Reports: ND is the ONLY school BIG would add

FWIW4922463

HR All-State
Apr 1, 2021
874
2,550
93
That's the word going around now. Here's a link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nc...terested-in-other-teams/ar-AAZdzVS?li=BBnbfcL

Again, since it's all about the money, this makes sense. OTOH, adding ONLY ND would give the conference an odd number of teams: 17.
So I guess you would have 3 divisions, 2 with 6 teams and one with 5. Or two divisions, one with 9 teams and 1 with 8. Since there would be cross-division games anyway, I guess the odd number wouldn't really matter. And again, it's all about the money.

So the Big Ten after adding ND could sort out something like this:

East: Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State

Midwest: Purdue, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Northwestern, Illinois, Wisconsin

West: USC, UCLA, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa

OR

East: Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame

West: USC, UCLA, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Northwestern, Illinois

Anyway, based on these latest reports that it's Notre Dame or nobody for the Big Ten, that would make it possible to have four or even five viable "major" conferences: Pac-?, Big 12? SEC, Big Ten, ACC -- depending on how many teams the SEC wants to poach. It might also make the Pac-12 members who are talking to the Big 12 rethink things. We know it's money-driven, but geography would seem to be a close second. It seems the Big Ten would NEED to add at least a couple more schools from the Pac-12 to accommodate travel for USC and UCLA. Bottom line: right now it's up for grabs and nobody knows how it will shake out.

BTW: The Big Ten has had an odd number of teams before. It dropped to nine for a few years when Chicago departed. Here's the info from bigten.org:
"After nearly 30 years with 10 members, the conference consolidated to nine schools when the University of Chicago formally withdrew its membership in 1946. Michigan State College (now Michigan State University) was added to the Big Ten three years later, bringing the number of affiliated conference schools to 10 once again."
 
Last edited:

scotthawk1964

HR All-American
Sep 12, 2014
4,072
6,891
113
58
DeLand, Fl
I watched Colin Herd, which is a first I have ever watched him on Youtube as he was talking with Joel Klatt. They were saying the same that the Big ten is done expanding, other then adding Notre Dame, but they were not going to add any more schools. They also discussed the fact that the Pac and the Big 12 need to combine forces. Klatt said that the Big adding more schools would only mean a smaller cut for each school, with the exception of adding the Irish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NevadaHawk

Gonzo Bloor

HR All-American
Oct 13, 2016
3,997
8,277
113
May be true but not sure I'm buying this. All we've heard since OU and UT to the SEC was announced and up until last week has been that the B1G was holding off on expanding. And then, boom. There's a lot of rumors being slung right now by people who have no clue. It's now just coming out that the story about UA, ASU, CU, UU having meetings with the Big 12 this week was "patently false." Lots of unfounded stuff going around just to generate clicks. I absolutely believe if UNC were somehow able to wiggle out of the ACC and came calling, the B1G would invite them immediately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarterHall

SDHawkDoc

HR Heisman
Jan 27, 2013
8,834
9,096
113
As this is all about football, a 17 team conference would seem like a weird structure to work with for scheduling logistics. Also not sure how it would work to best position the max number of participants for whatever playoff structure will be in place going forward. I don't disagree with what the OP has set up for proposed divisions; with 17 teams I don't think there is any good answer.
 

iahawkeyes17

HR Heisman
Apr 22, 2014
7,519
7,860
113
I watched Colin Herd, which is a first I have ever watched him on Youtube as he was talking with Joel Klatt. They were saying the same that the Big ten is done expanding, other then adding Notre Dame, but they were not going to add any more schools. They also discussed the fact that the Pac and the Big 12 need to combine forces. Klatt said that the Big adding more schools would only mean a smaller cut for each school, with the exception of adding the Irish.
If they were smart Pac and Big 12 would consolidate. It's interesting to read how Oregon and Washington both states could make it tough for one to leave with out the other. Because right now Oregon is the one big Nike sized prize left in the Pac 12. Honestly with ND the ACC can have them for all I care anymore. They have had their chance to join the Big 10 who should stop trying to cater towards them to join anymore.
 

