The Big Ten Conference Network (“BTCN”) is set to announce the new divisions and schedules for 2011. According to multiple sources Ohio State and Michigan are being placed in opposite divisions. Despite some rumors, the question of whether The Game will remain the final game of the regularly scheduled season is still a mystery.

ESPN’s Andy Katz reports that the divisional alignment will look like this: 

Big Ten Divisions?

A DIVISION	B DIVISION
Illinois	Iowa
Indiana	Michigan
Ohio State	Michigan State
Penn State	Minnesota
Purdue	Nebraska
Wisconsin	Northwestern

Objectively speaking, this has to be seen as a major step in the wrong direction for supporters of a final week meeting between the Big Ten titans. As I previously pointed out, almost no one had an appetite for a rematch of Ohio State and Michigan in 2006 and that was for the National Championship several weeks later. That is not lost on the BTCN, so I find it hard to believe that the idea of the two playing a rematch 7 or 14 days later is more palatable.

I have read the rumors, but I will believe it when I see it. As of right now, I expect The Game to be moved. (Typing that was horrible.)

What a buzz kill in advance of the opener.

For the last week or so, roughly 9 out of every 10 seconds of my Ohio State stream of consciousness has been dedicated to the traveshamockery that is the purported rescheduling of the Greatest Show on Earth.  Suffice it to say, I am spent.  I have written email upon email to Gordon, Gene, and Jim. Their email addresses are here if you wish to pick up my slack:

gordon.gee@osu.edu
genesmith@buckeyes.ath.ohio-state.edu
jdelany@bigten.org

Thankfully, Frank the Tank has captured the reality of the situation better than I ever could.  I consider the this link mandatory reading for anyone that loves Ohio State or Michigan football, the Big Ten, or college football.  Enjoy.

THE BIG TEN: THE NEW COKE CONFERENCE

Mssrs. Gordon Gee, Gene Smith, and Jim Delaney:

Stop what you are doing for a second and hear me out. Most of us fear that it is far too late, but this is too important not to say:  The idea of changing the schedule placement for The Game is an extremely bad one.  In fact, it’s embarrassing.  Stop it.  I am speaking for the vast, vast majority of fans of Ohio State, Michigan, the Big Ten, and college football when I say: “Moving the Ohio State-Michigan game is huge mistake.”

I do not want to come across as some sanctimonious rube.  I understand the money paid by television networks allows schools like Ohio State to renovate and maintain its beautiful stadium, support dozens of other varsity sports, and build state-of-the-art practice facilities that help build the teams we cherish.  I get it.  Money is part of the sport.  And, I am fine with that.

But, it is not the only part.

At this point, however, it seems like the tail is wagging the dog.  In the past, the product on the field drove the price that networks would pay.  Now, a conference as venerable as the Big Ten is tilting at windmills because networks will pay more if you change the product to their liking.  I now believe the Big Ten a television network first, collegiate athletic conference second.

My sample size is not enormous, but I have not heard anyone close to this say that they want to play The Game in any other format than the current one. For example, Jim Lachey and Chris Spielman have some opinions.  I also recall that less than four years ago, no one wanted to see the rematch of arguably the greatest game ever played by Ohio State and Michigan.  Most fans did not want it, and clearly the voters did not need to see it again.  Many former OSU players do not like the idea.  Hell, even Michigan’s players did not want it.  I do not think the sentiment has changed.

I thought Ivan Maisel summed it up perfectly this morning:

Putting Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions in 2011 is a bad idea. Their regular-season game would move to midseason to prevent them from playing in a Big Ten title game a week later. So the league would end a tradition that delivers at the end of everyseason for the possibility that the Buckeyes and Wolverines would play a rematch in the championship game in some seasons. Alabama and Auburn play for the SEC West, not for the Sugar Bowl. That rivalry is no less important.

