http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/ind/...hedule.pdf

new 9-game conference schedules are out for 2016 (above) and 2017 (below)

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/ind/...hedule.pdf

Note that OSU opens up the 2017 season at Indiana. I think that's the first time I can recall that OSU will be starting conference play on the opening week of the year.

Rutgers has a lethal start to the 2016 campaign. @ Ohio State and vs. Michigan to start. Yeesh. Also of note that Rutgers and Northwestern will not see each other until at least 2018.

OSU SID says OSU/Indiana is the first time OSU will open the year with a conference game since 1976.

(07-11-2013 09:21 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Note that OSU opens up the 2017 season at Indiana. I think that's the first time I can recall that OSU will be starting conference play on the opening week of the year.

I despise that fact. Non-conference games should be before conference play whenever possible. If you have to play a conference game before that, it most definitely should not be the first week of the year. The first week of the year should be a tune up game given the lack of scrimmages and limited practices. I know Indiana's always at the bottom of the conference, but still you are greatly adding to the uncertainty factor and I don't like the precedent.

Looking closer at it, I don't like this fact either. Ohio State plays Nebraska in both 2016 and 2017. We should fully cycle through the teams in the west, before getting any of them a 2nd time. This sounds like that "parity based schedule" that I haven't heard anyone be in favor of yet.

Edit: Definitely seems like it. Michigan has Wisconsin both years. Penn State has Iowa (Iowa was thought of as one of the big 6 during the last realignment).

Just noticed another interesting thing. In 2017, Penn State ends with Maryland, instead of Michigan State. Michigan State faces Rutgers. All of the rest are the same every year (including Iowa-Nebraska and Minnesota-Wisconsin, which is the only other ones I thought might change).

(07-11-2013 10:37 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Just noticed another interesting thing. In 2017, Penn State ends with Maryland, instead of Michigan State. Michigan State faces Rutgers. All of the rest are the same every year (including Iowa-Nebraska and Minnesota-Wisconsin, which is the only other ones I thought might change).

I suspect Penn State, Rutgers, Michigan State and Maryland will rotate around with each other as the final game of the season. Most years you'll see Penn State - Michigan State and Rutgers - Maryland but some years you'll see Penn State - Maryland and Rutgers - Michigan State and others Penn State - Rutgers and Maryland - Michigan State. I'm fine with that, but I'm the newb just happy to be a part of the club.

On another note Penn State has what I'd imagine to be their ideal schedule in 2016:
2016
Sept. 3 KENT STATE
Sept. 10 at Pitt
Sept. 17 TEMPLE
Oct. 1 MINNESOTA
Oct. 8 MARYLAND
Oct. 15 at Michigan
Oct. 22 OHIO STATE
Oct. 29 at Purdue
Nov. 5 IOWA
Nov. 12 at Indiana
Nov. 19 at Rutgers
Nov. 26 MICHIGAN STATE

Ohio State and Michigan in terms of elite powers. Temple, Maryland, Rutgers and Pitt in terms of regional rivals (with the middle two also now being conference rivals). Michigan State in terms of Big Ten rivals.

(07-11-2013 12:24 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(07-11-2013 10:37 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Just noticed another interesting thing. In 2017, Penn State ends with Maryland, instead of Michigan State. Michigan State faces Rutgers. All of the rest are the same every year (including Iowa-Nebraska and Minnesota-Wisconsin, which is the only other ones I thought might change).

I suspect Penn State, Rutgers, Michigan State and Maryland will rotate around with each other as the final game of the season. Most years you'll see Penn State - Michigan State and Rutgers - Maryland but some years you'll see Penn State - Maryland and Rutgers - Michigan State and others Penn State - Rutgers and Maryland - Michigan State. I'm fine with that, but I'm the newb just happy to be a part of the club.

