Sport

None of your examples have a 75 year history of playing on the last game of the season. Everyone gets a locked in cross division opponent and most people are smart enough to understand that, but people weren't worried that the OSU-Michigan wasn't going to played. That was never a concern because it's too crazy. The biggest concern (that they'll move the game because of being in opposite divisions) is about to happen. They're going to botch this thing and this rivalry will lose a lot of its intensity because it's being moved.

Oh, get the sand out. The rest of the world doesn't care about your stupid game. The conference doesn't revolve around the Michigan-Ohio State game.

There's a ton of evidence towards the contrary, but I don't care what the rest of the world thinks about the game. The conference doesn't revolve around this game, but it's pretty freaking close. The divisions were basically aligned to set up this match-up and the commissioner's office was inundated with complaints from people who feared that they would move the game proving that enough people do-in-fact care, but since you're so much cooler than me I don't expect any of this to change your outlook.

Dear god, these leaked Big Ten divisions are horrible.

This was supposed to be simple: East and West, right down the Indiana/Illinois line. But no. Instead it's this giant cluster:censored: and the conference's biggest money maker, Michigan-Ohio State, is history. How do they expect them to remain massive rivals through the years when the teams aren't even in the same division? The Big-Tween really dropped the ball on this one.

I dunno. Tennessee and Alabama, Georgia and Auburn, Miami and Florida State, North Carolina and NC State, and Maryland and Virginia seem to hate each other as much as always and they aren't in the same division. So long as the game is played annually, the rivalry should remain.

Why are protected rivalry games such a hard concept to grasp?

None of your examples have a 75 year history of playing on the last game of the season. Everyone gets a locked in cross division opponent and most people are smart enough to understand that, but people weren't worried that the OSU-Michigan wasn't going to played. That was never a concern because it's too crazy. The biggest concern (that they'll move the game because of being in opposite divisions) is about to happen. They're going to botch this thing and this rivalry will lose a lot of its intensity because it's being moved.

Also, Nike could stop with the pro-combat uniforms during the game anytime now.

I've been to Ford Field twice and it's beautiful. I'm sure Indianapolis will be a fine place to host the conference championship game, but I would've preferred Detroit.

Okay, how about we go back to the old two division system in each league? 8 teams a division for the NL, 7 for the AL. Top 2 teams in each division make the postseason. Division winners get home field advantage. The first round moves to a best of 7 (this is personal preference). The teams all play a balanced schedule, the same number of teams make the playoffs as before, but unlike the wildcard, two teams aren't competing for one spot with two drastically different schedules.

AL East: Yankees - Orioles - Blue Jays - Red Sox - Indians - Rays - Tigers

AL West: A's - Mariners - Angels - Rangers - White Sox - Twins - Royals

NL East: Mets - Brewers - Nationals - Marlins - Phillies - Pirates - Reds - Braves

NL West: Padres - Giants - Dodgers - Astros - Diamondbacks - Rockies - Cardinals - Cubs

In the old setup the Reds and Braves were in the NL West while the Cards and Cubs were in the NL East. I didn't like it then and I still don't so I reversed them.

The postseason could be handled two ways. Either you have a division championship series where the top team in the division plays the number two team in the division, or you play division winner #1 against the number 2 team from the opposite division and vice versa.

I realize the schedules aren't balanced so this really isn't fair, but just as an example here is how the NL East division standings would shake out if they used this system

NL East

1. Braves

2. Reds

----------------

3. Phillies

4. Mets

5. Marlins

6. Brewers

7. Nationals

8. Pirates

I've been thinking about it and I really like the idea of the first round becoming the division championship series.

Okay, how about we go back to the old two division system in each league? 8 teams a division for the NL, 7 for the AL. Top 2 teams in each division make the postseason. Division winners get home field advantage. The first round moves to a best of 7 (this is personal preference). The teams all play a balanced schedule, the same number of teams make the playoffs as before, but unlike the wildcard, two teams aren't competing for one spot with two drastically different schedules.

AL East: Yankees - Orioles - Blue Jays - Red Sox - Indians - Rays - Tigers

AL West: A's - Mariners - Angels - Rangers - White Sox - Twins - Royals

NL East: Mets - Brewers - Nationals - Marlins - Phillies - Pirates - Reds - Braves

NL West: Padres - Giants - Dodgers - Astros - Diamondbacks - Rockies - Cardinals - Cubs

In the old setup the Reds and Braves were in the NL West while the Cards and Cubs were in the NL East. I didn't like it then and I still don't so I reversed them.

