College football is going to look a lot different next year. Three of the six BCS conferences are going to be different next year, as well as the MWC and WAC.
Much of the analysis of these changes thus far has revolved around how certain teams will fare in their new conferences. How will Nebraska do in the Big10? How will Boise do in the upgraded Mountain West? Other analysis has delved into recruiting; how the Pac12 now has the states of Utah and Colorado at their disposal, and how the Big12 now doesn't have Colorado. Other commentary has poked fun at new logos, names (how the Big10 can have 12 teams and the Big12 can have 10....) or just made fun of this video; which isn't difficult to do.
But as I was reading a preview of Oklahoma, something caught my eye. The analysis included that "the Sooners don't have to play a Big12 title game anymore." Holy shit. That's right. This is pretty important, and something you would think would be included in one of the many articles about conference realignment. No more stupid BCS tiebreakers to crown a division winner. Unfortunately, no more oversised Dr. Pepper cans for players to throw balls through at halftime. Now, OU has one less game to win and subsequently sneak back into the national title, and one less game to lose, like they did in 2003. (but obviously got into the title game anyway).
Again, this is huge news. It got me thinking as to how the other schedules are going to work.
Lets start with the Big12. OU, for example, plays nine conference games now, and 3 non-conference games. Their non-conf games are Tulsa, @ F$U, and Ball State. So already, we're talking a harder schedule than they have had in the past. This also means that the Big12 has taken the place of the Pac10, and now plays a true round robin! This almost makes me like the Big12. It went from being one of the dumbest, more unbalanced conferences, to one of the better ones in terms of scheduling. OU now only has 6 home games, 5 road games, and 1 neutral in Dallas.
Conversely, the Pac10 is going from the best schedule to the worst. First, a recap of the new divisions:
North: Washington, Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State, Cal, Stanford
South: USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado
Teams will play everyone in their division once, and 4 teams from the other division. Going into this season, the North figures to be the tougher division. I don't have time to look at every schedule and determine who has the most difficult schedule, but Oregon doesnt play Utah or UCLA, so that seems like one of the harder ones right off the bat. Stanford doesnt play UCLA or ASU. Despite being in the weaker division, USC doesnt have the benefit of playing Wazzu.
There is a conference title game this year in the Pac12. It will be held in the stadium of the #1 team. I think this is pretty cool. Instead of inherently using the Coliseum, the Rose Bowl, or Sam Boyd stadium in Vegas, it gives a bigger reward to the best team. There was argument over where the game should be held. The Coliseum and the Rose Bowl are the biggest and are in LA, but they didnt want the game there for the same reason no owners want an NFL team to play in those stadiums; theres no luxury boxes. Vegas seemed like the next most logical choice, but Sam Boyd stadium only holds around 40,000 people, and there are no teams in Las Vegas. There will be debate about whether its a good idea to have the game in a home stadium - if it provides an unfair advantage for teams. It certainly could. BUt, you earn, so so what? It would be nice to see as the Big10 plans to play their championship game in the sterile, fake grass bullshit of Lucas Oil Stadium, that the Pac12 title could be decided in Eugene, or Palo Alto.
And finally, the Big10;
The Leaders Division: Illinois, Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Wisconsin
The Legends Division: Iowa, Michigan, MSU, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern.
Ill reiterate the general consensus and say that these are the dumbest fucking division names ever. Even worse though, is how Michigan and Ohio State are in separate divisions, yet get to maintain their rivalry every year. I like that they will play every year, but put them in the same division then. The reason for not doing this is obvious - in short, they hooked up Michigan. Michigan now gets to play both rivals (OSU and MSU) every year, and it will only be a matter of time before there is a Michigan and OSU Big10 title game that causes Thom Brenneman to ruin football forever (the first Big10 title game is on Fox - which is good since no other big10 games are on Fox all year....dont worry, Im sure Ill be writing about this again in December). This decision to keep the rivalry in tact is a slap in the face to all the other rivalries they abolished; Wisconsin v. Iowa, Penn State v. MSU, NW v. Illinois, and Wisconsin v. Minnesota (they basically took all of Wisconsin's rivals away).