Slappy Pappy

HR Heisman
Nov 24, 2007
5,965
6,563
113
If they were smart Pac and Big 12 would consolidate. It's interesting to read how Oregon and Washington both states could make it tough for one to leave with out the other. Because right now Oregon is the one big Nike sized prize left in the Pac 12. Honestly with ND the ACC can have them for all I care anymore. They have had their chance to join the Big 10 who should stop trying to cater towards them to join anymore.
I've said this for a long time. Pac 12 should join the B1G as the new West division. The division champs can then play the CCG every year on Jan. 1 in the Rose Bowl.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uihawk82

wneff

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Jan 14, 2003
8,754
4,675
113
BTW: The Big Ten has had an odd number of teams before. It dropped to nine for a few years when Chicago departed. Here's the info from bigten.org:
"After nearly 30 years with 10 members, the conference consolidated to nine schools when the University of Chicago formally withdrew its membership in 1946. Michigan State College (now Michigan State University) was added to the Big Ten three years later, bringing the number of affiliated conference schools to 10 once again."
And, had eleven members from 1990-2011 or so.
 
Last edited:

DodgerHawki

HR Heisman
Nov 19, 2002
9,699
11,566
113
May be true but not sure I'm buying this. All we've heard since OU and UT to the SEC was announced and up until last week has been that the B1G was holding off on expanding. And then, boom. There's a lot of rumors being slung right now by people who have no clue. It's now just coming out that the story about UA, ASU, CU, UU having meetings with the Big 12 this week was "patently false." Lots of unfounded stuff going around just to generate clicks. I absolutely believe if UNC were somehow able to wiggle out of the ACC and came calling, the B1G would invite them immediately.
Correct. Anyone believing that the Big 10 would only add ND and just be done at 17 is not facing reality. No one was talking about USC and UCLA to the Big 10 until literally the day it happened.

Anyone that says with any certainty what will happen 2-3 years from now is not living in reality. But the past 20 years have shown that conference are either expanding and increasing in prestige/power or falling behind. Big 10 showed it was willing to be a major player going forward. I just doubt that they are only interested in ND and no other teams.
 

shikreto

Scout Team
Mar 31, 2022
114
191
43
UConn Country
That's the word going around now. Here's a link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nc...terested-in-other-teams/ar-AAZdzVS?li=BBnbfcL

Again, since it's all about the money, this makes sense. OTOH, adding ONLY ND would give the conference an odd number of teams: 17.
So I guess you would have 3 divisions, 2 with 6 teams and one with 5. Or two divisions, one with 9 teams and 1 with 8. Since there would be cross-division games anyway, I guess the odd number wouldn't really matter. And again, it's all about the money.

So the Big Ten after adding ND could sort out something like this:

East: Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State

Midwest: Purdue, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Northwestern, Illinois, Wisconsin

West: USC, UCLA, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa

OR

East: Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame

West: USC, UCLA, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Northwestern, Illinois

Anyway, based on these latest reports that it's Notre Dame or nobody for the Big Ten, that would make it possible to have four or even five viable "major" conferences: Pac-?, Big 12? SEC, Big Ten, ACC -- depending on how many teams the SEC wants to poach. It might also make the Pac-12 members who are talking to the Big 12 rethink things. We know it's money-driven, but geography would seem to be a close second. It seems the Big Ten would NEED to add at least a couple more schools from the Pac-12 to accommodate travel for USC and UCLA. Bottom line: right now it's up for grabs and nobody knows how it will shake out.

BTW: The Big Ten has had an odd number of teams before. It dropped to nine for a few years when Chicago departed. Here's the info from bigten.org:
"After nearly 30 years with 10 members, the conference consolidated to nine schools when the University of Chicago formally withdrew its membership in 1946. Michigan State College (now Michigan State University) was added to the Big Ten three years later, bringing the number of affiliated conference schools to 10 once again."
I don't think that anyone else is coming on board now but I do think that if ND were to come on board, it'd only they'd have a lot of terms, and one of those terms just might be Stanford tagging along, which would also make USC/UCLA happy with regards to scheduling AND please Presidents/Provosts/etc with regard to academics.

Yes, this is all about the bottom line, of course. I get that. I agree that the B1G clearly wants to make as much as possible, but ND's addition would be so lucrative that the B1G would gladly let go of incremental millions (lol) to appease them. ND + a friend (or two) would still result in be a (very) positive ROI. Perhaps more importantly, lots and lots of happy stakeholders.

Reports say USC has been lobbying hard for ND for months, because they know that adding ND would payoff in droves and bringing on board another PAC school (or two) would make athletic life a bit more manageable. I do think USC and UCLA are banking on some of their neighbors coming along for the ride, whether that's sooner or later.