The postseason could be handled two ways. Either you have a division championship series where the top team in the division plays the number two team in the division, or you play division winner #1 against the number 2 team from the opposite division and vice versa.

looks good.

I think the Sabres have a really good uniform template. It's the Buffaslug that ruins it for me.

A large majority seemed to love the Minnesota Wild green third jersey uniform, but I hate it. There's so little red, and it eliminated the stripes on the pants.

I think the Oilers and Islanders will miss the mark when they return to royal blue and orange.

I hate the Blackhawks throwback third jerseys and the regular black third jerseys.

I love the uniforms of the Carolina Panthers, Kansas City Chiefs, new 49ers, and Miami Dolphins (navy blue and all)

I love the new Utah Jazz color scheme

I hate all of the extraneous alternates in baseball.

If baseball switched to a more practical Eastern-Western conference alignment

Eastern Conference

Atlantic

Boston Red Sox

New York Yankees

New York Mets

Philadelphia Phillies

Toronto Blue Jays

Central

Cincinnati Reds

Cleveland Indians

Detroit Tigers

Milwaukee Brewers

Pittsburgh Pirates

Southeast

Atlanta Braves

Baltimore Orioles

Florida Marlins

Tampa Bay Rays

Washington Nationals

Western Conference

North

Colorado Rockies

Minnesota Twins

Oakland Athletics

San Francisco Giants

Seattle Mariners

Central

Chicago Cubs

Chicago White Sox

Houston Astros

Kansas City Royals

St. Louis Cardinals

Southwest

Arizona Diamondbacks

Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim

Los Angeles Dodgers

San Diego Padres

Texas Rangers

I used to love that unused 76ers logo set, but I look back and have no idea what I was thinking. Everything from the colors to the minor league baseball cheesiness of the whole thing is awful. What they eventually settled on wasn't great, but it was a lot better than that set of logos.

they could go the route of the ACC, the other coastal conference, and align their divisions with no rhyme or reason whatsoever.

College football is about to be ruined.

Perhaps this will be the catalyst for a playoff.

As for OSU/Michigan. They will NOT be in the same division/conference. There is too much money to be made if they meet in the Big Ten/Big North/Big whatever they are going to call it, Title Game.

Bet you they won't be if they follow the model of other conferences. We've been over this before, if they're in separate divisions with the game being played on the last day of the regular season then it would set up a whole slew of problems. One, if they both have their divisions clinched then we're going to see a bad game in the regular season with the possibility of tanking. Two, it would mean that they would play in consecutive weeks. Three, some have suggested that the Michigan game be moved to earlier in the season so they don't play in back to back weeks. That can't happen because the date of the game just can't be moved. For the sake of the rivalry, they have to be placed into the same division.

Serious reel line mint discussion: Hypothetically, the New York Islaners move to Kansas City. Which Western Conference team jumps to the Eastern Conference? Columbus, Detroit, or maybe even Nashville?

Depends on where Phoenix ends up.

all things constant. They stay in the west.

Serious reel line mint discussion: Hypothetically, the New York Islaners move to Kansas City. Which Western Conference team jumps to the Eastern Conference? Columbus, Detroit, or maybe even Nashville?

What about rather than splitting the conference into divisions they would instead play the season as they do now and then at the end of the year the two best teams meet in Indianapolis or Chicago for the Championship game. Do you see that working out in any way?

The biggest two issues are:

1. You wouldn't play everybody

And more importantly:

2. How would you break ties?

With a divisional format there's always head-to-head games for tiebreakers and you play the relatively same schedule.

I'm not in favor of the system I just proposed, but I can answer your issues

1. The Big Ten championship is currently awarded without playing everybody. Adding a championship game to the current system and you eliminate sharing the conference title between two teams that didn't play each other. Come to think of it, I wish the NCAA would allow championship games to any conference under the 12 cap in the instance that two teams are tied for the conference title.

2. you break ties using the common opponents formula

but I am in favor of a divisional format. I'm just having a hard time arranging the divisions so that they make sense but are also relatively even while maintaining traditional rivalries.

