game has meant more to the big ten season the last two years then Penn State Iowa and Penn State Ohio State. Neither of these games were played at the end of the year. They had the most significance to the conference title.

Correct me if im wrong, both your teams and fanbases will be amped to play on Halloween the same they would during game #12. If you only get amped cause of the date, then both your programs have more issues then i thought.

by swiggy04 on Aug 26, 2010 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions  

More than the immediate fans...

…it effects the lure of the game for the entire audience.

Given that it makes everyone’s list as the biggest rivalry in the nation, it is not just another game for everyone else.

Last year tOSU-Iowa had as much if not bigger impact on the Big Ten title than PSU-tOSU, but I am noting long term – not just the last few years.

They will still be amped, but not as much if the game held more significance. it isn’t the date – it is the added significance the date and being in the same division brings.

The more significance you can give each rivalry, the better for the conference.

by ProveIt on Aug 26, 2010 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well Yankees/red Sox is the biggest rivalry in sports

and I dont know anyone that isnt a fan of either team that makes time out of the day to sit and watch that, just like i dont know anyone who isnt a fan of Michigan or Ohio State that make plans to watch that game. I know its hard for your fans to understand but people dont care as much as you do. Thats ok, i dont expect Ohio State fans to wake up and get ready to watch Penn State/Iowa or Wisconsin/Minnesota either. If you talk to anyone out west (I have family out there) they will tell you Stanford/Cal or Oregon/Oregon State is easily the best rivalry in college, do you make plans for that game? Down south its the iron bowl, or the red river shootout, do you have a party for those games? In New England nothing is better than BC/Notre Dame. I guarantee you people in those areas are more amped for those games then they are for your game. I doubt any of them say “our rivalry is good, but its no Michigan Ohio State thats for sure”

The point I’m making is that no rivalry or its “perceived significance” is so great and worthy that everything in the conference should be molded around it. Its a matter of regionalism and taste. Its a fine game, and I will watch it when both teams are playing well because im a fan of football, and especially if it plays a role in Penn State’s season. But the fact that michigan and ohio state fans act like people treat it like the super bowl just because its michigan Ohio State is absurd. Trust me, if there is a better game on (and there has been) I will watch the other game, and so will people everywhere else. Thats why its just another game.

by swiggy04 on Aug 27, 2010 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

I never made the claim...
rivalry or its "perceived significance" is so great and worthy that everything in the conference should be molded around it.

Looking for the game to remain at the end of the season
…and looking for the 2 teams to remain in the same divisions
(the 2 are tied together – the game is being moved because they aren’t in the same division)
…isn’t molding the conference around 1 rivalry.
(at least not more than trying to set up for a rematch in the conference title game)

But the fact that michigan and ohio state fans act like people treat it like the super bowl just because its michigan Ohio State is absurd.

They treat it like their biggest rivalry, a game that is recognized as among the biggest rivalries in NCAAF, and a game that is frequently the last hurdle to the conference title, which is why it is not just another game.
This may be absurd from some viewpoints, but it is also reality.

For those with a broader perspective of the conference, there is the opportunity to see another rivalry garnering national attention form between the other 2 conference national brands PSU-Nebraska.

But to give this the best chance of occurring,
…they would need to be in the same division (which likely puts tOSU-tSUN in the other)
…and the context of the game needs to be maximized, which means putting the game at or near the end of the season where it is more likely to at least be perceived to have a bigger impact on the conference title.

There is nothing absurd in this at all.

by ProveIt on Aug 27, 2010 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

so how about this proposed division alignment?

PSU
Nebraska
MSU
Indiana
Purdue

OSU
Michigan
Wisky
Iowa
Illinois
Northwestern

You get to stay in your same division, and would get to play your game in the second to last week of the conference play,and it is competitively balanced while keeping together major rivalries.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 28, 2010 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

There are lots of ways

Each has upsides and downsides.

I am guessing you didn’t trade Minnesota for a team to be named later.

