Jump to content

USC and UCLA to the Big Ten ?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, IUCrazy2 said:

So to play around a bit, if the BIG added those 4 teams do we see 4 divisions that play games like the NFL for football?  It would be an interesting split.

USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, and Nebraska?

Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan St.

Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana, Ohio State (too easy for Ohio St?)

FSU, Clemson, Penn St, Maryland, Rutgers

The 2 Illinois teams and the 2 Michigan teams were the hardest to place.  Tried to kind of regionalize and those 2 make it the hardest to balance.

Maybe 5 4 team divisions

Clemson, FSU, Rutgers, Maryland

PSU, OSU, PU, IU 

UM, MSU, NW, UI 

UW, Minn., Iowa,Neb. 

USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington 

I had trouble because geographical it would make sense to have MSU and UM with OSU and PSU but that is the 3 top teams in the same division

 Also that would have put a division of IU, PU, UI and NW together which is probably the bottom 4 teams if the conference in the same division.

Edited by IU Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Maybe 5 4 team divisions

Clemson, FSU, Rutgers, Maryland

PSU, OSU, PU, IU 

UM, MSU, NW, UI 

UW, Minn., Iowa,Neb. 

USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington 

I had trouble because geographical it would make sense to have MSU and UM with OSU and PSU but that is the 3 top teams in the same division

 Also that would have put a division of IU, PU, UI and NW together which is probably the bottom 4 teams if the conference in the same division.

not bad.

play the 3 teams in your division and then the 4 other divisions based on place finished. All the 1s play. 2s. 3s. 4s.

You need at least 1 more game somehow. Rivalry week? but that only allows UM and OSU. Everyone else is in the same division. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ledies22 said:

not bad.

play the 3 teams in your division and then the 4 other divisions based on place finished. All the 1s play. 2s. 3s. 4s.

You need at least 1 more game somehow. Rivalry week? but that only allows UM and OSU. Everyone else is in the same division. 

 

So I was thinking with 4 groups of 5 if you kept a 9 game schedule you would play the 4 teams in your divisions and then the 5 in one of the others and then you would just switch the division you play each year.  So You Have Group A, B, C, and D.  Group A would play each other every year and one year every team in Group A would play every team in Group B and then switch.  C would play D.  Then the next year A plays C and B plays D.  Then finally A plays D and B plays C.  Then you start over again but flip the location of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

So I was thinking with 4 groups of 5 if you kept a 9 game schedule you would play the 4 teams in your divisions and then the 5 in one of the others and then you would just switch the division you play each year.  So You Have Group A, B, C, and D.  Group A would play each other every year and one year every team in Group A would play every team in Group B and then switch.  C would play D.  Then the next year A plays C and B plays D.  Then finally A plays D and B plays C.  Then you start over again but flip the location of the game.

That way works for sure. But in IU's (assuming perpetual bottom feeder) case they would play 1 other "poor" team a year.  I like all the 1s play and so on. line up "like" opponents for several games. in this Case IU would play the worst of each league setting up better for more wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we need to get to 22 teams and have essentially two separate conferences as divisions. Possibly something like:

B1G: Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Wisconsin

PAC: Nebraska, Maryland, Rutgers, USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Cal, Stanford, Notre Dame, Colorado (maybe?)

Could play the football championship every year in Pasadena as the winner of each division. Not sure if anyone has thought of something like this before, but I think it could work. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I think we need to get to 22 teams and have essentially two separate conferences as divisions. Possibly something like:

B1G: Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Wisconsin

PAC: Nebraska, Maryland, Rutgers, USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Cal, Stanford, Notre Dame, Colorado (maybe?)

Could play the football championship every year in Pasadena as the winner of each division. Not sure if anyone has thought of something like this before, but I think it could work. 

Colorado is going to the Big 12

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Colorado is going to the Big 12

Scott, I understand you to be a godly man. 

This stuff over money is so old. I've watched pretty much all of my families be destroyed over inheritances. 

You know, money none of them kids had to work for. This love of money needs to stop!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, IUCrazy2 said:

Isn't the buy out like $300M?  That is an awful big ask...lol.

Yep that’s a ton of money.
 

Why buy them out if they had that type of money to give away…just donate it straight to the football program…why give it to all the other schools and media partners.

Edited by dgambill
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I think we need to get to 22 teams and have essentially two separate conferences as divisions. Possibly something like:

B1G: Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Wisconsin

PAC: Nebraska, Maryland, Rutgers, USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Cal, Stanford, Notre Dame, Colorado (maybe?)

Could play the football championship every year in Pasadena as the winner of each division. Not sure if anyone has thought of something like this before, but I think it could work. 

Why not just go back to the original ten vs the new ten. 
 

OSU, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan, MSU, Illinois, NW, Iowa, Min, and Wisc. 
 

Penn St, Maryland, Rutgers, Nebraska, USC, UCLA +  (Was, Oregon, +2 ACC)

Like you said you can have the championship game rotate between Pasadena and Indy or at least have each divisions championship games there before the final championship say in Chicago once they build that new stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...