What about rather than splitting the conference into divisions they would instead play the season as they do now and then at the end of the year the two best teams meet in Indianapolis or Chicago for the Championship game. Do you see that working out in any way?

I'll also add this; The Big XII ruined the Oklahoma - Nebraska rivalry when they messed around with it. Let's learn from history and not botch up Ohio State - Michigan.

They killed it because they adopted a scheduling system that lacked protected cross division rivalries. My suggested alignment that I think touched this off was going to allow for one cross division protected rivalry.

If having a championship game rematch immediately thereafter works for everyone, sure keep it at the last week of the season. The bigger issue here is we need to break up the Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State group of death somehow, and I'd like to see it done in a geographically rational way that is not like the ACC's cluster alignment that nobody really remembers and you could likely change annually without anyone noticing the difference.

Yes, you'd have to go with a primary cross-over opponent. I think it's silly and I'm a little surprised the Big 12 doesn't have that

I guess I could live with Michigan being in opposite divisions because a championship game rematch wouldn't be that often an occurrence, but they don't have to be opposite OSU and Penn State. This "group of death" doesn't exist right now, at least not with Michigan being included. They were 1-7 in the conference last year. Historically they've been good and so has Penn State, but Penn State, Michigan, and Ohio State can and do have their down years. Just tell me, how would divide the conference so that OSU and Michigan aren't together, but that it still makes sense geographically. North/South?

Just for kicks, here's how the divisions standings would've looked this season if you used the natural east-west lineups (I realize these teams did not play a divisional schedule)

East

Ohio State 7-1

Penn State 6-2

MSU 4-4

Purdue 4-4

Indiana 1-7

Michigan 1-7

West

Iowa 6-2

Wisconsin 5-3

Northwestern 5-3

Minnesota 3-5

Illinois 2-6

*new team*

Iowa would've had a rematch with Ohio State for the championship game.

If your fans need the framing device of "last week of the regular season-probably" to get it up for beating down those inbred halfwits at Archrival University, they kind of suck.

If your teams need the framing device of "last week of the regular season-probably" to get it up for beating down those inbred halfwits at Archrival University, your coaches kind of suck and need to be fired.

It's not that, it's that they've played it on the last day of the season for 70 years. People and players would still be able to get up for the game, but playing it in the middle of the season would cause it to lose some of its aura. Plus, you're tearing down 70 years of tradition for the low possibility of a championship game rematch. At this point, it would be a once in every ten years occurrence. I don't think that's worth breaking tradition.

What's more important about that rivalry? The fact that it is played, or when it is played?

If you want to keep it as the last game in the season, that means that the rivalry that defines the Conference to many will never again be the Big Ten championship game. If we play it earlier, and split the teams up, that makes a championship matchup possible.

Well they're not going to not play the game so what's more important is when it's played and it's been played as the last game of the season since 1938. They're not going to change the schedule because there's too much tradition there. Changing the date of the game would do more damage to the rivalry IMO than reducing the importance of the game from Conference champion to division champion.

Playing the game in late november is as big a part of the tradition as the winged helmets and buckeye leaf stickers.

Somehow the SEC has been able to keep "3rd Saturday in October" working even when it is not played on the 3rd Saturday in October, and the Auburn-Georgia rivalry is still as heated as it was before divisions.

I don't buy that date is important in this situation. The game is still being played annually. Even more importantly, it keeps open the possibility of a Michigan-Ohio State Conference Championship ratings bonanza.

Then you don't know the Ohio State-Michigan game. The game will always be played annually, we know that and we aren't worried that it won't be played if they are in separate divisions. Moving the game to September or October will change the dynamics of the game. Using Auburn-Georgia isn't a good comparison because the OSU-Michigan rivalry is more like Auburn-Alabama. Those two play on the last day of the season, are in the same division and their rivalry is just as heated as it was before divisions. Ask Auburn or Alabama fans how they would feel if the Iron Bowl were moved to the middle of the season.

The Big Ten may want to see an Ohio State-Michigan championship game rematch because of the $$$, but the fans won't if it means they have to play the first game in September.

Allow me to explain it this way, OSU-Michigan's placement as the last game on the schedule holds significance in that fans look forward to it all season. If you move it to the middle of the big ten schedule then it might as well be just another big ten conference game. It's placement on the last day of the season still makes the game important even if either team is having a bad year or 6.

