Same thing has happened in baseball where Nebraska for a while traveled much more to Iowa City than the Hawkeyes visited Lincoln (and some years didn't play each other). How they decide baseball schedules from year to year also makes zero sense, and that isn't even TV revenue driven (or at least I wouldn't think it is).
Can someone explain to me...
- Thread starter Pennsyhusker_rivals246774
- Start date
I'd expect Wisconsin/Nebraska continue to rotate between Ohio State/Michigan, for protected XO-games.
Heard they drew names out of a hat the last time ... So explain how we’ll end up with tOSU again..
If that was the case, the Ivy league schools and Minnesota would be the powerhouses and blue bloods in college football. Anything after 1950, the rules and structure of the game and institutions have remained pretty much the same, whereas before that, it was a very different game. The other reason I say 1950 is you're not running into major events like WW1, WW2, or the Great Depression where most young men are focused on other things besides sports.
In terms of historical significance, any success a team had after 1950 should be considered just as significant as if it had happened today. Anything before 1950 should be heavily discounted because it's not even really the same game before that.
Nebreska is already more competitive with OSU than Michigan. You've beat them once in the last 15 plus years. Nobody is more delusional than Michigan fans. Penn State has been far more competitive with OSU than Michigan. Not even close really. And in the last 15 years Penn State has won the BIG three times and the East four times to Michigan's zero.
Penn State is a blue blood and a Penn State vs Nebreska end of year game would be tremendous, especially as both programs get back to playing great football. We've had great games with Nebreska in the past when both programs were really doing well.
No one outside of Penn State fans considers them a blue blood. The consensus list is the following eight:
ND
Michigan
Alabama
Oklahoma
Ohio State
Texas
USC
Nebraska
Having said that an end of the year PSU/Neb game would be a highly anticipated game and a good move for the B1G.
We agree on the second point wholeheartedly. On your first point I missed where folks got together and said only eight, and those eight are bluebloods. But it doesn't matter anyway.
I think a Nebreska Penn State game to end the season would be fabulous which is why the BIG probably doesn't arrange it.
The problem is traveling on a Thanksgiving weekend..
Along way from Nebraska to Pennsylvania for fans wanting to travel..Personally I never liked this idea, would rather play Ioway it’s a boarder war and it’s becoming a hatred rivalry game..
James Franklin 3-12 versus OSU, Michigan ,MSU.
Michigan 14-8 versus PSU all time.
Harbaugh 3-1 versus PSU.
But I did forget that according to James Franklin "we are great but working on being elite" now tell me your coach is NOT delusional.
Last edited:
That's great. Congratulations. And you still haven't won a thing since the turn of the last century. Franklin has a BIG title. Harbaugh still has zero. I'll take it.
That is because everyone else in the big 8 also had to play OU. Now imagine CU winning the Big 8 over us despite not having to play OU while we did, and lost.
It’s called equity
Is there evidence, an example where a team from 1 division won every game within their division but didn’t play in the title game because they lost a crossover game?
While we are on the topic of fairness, perhaps the Big Ten should divvy up the media profits based on how much each school is worth to the conference. It's only fair that Ohio St and Michigan get more money than the rest of the schools.
I would say Penn St. would be considered a Blue Blood for no other reason than their head coach of 50+ years was an icon. Regardless of the fact that he may have a tarnished legacy, for the majority of those years at Penn St., Paterno was revered by almost all, including Tom Osborne.
Maybe. But I doubt you think so. You just seem to have a bee in your bonnet over the fact that I have called into question the fairness of NU having to play the best team in the B1G every year while other teams in the
West don’t. Fine. I ain’t gonna argue the point any further. I just made a simple point that that doesn’t seem right to me. You disagree. Okie dokie
Nah, its more to the point that people don't want to count games against the east division in the conference record
And Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, when they were getting a bigger share than the little 8 when all were in the Big 12. Fair is usually the battle cry for those who are in the have nots, but want to be in the haves.
If Nebraska had Maryland as a protected crossover, and played Indiana and Rutgers as crossovers, more times than we play Michigan and Penn St, no one would be crying about fairness. They may complain that we don't play Ohio St ever, but there would be no talk of crossover games not counting in league standings.
That's mathematically impossible
The team that ran the table in their division (Team A) would hold the tiebreaker over the team they beat (Team B). Team A (in a 9 conference game arrangement) would be 8-1. Team B at best would be 8-1. Team A goes to the CCG.
Would only make a difference if Team A lost TWO crossover games and Team B won every game except against Team A. Or Team A losses all three crossovers and Team B lost one other than against Team A.
To expand, though, I think as others have posted it's the matter that the more difficult crossover games have impacts in the following weeks. Throw in consecutive road games against good teams, the likelihood of a loss becomes more profound.
So while a single discrepancy in crossovers wouldn't eliminate a team from CCG qualification because that team still has the opportunity to beat the division competitor, the emotional and physical taxing from playing strong crossover opponent(s) shouldn't be scoffed at in terms of resilience as the season endures.
