Online Now 707

Wolverine247 Board

The place for discussion on the Michigan Wolverines

On this Board 505
Record: 2671 (1/26/2013)

Online now 735
Record: 7264 (3/12/2012)

Reply

Do you guys think the BIG should've put UM/OSU in same division?

  • OK so I shouldnt assume that ohio will even make it to play Michigan over and over again in the B1G championship game. Might have to lower my expectations to 4-0 against ohio for future Michigan player's careers, and anything else is profit. Haha im playing around, you are right the statistical odds of Michigan and ohio actually meeting in the championship game multiple times in a row become increasingly unlikely. However unlikely though(think lottery), the possibility remains.

    This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by Xixor on 11/13/2012 at 1:52 AM

    Xixor

  • WillyWolverine said...

    I think the Big Ten botched it up when they expanded and went to a CCG. I hate all this expansion crap. Never made any sense to me to determine a conference winner this way. Give me 10 teams and play each team. Boom conference champ.

    Although ingenious, this leaves alot of money on the table, which is always priority #1

    signature image signature image signature image

    Awink2

  • Xixor said...

    I love the possibility of playing ohio twice a season that the current set up of the B1G championship game provides. I can just imagine a future graduating Michigan player leaving with an 8-0 record against ohio in football, that makes me so happy and with the B1Gs current set up its a possibility.

    Yes - that would be great for you. It would start to make up for all the M players who left 0-4 during the Tress era.

    Meyer will be a lot easier for you to beat. roflmao

    signature image

    cesimon

  • I don't like the current set up, regardless of who is in what division.

    www.neoavatara.com/blog

    neoavatara ●

  • Frank C said...

    No.

    I like the divisions as they are now. I don't care if it "dilutes" the importance of The Game. Times have changed. The Big Ten did what's best for the conference in the wake of SEC dominance.

    Btw, when Miami joined the ACC, people believed that Miami and Florida State would meet almost every year for the ACC Championship. That has yet to happen even once.

    This.

    OU-UT play each other earlier in the season and their rivalry is just as big and has just as much history as UM-OSU’s.

    Even if they move tOSU, and UM in the same divisions “The Game” will never have the same significance it once had before the B1G expanded. Before expansion many years “The Game” was sort of like pseudo-B1GCG, which made it even more significant than it already was. Now since that’s over I would rather have a UM-OSU rematch to decide the B1G champ, then have “The Game” decide who win’s a division.

    signature image signature image signature image

    CWEBB

  • WillyWolverine said...

    I think the Big Ten botched it up when they expanded and went to a CCG. I hate all this expansion crap. Never made any sense to me to determine a conference winner this way. Give me 10 teams and play each team. Boom conference champ.

    To be honest, that would be my ideal scenario as well. I liked that the Big 10 was one of the only BCS conferences without a championship game. Just added to the old school, traditional feel, IMO. But I think conference championships are sort of the nature of the beast in this day and age of college football, so if there's going to be one, then it makes sense to do it the right way.

    Recruiting Analyst for Voice of the Hawkeyes. Email: tworly@yahoo.com; Twitter: @ToddWorly247

    Todd Worly ●

  • UMSkeletor said...

    To be honest, I've never heard of a rivalry being diluted by playing it more often. Generally speaking, if you play more often there's more room for controversy, the coaches and players get to know/dislike each other more. Imagine you spend 3 and a half hours getting hit, getting scratched, getting gouged and one set of guys will leave the field as seething losers but you know you will do it all over again next week. Resentment builds up, it would carry over to the fans.

    But simply viewed rationally (a) I don't think it will happen as often as people say. It's not gonna happen this year, I'd be surprised if it happened next year. People forget that one team in this rivalry more often than not is a 9-3 type team which may well not be enough to make it there. It will probably happen eventually maybe even a couple of times but the conference would love it because

    (b) nobody wants this to be the Big 12 title game. A game that was such a dud, out of the 15 games played hardly anybody outside the conference really remembers any of them. Personally, I can think of like three of them (2001, 2003, 2009) as semi-notable but even those weren't any more high-profile than any normal potentially BCS-busting conference match-up. Arguably, last weekend's Texas A&M vs Bama game may well remain more memorable than any of those. The Big 12 had the two teams most likely to have national championship ambitions in the same division and thus made it by decree impossible for that match-up, the only one likely to really get the focus of the nation, to happen. The Big Ten really doesn't want it to play out like that.

    I think a division change is less likely than moving the Michigan-OSU game up to somewhere around the time ND hosts USC or the Red River Shootout and instead put the MSU game last in the year. As untraditional and possibly detrimental that would be for us, it would probably help the conference quite a bit.

