I'm trying to figure out the method to your madness, here, while giving the benefit of the doubt that all your math adds up.
Inasmuch as I can tell, it would appear that you are suggesting that the good teams in one division should play the good teams in the other division more often than they play the bad teams in the other division.
And that the bad teams in one division should be playing the bad teams in the other division more often then they play the good teams in the other division.
All while making the occasional Trophy game exception, where those rivalries get 4 games every 8 years instead of 2, regardless of their stature within their division; with the Bucket being the only fixed crossover that remains on the annual.
Am I warm?
You got it.
Except the original idea i had was that you pick 5 teams you play 4 times and 2 treams you play 2 times.
But then it got skewed because Purdue and Indiana need to play 8 times. So purdue and Indiana ended up being the teams that lots of teams played twice.
Yes it was intentionally set up so that the top 4 from each division all played each other 4 times while the bottom 3 would play each other 4 times. Its debatable if Minn or NW is the current #4 in the west, but for rival reasons, its easier to call Minn #4 and NW #5.
My other concern, although I did not spell it out, would be that the top 4 teams from the west would rotate playing the top 4 teams from the east so that they would always play 2 of the top 4 every year.
My motivation was to avoid schedules like Wisconsin's last year where they got MSU, Mich and OSU all in 1 year. Then Wisc only gets Mich this year. Or Iowa's schedule this year where it gets PSU, MSU and OSU. Then next year only gets PSU.