IMO, even if the PAC stabilizes and/or merges with the Big 12 somehow, this will still be the end goal (however many more years it takes). USC/UCLA will want more west coast peers, and all members of the B1G will still want ND. Unless 1) Wash, Oregon, Stanford end up dropping football 2) ND joins the SEC) or 3) the B1G ends up at 24 after grabbing its choice of ACC/whoever teams, I think the "PAC-3" will still be contenders for expansion as the years go by, as long as ND is still a contender (maybe Pac-4, if anyone cares about Cal -- some people say the CA Board of Regents does -- whatever lol).
 

Packer54

HR All-American
Mar 30, 2014
2,975
2,484
113
I certainly understand the "why" behind adding ND but I still think they should go to 18 and add another Pac school. Washington or Stanford.
 

dekhawk

HR Heisman
Nov 14, 2001
6,416
7,226
113
Correct. Anyone believing that the Big 10 would only add ND and just be done at 17 is not facing reality. No one was talking about USC and UCLA to the Big 10 until literally the day it happened.

Anyone that says with any certainty what will happen 2-3 years from now is not living in reality. But the past 20 years have shown that conference are either expanding and increasing in prestige/power or falling behind. Big 10 showed it was willing to be a major player going forward. I just doubt that they are only interested in ND and no other teams.

who other than notre dame will increase all current conference members payouts rather than reducing them?

I still think Stanford may be a BIG bargaining chip to get the domers.
 

Gonzo Bloor

HR All-American
Oct 13, 2016
3,997
8,277
113
I don't think that anyone else is coming on board now but I do think that if ND were to come on board, it'd only they'd have a lot of terms, and one of those terms just might be Stanford tagging along, which would also make USC/UCLA happy with regards to scheduling AND please Presidents/Provosts/etc with regard to academics.

Yes, this is all about the bottom line, of course. I get that. I agree that the B1G clearly wants to make as much as possible, but ND's addition would be so lucrative that the B1G would gladly let go of incremental millions (lol) to appease them. ND + a friend (or two) would still result in be a (very) positive ROI. Perhaps more importantly, lots and lots of happy stakeholders.

Reports say USC has been lobbying hard for ND for months, because they know that adding ND would payoff in droves and bringing on board another PAC school (or two) would make athletic life a bit more manageable. I do think USC and UCLA are banking on some of their neighbors coming along for the ride, whether that's sooner or later.

IMO, even if the PAC stabilizes and/or merges with the Big 12 somehow, this will still be the end goal (however many more years it takes). USC/UCLA will want more west coast peers, and all members of the B1G will still want ND. Unless 1) Wash, Oregon, Stanford end up dropping football 2) ND joins the SEC) or 3) the B1G ends up at 24 after grabbing its choice of ACC/whoever teams, I think the "PAC-3" will still be contenders for expansion as the years go by, as long as ND is still a contender (maybe Pac-4, if anyone cares about Cal -- some people say the CA Board of Regents does -- whatever lol).
I'd be shocked if Warren turned down an ND request to include Stanford if that meant bringing in the Domers.

I watched Cowherd and Klatt's discussion of this and at one point Klatt said he could see a situation where ND scraps its loose affiliation with the ACC and enters into the same type of deal with the B1G, where all other sports are members except football. There's no way I'd see Warren accepting a deal like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ROCKY MOUNTAIN HAWK

pistachio1999

HR MVP
Nov 29, 2021
2,381
2,848
113
I'd be shocked if Warren turned down an ND request to include Stanford if that meant bringing in the Domers.

I watched Cowherd and Klatt's discussion of this and at one point Klatt said he could see a situation where ND scraps its loose affiliation with the ACC and enters into the same type of deal with the B1G, where all other sports are members except football. There's no way I'd see Warren accepting a deal like that.
ND will be screwed in a playoff if they stay on the outside.
 

Auger

HR All-American
Sep 14, 2007
3,642
4,309
113
In this new world where money is all that matters ND has to be looking at the current B1G with longing eyes. The current value of 90-100 million per team is insane. ND would guarantee the 100 million tag and likely increase it. They could request Stanford and total Michigan, Purdue, USC and Stanford and keep traditional rivalries on their schedule every year.

