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

I still don't see how the trio of Penn State, Michigan and Nebraska could be "too tough" for OSU, but "just right" for MSU. 

I don't think I will get an answer either, just more tap dancing from our resident clown.

How would you break the 14 schools into separate conferences today? Just go East-West like now?

Add schools (if so, which ones)?

If the West is a conference, it's probably at the bottom of the P5 immediately.

I just know that 14 or 16 schools all trying to play each other regularly w/o having annual matchups for certain programs doesn't work

Minnesoota, Nebraska and Iowa being forced to schedule Rutgers and Maryland regularly just because they're in the same "conference" sucks

I'm sure MAryland and Rutgers feel the same way

Perhaps each program in the Big should pick 3 teams that they are not going to play regularly and develop the rivalries with the other 10 programs?

Well, in my mind that would be akin to returning to this:

MSU - UM and Neb, Penn St....wasn't sure which western team to go with here, as I feel like MSU kind of has a little link with Iowa and UW as well.  Am I making that up?

I appreciate what you are trying to do here but I agree with @Brutus Buckeye that this is just way too unbalanced.  MSU would be playing three of the four traditional helmets annually.  Even if Nebraska never returns to their former glory they are still probably going to be better, on average, than most of the league's other non-helmets so MSU gets stuck playing what are likely to be at worst three of the top-half teams every year.  

It is funny in this thread you see two views.  Brutus thought it sucked that tOSU got "stuck" with Rutgers and similarly, @847badgerfan wanted tOSU for his Badgers.  So those are the people looking for tougher games which should also be higher-rated games.  Basically more risk and more reward.  Other fans are going to be a bit more strategic.  I'd be fine if you said tOSU's three annual rivals would be Rutgers, Indiana, and some other team that is typically a bottom-feeder.  Brutus would be apoplectic but that would get tOSU into more CFP's than playing his preferred UM/UNL/PSU every damn year.  

MSU and Iowa:
You really need answers more from Spartan/Hawkeye fans but I've always thought of them as at least having some history largely because back in the "Big2/Little8" era they were generally either the best or among the best after the "Big2" of tOSU/M.  For example, Indiana (yes, the Hoosiers) went to the 1968 Rose Bowl (1967 season).  Then from 1969 through 1981 (1968 through 1980 seasons) the BigTen was represented in the RB every single year by either tOSU or M.  Iowa broke that with an appearance in the 1982 Rose Bowl (1981 season) and Michigan State was not long after with an appearance in the 1988 Rose Bowl (1987 season).  Also note that between Purdue's win in the 1967 Rose Bowl (1966 season) and Wisconsin's win in the 1994 Rose Bowl (1993 season) only three of our teams won Rose Bowls:

• Ohio State in 1969 and 1974
• Michigan in 1981, 1989, and 1993
• Michigan State in 1988

Part of that, of course, is the BigTen's colossally bad RB record of 6-20 in those 26 years.  

I appreciate what you are trying to do here but I agree with @Brutus Buckeye that this is just way too unbalanced.  MSU would be playing three of the four traditional helmets annually.  Even if Nebraska never returns to their former glory they are still probably going to be better, on average, than most of the league's other non-helmets so MSU gets stuck playing what are likely to be at worst three of the top-half teams every year. 

It is funny in this thread you see two views.  Brutus thought it sucked that tOSU got "stuck" with Rutgers and similarly, @847badgerfan wanted tOSU for his Badgers.  So those are the people looking for tougher games which should also be higher-rated games.  Basically more risk and more reward.  Other fans are going to be a bit more strategic.  I'd be fine if you said tOSU's three annual rivals would be Rutgers, Indiana, and some other team that is typically a bottom-feeder.  Brutus would be apoplectic but that would get tOSU into more CFP's than playing his preferred UM/UNL/PSU every damn year. 

MSU and Iowa:
You really need answers more from Spartan/Hawkeye fans but I've always thought of them as at least having some history largely because back in the "Big2/Little8" era they were generally either the best or among the best after the "Big2" of tOSU/M.  For example, Indiana (yes, the Hoosiers) went to the 1968 Rose Bowl (1967 season).  Then from 1969 through 1981 (1968 through 1980 seasons) the BigTen was represented in the RB every single year by either tOSU or M.  Iowa broke that with an appearance in the 1982 Rose Bowl (1981 season) and Michigan State was not long after with an appearance in the 1988 Rose Bowl (1987 season).  Also note that between Purdue's win in the 1967 Rose Bowl (1966 season) and Wisconsin's win in the 1994 Rose Bowl (1993 season) only three of our teams won Rose Bowls:

• Ohio State in 1969 and 1974
• Michigan in 1981, 1989, and 1993
• Michigan State in 1988

Part of that, of course, is the BigTen's colossally bad RB record of 6-20 in those 26 years. 

You'd rather play Rutgers every year than the Wolverines?

An easy fix for this would be to move MSU into the West and Purdue to the East. Still have that one locked crossover anyway, except it's MSU-UM versus PU-IU.

^^^^

That started almost 20 years ago my friend, when the ACC blew up the Big East.