Post-Big Ten Division Announcement Debriefing
by KJ@theonlycolors on Sep 2, 2010 7:50 AM CDT
in Michigan State Spartans Football
Email
Print
So, big picture, the process of arriving at Big Ten divisions can be summed up as follows:
- Step 1: Maximize the odds that Michigan and Ohio State meet in the title game by putting them in opposite divisions and precisely balancing the two divisions based on post-1993 performance.
- Step 2: Guarantee that, should the outcome you want from Step 1 actually occur, there will be at least some level of anticlimax associated with the outcome since the two teams in question will be playing in back-to-back weeks. As a bonus, you reduce the odds of getting semifinal-type games in the final week of the regular season and stick several teams with decided non-rival Rivalry Week opponents. And, that's not enough, every Big Ten team will miss playing one conference opponent for a full four-year period starting next season.
So, like, smashing success, boys. So much more interesting (and revenue maximizing!) than a simple geographic split.
Moving right along: Within the context of the jury-rigged framework Jim Delany et al. have created, MSU comes out looking pretty good. Our primary rival is in our division, Nebraska and Iowa are somewhat less frightening than Ohio State and Penn State as divisional foes, and fixed cross-divisional rivals don't come much friendlier than Indiana (as artificially-generated as that rivalry may be, Brass Spittoon or not). (Bonus: Mark Hollis gets his regular trips to Chicago to play Northwestern.) If/when MSU puts itself in a position to make a run at a Big Ten title, odds are we won't be able to complain about schedule imbalances as a major obstacle.
Of course, the two non-fixed cross-divisional opponents we drew for the first two years of 12-team play both came up "CONTENDER": Ohio State and Wisconsin. There was a decent chance we'd draw two teams from the OSU/PSU/Wisconsin group, 30%, but that does take the short-term sheen off the IU thing. (By the way, there was some sort of a random draw, right? Right? Who am I kidding? Probably not.)
Other observations (many of them lifted from LVS and Pete):
- Not sure why there's any reason not to just go with "North" and "South" for the division names. Close enough:
(Image Credit: This guy.)
- If we're not using "North" and "South," then please, pleeeease let it be "Rotel" and "Barbasol." (Frank the Tank: "Wisconsin is going to put more miles on the road than the Barbasol truck driver.")
- On that parenthetical note: For as much information as Barry Alvarez leaked to the public, you'd have thought he'd have more influence on the process. Wisconsin gets pretty clearly the worst deal in the league, missing out on regular games against 2 of its 3 obvious preferred choices (Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska). Delany called it being "geographically stretched." I think most Badgers fans will call it being "hosed."
- Cross-divisional games count just like the divisional ones. So at least one disturbing rumor was wrong. In the immortal words of Jack Shephard: "All of this matters!" [/LOST geekery]
- Tie-breakers are fairly sensible: head-to-head if it's a two-team tie, division record if it's three teams (BCS ranking if still tied).
- Killer start to the 2011 conference slate for MSU: @OSU, Michigan, Wisconsin, @Nebraska. No worries about the traditional fast MSU start followed by a late-season collapse next year.
- 2012 is the year to sign up for season tickets: Notre Dame, Ohio State, Iowa, Nebraska, and Northwestern at home. If nothing else, you'll be able to make a handy profit off those first four fan bases. (Note: Don't actually do this.)
- For 2013 and 2014, one or both of Illinois and Purdue will replace Ohio State and Wisconsin (Penn State is the third option). Feel free to start daydreaming about a Maxwell/Gholston/Thomas-led run to the title game in 2013.
- No divisions for basketball. Which is a good thing. As much as using the football divisions would have paved the way for MSU Big Ten regular season basketball championships to infinity and beyond, they'd also have damaged our RPI and greatly reduced the number of clashes with other Big Ten contenders.
28 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
UM
really got off easy for 2011. looks like they want that back to back game ASAP. i dont beleive in random drawings.
From previous post
Moving my uninteresting comment to here since this went up right after I commented. I’m basically fine with everything but the last week. Teams in the same division should be playing on the last week of the season:
Don’t the SEC and Big 12 all have teams from the same division play each other in the last weekend? Outside of whether THE GAME could be played back-to-back, doesn’t this open up all sorts of bad scenarios where a team that already has won a division (and not worried about BCS) could be playing a team leading another division and not play all out?
I’m fine with the division set-up, I just think playing across division lines the last week of the year could lead to some issues eventually.
I agree
With my cross-eyed counterpart that the final week should be reserved for inter-divisional games.