So while a single discrepancy in crossovers wouldn't eliminate a team from CCG qualification because that team still has the opportunity to beat the division competitor, the emotional and physical taxing from playing strong crossover opponent(s) shouldn't be scoffed at in terms of resilience as the season endures.
Agree, and I have proposed this in the past. But as others have said, those games become glorified exhibitions and only matter for those with aspirations on the national stage.
That's mathematically impossible
The team that ran the table in their division (Team A) would hold the tiebreaker over the team they beat (Team B). Team A (in a 9 conference game arrangement) would be 8-1. Team B at best would be 8-1. Team A goes to the CCG.
Would only make a difference if Team A lost TWO crossover games and Team B won every game except against Team A. Or Team A losses all three crossovers and Team B lost one other than against Team A.
Uhm no If Nebraska went 6-0 in the west, and lost 2 of 3 crossover games, they would be 7-2, Wisconsin could be 5-1 in the west, losing to Nebraska, and win all 3 crossovers and be 8-1 and win the division.
I don't disagree with that scenario (covered in my third paragraph). But I took your post literally: "because they lost a crossover game?"
I took "a" to mean one.
More difficult, again that is so subjective. Is playing Ohio St at home more difficult than playing Michigan in Ann Arbor? What if you had Wisconsin, Iowa, Northwestern and Ohio St at home and only had to play road games against Minnesota and Purdue. Is that more difficult than playing Minnesota, Purdue, Michigan and Wisconsin at home but traveling to Iowa, Northwestern and Rutgers?
When you play in the Big Ten west, it is very difficult to get Rutgers, Maryland and Indiana as your crossover teams in one season, let alone several. IF you have any combo of Penn St, Michigan St, Michigan, Ohio St. on your schedule, plus playing you full west schedule, the odds of the crossover being the determining factor in the division race is small. It may well have a significant affect on playing in the CFP though.
Yep, it's a very complex issue except in one sense: $$$. I think we can all agree on that. When people have different values, there's going to be conflict. I know I'm tired of the Big Ten cannibalizing itself on the national stage with 9 conference games instead of 8 (in comparing to other conferences). Pennsy (and others, me included) are frustrated when comparing crossover schedule strength from one team to the next. The combination of arbitrary and deliberate scheduling if even more frustrating (ie NU playing OSU for so many consecutive seasons, then getting a random assortment of the other 6 in no rhyme or reason).
I don't disagree, but that, in and of itself, is different than wanting the division winner to be crowned based on division games only.
As unfair as the schedule appears to be, I couldn't find one example where either Big Ten division champ, won the division because of crossover games strength or weakness. I am not saying it doesn't exist because I didn't check every schedule, just the top 2 teams and teams within 2 games. Just nothing that was clearly because of cross over games.
SEC has protected crossovers, Tennessee has to play Alabama every year, LSU gets Florida, Auburn gets Georgia. Then you have the deep seeded hatred games between Missouri and Arkansas, South Carolina and Texas A&M, Ole Miss and Vandy and Kentucky and Mississippi St. The rest of the other cross division teams they play every 6 years or so. Is it fair, probably not, but the teams that are historically good in that conference, Alabama, Tennessee, LSU, Auburn, Georgia, and Florida all play each other. Which is sort of like Wisconsin vs Michigan, Iowa vs Penn St, Nebraska vs Ohio St and Michigan St vs Northwestern.
Your last paragraph is very pertinent to this conversation. I did not know that the SEC had that many protected crossovers. Shows my ignorance. It shows that this is not some dumb ******** the B1G uniquely does for the sake of money. It is a standard practice in the nation’s premier league as well. I still think it is not ideal and all leagues need a fairer structure. But how is that adjudicated? We could pressure the B1G to play Rutgers, Maryland and Indiana every year for six years beginning in 2024 only to have two of those three become really good before then. And Ohio State could become mediocre. It has happened before.
I think Tuco wins the inter webs on this one....
Alabama and Tennessee and Georgia and Auburn were all big rivalry games before the SEC went to divisions...
Florida and LSU haven’t played as long as the other rivalries only 65 meetings.. so it made sense for the SEC having cross over protected rivalries..
The difference is divisions the B1G doesn’t have cross over protected rivalries like the SEC has when it comes to geographical areas except for the exception of Michigan and Minnesota..
Florida and LSU haven’t played as long as the other rivalries only 65 meetings.. so it made sense for the SEC having cross over protected rivalries..
The difference is divisions the B1G doesn’t have cross over protected rivalries like the SEC has when it comes to geographical areas except for the exception of Michigan and Minnesota..
Last edited:
The why isn’t important. The fact that they do is what is important. Alabama will play Florida or Georgia 1 time every 6-7 years.
The only 2 east teams that will ever have to to play LSU and Alabama in the same year are Tennessee and Florida. And that only happens 1 time every 7 years.
The why is important to those long standing rivalries.
Since 1966 Georgia and Alabama have only played 14 regular season games so this even started before they switched divisions and when Alabama played Georgia they still played Tennessee the 3 week in October..
Cant compare what the SEC does with their scheduling compared with the B1G, especially when the SEC doesn’t even play nine conference games..