Among the top 4
It maximizes the conferences top 4 brands.

You can have tSUN-tOSU and PSU-Neb play in the last week or next to last week of the regular season, maxing out the context of these games.

PSU and Nebraska can decrease their travel by naming local teams as their allotted 1 preserved rivalry.

It has a decent geographic mix encouraging media and fan following of the entire conference – I look for each to have 2 teams from the east 1/3 (PSU, tOSU, tSUN, MSU), 2 teams from the west 1/3 (Nebraska, Iowa, Minn, WIsc), and 2 teams from the middle 1/3 (Indiana, Purdue, Illini, NW) (yes, I know that you might swap a couple of these 1/3s if you followed a map).. You could also make a case for swapping Indi-Purdue for Illini-NW, Minnesota for Iowa, etc.

I will take your word on the balance. I usually go a bit further on the balance issue to look at how the 2 halves fare against each other (otherwise preserved rivalries can distort the results). I also tend to discount the balance issue when it comes to splitting the bottom 1/3 of the teams.

Trying to preserve some rivalries is a crap shoot. Their significance changes over time, has different value for each fan base, and it changes from fan to fan (as a tOSU fan, I still have a grudge against Wisky going back decades, and their present coaches certainly have a grudge against tOSU, but this isn’t a recognized rivalry). You could make a case for the swaps above.

by ProveIt on Aug 28, 2010 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

heh, yeah, I didn't really double check my divisions

I was basically trying to make the same “extreme” division of placing PSU in the west, but instead doing it with Michigan and OSU.

What I really should have had was:
PSU
Nebraska
MSU
Indiana
Purdue
Northwestern

OSU
Michigan
Wisky
Iowa
Illinois
Minnesota

It was a (failed) attempt at saying "how would you like it, where it isn’t even quite as bad for you, since you still get to keep Michigan, plus you aren’t as far east. And yes, I know we likely won’t see the “PSU in the West, but otherwise straight geographic split” but the fact that there are people out there that think it is a perfectly valid and reasonable suggestion is what irritates me.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 30, 2010 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

In this situation, you have a right to be irritated.
I know we likely won’t see the "PSU in the West, but otherwise straight geographic split" but the fact that there are people out there that think it is a perfectly valid and reasonable suggestion is what irritates me.

I argued against this split just as vigorously. It generally originates from people who start with the straight geographic split, then look for an easy fix.

As noted in another calculation, the travel issue isn’t that big. The most they hit was 70 miles 1 way using the split that irritates you vs. a strict geographic split and not claiming the closest team as the fixed rivalry.

In reality, the difference between the ideal and the final result will probably be around 35 miles 1 way (6% more than the ideal), maybe even a bit less depending on who PSU choses as their preserved rivalry.

by ProveIt on Aug 30, 2010 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

Your handle is less than one month old.

I tried your archives and they sucked are incomplete.

(Disagree about Brewster and Zook, though. Either one of them could get fired this year, based on my understanding of the Big Ten landscape.)

by Aaron PSU on Aug 25, 2010 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

"Check back in 25 to 50 years".....

Will Ron Cook, et.al. be telling the DerryPharmer to retire from the BSD then ?

by DerryPharmer on Aug 25, 2010 11:07 AM EDT reply actions   1 recs

I think derrypharmer has earned the right

to retire when he chooses to. That being said, the blogging world has passed him by and he is really affecting our ability to bring in new blue chip snarky comment recruits. I doubt you can take BSD seriously as a national power until he steps aside for a younger, more energetic frequent poster.

The will to win is important, but the will to prepare is vital.
Joe Paterno

by jaytay13 on Aug 25, 2010 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Derry has definitely earned the right to retire when he chooses, but don't count him out yet.

He’s still got just as much snark as you or me (probably more so) and is reeling talent into BSD just fine. He’s beloved by the whole BSD community for his knowledge and hatred of Pittsburgh media and his analyses are spot on! It’s not like he’s delegating his blogging duties to the assistants and just making sure that his name shows up here. He’s still completely in control of the DerryPharmer name. Trust me, Derry will be commenting for a long time to come!