The worst part for fans is that we have not heard a single cogent argument for moving the Ohio State-Michigan rivalry forward in the season that is not based on the desire to make more money.  I do not believe we will ever hear one.  Does one exist? And to pour salt in that wound, the teams will play in abject neutrality in a city with the newest hotel rooms.  If you believe those games will matter as much as the current set up, you’re dreaming.

In the end, you will do what you think is right for the universities and conference.  Unfortunately, I believe your metric for righteousness is measured in dollars, not fan experience.

Best-

BuckeyeCommentary.com

The Buckeyes and the rest of the Conference recently reported to camp.  Other than some random pictures of players were shorts and t-shirts, not much has happened yet.  But soon, OSU and the rest of the League will be at each others’ throats trying to win what will be the last of its kind.

It turns out that 2010 is the last year that a team can represent the (newish) old school Big Ten.  The Conference was founded in 1896, so with its most recent incarnation clocking in at 20 years old that makes the Penn State era the shortest term in the league’s history without adding a team.  Something tells me the Nebraska era will be even shorter.

Unfortunately for most of the league’s teams, this farewell season looks like it will end in the same fashion as the last five - with Ohio State at that top.  That does not mean that it will not be interesting along the way. This is my humble, brief, and (ultimately incorrect) look at how good I believe the teams are; not how they will finish.

1. Ohio State

Positives: For the first time in a long time, the lines at OSU are projected as strengths of their respective units.  There were some losses on the defensive line, but if John Simon progresses the way most people expect they should be better than 2009.

Negatives: I’m nitpicking but the running back situation is not ideal and the kicking game is in shambles by Tresselian standards.  The defensive secondary has no proven leaders. (Sorry Chekwa fans.)

Realities: Missing two of the league’s upper crust is an unnecessary gift for what is easily the most talented team in the Conference.  Despite trips to Madison and Iowa City, the Buckeyes are likely to be favored in every game of the season. 8-0 is expected.

2. Wisconsin

Positives: The Badgers return 10 offensive starters including a great offensive line (again) and arguably the league’s best skill players.  John Clay should run for another 1,500 yards if he shows up every game.

Negatives: The schedule is not great.  They miss PSU but they travel to Iowa, Michigan State, and Michigan.  Ohio State comes to Madison after a few scrimmages.

Realities: Wisky tends to play to the jersey (see several close games in 2009) so asking them to finish second in an imporved Big Ten may be asking too much.  Still, on paper this team is better than all but one.

3. Iowa

Positives: The Hawkeyes’ defense is going to be lights out.  Between the players, coaches, and team mentality, this is probably the best defensive unit in the Conference…

Negatives: … unfortunately, they will be playing in a lot of close games because an offense that largely struggled in 2009, has to rebuild their offensive line (which was its strength).

Realities: Stanzi likes to get hurt, but when healthy (a big if behind the new line) they are productive.  All the big games are at home, which is huge benefit.

4. Michigan State

Positives: Oddly, for a team sporting arguably the best defensive player in the Big Ten, MSU’s offense was the lifeblood of this team in 2009.  Cousins and co. should lead the way again, but the Spartans should be more balanced.

Negatives: Four teams had multiple players rush for more yards than MSU’s leading rusher, Larry Caper (Illinois and OSU had 3 players each).

Realities: They struggle to get over the proverbial hump.  MSU has not defeated a top ten team since an overtime victory against Notre Dame in 2005.  They are 0-8 since that game.

5. Penn State

Positives: I feel like I say this for every team, but the PSU defense looks really good.  Evan Royster is a stud and he will be running behind another good Big Ten line.

Negatives: The quarterback situation is a puddle.  Kevin Newsome is extremely likely to win this derby but any Nittany Lion fan would tell you that this position battle is unsettling.  I just don’t think the WRs are that great.

Realities: This was a super balanced team in 2009 - ranked second in both total offense and defense.  That was not nearly enough to beat the league’s elite as Iowa and Ohio State handled Penn State easily in Happy Valley.  Without Clark, it is hard to imagine a better outcome.