Truth be told, however, this appears to be another situation like when the ACC formed a few years ago. That is, I most likely won't know the divisions five years from now. What the fuck is wrong with these people? The Big12 was easy to remember, it was the 6 northernmost teams, and the 6 southernmost. Same with SEC, only 6 western teams, 6 eastern teams. I dont get confused that Florida and Mississippi were in the same division because they wanted to preserve some rivalry. Even the new Pac12 divisions are easy to remember, even if the geography isn't 100% correct. THe South division is the four southernmost schools; USC, UCLA, UofA, ASU, and the 2 new schools. The other division is the other 6 schools. Easy.
But the ACC and the Big10 split up their divisions with no rhyme or reason. The ACC calls their divisions the 'Atlantic' and the 'Coastal' - real fucking clever, the first two names of the conference. Here, they paid no attention to geography, as F$U and Miami are in two different divisons. Wake Forest is in a different division from UNC and DUke, and, its just a clusterfuck.
The big10 paid no attention to geography either, as Northwestern and Illinois are in two different divisions, Michigan is with Nebraska, and Ohio State is with Wisconsin; none of it makes any fucking sense.
The Big10 plans to play all your divisional teams, and 3 teams from the other division. Eight games in total. Ohio State, for example, plays Michigan, MSU, and Nebraska. Tough schedule. What I don't understand is what is going to happen when these schedules rotate. That is, all other teams have 5 games set, and it would be easy to play 3 teams from the other division for 2 years, once at home, once on the road, then for the next 2 years, play the other 3 teams. That is basically what they did before Nebraska joined. But Ohio State and Michigan are guaranteed 6 common games, their divisional games, and each other. So how are they going to rotate? Also, not only does this set-up a potential rematch between Michigan and OSU in the championship game, but the games would be back to back weeks. What a bunch of ass.
I can't think of another situation where this is possible.... If you look at the perenially good teams, their rivals, and when they play, it has never happened. One of the reasons it never happens, is because, the RIVALS ARE IN THE SAME FUCKING DIVISION. Texas plays OU in October, and theyre in the same division. Only one can advance. Alabama plays Auburn the last week, but they never had a rematch in the championship, because theyre in the same division. Never have any significant rivals played each other twice in the same year. If we look at the history of each conferences title games, the only instance in which you could make a case for significant rivals having played each other in the conference title game is:
Nebraska played Texas three times in the Big12 title game (if you even call this a rivalry game). 1996, 1999, and 2009. Only in 1999 did they meet in the regular season. Nebraska met OU in 2006, but again, had not played the Sooners in the regular season.
In the SEC, I consider all of the teams' main rivals to be in the same division. Bama & Auburn, Miss & Miss State, LSU & Arkansas, Florida & UGA, Vanderbilt and ........ BUt the point is, its almost impossible for rivals to face each other in the title game (unless you consider that in the SEC everyone hates everyone else, in which case every game, including the title game, is a rivalry.) But for the sake of argument, lets say Florida and Alabama is a big rivalry. There have been 19 SEC title games. Seven of the nineteen, and 4 of the first 5, have been Florida vs Alabama (the first two were played in Birmingham). Only ONCE out of the seven matchups have they met in the regular season. This occurred in 1999. Florida had lost to Alabama in the regular season in Gainesville, 40-39 in OT, in one of the craziest endings ever....
Later that year, Bama dominated them in the SEC title game, 34-7
Incidentally, the two went on to play two of the more memorable bowl games of our generation that same year (below).
But the point of the article is that, although the Big12 improved their schedule, the other conferences have hurt theirs greatly. Hopefully you can memorize the Big10 division alignments, and try to figure out who is playing who now.
As promised though, here are my youtubes of the day (lot of clips in this article).
2000 Citrus Bowl: Florida vs Michigan State....only clip I could find....
2000 Orange Bowl: Michigan vs Alabama.....really one of the better games of the last 10-15 years, and worth the 30 minutes to watch on YouTube.
No comments:
Post a Comment