How bad is Big ten east and west disparity?

CascadeClone

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2009
5,055
4,527
113
It's honestly worse than the old B12 North/South disparity
Big12 North had a appx decade where they dominated the South. Remember those real good Nebraska and Colorado teams? And KSU too. People forget, but the South was an also ran for quite a while.

These things tend to be cyclic, based on coaches. But not the b1g right now, all the traditiknal powers w the reccruiting are all together.

But b1g has it set up just the way they want it. Puff up an avg west team and then crush them. Its a feature, not a bug.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoilCon1

clonehome

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2006
480
684
93
I wish the Big 10 was 10 teams too, but even 12 wouldn't be great. Because you would need to choose between parity and an even rotation. Because if you choose even rotation, you divisions will be Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and then either Northwestern & Illinois or Indiana and Purdue vs. Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Michigan State, and then Northwestern & Illinois or Indiana and Purdue. So also not great and you still end up with an 8-0 "east" record. If you try and create parity, then it isn't balanced and you run the risk of Ohio State winning 7 big 10 titles (because they are probably have either Penn State or Michigan State in their division.

And the format they have at 14 is the best they can have at 14.


I disagree it makes no sense. It actually does, and I think it might be the only way to do it if you have nine conference games. Six of them are against the other teams in your division. Another game is against a team you have a six game series with. For Indiana and Purdue, that game does not change. For everyone else, that game changes. The 2016 - 2021 series was designed to produce competitive series. And they probably did a pretty good job (though I haven't gone through to look at each series) with the exception of the Ohio State - Nebraska. And whoever got Ohio State was not going to do well. For 2022 on it was/is randomly decided and you'll rotate through the other five teams in the other division. Finally, for the last two games, you rotate through the other six teams.

And your suggestion is just going to produce scheduling chaos. When do we decide the schedule? It has to be late spring/early summer at the earliest. Plus, teams are going to go without playing each other for long periods of time. You could also easily have a scenario where a team does better than expected and you're right back to "that team had a 'fake id' season."
In my scenario teams would most likely never go without playing an opponent for a long time like they do now. Unless one West team finished last every year and got to dodge Ohio St and Michigan. Which would be fair. You can do a lot with past results, say a rolling 3 year window to pick the biggest West patsy and give them a break. Schedules can still be set well in advance. I think the NFL uses past results in building schedules. Someone more familiar with the NFL can probably explain.

I just looked ahead to Iowa’s schedules for the next 3 years. They get both Ohio St and Michigan next year but then skip both in ‘23 and ‘24. How can that be? A team like Iowa that almost always finishes near the top of the West should play Michigan or Ohio St every year. And Michigan State or Penn St. And no West team should ever play Ohio St, Michigan and Michigan St in the same season like Nebraska did this year. That’s just masochism.
 

HFCS

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2010
51,461
32,213
113
LA LA Land
Big12 North had a appx decade where they dominated the South. Remember those real good Nebraska and Colorado teams? And KSU too. People forget, but the South was an also ran for quite a while.

These things tend to be cyclic, based on coaches. But not the b1g right now, all the traditiknal powers w the reccruiting are all together.

But b1g has it set up just the way they want it. Puff up an avg west team and then crush them. Its a feature, not a bug.
it was part of how Ohio State jumped over TCU that had an objectively better resume that year…look how they dominated the title game!
 

WooBadger18

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2012
10,716
7,103
113
On Wisconsin
In my scenario teams would most likely never go without playing an opponent for a long time like they do now. Unless one West team finished last every year and got to dodge Ohio St and Michigan. Which would be fair. You can do a lot with past results, say a rolling 3 year window to pick the biggest West patsy and give them a break. Schedules can still be set well in advance. I think the NFL uses past results in building schedules. Someone more familiar with the NFL can probably explain.

I just looked ahead to Iowa’s schedules for the next 3 years. They get both Ohio St and Michigan next year but then skip both in ‘23 and ‘24. How can that be? A team like Iowa that almost always finishes near the top of the West should play Michigan or Ohio St every year. And Michigan State or Penn St. And no West team should ever play Ohio St, Michigan and Michigan St in the same season like Nebraska did this year. That’s just masochism.
Right, but if Nebraska pulls a Kansas under your system they won't be playing Ohio State for a while.

And I looked up Wisconsin's future schedule (because the same thing will apply to Iowa's). I assumed that the format was like in Big 12 where you would play a team in the opposite division at home one year and away the next. I was wrong, the Big 10 is doing it differently. The Big 10 is making the switch every year. So Wisconsin's next 6 years are Ohio State every year, and then:
2022: Maryland and @ Michigan State
2023: @ Indiana and Rutgers
2024: @ Michigan and Penn State
2025: @ Maryland and Michigan State
2026: Indiana and @ Rutgers
2027: Michigan and @ Penn State

I guess the benefit of this is that you play everyone every three years as opposed to every five years. It's different, but I don't think it's worse.

As for the bolded, I disagree. The Ohio State game was their "permanent" game, so they were always going to need to play two other teams. And Michigan and Michigan State looked like a favorable draw this year. Michigan was projected to be 4th in the east and Michigan State 7th. But even if it was a tough draw, that just means they didn't need to play them other years. Iowa State played Texas and Oklahoma in the same seasons and I kind of liked that because it meant things were easier when they were off the schedule.
 

BillBrasky4Cy

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 10, 2013
10,155
18,833
113
10 team is the best conference, 12 team can work with an even rotation but less desirable. B1G setup and scheduling is embarrassing.
Yes, the ten team format is the best for entertainment value but the current Big 12 has a huge disadvantage compared to the B1G, ACC, SEC, and PAC. There are no scheduling breaks.