Big Ten Conference Divisions

[BB73]

Well, of course not. But, as you point out, it was the FIRST time that had EVER happened, after 93 OSU-MU games. I think the game should be left where its at, but a once-in-a-century occurrence is hardly the best argument for doing so.

Well, it wasn't intended to be the best argument; I was simply illustrating that one of the 'possible' pros didn't belong, even as a possibility, in a list that another poster had suggested in moving The Game.

There have been several times where both teams came in undefeated. Any of those instances would probably also be a bigger deal than any future rematch would be. But we both agree that the '06 battle couldn't possibly be surpassed by any CCG rematch.

From '70 to '75 TSUN came into The Game undefeated each year. They got 1 win and 1 Rose Bowl appearance out of those 6 seasons. Moving The Game to earlier in the season takes out a significant aspect of the rivalry by losing the aspect of the once-a-year, end-of-the-season, soul-crushing loss. There have also been a few of them that had tOSU on the losing end, but I prefer not to highlight them.

 

[muffler dragon]

As I've said, my "greater good" comment was intentionally left vague. The benchmarks you provided are along the lines of what I would have used to qualify it.

I understand that now. I was just providing clarification on the underlying tone of my question.

I don't know what more you are looking for.

I'm always open to knew ideas when substantiating points are provided that I hadn't thought of. That's all I was looking/hoping for.

While I agree that the present tradition is safe, predictable and ingrained into the minds of every single one of us that's been involved, one way or another, in the largest rivalry in college football, I feel that this isn't to say that it's intrinsically the BEST tradition. There's no way of telling, of course, whether a move to mid-season would actually be better or worse.

Understood. I can appreciate the fact that my opinion on keeping THE GAME like it is now (or as close as possible) is myopic. I just happen to find it so satisfactory that I'm not really inclined to seek alternatives.

Possible Pros:

• A game with such pre-defined meaning could inherently draw both teams closer to the top of their game at an earlier point in the season.
• It's possible that with the added "mystery" of each teams' overall season fate, The Game has the opportunity to still be do or die for both teams more often than if it were at the end of the season when both teams' schedules have already played out.
• In the same vein as the previous point, having The Game earlier in the season gives both teams an opportunity to recouperate and make a run to a conference or national title. We've seen in previous years that an early season loss is easier to recover from than one later in the season.
• A re-match in the title game could prove to be larger in emotion, energy and passion than any version of The Game has ever been.

Possible Cons:

• Unless a bye week is a staple in the schedule after an early season match-up, having what is notoriously the hardest hitting game in football played at the apex of each teams' schedule could become a serious issue.
• In certain seasons, under certain scenarios, such as a scenario where one team is undefeated going into The Game and the other has 2 or 3 losses there's neither a drive to "end the season on a high note" for the underdog or "cap off the season with another big win" for the favorite, something that is always the "at least" factor when The Game is at the end of the regular season.

Thanks for the compilation. They are well presented points. What becomes problematic for me is that I can view a Pro as a Con; therefore, it's difficult to necessarily ascertain commonality.

Both boil down to the fact that both teams stay in the same division. Just for the record, I'm not opposed to this outcome and I acknowledge that it is the safer option.

True and understood.

Maybe I don't have as rotund of a vocabulary, but I don't understand what you mean by "BB73 has enumerated substantiation" better than you have.

Sorry about that. At times, my communication takes on various odd forms. My apologies. :)

What I meant to say is that BB73 has presented points that I consider substantiate the stance which he takes (and I happen to agree with).

As far as I can tell, the points BB73 made in 318 and 341 are for the most part agreeable by the both of us. The only things I would contend with are that the conclusions made from the examples cited in 318 are not as strong as implied. On that matter I take a similar stance to BigJim. And in regard to the point made in 341, I've already mentioned that I am not qualified nor do I have the resources to accurately make such a prediction. I don't know if BB73 is or not (not trying to be a smartass, I just don't know what his qualifications are) but if he is not, his argument is based as much upon evidential speculation as mine is (after all, he did preface it by "I think"). FWIW, I agree with the idea that his predicted outcome is possible but I don't think that it would be inevitable.

Well... we're all dealing with hypotheticals. Thus, all things are possible, but not necessarily inevitable. BB's acumen regarding collegiate football is vast, IMO; therefore, I take his thoughts as more than simplistic evaluation. There's a LOT of depth there.

