header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread

 (Read 2294 times)

Hawkinole

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #28 on: January 29, 2022, 06:04:51 PM »
Not a good look for James Franklin.



Too bad for this player going through these weight issues that are difficult to deal with. A lot of us have a natural weight which is apart from our ideal weight.
With the meager debt he incurred for living on campus ($3,000 is still a lot if you are not employed) and being disenrolled from school he is learning the travails of nonscholarship students, and the bureaucracy we all faced at large institutions of learning. There are hard lessons that may benefit him in the longer haul, and perhaps some hard lessons will be learned by Penn State University and its football staff.
It maybe somewhat comparable to Akrum Wadley's situation at Iowa because he was told he needed to gain weight, and this made the state's sports news enough I was aware of it.  And yet while he had difficulty maintaining his ideal football weight goals set by coaching staff, Wadley received much notoriety at Iowa as a superstar Hawkeye running back.
Wadley later sued 13 football coaches and the University of Iowa for racial discrimination (the suit is not just over weight issues).  Former Iowa football player still seeking closure for racism within program — The Undefeated

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 16712
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #29 on: January 30, 2022, 08:57:50 AM »
This is an interesting way to schedule, but if you look at it from the standpoint of Illinois, Rutgers, or Maryland, who would rotate between playing Oregon State, Duke, and Wake Forest, it adversely affects their programs. It affects their fan interest, attendance, and maybe not revenues. It continues homeostasis for the Buckeyes, and everyone else in the Big Ten. The big TV games will bring in more shared revenues, but it promotes fan disinterest at the lesser football programs.
I lived through 19-seasons of nonwinning Iowa football during the 1960s and 70s. But, during this time I enjoyed watching Iowa play home games against USC, Penn State (when it was independent), and UCLA.
I don't care a rip about watching Iowa play at home against Arkansas State, Northern Illinois and some of the other nonconference teams they schedule now. If Iowa were scheduled to play Duke, or Wake, most years I wouldn't care anymore about seeing those games than I do watching Arkansas State and Northern Illinois or directional Michigan schools.
I prefer Iowa having a chance to knock off USC at night in Iowa City maybe once in 30-years, than watching Iowa have a chance to knock off North Carolina State, or North Carolina at 11:00 a.m. every other year.
This is very much an Ohio State proposal that sustains the Buckeyes at the expense of others.
Absolutely.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

LittlePig

  • Player
  • ****
  • Posts: 625
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #30 on: January 31, 2022, 02:27:27 PM »
I like getting rid of divisions for 2 reasons.

I like the flexible scheduling you get from getting rid of divisions. You can set up a schedule with 3 to 5 protected rivals and play everybody else at least 50% of the time. I like the idea of Iowa playing Mich, OSU, MSU and PSU at least 50% of the time. Hopefully you could set it up for Iowa to play Mich+PSU in 1 year and OSU+MSU the other year.

Right now the Big Ten's dumb schedule from 2022-2027 is set up for Iowa to play Rutgers every year and to play Mich, MSU, Mich, OSU just 2 times in 6 years. I hate that proposed schedule.

The other thing I like is the idea that the 2 best teams go to the conference championship game regardless of division.

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 15876
  • Liked:

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 16712
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #32 on: February 15, 2022, 01:26:56 PM »
I would like to see the conference break from ESecPN. 
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 15876
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #33 on: February 15, 2022, 07:51:30 PM »
I would like to see the conference break from ESecPN.
Yes.  But FOX has to seriously upgrade their announcing talent

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 15876
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #34 on: February 17, 2022, 10:14:35 AM »
Didn't they just get rid of NBCSN?  Hope everyone enjoys subscribing to Peacock


https://twitter.com/FOS/status/1494309540690599940?t=rCeRCfMwcxnq8JIoCC5vrw&s=19

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 16712
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #35 on: February 17, 2022, 11:06:09 AM »
Oh boy...
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

medinabuckeye1

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5613
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #36 on: February 17, 2022, 11:09:24 AM »
This is an interesting way to schedule, but if you look at it from the standpoint of Illinois, Rutgers, or Maryland, who would rotate between playing Oregon State, Duke, and Wake Forest, it adversely affects their programs. It affects their fan interest, attendance, and maybe not revenues. It continues homeostasis for the Buckeyes, and everyone else in the Big Ten. The big TV games will bring in more shared revenues, but it promotes fan disinterest at the lesser football programs.