For the glory

by Paige2PSU on Aug 25, 2010 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions   2 recs

I believe I read somewhere...

that DerryPha would only hang up his keyboard when the posting wasn’t ‘fun’ anymore, but these injuries and sicknesses keep adding up. I would hate to think DerryPha was ruining his quality of life by hanging on after his time was up.

Not to mention his legacy.

I think we all agree that DerryPha is a hall of fame poster. Wouldn’t you rather remember him as that spry energetic man of countless rec’s instead of the broken down poster just going through the motions?

Besides, didnt you see him at the BSD media days? It’s just sad… he fumbled with his posts, seemed like he was searching for words, and even tried to leave before his interview was over.

I’m worried. I just can’t think of any other way to put it.

The will to win is important, but the will to prepare is vital.
Joe Paterno

by jaytay13 on Aug 25, 2010 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

I think this is always going to be fun for DerryPha and nothing will diminish his legacy.

I also saw him at BSD media days and I thought he was in great form. Of course he was searching for words! He’s blogging for Goodness’ sake! You try coming up with all the stuff he does! He’s the expert.

You’re just a fair-weather DerryPha fan, no better than those Pitt a-holes or The Casual Fan, always nit-picking and going “ZOMG the sky is falling, because I haven’t seen DerryPha post today! He must be gravely ill.”

For the glory

by Paige2PSU on Aug 25, 2010 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions   2 recs

I thank you all...

for the kind words, but I’m not intending to quit until maybe MrsPharmer says so, and I ’m probably not doing my Thursday Nite Blog In anymore with Steve Jones…other than that I feel fine.

by DerryPharmer on Aug 25, 2010 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions   2 recs

I believe i heard this sound clip at Media Day: "I dont always post but when I do I only post on BSD. Stay thirsty my friends"

"It was fun. It really was, ... People say to me, 'Why don't you give it up?' I don't want to miss out on this stuff, because I'm having a good team. I've never had a bad season when I didn't have a good time." JVP

by psu in the w-b on Aug 25, 2010 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

Why is this solution so hard?

1: Michigan, Nebraska in one division, Ohio State, Penn State in the other.
2: Michigan plays Ohio State on the last week of the regular season.
3: The Big Ten Championship game is played by the teams from either division with the best record. If those two teams have already played each other, the losing team is disqualified and the next-best team in the division plays.

If people don’t like rematches, get rid of them all. Everyone’s happy, and ‘The Game’ ends up taking on more importance; if they’re both leading their divisions, the winner kicks the other one out of the Big Ten Championship.

Oh, and we’re happy, because if OSU’s leading the division and Michigan wins, we end up in the Big Ten championship game. Works for me.

by Bleed Blue 'n White on Aug 25, 2010 11:12 PM EDT reply actions  

When you set up divisions, then the team with the best record in that division goes to the CCG.

If there is a tie, then you look at head to head or overall conference wins. If OSU was undefeated until losing to Michigan (in a separate division) and Penn State had a loss in its own division, then OSU would still go to the CCG because it would win the division. If that happened to be Michigan (cough, laugh), then there would be a rematch a week later (if it was still the last game of the season). I don’t want to go through every scenario, but you couldn’t disqualify a team just because it’s a rematch, because despite losing to a team in the other division, they still hold the division record.

For the glory

by Paige2PSU on Aug 25, 2010 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not in favor of this as an absolute...

…but I do like the idea as a 1st tie breaker.

by ProveIt on Aug 26, 2010 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions  

I like the idea of making it so the CCG can't be a rematch

but (especially if we go to 9 conf games) the rematch will be really hard to avoid, and you could wind up getting a really mediocre team in the CCG because of such a rule.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 27, 2010 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

Is the Michigan/OSU rivalry the most important thing in the conference?