It wouldn't surprise me if Illinois and Northwestern get sent to the East and the West becomes Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Purdue, Nebraska, ND, USC, UCLA and Stanford. The East would be Ohio St, Michigan, PSU, MSU, Northwestern, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland and Rutgers. The B1G would beef up the West in this scenario by adding USC and ND and create potential dream B1G Championship matchup$$ with Ohio St or Michigan vs ND or USC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Underscore2
Feb 25, 2008
52,446
25,457
113
I think the thought process is gauge Notre Dame's interest, and if they're willing to bite the bullet, great! If not, fart noises, they'll settle on 16 teams.

But if they do land Notre Dame, then, and ONLY then, will they explore another team to round out the conference. Not to mention, I wonder just how much input Notre Dame would be allowed to have in terms of who else would come in along with them.

For example, would Notre Dame be more open to joining if the Big Ten said we'll also invite Stanford (or Boston College)?

Here's a couple ways I see it shaking out, at least in the short term:

(ND and Stanford join for 18 team B10)-
East-
Maryland
Rutgers
Penn State
Ohio State
Michigan

Central-
Michigan State
Notre Dame
Indiana
Purdue

Midwest-
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa
Illinois
Northwestern

West-
Nebraska
Stanford
USC
UCLA

***(or you have two 9-team divisions between the East/Central and Midwest/West)

-or-

Notre Dame stays butthurt about stuff that happened decades ago and joins the ACC full time in an effort to help retain Clemson and Florida State. Pac 12 folds as some combine with the Big 12 and others with the MWC. The Big Ten remains at 16 teams and the ACC adds West Virginia to become a 16 team league themselves. Boise State jumps to the Big 12:

ACC-
(Atlantic)
Notre Dame
Boston College
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
West Virginia
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Louisville

(Coastal)
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Duke
Wake Forest
Clemson
Georgia Tech
Florida State
Miami


Big 12-
(East)
UCF
Cincinnati
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State

(South)
Baylor
TCU
Texas Tech
Houston

(West)
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado
Oklahoma State

(North)
Oregon
Washington
Boise State
BYU
Utah

**(or again, two 9-team divisions)
 

ChiHawk21

HR All-State
Mar 17, 2010
675
1,329
93
Every single article being consumed right now is just a strategically positioned bargaining chip. Discussions are going on at every school right now. And the B1G isn’t done expanding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pawkhawk1

iowahawkeyes1982

HR All-State
Jan 13, 2010
898
1,130
93
It would be nice to only have 4 major conferences. Champ gets an auto bid to the playoffs.

Sounds nice in theory, but the B1G and SEC will never go for it. And they shouldn't. Hate the SEC all you want, but the second place team in that conference is usually (almost always) better than the champ from the PAC 12 or ACC. The more deserving team should get in the CFP, not an arbitrary champ.
 

Titanhawk2

HR Legend
Jul 14, 2011
12,121
5,370
113
As this is all about football, a 17 team conference would seem like a weird structure to work with for scheduling logistics. Also not sure how it would work to best position the max number of participants for whatever playoff structure will be in place going forward. I don't disagree with what the OP has set up for proposed divisions; with 17 teams I don't think there is any good answer.
Because teams don't have bye weeks?

I don't see divisions, maybe a 4 team playoff that almost always assures OSU, Mich, USC and ND are in it
 

squeezebox

HR All-American
Mar 6, 2018
2,511
3,009
113
Sounds nice in theory, but the B1G and SEC will never go for it. And they shouldn't. Hate the SEC all you want, but the second place team in that conference is usually (almost always) better than the champ from the PAC 12 or ACC. The more deserving team should get in the CFP, not an arbitrary champ.
There will absolutely be an expanded playoff. The PAC was one of the major hold ups over that vote previously.
 

PlutoDroid

HR All-State
Aug 16, 2015
718
565
93
Notre Dame will NEVER join a conference as long as the rest of college football allows them to have their cake, and eat it too. Take 2020, the ACC allowed them to use them to get in a season. The ACC got nothing in return. So unless these leagues just decide that an independent can't make the playoffs, Notre Dame will maintain their independence.

Notre Dame has a large fan base, a great history. But to the younger generation they are just another big brand that has a history. It's really pathetic how everybody allows them to maintain their unicorn status. College football will roll on without Notre Dame. Let them play their game, maintain their arrogance. Move on, lock them out of ever making the CFP. Otherwise they are just the 70 year old former model who still believes they are still the covergirl.
 