I lived through 19-seasons of nonwinning Iowa football during the 1960s and 70s. But, during this time I enjoyed watching Iowa play home games against USC, Penn State (when it was independent), and UCLA.

I don't care a rip about watching Iowa play at home against Arkansas State, Northern Illinois and some of the other nonconference teams they schedule now. If Iowa were scheduled to play Duke, or Wake, most years I wouldn't care anymore about seeing those games than I do watching Arkansas State and Northern Illinois or directional Michigan schools.

I prefer Iowa having a chance to knock off USC at night in Iowa City maybe once in 30-years, than watching Iowa have a chance to knock off North Carolina State, or North Carolina at 11:00 a.m. every other year.

This is very much an Ohio State proposal that sustains the Buckeyes at the expense of others.
I didn't see this until now.  

Wow, that is a pretty stinging rebuke.  

I see where you are coming from but I still like my idea.  We (myself included) might not like it but the money comes from TV and the money is what makes this whole thing work.  Lets say that tOSU and Clemson are highly ranked expected NC contenders while Iowa and Wake are unranked teams expected to be middling teams in the B1G and ACC respectively.  

If you schedule tOSU at Wake and Clemson at Iowa that certainly helps Wake and Iowa sell tickets but the ratings for those games are not going to be very good because interest is regional. Wake and Iowa fans will watch of course because they'll be hoping that their team can pull off the big upset.  Clemson and Ohio State fans will watch but they will not exactly see it as "must see" because they'll expect an easy win.  Non-regional fans will not watch at all because they'll all expect Clemson/tOSU to win.  

If you instead schedule tOSU at Clemson and Wake at Iowa the Iowa/Wake game still has limited TV viewers/ratings but the tOSU/Clemson game is a HUMONGOUS ratings draw. Not only will fans of both programs watch but the game will also draw a national audience because fans like @rolltidefan will want to see what the competition looks like and which of Clemson/tOSU gets the advantage in the CFP race.  

The combination of tOSU/Clemson and Iowa/Wake massively outdraws tOSU/Wake and Clemson/Iowa and the league TV contract (that we all share) gets bigger.  

I completely disagree with yours and @847badgerfan 's claim that this is an Ohio State proposal that sustains the Buckeyes at the expense of the others because we all share the TV money.  This proposal maximizes TV money and that isn't just an Ohio State thing, that helps everybody.  

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 16712
  • Liked:
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Hawkinole

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #38 on: February 19, 2022, 01:37:55 AM »
Seems like a moot point.

End of The Alliance? Ohio State AD says scheduling conversations essentially over among ACC, B1G and Pac-12 (saturdaytradition.com)
The article says the Big Ten will probably stick to a 9-game conference schedule. Does that mean we keep the existing divisions?
If the conference were to tweak division alignment it could send MSU West, and send Purdue East. 

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 16712
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #39 on: February 19, 2022, 08:19:22 AM »
I haven't heard much more about the divisions.

Probably should move Michigan West, so they can meet OSU in the CCG every year.

Kinda like FSU and Miami in the ACC.


:29:
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10004
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #40 on: February 19, 2022, 11:55:55 AM »
Yeah, getting rid of the divisions would put the possibility of back to back OSU-Michigan games back on the table, which everyone already decided would be dumb a few years back when they realigned the divisions. 

Round and round we go. 
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

medinabuckeye1

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5613
  • Liked:
Re: 2022 B1G Offseason Thread
« Reply #41 on: February 24, 2022, 05:02:48 PM »
Yeah, getting rid of the divisions would put the possibility of back to back OSU-Michigan games back on the table, which everyone already decided would be dumb a few years back when they realigned the divisions.

Round and round we go.
I'm ok with tOSU and M in opposite divisions but if that is done I think you have to move The Game off of the last weekend.  I know that is absolute heresy to most tOSU and M fans and I get it but I just think that back-to-back games would be silly.  With the exception of games like IU/PU I think all late-season games should be within the divisions.  

No offense to @betarhoalphadelta and the rest of the IU and PU fans here but realistically the chances of either IU or PU making the CG in a given year are remote and the chances of both making it are near nonexistent.  It is a lot different when you are talking about the two teams with the best long-term records in the league.  They are pretty likely to eventually meet in the CG and having that back-to-back with their regular season game is just silly.  

Now if we go to a non-divisional format then it gets weird.  In theory all the usual contenders should be playing teams that are typically not contenders in those last few weeks which means no more tOSU/M the last weekend.  

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.