Anyway... you've presented your thoughts very well, and I appreciate the insight and sharing. There's not much more I can add to the discussion.

 

[muffler dragon]

a significant aspect of the rivalry by losing the aspect of the once-a-year, end-of-the-season, soul-crushing loss.

This is quite possibly the biggest issue for me about moving THE GAME. All the marbles.

 

[SloopyHangOn]

I firmly believe there is absolutely no way that a rematch in any future CCG could mean more than The Game did in 2006, when it was between two undefeated teams, for the first time ever ranked #1 and #2 as they faced each other.

You're absolutely right. Let's amend my statement to say "many" rather than "any".

Well, it wasn't intended to be the best argument; I was simply illustrating that one of the 'possible' pros didn't belong, even as a possibility, in a list that another poster had suggested in moving The Game.

There have been several times where both teams came in undefeated. Any of those instances would probably also be a bigger deal than any future rematch would be. But we both agree that the '06 battle couldn't possibly be surpassed by any CCG rematch.

If amended, that possible pro absolutely belongs.

From '70 to '75 TSUN came into The Game undefeated each year. They got 1 win and 1 Rose Bowl appearance out of those 6 seasons. Moving The Game to earlier in the season takes out a significant aspect of the rivalry by losing the aspect of the once-a-year, end-of-the-season, soul-crushing loss. There have also been a few of them that had tOSU on the losing end, but I prefer not to highlight them.

I listed exactly this as one of my possible cons. That definitely takes some of the sting out of the game for sure.

 

[SloopyHangOn]

In the end, a split and a move is hoping for the perfect storm to happen. If it doesn't, the conference suffers. If it does, the conference has every possibility to grow and thrive. I was mostly playing devil's advocate and hoping to steer the conversation away from "this is great" vs "this is dumb". It seems to me that it's a bit more complex than that.

 

[Buckeye737]

This is quite possibly the biggest issue for me about moving THE GAME. All the marbles.

Agreed 100%. I don't think this can be overstated. Back in the Cooper years, it was painful and I often wished there was a way for redemption except for waiting another full year. I had even thought of how it would be much easier if OSU didn't have to play Michigan to end the year. Now that I look back, the reason that The Game causes so much anguish and pain is the same reason why it is the best rivalry in sports.

 

[BearBuck27]

And OSU-PSU draws very well earlier in the year (late sep, oct or even early nov). College Gameday came 3 straight years and it is often a nationally televised night game.

Minor point that doesn't change the point of your post, but I think it might have been 4 straight years. I know for a fact they were there for 2005, 2006, and 2008. I'm not sure on 2007.

 

[LightningRod]

I'm over the shock of what the OSU powers that be are doing to this rivalry. Traditions be damned, full steam ahead on what is good for the conference whatever that may be. Perhaps the conference could enact a policy of forcing the 6 top football teams in each of the nest 4 years to send the #3 and #4 rated recruits to Indiana with the hope that Indiana will become competitive enough that it can sell more than 10,000 home game tickets rather than sell home games to Dan Snyder and FedEx. One thought that continues to resurface in my mind is the late Myles Brand explaining to the House Ways & Means Committee the line of demarcation between NCAA Div 1 football and pro football. Here is what Brand wrote - LINK on page 5:

The annual return also states that one of the NCAA?s purposes is to ?retain a clear line of demarcation between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports.? Corporate sponsorships, multimillion dollar television deals, highly paid coaches with no academic duties, and the dedication of inordinate amounts of time by athletes to training lead many to believe that
major college football and men?s basketball more closely resemble professional sports than amateur sports. The NCAA has no control over two of the differences between professional and amateur sports: the level of play and the tax exemption for college athletics revenue. Beyond rules prohibiting compensation for college athletes, what actions has the NCAA
taken to ?retain a clear line of demarcation? between major college sports and professional sports?

There are clear distinctions between the collegiate and professional models of athletics. Professional sports? sole purposes are to entertain the public and make a profit for team owners. The purpose of the collegiate model is to enhance the educational development of student-athletes. Those who participate in professional athletics are employees, a commodity to be traded from team to team, often with little or no input from the participant. Those who participate in college sports are students and are not employed to play sports, nor are they traded from school to school. The teams in professional sports are aligned with a community only so long as the community provides facilities and support to keep the teams with them.
The teams in collegiate sports are embedded within the college or university that sponsors the teams and cannot leave if they are not satisfied with the facilities or levels of support.