By having the set up where teams are playing their non-divisional rivals in the final regular season game, the B10 essentially is making a format in which the divisions titles will be completely decided in game 7 of conference play. Kind of takes the luster off those last week matchups, essentially, it will be a lot of UM trying to sabotage OSU’s national ranking.
by MSUDersh on Sep 2, 2010 9:42 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Not necessarily
Some teams will be playing within their division and some will be playing crossover games on the last weekend. For example, MSU plays Northwestern (same division) in the final game next season, while UM plays OSU (crossover). However, because every game counts toward winning your division, it doesn’t matter that UM-OSU is a crossover game. If UM loses, that will count against them for the division standings.
by Ducking Delvon on Sep 2, 2010 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions
Oh, ok
That makes more sense. Yesterday on Detroit sports radio, the talking heads were saying that only the 5 in-division games count towards the divisional title, & only time the non-divisional games would be used is in instance of a 3 way tie of teams with a 3-2 record in division.
by MSUDersh on Sep 2, 2010 11:42 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Surpisingly...
Some teams don’t even play conference games the last week of their season. Clemson and South Carolina always play each other in their last game of the schedule, but Clemson is in the ACC and Carolina is in the SEC. It’s really up to the schools, just so long as they get their required conference games played.
That's different, though
Those are long-standing in-state rivalries which happen to be OOC. The last week of the season should ALWAYS be Rivalry Week, and that means in-division games (unless you’re insane and split up rivals just for the heck of it, like a certain commissioner I won’t name).
The division outline map looks like a Yin-Yang symbol
Not that I would suggest those for division names. Wisconsin does really get screwed – they wanted a Nebraska rivalry and didn’t get it, plus they lost one of their two natural rivalries because they’re not in the same division with Iowa and Minnesota.
We couldn’t have asked for a much better outcome from a long term win-loss standpoint – we get to play U of M every year (which for the next couple of years at least looks like it will be an easier than usual win) and our protected cross-division game is against the traditional league cellar-dweller, plus we don’t have to play either PSU, Wisconsin, or OSU on an annual basis. It would have pretty much sucked being in a division with PSU, OSU and UM, although that would have been the most natural way to create the divisions to protect rivalries.
You know who comes out really well?
Iowa. Unless Michigan actually does return to being a high-level program soon, they get four free conference wins every year. With this setup, their “step-back” years look less 6-6 and more 8-4. When your bad years keep you in the fringe of the top-25, you are well on your way to being a national power.
They do better than Wisconsin
They get to play the rivalry game with Minnesota and have a chance to develop a new one with Nebraska (thanks to the shared border and the affinity for corn), although they lose the Wisconsin rivarly which sucks. Plus, as of now, they are the best or second-best program in the division, given Nebraska’s lost decade and the current state of the UM program. They should be a contender on a regular basis. I’d argue that the bottom of our division might be a little stronger than the bottom of the other – Indiana is clearly the worst program in the Big 10 right now and Illinois just can’t seem to put the pieces together despite what should be pretty advantageous conditions – a large, talent rich state in which they should be the #1 program.
by TheCrestedHelm on Sep 2, 2010 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes
While Nebraska has been consistently solid, they haven’t been GREAT in a while. They have lost at least 4 games every year since 2003, and they were 10-3 that season and had 7 wins the year before.
I think given OSU’s rediculous run of 5 straight conference titles, in the immediate future whatever division they were in was going to be the toughest. But I think our division sets us up nicely to compete, except of course for the way the “random” drawing turned out.
by trivialstuff16 on Sep 2, 2010 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Automatic wins?
Who qualifies as an automatic? Iowa has lost like 4 of 5 to Northwestern, and MSU has held our own against them lately.
Good set up for us in the long run
although 2011 and 2012 will be tough with having to play OSU and Wisconsin as our cross over games. A lot can happen this year that can change my view, but I think our 2011 squad will have the most talent out of any Dantonio team. For 2011 our offense should be scary good and I bet our defense will be better even though we lose Jones and Gordon. LB is arguably our deepest position group.
Anyways, it’s too early to project for next year. I’m just glad we’ll finally get to see some football this Saturday.
Oh, how I hate the Delany
Repeating the Big 12 and ACC’s mistakes is just stupid.
Pandering to U of M is just annoying.
Corn division and Soy Bean division is my nominee for names.
I like our chances,
especially if crossover games don’t count in the division standings. We appear to be recruiting better players consistently and are moving on up (Weezie).
They do.
Anything else would be beyond insane, and I’m starting to think that the statement that they didn’t was because some clown on Scout misinterpreted the SEC tiebreakers to think that they don’t count crossover games.
Paranoia
I like the long term outlook of the divisions, but I in in no way believe that we just happen to get two good teams (actually, I’m ok with OSU being on since we missed them the last two years) while Michigan gets bad cross division foes. Seems like they’re trying everything possible to get milk from a cow that’s currently dry.