No, I don’t think it is.

Is it more important than making Penn State have to travel a little bit more for their football games?

Hell yes! You already have to travel all over the place, because you’re on the very far edge of the conference. Get over it.

That said, it would be a concession on the part of Penn State, and one that could be rewarded in some other way. Maybe they start talking to Pitt or Rutgers. Maybe they sweeten the TV deal a little to make up for the extra travel cost for football.

But it’s not like they’d be sending you to siberia! It’d like the NFL divisions – the geographic names mean jack. indianapolis is in the AFC South but Cincinatti is in the north?

Hell, I’d even say you guys could have a protected cross divisional rivalry with OSU, since you seem to think you’re our rivals (as much as we do respect Penn State football, the fact that OSU/Michigan fans are getting this upset over this shows that you still aren’t – there just isn’t the history).

You have to understand… this isn’t arrogance or dislike for the rest of the conference. This is a decision that is one item short of the biggest “fuck you” to the OSU/Michigan fanbases you could possibly get (the only thing worse would be to say that they don’t play every year). It’s striking at the heart of the biggest tradition we have, one of the biggest in the country. I’m sure there are Penn state traditions that go back as far – that’s one of the things I like about Penn State. I really wish that things were balanced to put all three teams in an eastern division.

Adding to that, from a competitive fairness standpoint it makes no sense. If Michigan/OSU are two of your four powerhouses, having them play cross divisions every year makes each of those teams have an assured harder schedule than the whole rest of the conference. It’s just a bad idea all around, and the OSU/Michigan AD’s shouldn’t stand for it. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have to give up something else in return, but this is a core principle.

by yrro on Aug 26, 2010 2:57 PM EDT reply actions  

Is it more important than making Penn State have to travel a little bit more for their football games?

Hell yes! You already have to travel all over the place, because you’re on the very far edge of the conference. Get over it.

It’s not IMHO about “travel” – it’s about competing directly against teams that are closest to you and who you are most connected with. PSU is already a relative geographic outlier in the Big Ten. We should be in a division with schools that are closer, not with ones in the central time zone. PSU fans already feel disconnected playing in a “Midwest” conference, but at least places like Ohio, Michigan and Indiana are kinda close. But Iowa, Nebraka, Minnesota? Those are just a world away.

I’m fine with any breakdown that puts PSU in a division with Ohio State and at least 2 of the 4 scholls from Michigan or Indiana. Less than that and it sucks IMHO. I could care less what happens to the UM/tOSU game or anything else.

by Laaaaazzz on Aug 26, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

agreed

does he realize Minnesota and Nebraska are over A THOUSAND miles away? A THOUSAND. thats not “a little bit further.”

by swiggy04 on Aug 26, 2010 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Do you realize...

With a 9 game schedule, even if you catered the conference divisions to PSU travel, you would still have 5 divisional games and 4 long trips to the non-divisional games.
1. This is a difference of 1 road game every other year. If you took the average of the 6 closest, and the average of the 6 furthest, you are only averaging a few hundred miles a year in travel.

2. If a person wants to go to every game, they have to travel to these locations now, they will have to travel to these locations afterwards. This isn’t much of a drop from the current status quo.

3. PSU has the power to decrease this further. Each team is being allowed to specify 1 presaerved rivalry. PSU can select tOSU or tSUN or any other team they want, diminishing the travel issue further.

4. How many people are we really talking about here – it is not as if you have millions travelling to see a game. The total road attendance is probably under 100,000. Much of this is local alumni.

5. Sure, they fill the visiting teams seats for road games – but more than a few of those seats are filled by local alumni. When you cut the travel for some, you increase the travel for others.