    Great point about what the Big 12 did, and you're right that there wasn't much parity between the two divisions.

    But I think the B1G is traditionally better and more competitive top to bottom than what the Big 12 was, so I don't see that as an issue moving forward with the B1G. If you align the divisions with Michigan, Michigan and Ohio State on one side, and Penn State, Wisconsin and Nebraska on the other side, you'll usually get at least one very good team from each division every year. And that doesn't even take into account the years where a team like Iowa, Illinois or Northwestern wins 10 games and makes a run at the conference title.

    Recruiting Analyst for Voice of the Hawkeyes. Email: tworly@yahoo.com; Twitter: @ToddWorly247

    Todd Worly ●

  • CWEBB said...

    This.

    OU-UT play each other earlier in the season and their rivalry is just as big and has just as much history as UM-OSU’s.

    Even if they move tOSU, and UM in the same divisions “The Game” will never have the same significance it once had before the B1G expanded. Before expansion many years “The Game” was sort of like pseudo-B1GCG, which made it even more significant than it already was. Now since that’s over I would rather have a UM-OSU rematch to decide the B1G champ, then have “The Game” decide who win’s a division.

    The difference, as I see it, is that Texas and Oklahoma didn't traditionally play the last game of the season for decades before the conference split into two divisions, whereas Michigan and Ohio State have. One thing I love about college football is tradition, so I like to preserve rivalries as much as possible, and I don't like teams that switch uniforms every week. I think it's neat for a current player to watch a highlight clip from the 1980's or 1960's and see other players wearing the exact same uniform (for the most part) that he's wearing that week. And I think part of that tradition is seeing The Game capping the regular season every year.

    Recruiting Analyst for Voice of the Hawkeyes. Email: tworly@yahoo.com; Twitter: @ToddWorly247

    Todd Worly ●

  • They should swap PSU, Wisky and Illinois for UM, MSU and NW. Divisions would be reasonably balanced and the only school out of place geographically would be PSU. It would also restore Wisky's annual rivalry game with Minny and would enable them to eliminate guaranteed crossover games entirely, resulting in more evenly balanced schedules and a two-year on/off cycle for playing everyone in the other division.

    B10 East:
    OSU
    UM
    MSU
    NW
    PUR
    IU

    B10 West:
    PSU
    UNL
    WIS
    IOWA
    ILL
    MINN

    This post was edited by MrWoodson on 11/13/2012 at 10:29 AM

    MrWoodson ●

  • The possibility of playing you guys twice really doesn't bother me. The possibility of playing back to back weeks does. The game has to be moved. I like the idea of playing at night either the second week of the season (to allow a tune up game for both teams), or in mid October, where the losing team has time to recover and make a run at a possible rematch in the title game.

    chrism2184

  • chrism2184 said...

    The possibility of playing you guys twice really doesn't bother me. The possibility of playing back to back weeks does. The game has to be moved. I like the idea of playing at night either the second week of the season (to allow a tune up game for both teams), or in mid October, where the losing team has time to recover and make a run at a possible rematch in the title game.

    I agree there needs to be a gap in between games. More time for the build up.

    signature image signature image signature image

    SteelBlue0348 ●

  • Yes, swap Nebraska and OSU. Keep the Game at the end of the year, it would be huge. To me it's a no-brainer.

    y2kMgrad

  • Yes, the battle between the 2 teams should decide who will play any other team for the B1G championship.

    signature image

    CWoodtheGreat

  • Todd Worly said...

    To be honest, that would be my ideal scenario as well. I liked that the Big 10 was one of the only BCS conferences without a championship game. Just added to the old school, traditional feel, IMO. But I think conference championships are sort of the nature of the beast in this day and age of college football, so if there's going to be one, then it makes sense to do it the right way.

    It's all about the dollars.

    More games = more dollars, esp conference title games

    It's the same reason there are like 40 bowl games

    BigPapi

  • BigPapi said...

    It's all about the dollars.

    More games = more dollars, esp conference title games

    It's the same reason there are like 40 bowl games

    I totally understand, and I realize we're likely past the point of no-return. Was just saying what my preference would be in a perfect world.

    Recruiting Analyst for Voice of the Hawkeyes. Email: tworly@yahoo.com; Twitter: @ToddWorly247

    Todd Worly ●

  • Meh. The Game was already diluted when it was moved back to Thanksgiving weekend. At first, I thought it was pretty dumb having the possibility of playing twice, and I still do, but putting The Game earlier in the season would be best at this point. Maybe the same weekend as the Red River Rivalry?

    freshone

Michigan
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports