Leaders and Legends

[hoosier roadtrips]

I wasn't sure how the requirements were possibly changed to limit JUCO admission. It may have been a change by the conference. I wish I had cut out the story then so I could refer to it on any needed occasion.

 

[Army88]

Illinois ought to be one of our three... If they're not a "natural" rival I don't know what is... All we need is a decent trophy...

I respectfully suggest "The Split Rail" in honor of INDIANA having been where Abraham Lincoln developed his character and work ethic and Illinois having been where he put it to use... They're less than a 3 hour drive campus to campus and historically we have already played them on a semi-regular basis...

P U has to be locked in solely for The Bucket...


"The Split Rail" in honor of INDIANA having been where Abraham Lincoln developed his character and work ethic and Illinois having been where he put it to use...

Or why not THE Big (10) ABE TROPHY?

 

[mushroomgod_1]

I wasn't sure how the requirements were possibly changed to limit JUCO admission. It may have been a change by the conference. I wish I had cut out the story then so I could refer to it on any needed occasion.

I had a thread on this back in Oct '21:

• Oct 13, 2021
• Add bookmark
• #1

I understand it can be done now under NCAA rules? If so, it should be, and it's not hard to come up with a good alternative plan.

The only good reason to keep divisions is geography and rivalries, which can easily be preserved.

Each team in the BT could have 2 or 3 preserved game each year:

ILL---NW; PUR..........
IND---PUR; NW.......+ 7 of ILL; IOWA: MD; MN; MICH; MSU; NW; OSU; PSU; RUT; NW; WIS on some sort of rotating basis.
IOWA---NEB; WIS; MN
MD---PSU; RU
MICH---OSU; MSU
MSU---OSU; MICH
MN---WIS; IOWA
NEB---WIS; IOWA
NW---ILL; IU
OSU---PSU; MICH; MSU
PSU---OSU; RU; MD
PUR---ILL; IU
RUT---PSU; MD
WIS---NEB; IOWA; MN

We'd see a little less of MICH; MSU; OSU; PSU; MD; RU
And a little more of ILL; IOWA: MN; NEB; NW; WIS

I like this arrangement better overall. And for IU based on the following: 1. Right now, we really don't have good 'travel' games other than PUR. By that I mean games not too far away, were we can fairly easily get tickets, which we have a decent shot of winning when we have better-than-average teams. With this arrangement, ILL & NW fall into that category; 2. I've personally seen more than enough of OSU, Michigan, and PSU over the years. Also, I see no benefit to playing MD & RUT every year. Under this arrangement, we'd still play those teams 7/12 years but see an equal amount of Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Illinois, MN.

This is easy to do.....get er done IU AD.

EDIT---I also see a third reason this would be good, as an IU fan. I'd like to see us play a UK, A UL, or a Cincy every year in NC. Or a Pitt or Missouri. Another regional travel game, which would interest me as much as anyone on our schedule other than Purdue. Under the present arrangement where we get OSU, PSU, MSU, MICH every year it does make it harder to play 1 decent NC game each year.

Last edited: Oct 13, 2021
Reactions:Fenny72

 

[vesuvius13]

I had a thread on this back in Oct '21:

• Oct 13, 2021
• Add bookmark
• #1

I understand it can be done now under NCAA rules? If so, it should be, and it's not hard to come up with a good alternative plan.

The only good reason to keep divisions is geography and rivalries, which can easily be preserved.

Each team in the BT could have 2 or 3 preserved game each year:

ILL---NW; PUR..........
IND---PUR; NW.......+ 7 of ILL; IOWA: MD; MN; MICH; MSU; NW; OSU; PSU; RUT; NW; WIS on some sort of rotating basis.
IOWA---NEB; WIS; MN
MD---PSU; RU
MICH---OSU; MSU
MSU---OSU; MICH
MN---WIS; IOWA
NEB---WIS; IOWA
NW---ILL; IU
OSU---PSU; MICH; MSU
PSU---OSU; RU; MD
PUR---ILL; IU
RUT---PSU; MD
WIS---NEB; IOWA; MN

We'd see a little less of MICH; MSU; OSU; PSU; MD; RU
And a little more of ILL; IOWA: MN; NEB; NW; WIS

I like this arrangement better overall. And for IU based on the following: 1. Right now, we really don't have good 'travel' games other than PUR. By that I mean games not too far away, were we can fairly easily get tickets, which we have a decent shot of winning when we have better-than-average teams. With this arrangement, ILL & NW fall into that category; 2. I've personally seen more than enough of OSU, Michigan, and PSU over the years. Also, I see no benefit to playing MD & RUT every year. Under this arrangement, we'd still play those teams 7/12 years but see an equal amount of Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Illinois, MN.

This is easy to do.....get er done IU AD.

EDIT---I also see a third reason this would be good, as an IU fan. I'd like to see us play a UK, A UL, or a Cincy every year in NC. Or a Pitt or Missouri. Another regional travel game, which would interest me as much as anyone on our schedule other than Purdue. Under the present arrangement where we get OSU, PSU, MSU, MICH every year it does make it harder to play 1 decent NC game each year.

Last edited: Oct 13, 2021
Reactions:Fenny72

I agree with you and I really like the 3-5-5 scheduling and I hope the B1G changes to this scheduling. Every team would play each other within 2 seasons as they rotate the 5 teams every other year.

 

[Dylan Orr]

I prefer O$u, Pu, and MSU. 3 better than average probabilities and a home run potential. Causes for 2 good years and perhaps 1 significant year.
upd: maybe. But if you will read any sports leadership essay examples about them (just a hint: https://graduateway.com/essay-examples/leadership/ ) you will consider the opposite. I am lazy to argue, and I respect your view. As you have said, we will see in the next couple of years.

 

[vesuvius13]

I prefer O$u, Pu, and MSU. 3 better than average probabilities and a home run potential. Causes for 2 good years and perhaps 1 significant year.

I am afraid you may be discounting MSU too much, we will see in the next couple of years.