I agree. I kind of envisions the conversations going like this:

a) For 2014-2015, they took the safe option without much discussion and gave us Michigan State-Penn State and Rutgers-Maryland.

b) There was a lot more debate for 2016/2017. Michigan State wanted to keep Penn State as season ending given they have no history against either Rutgers or Maryland. Rutgers/Maryland favored playing Penn State at the end of the season at least some of the time, with a preference given for a full rotation of the 4 schools. Penn State could have gone either way, but probably was in favor of some kind of rotation (since if both Penn State and Michigan State wanted to end every year against each other, the discussion would probably have ended then and there).

c) A compromise was reached. For this 2 year period, Penn State will play Michigan State once and one Maryland once. In the next, I'd guess we'll see Michigan State once again and then Rutgers. If we continue in this way, Michigan State ends the season more against Penn State than either east coast school, but there is still a rotation. So if I'm guessing correctly (and that's all it is), they'll end with Michigan State one year and one of Maryland/Rutgers in each 2 year period (home and home rotations though will mean it will sometimes be 2 years in a row of east coast schools/Michigan State though).

What kind of surprised me is they didn't do the same in the west. Since Minnesota has season ending history with both Iowa and Wisconsin, I'd have definitely done a rotation with Wisconsin sometimes facing Nebraska on Black Friday and Iowa sometimes playing Minnesota (never Minnesota/Nebraska though).

(07-11-2013 10:32 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  ... We should fully cycle through the teams in the west, before getting any of them a 2nd time.

However, its easier to schedule one single rotation of three, including Purdue as the locked school in the West, and two pairs of home and away alternating. That approach to scheduling for two seven schools divisions with one locked cross division rivalry game is independent of whether the the allocation of the six unlocked schools is done using parity scheduling.

maryland & psu are rivals which is why they end playing each other


although if the b10 was smart they would turn unl/psu into rivals

(07-14-2013 02:16 PM)john01992 Wrote:  maryland & psu are rivals which is why they end playing each other


although if the b10 was smart they would turn unl/psu into rivals

I think this would have been ideal, but it would have required inner/outer divisions. In the set-up we're going to, they won't play every year.

(07-15-2013 09:37 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I think this would have been ideal, but it would have required inner/outer divisions. In the set-up we're going to, they won't play every year.

Yes, which is why the end of year rivalry game will have MSU, Penn State, Maryland, and Rutgers rotating for a while until and unless one or a split pair of rivalries emerge.

(07-15-2013 05:35 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 09:37 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I think this would have been ideal, but it would have required inner/outer divisions. In the set-up we're going to, they won't play every year.

Yes, which is why the end of year rivalry game will have MSU, Penn State, Maryland, and Rutgers rotating for a while until and unless one or a split pair of rivalries emerge.

To be fair to the leaders on this point, I think the current set-up probably allowed for the best set of season ending games. Those 4 were always going to be the question marks (and to a lesser extent, the specific combination of Iowa/Nebraska/Wisconsin/Minnesota). With inner/outer, we probably would have gotten Ohio State/Michigan, Indiana/Purdue, Illinois/Northwestern, Iowa/Nebraska, and Wisconsin/Minnesota for sure most years. That would have left Michigan State from the inner and Rutgers, Penn State, and Maryland from the outer. Michigan State wouldn't play any of those three annually though. Most years, they'd probably have put Michigan State up against the one of those 3 they were playing, but every 7 years or so, they wouldn't be playing any of those three, and you'd have to interrupt one of the western season ending games (probably Iowa/Nebraska) to get things to work.

Alternatively though, with inner/outer, they could have done Penn State/Nebraska most years, have Iowa/Wisconsin alternate ending with Minnesota (both have done it before), and have the other play either Michigan State or one of Rutgers/Maryland (couldn't always be Michigan State though as they wouldn't be in same division).

Nebraska is a much better 'rival' game than Maryland.......

(07-16-2013 10:26 AM)Etuck24 Wrote:  Nebraska is a much better 'rival' game than Maryland.......

But Nebraska is not in the East, so they are better off pursuing their neighboring state rivalry.