So there are two options, put them into different divisions which would mean that you would have to move one of the most famous college football rivalries off of the last game so that in the instance where they meet in the champ game then they won't play in back to back weeks. Or, put them into the same division, continue to play on the last day of the regular season and battle it out for the division championship.

Does it really matter when in the season a beat down of your arch rival happens, just so long as it happens?

Yes, I've explained it. Being at the end of the season adds more to the rivalry. period. Put it in the beginning or the middle and it might as well be Ohio State-Minnesota or Michigan-Purdue.

So there are two options, put them into different divisions which would mean that you would have to move one of the most famous college football rivalries off of the last game so that in the instance where they meet in the champ game then they won't play in back to back weeks. Or, put them into the same division, continue to play on the last day of the regular season and battle it out for the division championship.

If Michigan and Ohio State were to play in opposite divisions, exactly why can't they keep their game at the end of the season?

I don't understand why it can't be the last game of the regular season with a championship game following it. Good God, the world can't revolve around Michigan-Ohio State.

For one, if both teams have their respective divisions locked up prior to the final game then it basically becomes a meaningless exercise in redundancy (assuming there are no BCS title game implications). You might as well just forget the regular season game altogether and go straight to the Big Ten Championship game. Of course, this is all contigent on Michigan ever getting their act together and becoming competitive again, but I just don't think it's fair to ask a team to beat their biggest rival in back-to-back weeks to win a conference. I'm also against playing the game in the middle of the season. Hence, I'm in favor of putting the Buckeyes and Wolverines into the same division where they can battle for the division on the last day.

What's more important about that rivalry? The fact that it is played, or when it is played?

If you want to keep it as the last game in the season, that means that the rivalry that defines the Conference to many will never again be the Big Ten championship game. If we play it earlier, and split the teams up, that makes a championship matchup possible.

Well they're not going to not play the game so what's more important is when it's played and it's been played as the last game of the season since 1938. They're not going to change the schedule because there's too much tradition there. Changing the date of the game would do more damage to the rivalry IMO than reducing the importance of the game from Conference champion to division champion.

Playing the game in late november is as big a part of the tradition as the winged helmets and buckeye leaf stickers.

Somehow the SEC has been able to keep "3rd Saturday in October" working even when it is not played on the 3rd Saturday in October, and the Auburn-Georgia rivalry is still as heated as it was before divisions.

I don't buy that date is important in this situation. The game is still being played annually. Even more importantly, it keeps open the possibility of a Michigan-Ohio State Conference Championship ratings bonanza.

Then you don't know the Ohio State-Michigan game. The game will always be played annually, we know that and we aren't worried that it won't be played if they are in separate divisions. Moving the game to September or October will change the dynamics of the game. Using Auburn-Georgia isn't a good comparison because the OSU-Michigan rivalry is more like Auburn-Alabama. Those two play on the last day of the season, are in the same division and their rivalry is just as heated as it was before divisions. Ask Auburn or Alabama fans how they would feel if the Iron Bowl were moved to the middle of the season.

The Big Ten may want to see an Ohio State-Michigan championship game rematch because of the $$$, but the fans won't if it means they have to play the first game in September.

Allow me to explain it this way, OSU-Michigan's placement as the last game on the schedule holds significance in that fans look forward to it all season. If you move it to the middle of the big ten schedule then it might as well be just another big ten conference game. It's placement on the last day of the season still makes the game important even if either team is having a bad year or 6.

So there are two options, put them into different divisions which would mean that you would have to move one of the most famous college football rivalries off of the last game so that in the instance where they meet in the champ game then they won't play in back to back weeks. Or, put them into the same division, continue to play on the last day of the regular season and battle it out for the division championship.

What's more important about that rivalry? The fact that it is played, or when it is played?

If you want to keep it as the last game in the season, that means that the rivalry that defines the Conference to many will never again be the Big Ten championship game. If we play it earlier, and split the teams up, that makes a championship matchup possible.

Well they're not going to not play the game so what's more important is when it's played and it's been played as the last game of the season since 1938. They're not going to change the schedule because there's too much tradition there. Changing the date of the game would do more damage to the rivalry IMO than reducing the importance of the game from Conference champion to division champion.

