I don't like to over-whine about being in the East, in that I believe Allen believes he can cross the hurdle in the future and I tend to be an eternal optimist who thinks IU can evolve into a team that competes for a B10 title.
But I read the post about the way to have a few (3 to be exact) permanent rivals and then cycle every team in the conference every few years - https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2016/6/16/11935718/ncaa-conferences-divisions-scheduling. The cycle thru part is great, but not sure IU's 3 "annual rivals" of PU, NU & Rutgers makes sense vs. say Minnesota who'd get IA, Michigan & Wisconsin.
But if plan was to maintain two divisions - then here would be my suggested conferences - geography be damned! - that would still borrow from a mandatory 2/3 rival games required on a B10 Schedule, I tried to keep a fair assessment approach and damn if the only change I made was trading OUT Penn State for Northwestern.
Conf 1: Conf 2:
Ohio St Penn State
Michigan Wisconsin
Michigan St Nebraska
Northwestern Iowa
Maryland Minnesota
Indiana Purdue
Rutgers Illinois
Some might say that change could make Conf 2 stronger in time as Nebraska & Iowa step up their games? But I'd expect IU, MD & Northwestern to be on the uptick to challenge the big 3 of conf #1 as well. Probably best place to start is OSU & Penn St not being in same conference and then evaluate from there.
Go IU!
But I read the post about the way to have a few (3 to be exact) permanent rivals and then cycle every team in the conference every few years - https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2016/6/16/11935718/ncaa-conferences-divisions-scheduling. The cycle thru part is great, but not sure IU's 3 "annual rivals" of PU, NU & Rutgers makes sense vs. say Minnesota who'd get IA, Michigan & Wisconsin.
But if plan was to maintain two divisions - then here would be my suggested conferences - geography be damned! - that would still borrow from a mandatory 2/3 rival games required on a B10 Schedule, I tried to keep a fair assessment approach and damn if the only change I made was trading OUT Penn State for Northwestern.
Conf 1: Conf 2:
Ohio St Penn State
Michigan Wisconsin
Michigan St Nebraska
Northwestern Iowa
Maryland Minnesota
Indiana Purdue
Rutgers Illinois
Some might say that change could make Conf 2 stronger in time as Nebraska & Iowa step up their games? But I'd expect IU, MD & Northwestern to be on the uptick to challenge the big 3 of conf #1 as well. Probably best place to start is OSU & Penn St not being in same conference and then evaluate from there.
Go IU!