6. To follow other comment, why should an established rivalry be diminished, alumni living outside the PA area travel further, and ultimately at least 1 other fan base likely to have to travel further so a small number of a fan base can cut their travel an average of a few hundred miles a year? (it cuts both ways)

by ProveIt on Aug 27, 2010 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

6. To follow other comment, why should an established rivalry be diminished, alumni living outside the PA area travel further, and ultimately at least 1 other fan base likely to have to travel further so a small number of a fan base can cut their travel an average of a few hundred miles a year?

the overall travel of the conference will be lessened by splitting the divisions east west. For every game PSU fans would have to travel all the way out west in the Western division, those same opposing fanbases would have to make the trip to PSU. The only teams that would really likely have to switch their travel around would be in the middle of the footprint, and it wouldn’t be traveling more, it would be traveling about the same, just in slightly different directions.

As I posted above, if you see any issue with this divisional lineup, then realize that the problem would be even worse for PSU in the similarly proposed lineups (wouldn’t have a close team nearby like OSU-Michigan, plus we’re further East)
PSU
Nebraska
MSU
Indiana
Purdue

OSU
Michigan
Wisky
Iowa
Illinois
Northwestern

And yet that similar opposite alignment is basically what is being tossed to PSU as a “fair and balanced” alignment, all for the sake of preserving “the Game” so we can satisfy 2 fanbases, something which 80% of the conference doesn’t actually care about.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 28, 2010 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

When you try to cater the conference divisions strictly by gepgraphy,

you introduce more problems than travel to 1 game a year.

And even in this quickie comment, you still have the other issues I noted.

I made some comments on this alignment above.

It is not an issue of finding 1 problem in a format, it is finding the format which had the most upside with the least downside.

by ProveIt on Aug 28, 2010 7:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

i dont know that we consider you a rival

in the most specific sense of the word. Do I hate Ohio State, yes. I also hate Notre Dame, Michigan and USC. I dont consider them my arch-rivals. Most of the hate for OSU is that we’ve been the two most competitive schools in the conference in the last 5 or 6 years.

I just dont get why maintaining a rivalry game for two schools is ok even if that means one fan base has to fly everywhere to watch games.

No one, no school, no fanbase, wants to know that they in a division which means at least 3 times a year they have road trips of 1000 miles. no one. Its easy for OSU fans to claim PSU is whining because no one ever says “How bout we put Ohio State out west with Nebraska.” And even for them its not that bad, as they are 350 miles closer then we are. I dunno maybe those schools dont teach geography. I just dont think Ohio State fans would be so cavalier about the ease of travelling and the “get over its” if they somehow found themselves in our unenviable position.

by swiggy04 on Aug 26, 2010 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

This is a bit of an exaggeration...
No one, no school, no fanbase, wants to know that they in a division which means at least 3 times a year they have road trips of 1000 miles.

I haven’t looked it up, but I think there are 6 conference teams 1,000 miles from PSU. There would have to be 6 to have to travel 3 times a season.

Even if they are in different divisions, they will still play 2/3 of the time – you can only drop travel a little.

The Big Ten isn’t going to split the conference so PSU is in the same division as the 5 furthest schools. A similar format was proposed early by some fans, but it isn’t going to come to fruition.

I just don’t think Ohio State fans would be so cavalier about the ease of travelling and the "get over its" if they somehow found themselves in our unenviable position.

I suspect the fan base would like to see their team play PSU, tSUN, Nebraska, Wisc, and Iowa yearly, but this isn’t going to happen, it wouldn’t be good for the program, and it wouldn’t be good for the conference. If Texas had joined, you would have been able to add them to this list. The distance traveled isn’t a factor.

Wanting to preserve the context of a rivalry is not being cavalier to other concerns, but using the worse case scenario is an exaggeration.

by ProveIt on Aug 27, 2010 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well I think it may be about travel.....

I think a scheduled rivalry game that the students cant road trip to after class on friday afternoon is IMHO a bad idea…..

1000 miles = 17 hours give or take…. so figure non stop on a 12 o clock kickoff with a few hours to find parking, get in the stadium, etc…. They’d have to leave at 4 o’clock….. could be done, I guess… but how many actually would take the trip?