6. Michigan

Positives: Let’s see … they are really good at returning punts and kicks.  Seriously, this was the youngest team in the Conference last season so they have to be … actually let’s just say that the lines will be decent.

Negatives: Rich Rod is their coach and has made a mess of the program.  Is there any confidence left in Ann Arbor?

Realities: According to people who get paid to talk about it, they have lots of talent.  Two straight top ten classes need to start making a difference. Placing them in the top half of the league could make me look like an idiot.

7. Northwestern

Positives: This is a really mysterious team.  How do they win games?  Pat Fitzgerald appears to make a huge difference…

Negatives: He better, because the offensive options are slim.  Kafka’s graduation is troubling but NW seems to replace QBs in the same way that Wisky replaces offensive lineman.

Realities: Despite a lot of statistical leaders leaving, the Wildcats do return 13 starters.  That is bound to count for something.

8. Purdue

Positives: Despite losing surprisingly productive QB Joey Elliot, the Boilers might be in better shape at the QB spot.  Miami transfer Robert Marve is now under center and provides the athleticism that Purdue has never had at the position.  The front 7 has lots of experience.

Negatives: The loss of RB Ralph Bolden ensures that balance is not a word many will be using to describe the Purdue offense.

Realities: Maybe I am biased after the loss to the Boilermakers in ‘09, but this team looked better than its 5-7 record.  If nothing else, this is the league’s most intriguing team with the addition of Marve.

9. Illinois

Positives: The Illini could experience addition through subtraction with the loss of their 4-year starting QB.  Their passing attack was the worst in the Big Ten.

Negatives: Ron Zook.  I don’t understand why he is still the Illinois coach.  He recruit marginally well but his teams are getting worse.

Realities: The offensive and defense look equally shaky.  If you had to point to one unit as decent, it would be the running backs.

10. Minnesota

Positives: Adam Weber is a 4-year starter and a dual-threat.  He was more effective running the spread offense but he is clearly the lifeblood of this team.

Negatives: The Gophers return 2 starters from a statistically average defense.  This could get ugly.

Realities: I would be shocked if they won more than 5 games.  But I hear that new stadium is nice.

11. Indiana

Positives: The offense is poised to really improve with Chappell and his entire receiving corp back.

Negatives: With two players off the NFL, the defense figures to be the same or worse.  That would make it the league’s worst for the third year in a row.

Realities: This offense may be nice to watch at times and thanks to a horrible non-conference schedule, they may actually make a bowl game.

Divisional Alignment: Assuming Nebraska exits stage east and heads to the Big Ten, one of the most hotly discussed topic will be the alignment of the divisions.  Of course, I am partial to only one division with a round-robin scheduling for the elite programs (sorry, Iowa) but that is extremely unlikely (a major reason for expansion is a conference championship game).

Do you divide it up East v. West?  Do you put Michigan and Ohio State in the same or opposite divisions?

Here is a rough and unthoughtful guess:

Big Division	Ten Division
Nebraska	Ohio State
Penn State	Michigan
Iowa	Wisconsin
Minnesota	Michigan State
Northwestern	Illinois
Indiana	Purdue

Thoughts folks?

Succession Plan: Bo Pelini has long been rumored to be a serious contender for the head coaching vacancy that Jim Tressel will leave.  Does his (potential) inclusion in the league make this succession idea more or less plausible?  Does it have any effect at all?

For me it makes it less plausible, if only slightly.  I say that because it is rare to see head coaches move within a conference.  (Except in the SEC, where they have a very sustainable attitude towards coaches - recycle!)

Still, he is a former OSU captain who grew up in Youngstown.

Booo! I am not really excited for the end results of the expansion negotiations going on from coast-to-coast right now, although I will admit that the irrational exuberance of the process is thrilling.  I am not really in favor of any major reshuffling in college football that does not lead to a playoff.  From I have read, the additional dollars generated from the proposed expansion (and super conferences) would virtually guarantee the existence of the BCS for years to come.

