West-East Big Ten Alignment Works!
Ever since Nebraska officially agreed to join the Big Ten last Friday, the topic of division alignment immediately arose as one of the most important issues to iron out before Big Red comes into the fold. Conference commissioner Jim Delaney has stated that the three most important factors, in order, for divisional breakdown are 1) competitive balance 2) rivalries and 3) geography. Prior to that little diddy, everyone took a look at a map and saw that an West-East alignment divided the teams up nicely; however, that statement seemed to fuel the fire of common concerns among fans of the Big Ten. “You can’t have Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State in the same division! That’s too top heavy! It’ll be just like the Big XII South all over again!” Bull.
If one actually takes a look at the Big Ten (plus Nebraska) in the BCS era, you might actually be surprised at how balanced the East and West actually are. Certainly the four most historic programs in the conference are Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska and Penn State, but what about over the last 12 years?
Surprisingly, Wisconsin(!) has been to as many BCS bowls (2), New Years Day bowls (6) and has more 10 win seasons (5 vs. 4) and overall bowl appearances (11 vs. 8 ) than Penn State. In fact, if it weren’t for Nebraska’s BCS National Championship appearance in the 2001, one could argue that the Red in Madison was a stronger and more consistent program than the Red in Lincoln (makes me puke just typing that). Furthermore, Iowa and Penn State look exactly the same over the BCS era: 2 BCS bowl appearances (with 1 win and 1 loss each, both to USC), 4 10-win seasons, 6 NYD bowls and 8 overall bowl appearances. So, while it’s true that the 3 of the 4 most historic programs in the Big Ten are East of Chicago, one could argue (and would be correct, in my opinion) that the proposed west is just as competitive as their Eastern neighbors.
So, how would I break down the conference in order to preserve rivalries, competitive balance and geography?
Pardon my crappily made graphic, but I feel this alignment solves the vast majority of issues people have with divisional alignment, ensuring neither division is imbalanced while preserving rivalries and maintaining a somewhat close geographic distance.
In this scenario, each team would get a protected cross-divisional rival that would play every year, while other opponents would follow a rotation – likely a 2 year rotation similar to the one the Big Ten currently uses. Based upon the list of “protected” rivalries Adam Rittenberg came up with in a recent blog post, here’s what how you could break down the protected games:
- Minnesota-Michigan (Little Brown Jug)
- Indiana-Purdue (Old Oaken Bucket)
- Iowa-Penn State
- Northwestern-Illinois
- Wisconsin-Michigan State
- Nebraska-Ohio State
In addition, here are the rivalry games (old plus new/renewed) that would already see action every year due to inter-division alignment:
- Minnesota-Wisconsin (Paul Bunyan’s Axe)
- Minnesota-Iowa (Floyd of Rosedale)
- Minnesota-Nebraska (renewed)
- Nebraska-Iowa (renewed)
- Nebraska-Wisconsin (new)
- Iowa-Northwestern
- Purdue-Illinois (Purdue Cannon)
- Michigan-Michigan State (Paul Bunyan Trophy)
- Michigan State-Penn State (Land Grant Trophy)
- Ohio State-Penn State
- Ohio State-Illinois
- Michigan-Penn State
- And last, Ohio State-Michigan (The Game)
That’s an extensive list of rivalries and big games that the West-East format protects. I think that’s enough tradition left in place to make the majority of fanbases happy, even if a few games put on the back burner (like the Governor’s Victory Bell trophy between Minnesota and Penn State). Sound off FBT readers! What divisional alignment would you like to see in the new and improved Big Ten? Leave your comments or send them here and I’ll post the discussion on Wednesday!
Tags: Big Ten, college football, football, Golden Gophers, Minnesota
6 Responses
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
matthurm
Just curious why you choose Illinois in the East and Indiana in the West. It seems it would be more geographically easy to switch the two and then the Indiana-Purdue, Old Oaken Bucket rivalry wouldn’t even have to be inter-divisional. What am I missing besides the wish to have a terrible Hoosier football team for our Gophers to kick around every year?
AhliBobwa
Great breakdown. I agree with everything with the possible exception of what matthurm already stated.
Would love to have Indiana to kick around though.
MV
It would seem that way, but the rivalries get all screwed up if you try and put Illinois in the West. Competitive balance really isn’t affected if you put Illinois in the East, since Illinois produces a bowl team about 2 times a decade. I forgot to add that Illinois has a quasi-rivalry with Michigan recently, so that only underscores the need to put them in the East.
faolan
Whoa there big fella. I love your writing, but I take issue with the following statement:
Certainly the four most historic programs in the conference are Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska and Penn State…
In the Big 10+ the recognized National Championships, according to the College Football Data Warehouse (…an online resource and database that has collected and researched information on college football and national championship selections. It provides a comprehensive list of national championship selectors and has itself recognized selectors that it has deemed to be the most acceptable throughout history) are as follows:
Michigan 11
the Ohio State 7
Nebraska 5
Penn State 4
This list seems to omit The U (of Minnesota) with their 6 National Championships, which I believe would make their inclusion to “historic” programs necessary.
* Michigan is often credited with a 1947 title based on a No. 1 ranking in a post-Rose Bowl AP poll which the AP itself does not recognize as official, and is not recognized by the NCAA.
Pac12Cooler
What do you think of the plan over at BigTenCooler.com?
MV
Hate it. A division with Michigan and Penn State but not Iowa and Wisconsin? No thanks.