Let’s just invite Pitt, Maryland, Missouri, and ummm I dont know…. Oklahoma and set it up like that….

The will to win is important, but the will to prepare is vital.
Joe Paterno

by jaytay13 on Aug 26, 2010 9:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

as a comparison

an OOC trip to Alabama (~900 miles) would be as close or closer than most of our divisional opponents.

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 27, 2010 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions  

Nothing dictates who fan bases consider a rival.

Even a big honking trophy and speeches by governors can’t do that.

If you are going to cite travel distance, put some numbers to it.

No matter how it is divided, every 2 years you will travel to 5 games in the same division, 4 games in the other – use the average travel distance to the other division times 4 for an estimate.

In the worse case scenario setting the divisions strictly on the closest and furthest distance for PSU, I would estimate it averages around 300 miles a year total for all games.

Keep these in perspective – we aren’t talking about millions traveling – if it is a valid concern, it will hold up without exaggeration.

Compare the 2 formats and you have the downside of travel. Now compare the cost of alleviating this concern for the downside of that format.

by ProveIt on Aug 28, 2010 8:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

how is a protected cross divisional game between OSU and Michigan

and different/harder than a protected cross divisional game between OSU and PSU? It is like you either really don’t respect the quality of the Penn State football program, or you just don’t understand logic (or more likely, are just self-consumed with “The Game” to the point that you think everyone else should just bow down to the whims of those two teams).

by The JuggerNitt on Aug 27, 2010 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions  

Option C

It is about preserving the context of the rivalry.

Having the teams in the same division and playing at the end of the season places the game in the biggest context.

The tSUN and tOSU fan bases consider their game against each other a bigger rivalry than their games against PSU.

It has noting to do with respect for PSUs gridiron success – they just have nearly a century more history playing each other.

(or more likely, are just self-consumed with "The Game" to the point that you think everyone else should just bow down to the whims of those two teams).

Wanting to be in the same division and playing the game at the end of the season is not asking everyone else to bow down to their whims (or at least is less than asking the conference divisions be formed specifically to limit the travel of 1 team’s fan base).

or you just don’t understand logic

The end result also has many other benefits for teams outside of tSUN and tOSU. Not wanting to change the context of the rivalry or lose potential gains elsewhere is not illogical.

by ProveIt on Aug 27, 2010 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Black Shoe Diaries. If you haven't already done so, create an account and get involved in the conversation.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Avatar2_small
Sad News: 717's Own, Reading Rambler Passes On
154690_10100374022013820_13900087_66639438_4085030_n_small
Breaking Down Penn State's Inaugural D1 Hockey Schedule
At_the_foot_of_a_legend_small
My Obligatory Off-Season Book Post

Recent FanPosts

Hugh_griffith_small
Food for Thursday....The PA Pineapple Company
Psukoolaid_small
Suggestions for fun in Minneapolis?
1-joe-paterno_small
Please clarify your posting policy.
A_cullen_the_bug_small
JoePa & Esquire - and other stories
Jet_ski_jump__reef_central_avatar__small
Sandusky Jury Selection Begins June 5th
Small
Kameron Miles
Small
ESPN - reporting PSU considering schedule changes
Joepa1_small
Jimmy Johnson's worst loss

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SHOP THE BLACK SHOE DIARIES STORE

Gameday Depot University Apparel


Managing Editors

Zn_avatar_small Mike Pettigano

Img110_small Jeff Junstrom

Asst. Editors

6a00d8341c630a53ef0105369fb7ee970b-800wi_small Jared Slanina

Olmec_small Devon Edwards

Baller_small Eric Gibson

Mauti_small Cari Greene

Staff Writers

Iron_armor_small Galen

New4_good_small Nick Blonde

Turd_ferguson_psu_small Tim Aydin

On_the_way_to_grad_small Kyle_Martin

N53100510_31463067_5584_small Adam Collyer

Bus-fire-bikes_small Dan Vecellio

What-a-country-yakov_small bscaff

Small Keith Platt