Playing the game in late november is as big a part of the tradition as the winged helmets and buckeye leaf stickers.

How easy would it be to get a team out of the Big East? I assume that the Big East sured up their borders after the last raid by the ACC.

and if Pittsburgh left, who would replace them? East Carolina, UCF, maybe even Temple again?

^The problem with both your proposals is that they'd split Northwestern and Illinois (I think they want to maintain their rivalry)

So then what are our main rivalries here?

Ohio State-Michigan

Michigan State-Michigan

Indiana-Purdue

Minnesota-Wisconsin

Minnesota-Michigan?

NorthWestern-Illinois

so we'll go the ACC route and abandon geographical ties to the divisions (and name them after key founders of the conference) then we'd have

Division #1

Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, Purdue, Indiana

Division #2

Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Northwestern, Illinois, *New Team*

Ohio State-Illinois and Minnesota-Michigan are two games that both involve a trophy. These could be made the primary out of division opponents for all 4 teams. How about that?

I can guarantee that a Big Ten Championship game in Lucas Oil Stadium would sell out. I've long wanted a 12th team for the Big ten because I'm envious of what the Big 12 and SEC have and it'd be more interesting to have division rivals rather than just big ten rivals.

I could see the Big Ten dividing their divisions like the ACC did: With no geographical ties at all. I would think that the conference would salivate over the chance of Michigan and Ohio State meeting in their conference championship game. Plus, there's so many rivalry games within the conference, they might need to resort to maintaining their rivalry games first, then deciding their divisions to where the most of these games are kept intact.

I'm very intrigued at how the different possible additions would affect the divisional lineups and I'm beginning to like the idea of Missouri making the jump. They just sound like a big ten team, but I could live with Pittsburgh being in the conference as well. They would make Penn State's inclusion in the conference more sensible. The Big Ten's teams are certainly close enough where the divisions don't have to fall on geographic ties, but let's see how it would work if they did first.

If we go with Missouri/Iowa State/Notre Dame then the divisions would likely be,

West: Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Miss/ISU/ND, Northwestern, Wisconsin

East: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue

if Pitt (or another more eastern team such as West Virginia or Syracuse) joins then things become a bit more complicated. You'd put PIttsburgh into the east of course, but you don't want to split traditional rivalries into separate divisons. So either Purdue and Indiana are both in the east or they're both in the west. With Pitt in the east you could move Mich. St. to the west, but that would split up their rivalry with Michigan. My solution is this,

West: Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Purdue, Wisconsin

East: Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Pittsburgh

Problem with this is that the Western division is unbelievably weak. The conference champion would come out of the east more often than not, so...

we could try going with a North/South Model

North: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Mich St. Michigan, Iowa, Northwestern

South: Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue, Pittsburgh, Penn State, Illinois

but that splits up Ohio State-Michigan. This means that they could meet twice in some season in the championship game. I don't know if that's a bad thing or if any other conferences have two big rivals split against each other. Personally, I like that OSU and Michigan meet only once per year.

In any scenario, that western division looks awfully weak. The Big XII north looks strong compared to that. Perhaps the Big Ten doesn't even organize into divisons and instead pits the two best teams against one another in the championship game? Or they could go the ACC route and have the divisons make no sense whatsoever. Atlantic and Coastal? Aren't those the same things?

I guess it doesn't matter if rivals are split up. The schedulers give the team 5 games every year against their divisional opponents, then a primary opponent in the other division that they play every year and then two other games against revolving teams from the other division. So even if your biggest rival is in the other division, you can still play them every season.

I also want to see Michigan fall into the eastern division so that by singing the last line of their fight song their fans appear misinformed.

this is now the longest post in my history on the CCSLC. Thank you.

yeh, I can easily see Iowa State as a Big Ten team. What with their rivalry with the Illini, Mizzou could fit in pretty well too. Rutgers, though? Rutgers in the Big Ten just seems like an experiment that would fail miserably.

anybody have a guess where the championship game would be held if it ever happened? Soldier Field? the Colts' digs? Ford Field? Lambeau?

I'd want to see it played in a cold weather stadium like Lambeau, but they'd likely try to play it in the Colts' dome. It's pretty central and they've had the big ten tournament for basketball in indianapolis in years past.