WinOneThisCentury II

HR MVP
Gold Member
Sep 19, 2021
1,014
2,559
113
Notre Dame is not going to join the B10 now that the heathens in Los Angeles have joined. It doesn't fit with their Catholic...holier than thou persona. F&#K ND...ok...there I said it.

The SEC or ACC can have them...you think Nebraska's ego was bad when they joined...at least they have been brought back down to planet earth and have settled into their bottom tier position...where they are the punchline of any and all Big Ten jokes about Nebraska dominance.

ND has an ego problem and a "chosen one" complex. Why would you want to deal with that. It's not worth the money they bring. Bring in CAL, Stanford, Washington, and Oregon.
 

PennsylvaniaPride

HR Heisman
Jan 4, 2002
9,149
86
48
Notre Dame will NEVER join a conference as long as the rest of college football allows them to have their cake, and eat it too. Take 2020, the ACC allowed them to use them to get in a season. The ACC got nothing in return. So unless these leagues just decide that an independent can't make the playoffs, Notre Dame will maintain their independence.

Notre Dame has a large fan base, a great history. But to the younger generation they are just another big brand that has a history. It's really pathetic how everybody allows them to maintain their unicorn status. College football will roll on without Notre Dame. Let them play their game, maintain their arrogance. Move on, lock them out of ever making the CFP. Otherwise they are just the 70 year old former model who still believes they are still the covergirl.
Not to mentiom the Big Ten allows them to play hockey as member.
 

jhawk23

All-Conference
Oct 3, 2015
429
1,251
93
Notre Dame will NEVER join a conference as long as the rest of college football allows them to have their cake, and eat it too. Take 2020, the ACC allowed them to use them to get in a season. The ACC got nothing in return. So unless these leagues just decide that an independent can't make the playoffs, Notre Dame will maintain their independence.

Notre Dame has a large fan base, a great history. But to the younger generation they are just another big brand that has a history. It's really pathetic how everybody allows them to maintain their unicorn status. College football will roll on without Notre Dame. Let them play their game, maintain their arrogance. Move on, lock them out of ever making the CFP. Otherwise they are just the 70 year old former model who still believes they are still the covergirl.
Not necessarily. Once the big 10 gets it’s new TV deal, each school will be getting much more than ND will be getting by staying independent. The per school amount would be even bigger if ND were to join. Over time, the difference in revenue will put ND at a competitive disadvantage.
 

iowahawkeyes1982

HR All-State
Jan 13, 2010
898
1,130
93
Notre Dame is not going to join the B10 now that the heathens in Los Angeles have joined. It doesn't fit with their Catholic...holier than thou persona. F&#K ND...ok...there I said it.

The SEC or ACC can have them...you think Nebraska's ego was bad when they joined...at least they have been brought back down to planet earth and have settled into their bottom tier position...where they are the punchline of any and all Big Ten jokes about Nebraska dominance.

ND has an ego problem and a "chosen one" complex. Why would you want to deal with that. It's not worth the money they bring. Bring in CAL, Stanford, Washington, and Oregon.

ND plays non-football sports against the likes of Miami, surely USC/UCLA doesn't scare them. What a weird anti-Catholic take.
 

Hwk-I-St8

HR Legend
Gold Member
Nov 10, 2009
13,371
8,935
113
Lower Slobovia
I've said this for a long time. Pac 12 should join the B1G as the new West division. The division champs can then play the CCG every year on Jan. 1 in the Rose Bowl.
That would be stupid beyond belief. Sure, add a bunch of teams that bring less to the table than they consume. Are you trying to weaken the conference?



Sounds nice in theory, but the B1G and SEC will never go for it. And they shouldn't. Hate the SEC all you want, but the second place team in that conference is usually (almost always) better than the champ from the PAC 12 or ACC. The more deserving team should get in the CFP, not an arbitrary champ.

I have two issues with this. First, I HATE using subjective criteria for selecting teams in the playoff. Using conference champs is subjective, measurable, and not subject to bias.

Second, if you aren't even the best team in your conference, how can you be the best team in the country? Sorry, no conference championship, no playoff.