These points of difference are critical to the demarcation between college and professional sports beyond the amateur status of student-athletes. While intercollegiate athletics is very entertaining, entertainment is not the primary purpose of the enterprise. While football and men?s basketball at the Division I levels are enormously popular with the public and attractive
to the entertainment media, they are as distinct from their professional counterparts as student musical groups are from professional symphonies. They are demarcated by their purpose and motivation rather than their scale of public or media fiscal support.

In 2006 Congress was looking at whether taxpayers should continue to subsidize Div 1 college football and basketball. The matter was dropped when control of the Congress changed parties after the election. This line of demarcation continues to blur to the point that it is no longer recognized. If all that matters for colleges, conferences, and the NCAA is taking action to generate more income, then there will come a point when the tax exempt status of college football operations will be lost.

 

[Piney]

Well, it wasn't intended to be the best argument; I was simply illustrating that one of the 'possible' pros didn't belong, even as a possibility, in a list that another poster had suggested in moving The Game.

There have been several times where both teams came in undefeated. Any of those instances would probably also be a bigger deal than any future rematch would be. But we both agree that the '06 battle couldn't possibly be surpassed by any CCG rematch.

From '70 to '75 TSUN came into The Game undefeated each year. They got 1 win and 1 Rose Bowl appearance out of those 6 seasons. Moving The Game to earlier in the season takes out a significant aspect of the rivalry by losing the aspect of the once-a-year, end-of-the-season, soul-crushing loss. There have also been a few of them that had tOSU on the losing end, but I prefer not to highlight them.

This is quite possibly the biggest issue for me about moving THE GAME. All the marbles.

Just to pile on with muffler about BB's point. THIS is what has MADE this rivalry what it is. It would be interesting if someone had the time to go back to find out how many times the team with the most riding on the season was 'upset' and it ruined their season. Like BB pointed out the '70-'75 period and there were plenty of others just like that where one team was undefeated and lost to prevent them from winning the National Title let alone the Big 10 title.

And THAT is what makes the game THE GAME. No matter how down, there have been plenty of cases where the team that is down rose up to ruin the other's season.

That CANNOT happen when it is played in October

 

[OHSportsFan]

Just to pile on with muffler about BB's point. THIS is what has MADE this rivalry what it is. It would be interesting if someone had the time to go back to find out how many times the team with the most riding on the season was 'upset' and it ruined their season. Like BB pointed out the '70-'75 period and there were plenty of others just like that where one team was undefeated and lost to prevent them from winning the National Title let alone the Big 10 title.

And THAT is what makes the game THE GAME. No matter how down, there have been plenty of cases where the team that is down rose up to ruin the other's season.

That CANNOT happen when it is played in October

And that's what makes the great ones, great.

Those that fold under the pressure and those that rise to the occasion in the biggest game. Simply put, if it's not the last game of the regular season- it's not The Game.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Just to pile on with muffler about BB's point. THIS is what has MADE this rivalry what it is. It would be interesting if someone had the time to go back to find out how many times the team with the most riding on the season was 'upset' and it ruined their season. Like BB pointed out the '70-'75 period and there were plenty of others just like that where one team was undefeated and lost to prevent them from winning the National Title let alone the Big 10 title.

The year before that period is the greatest example of The Game totally ripping the hearts out of one entire fan base...

 

[CHU]

For "Big Ten Pulse" on Big Ten Network. You can vote your opinion on the rivalry on BigTenNetwork.com right now.

Big Ten Network

 

[Piney]

Speaking of the Big Ten Network...

A "Special" Live program scheduled at 7pm Wednesday. And there is a rumor on an Iowa board (I would link, but I can't access it at work to get the actual link) that they are going to announce the divisions tomorrow night.

 

[Woody1968]

For "Big Ten Pulse" on Big Ten Network. You can vote your opinion on the rivalry on BigTenNetwork.com right now.

Big Ten Network

I'm guessing the 26% who think it can be moved are fans of other teams like Penn State and Michigan State.

 

[DallasHusker]

I'm guessing the 26% who think it can be moved are fans of other teams like Penn State and Michigan State.

Not to mention the 8% who think it doesn't even need to be played every year at all? Shades of what the Big XII did to us!

I voted with the 64% majority for you.