Moreover, any Big Ten restructuring that may harm in the slightest the rivalry between Ohio State and Michigan makes me cringe.  While a playoff comprised of the top 4 to 6 teams at season’s end would be amazing, losing the historic luster of The Game does not sound like a feasible way to get it.

So, the news that Nebraska is on the brink of publicly committing to the Big Ten is a bittersweet.  To be sure, the Conference will be better from the standpoints of football quality, on-field tradition, and national relevance.  But, if the Cornhuskers are the only addition, it seems like the glass is half empty.

After all, the Big Ten warmed up this expansion fever with its eyes on the big prizes - Texas and ND.  At this moment, ND appears perfectly content to stay independent and the Pac 10 may very well walk away with Texas and Oklahoma.  Did the conference that has pioneered in some many areas get caught a flat-footed?  Was hubris part of the equation?  Have they overvalued of the BTN or underestimated other conferences ability to get a network up and running?  Did geography catch them off guard?  Whatever the case, the Pac-10 seems poised to pull the rug from under Delaney and Co. by grabbing a major object of Big Ten desire.

Big Ten driving ND further away? Did Notre Dame use the Big Ten’s never-ending interest to leverage a new television contract out of NBC?  We see this all the time when a coach allows his name to be floated for a new job in an effort to get a new deal.  They always stay in the end…for more money.  Will you really be that surprised if NBC tears up the current deal and inks a more lucrative deal for the Irish?

The scuttlebutt circulating this afternoon is that the Big Ten has extended offers to Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame and Rutgers.

I have no idea if this is true, although this article says “‘multiple sources close to the negotiations’” support the claim.

The report goes on to say:

Missouri officials have been told by the Big Ten that they would like the expansion process to be wrapped up this summer, the report stated.

Sources told WHB that the school would give a one-year notice to the Big 12 for the proposed shift in affiliation should it accept the offer.

Any such change would require approval from the Missouri Board of Regents.

According to the scenario presented by WHB, Missouri and Nebraska, which are members of the Big 12 Conference, would be the 12th and 13th teams to join the Big Ten.

If Notre Dame declines — the Irish, who are independent in football and members of the Big East Conference in other sports, have twice turned down overtures in the past — then Rutgers would be added as the 14th team and the Big Ten would decide whether to offer membership to two other institutions.

If the Irish and Rutgers accept the offer, the Big Ten would look to add one more school to bring its ranks to 16.

Feel free to shoot this post down as insidious rumor mongering and unfettered gullibility.  Judging by the way this entire scene has played out, you are probably right.

Can the Big Ten Conference unilaterally change its rules? Could the league install a different overtime system for its league games?

I don’t know but my off the cuff answer? Nope.

There is some general confusion as to the NCAA’s reach and power. You may recall that the Big Ten implemented instant replay before any other conference but I am not so sure that was not an NCAA-sanctioned experiment. (The Big East’s 6-foul experiment was NCAA-sanctioned.) While the NCAA is the gatekeeper for many rules and standards for FBS football - academic eligibility, scholarships limits, player benefits, and practice time restrictions - there are plenty of other items that the NCAA has no control over - conference membership and revenue sharing, player discipline, scheduling.

Oh yeah, the NCAA does not even handout an official National Championship for FBS.

Where is the line drawn? I am not sure, but I sincerely doubt the Big Ten could change or eliminate rules like roughing the passer (or punter) or any other rule specifically designed for safety.  If anyone knows, feel free to enlighten me.

While we are on the subject, here are some rules that I would like to see altered that will not alter the core of the game.

Down by contact: I cannot figure out why this rule has not been changed.  Kneel down to make a reception?  Stop right there.  Slip on wet astro-space-turfness without a defender nearby.  Too effing bad.  Make a diving catch (or interception)?  You can’t advance it.  I have a hard time thinking of any valid arguments for keeping this rule.  The NFL’s rule is better.  The League is hardly perfect, but there is no reason not to cherry pick the best parts.