Es gibt keine Freude wie Schadenfreude
Nice try, Delaney. How bout sucking up just a little more to the bix six.
To me, a pure East-West division (MSU UM OSU PSU Purdue Indiana in the East, NW IL WI MN IA NE in the West) made the most sense. Delaney talked about preserving most of the trophy games, but with the pure East-West split, the only well-known trophy/rivalry game that doesn’t get played every year is the Little Brown Jug, and UM has owned that for all but about five years over the last fifty.
What they came up with makes no sense at all geographically, another repeat of the ACC fiasco. Unless you’re a big ACC fan, who can remember which teams are in what division. Big Ten will become the same. ACC calls their divisions Atlantic and Coastal, so Delaney must be planning on calling his the Big and the Ten (six teams in a division named “Ten” – hey there are twelve teams in a conference called “Ten”).
OK, so you want “competitive balance,” you’ve still got it with and East-West split.
But what really gripes me is that the big six (UM OSU PSU WI IA NE) plus Purdue and Indiana get to play an annual rivalry game the last game of the season. MSU IL NW and MN are now left with almost meaningless games in comparison. This is a huge recruiting advantage for the big six, as if they needed one.
As far an NE, whatever happened with the new kid on the block having to pay a few dues. NE not only gets a last game of the year rivalry game with IA, but they also get PSU as its permanent crossover rival. Check your history on paying dues – when MSU joined back in the 50s, they had two home conference games vs. four road conference games the first three years (53-55), and had to play at UM four straight years (54-57).
So I say nice try, Delaney. I can see through all your BS – you’re just trying to keep the big six happy. NE has been whining about Texas controlling the Big 12, so now they and the other five get to control the Big Ten.
by LittleRockSparty on Sep 2, 2010 3:27 PM CDT reply actions
They're also in the "easier" division
if you look at the traditional powers. PSU is inexperienced this year but is not supposed to be awful. UM looks to be a bottom tier team, leaving only Iowa up to snuff. I hadn’t thought about the recruiting angle of an end of year rivarly game. Indiana woudn’t work to well from the standpoint of a final game that brings a lot of national interest. Minneapolis is at least a fairly large media market – I say we start playing them the last game of every year for a walleye taxidermed walleye. It may not look like much and may start smelling after a few years, but it still beats the hell out of the land grant trophy.
by TheCrestedHelm on Sep 2, 2010 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions
This assumes of course
that we can’t fix an end of year game with NW, which is in an even bigger media market. I assumed that they would have an end-of-year lock in with Illinois but maybe that game won’t be a season closer every year.
by TheCrestedHelm on Sep 2, 2010 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Give it a few years
Things go in cycles.
UofM: what indicates that they are going to be back on the road to being anything even close to .500 in conference anytime soon?
PSU: After the JoPa era, can they make the transition and keep the same success? Many programs (even most programs) often fail to do so
Iowa: They have been good for the last 10 years, but still have an 8th place Big Ten finish in there, and look at the decade before that, they won 7 games TOTAL in the 3 years leading up to 2000. They are a solid team for sure, but I don’t really buy the “traditional powerhouse” label at all.
"It's a trap!"
“Why didn’t Jim Delany and the Big Ten ADs remember that simple maxim of financial investment: “Past results are not predictive of future performance”? At the time, Delany and co. were touting the virtues of competitive balance (and looking to generate revenues from national tv interest in the “Big Game” and an annual protect PSU-UNL matchup. Somewhere amidst the dollar signs and the respect for the past, geography and common sense got lost.
“Oh, how times have changed.
“The prime example here is Michigan State, of course. The fifteen years before Nebraska’s entrance into the Big Ten were filled with erratic performances and frequent frustrations, so much so that older fans might remember that MSU teams were sometimes associated with an SOS (”Same Old Spartans"). But from 2010-2025, MSU was the most dominant program in the Big Ten, a national champion in 2017, and a perennial BCS presence.
“Likewise, the concerns in 2010 over the Big Game proved much ado about nothing. Although fans in Columbus would continue to flock to the game, UM fans petitioned to have it removed from protected rivalry status as early as 2021, following a 66-0 drubbing from the Buckeyes. Many younger OSU fans agree—it’s been more than 20 years since UM actually won the “Big Game”—but it’s hard to imagine the venerable Coach Tressel giving up his annual punching bag."
by njd on Sep 2, 2010 6:10 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
One other thing I just realized
With the two years on, home-and-home repeat of the non-protected games, odd-year freshmen will not play every team in the Big Ten. (Our 2011 class will get Indiana, OSU, Wisconsin from the opposite division the first two years, then two of the other three the next two. One of Purdue, Illinois, or Penn State will be nothing but a rumor to them.)
Yet more evidence that this is a giant steaming pile of FAIL.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
