Would any b1g schools want to be considered "south"?

Historically speaking, I think the divisions are pretty well balanced. Not long ago I thought these divisions were just short term but it turns out they may not be.

These divisions should actually give programs like Nebraska, Iowa and Wisconsin an opportunity to remain at the top of the conference. Had we had a division set up of that North and South, I could see Iowa and Nebraska continuing to fade in significance.

(05-08-2013 05:19 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Historically speaking, I think the divisions are pretty well balanced. Not long ago I thought these divisions were just short term but it turns out they may not be.

These divisions should actually give programs like Nebraska, Iowa and Wisconsin an opportunity to remain at the top of the conference. Had we had a division set up of that North and South, I could see Iowa and Nebraska continuing to fade in significance.

On the flip side though, these divisions are recipe for Michigan State to fall down a lot. Reading their boards, there's a pretty good chunk who would have preferred western division even if it meant no annual game with Michigan.

(05-09-2013 03:07 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 05:19 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Historically speaking, I think the divisions are pretty well balanced. Not long ago I thought these divisions were just short term but it turns out they may not be.

These divisions should actually give programs like Nebraska, Iowa and Wisconsin an opportunity to remain at the top of the conference. Had we had a division set up of that North and South, I could see Iowa and Nebraska continuing to fade in significance.

On the flip side though, these divisions are recipe for Michigan State to fall down a lot. Reading their boards, there's a pretty good chunk who would have preferred western division even if it meant no annual game with Michigan.

Yeah, MSU is definitely not primed and in position to take advantage of this situation. Quite frankly though, I don't think I mind all that much. Does there really need to be two dominant programs in the Big Ten from the State of Michigan every year?

so looking forward to the BIG ... have wanted out of the ACC for many years ... its def up to the TERPS to fit in and make this a solid choice ... disappointed MD lost to Cornell yesterday in Lacrosse ... wanted that Ohio State matchup badly ... soon enough tho

The stupid division names will be gone soon enough. That's what happens when you put a PR firm incharge of athletics. I like the new setup, even if that means Wisconsin has a cakewalk to their division title every year.

"East" and "West" are vast improvements to "Leaders" and "Legends".

Sparty does have 3 programs that very highly value football with them in the East, and while I understand that this is now about looking forward rather than looking back, it's also true that until the B1G expanded, they were used to having to deal with everyone (or almost everyone with the wonky 11-team schedules) in past years.

(05-04-2013 10:51 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  Would any b1g schools want to be considered "south"?

Working title, dude ~ if there were N/E/S/W divisions, they'd be NAMED North, East, Central and West.

Thing with the names is they could have said east and west last time. Sure it wouldn't have been great, but if Missouri can be in the SEC East, then Wisconsin could have been in the Big Ten East.

(05-14-2013 07:52 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Thing with the names is they could have said east and west last time. Sure it wouldn't have been great, but if Missouri can be in the SEC East, then Wisconsin could have been in the Big Ten East.

Yeah, but you can draw a line through a map of the SEC to split the East and the West. It might not be a line of longitude, it might not be straight, but OTOH its easy to draw the line to form two contiguous geographic divisions.

And of course, while the angle of that dividing line implies that its really a Southwest division versus a Northeast + Florida division ... the SEC can't call one of its divisions the Northeast division, for the equal though opposite reason that the Big Ten can't have a "South" division.

Hopefully Illinois can take advantage and rebuild to get back to the Rose Bowl

(05-14-2013 10:55 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:52 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Thing with the names is they could have said east and west last time. Sure it wouldn't have been great, but if Missouri can be in the SEC East, then Wisconsin could have been in the Big Ten East.

Yeah, but you can draw a line through a map of the SEC to split the East and the West. It might not be a line of longitude, it might not be straight, but OTOH its easy to draw the line to form two contiguous geographic divisions.

And of course, while the angle of that dividing line implies that its really a Southwest division versus a Northeast + Florida division ... the SEC can't call one of its divisions the Northeast division, for the equal though opposite reason that the Big Ten can't have a "South" division.

I'm just talking in respect to the current divisions though. I agree about the SEC, but by the same light, you really could have looked at the Leaders (Why Is Wisconsin Here division) as the southeast and the other division as the northwest. Wisconsin would have been the only real outlier.

(05-15-2013 08:29 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I'm just talking in respect to the current divisions though. I agree about the SEC, but by the same light, you really could have looked at the Leaders (Why Is Wisconsin Here division) as the southeast and the other division as the northwest. Wisconsin would have been the only real outlier.

But Wisconsin was a real outlier ~ its Florida that prevents you from splitting the SEC divisions with a straight line (an angled straight line, but still straight), but at least it is located toward the east in a northeasterly division ~ Wisconsin was north and west in a primarily southeasterly division.

If MSU had been put in the West and Purdue in the East, the division boundary would have required and S-curve, but it would still be geographically coherent.