Point after: In college football the PAT is attempted from the three-yard-line. In the NFL it’s the two-yard-line.  That extra yard does not make much difference on PAT attempts, but it does limit the play selection rather dramatically.  I have read that the 2-point conversion success rate is approximately 40-percent in both college and pro (admittedly lacking source at the moment), but I think the extra yard may make a big difference, especially for running dominant teams.

Facemask: Bring back the incidental facemask penalty. I realize the rationale for ending the incidental variation was to signal that any facemask is dangerous.  In reality officials call a penalty any time that a hand hits a facemask and, currently, that equals a 15-yard penalty.  I don’t believe that the 5-yard incidental version made players more likely to commit the penalty, so why was it eliminated.  Adding a little subjectivity to this penalty was positive and should be revived.

Overtime: This is truly a topic for an entire post but I will keep this brief.  Start with the NFL’s new model for overtime except guarantee that each team gets a possession.  If the game is still tied after that, you play sudden death.  The positives are that each team gets an opportunity in overtime and the process continues to resemble the game that had been played for the previous 60 minutes (special teams included).  The rules, strategy, and integrity of the game will essentially remain the same.  And, this adjustment is still mindful of the desire to drive the game towards conclusion.

There are some negatives to this approach, however.  There is a clear advantage for the kicking team because of the field position battle and the ability to make all four downs meaningful knowing they can end the game without their opponent getting another chance.  Also, defensive struggles could last longer than desired.  Finally, as Doug Gottlieb and other blogs have pointed out, many exciting games are going to end on an incomplete pass, which is one of the most boring possible outcomes.

I saw that Mississippi is considering a new mascot. I realize their motivations may be different and somewhat unique, but I also think Brutus could use a bit of a makeover. When was the last time he was modified?

If Ohio State’s options are sticking with the status quo or having Admiral Ackbar as a mascot, I think they should stay right where they are.  Of course, they could go for a retro look.

By now you know who is facing whom in all of the BCS games this year.  But for the record here is the rundown:

Sugar Bowl:

Cincinnati vs. Florida

Fiesta Bowl:

Boise State vs. Texas Christian

Orange Bowl:

Iowa vs. Georgia Tech

Rose Bowl:

Oregon vs. Ohio State

BCS National Championship Game:

Texas vs. Alabama

Well, as much as it would seem that the BCS hates the Big Ten, they’re one of only two conferences to get two teams into BCS bowls.  (Partially due to the two “mid-majors” in the Fiesta Bowl.)  I would love to see Texas beat Alabama because I really don’t like the SEC and never have, but I’m kind of getting tired of this whole “Big 12 vs. SEC” game for the national championship.  And I really don’t understand the Fiesta Bowl matchup.  I know both TCU and Boise have been trying to make a case to play for the title, but playing each other isn’t going to get it done.  If anything, I think the greatest interest would have come from switching TCU and Cincy in their respective bowl games.  But I digress.  For the state of Ohio football, I hope that Florida puts Cincinnati in their place by 30 and that Ohio State is able to muscle out a win against Oregon.  Tell me your predictions below in the comments section.

My history major brain is telling me that no Civil War battle ever took place in Oregon.  But, if this were 140 years ago we might be getting pretty close.  Oregon and Oregon State are currently locked in their annual Civil War.  I can’t imagine what those who are devout American-ites would be saying about the rivalry if it was as huge as, say…The Game.  But, I digress.  Oregon hasn’t been to the Rose Bowl since 1995 and Oregon State hasn’t been there since 1964.  No matter who wins, our Buckeyes will be facing two teams who love to run the football and take it up and down the field.  Unfortunately for them, the Pac-10 has this nasty habit of not playing defense very well (part of the reason why USC has dominated the past decade).  Who would you rather see in Pasadena on January 1?  I was rooting for Arizona, but since that’s out of the question, I’ll go with Oregon State for a number of reasons.