Everyone wants to make college football like the NFL. STOP IT. Let college football be college football. We already have an NFL....we don't need another one.
 

wneff

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Jan 14, 2003
8,754
4,675
113
Notre Dame is not going to join the B10 now that the heathens in Los Angeles have joined. It doesn't fit with their Catholic...holier than thou persona. F&#K ND...ok...there I said it.

The SEC or ACC can have them...you think Nebraska's ego was bad when they joined...at least they have been brought back down to planet earth and have settled into their bottom tier position...where they are the punchline of any and all Big Ten jokes about Nebraska dominance.

ND has an ego problem and a "chosen one" complex. Why would you want to deal with that. It's not worth the money they bring. Bring in CAL, Stanford, Washington, and Oregon.
First, USC and Norte Dame have played football every season since 1926(!)* except for interruptions due to WWII and COVID.
Second, Los Angeles has the largest by a wide margin Roman Catholic Diocese (technically it is an archdiocese) in the country.


*John Wayne (Marion Morrison) was on that USC team.
 
Last edited:

iowahawkeyes1982

HR All-State
Jan 13, 2010
898
1,130
93
That would be stupid beyond belief. Sure, add a bunch of teams that bring less to the table than they consume. Are you trying to weaken the conference?





I have two issues with this. First, I HATE using subjective criteria for selecting teams in the playoff. Using conference champs is subjective, measurable, and not subject to bias.

Second, if you aren't even the best team in your conference, how can you be the best team in the country? Sorry, no conference championship, no playoff.

Everyone wants to make college football like the NFL. STOP IT. Let college football be college football. We already have an NFL....we don't need another one.

Agree to disagree, I guess.

Last year Georgia was 12-0 going into the conference championship, which they lost to Bama. Only to go on to win the Natty. They were clearly one of the best four teams in the country last year and deserved to be in. You would have preferred 10-3 Utah getting in over Georgia?

I would say the subjective nature of college football is what differentiates itself from the NFL. In the NFL, teams get automatic playoffs spots for winning their conference. The 2010 Seahawks made the playoffs with a LOSING record. No one wants that.
 

LaQuintaHawkeye

HR All-American
Dec 16, 2017
4,636
6,695
113
If ND joins ...(and I hope they don't)...here are my B1G-20 & B1G-24 scenarios.

These are not perfect and I'm sure rearranging pod assignments is open for debate. For example, in the B1G-20 scenario, I could see swapping Oregon/Washington and Northwestern/Illinois in order to make the pods more equitable.


B1G-20


Ohio StateUSCIowaPenn State
MichiganUCLAMinnesotaMaryland
Michigan StateNotre DameWisconsinRutgers
OregonStanfordIndianaNorthwestern
WashingtonNebraskaPurdueIllinois


Stay at 9-gm schedule, play 4 in your pod every year + 5 from a single pod rotating pods every two yrs. because of the home-and-home requirement.

3 O.O.C. games same as before.

Potential for a 4-school conference playoff…and would mostly likely be the four pod champions.



B1G-24


Ohio StateUSCIowaPenn State
MichiganUCLAMinnesotaMaryland
Michigan StateNotre DameWisconsinIndiana
OregonStanfordNorthwesternPurdue
WashingtonBoston CollegeIllinoisNorth Carolina
California or ColoradoRutgersNebraskaVirginia or Duke


Go to 11-gm schedule, play 5 in your pod every year + 2 each from another pods rotating (home/away)

Only 1 O.O.C. game unless current 12-game season is expanded.

Notre Dame would probably just keep Navy as their sole O.O.C. game every year.
Does Iowa keep Iowa State as theirs, or do they make it a home-and-home with 2 yrs. off in between?

Definitely go to a 4-school playoff…and would definitely be the four pod champions.
 

Hwk-I-St8

HR Legend
Gold Member
Nov 10, 2009
13,371
8,935
113
Lower Slobovia
Agree to disagree, I guess.

Last year Georgia was 12-0 going into the conference championship, which they lost to Bama. Only to go on to win the Natty. They were clearly one of the best four teams in the country last year and deserved to be in. You would have preferred 10-3 Utah getting in over Georgia?

I would say the subjective nature of college football is what differentiates itself from the NFL. In the NFL, teams get automatic playoffs spots for winning their conference. The 2010 Seahawks made the playoffs with a LOSING record. No one wants that.
If you can't win your conference, you don't deserve a NC. Best case is 4 good conferences, winners go to playoff.
 

Latest posts