NCAA Conference Realignment

[illiniguy]

IU and Purdue in the same division causes the same problem in basketball since both are historically the best in the Big Ten.

 

They are?

Sure they are.... If you get rid of OSU, Mich, MSU and Illinois.

[Vanilla Ice]

IU and Purdue in the same division causes the same problem in basketball since both are historically the best in the Big Ten.

 

They are?

Sure they are.... If you get rid of OSU, Mich, MSU and Illinois.

Also, I dont see why you have to go to divisions in basketball.

[illiniguy]

IU and Purdue in the same division causes the same problem in basketball since both are historically the best in the Big Ten.

 

They are?

Sure they are.... If you get rid of OSU, Mich, MSU and Illinois.

Also, I dont see why you have to go to divisions in basketball.

I hope they don't I hate what it does to the Big 12. If you are in the easier side, you always have an advantagein the conference as the other side beats up on itself.

[UMFan83]

Purdue

National Champs: 1 (1932)

Final Fours: 2 (1969, 1980)

Big Ten Titles: 21 (13 prior to 1940)

NIT Titles: 1 (1974)

Big Ten Tournament Champs: 1 (2009)

 

Michigan State

National Champs: 2 (1979, 2000)

Final Fours: 7

Big Ten Titles: 11 (all after 1940)

NIT Titles: 0

Big Ten Tournament Champs: 2 (1999, 2000)

 

Michigan

National Champs: 1 (1989)

Final Fours: 6 (4 "official")

Big Ten Titles: 14 (12 "official", 10 after 1940)

NIT Titles: 2 (1997, 2004)

Big Ten Tournament Champs: 1 (1998 - over Purdue!)

 

Illinois

National Champs: 1 (1915)

Final Fours: 5

Big Ten Titles: 17 (12 after 1940)

NIT Titles: 0

Big Ten Tournament Champs: 2 (2003, 2005)

 

Ohio State

National Champs: 1 (1960)

Final Fours: 10 (9 "official")

Big Ten Titles: 19 (14 "official", 16 after 1940)

NIT Titles: 2 (1986, 2008)

Big Ten Tournament Champs: 2 (1 "official" 2002, 2007)

 

But yeah, lets make sure Purdue and Indiana stay in separate divisions because it would be stupid to put so much prestige in one division.

[Vanilla Ice]

IU and Purdue in the same division causes the same problem in basketball since both are historically the best in the Big Ten.

 

They are?

Sure they are.... If you get rid of OSU, Mich, MSU and Illinois.

Also, I dont see why you have to go to divisions in basketball.

I hope they don't I hate what it does to the Big 12. If you are in the easier side, you always have an advantagein the conference as the other side beats up on itself.

One division works out just fine for the ACC

[illiniguy]

Purdue

National Champs: 1 (1932)

Final Fours: 2 (1969, 1980)

Big Ten Titles: 21 (13 prior to 1940)

NIT Titles: 1 (1974)

Big Ten Tournament Champs: 1 (2009)

 

Michigan State

National Champs: 2 (1979, 2000)

Final Fours: 7

Big Ten Titles: 11 (all after 1940)

NIT Titles: 0

Big Ten Tournament Champs: 2 (1999, 2000)

 

Michigan

National Champs: 1 (1989)

Final Fours: 6 (4 "official")

Big Ten Titles: 14 (12 "official", 10 after 1940)

NIT Titles: 2 (1997, 2004)

Big Ten Tournament Champs: 1 (1998 - over Purdue!)

 

Illinois

National Champs: 1 (1915)

Final Fours: 5

Big Ten Titles: 17 (12 after 1940)

NIT Titles: 0

Big Ten Tournament Champs: 2 (2003, 2005)

 

Ohio State

National Champs: 1 (1960)

Final Fours: 10 (9 "official")

Big Ten Titles: 19 (14 "official", 16 after 1940)

NIT Titles: 2 (1986, 2008)

Big Ten Tournament Champs: 2 (1 "official" 2002, 2007)

 

But yeah, lets make sure Purdue and Indiana stay in separate divisions because it would be stupid to put so much prestige in one division.

At this point I think he's been watching basketball for about three years. There is no way you can argue Purdue over any of that other four.

I don't know as much about the other schools, but I know that Illinois hasn't been playing as long as Purdue. Yet we have, more wins, a better winning percentage, more final fours, more big ten tourny titles. Plus since World War two we have more Big Ten regular season titles. All of that and I would have us about 3rd or 4th in Big Ten history.

[stuy119]

Would Louisville be considered?

 

They have had success with the right coaches in football, have the facilities, and have some money. Basketball would be welcome with Pitino at the helm, and it would give a big stage out of conference game with UK every year.

 

Geographically, it works fairly well (almost as well as ND, but further south) and gives the conference a slightly warmer place to have games in November, with the Conference Championship to be played at Soldier Field (I would assume).

[UMFan83]

At this point I think he's been watching basketball for about three years. There is no way you can argue Purdue over any of that other four.

I don't know as much about the other schools, but I know that Illinois hasn't been playing as long as Purdue. Yet we have, more wins, a better winning percentage, more final fours, more big ten tourny titles. Plus since World War two we have more Big Ten regular season titles. All of that and I would have us about 3rd or 4th in Big Ten history.

 

I would think his argument would rest solely on winning the most Big Ten titles of any team, but as I pointed out above, 13 of their 21 titles happened before 1940, meaning they were back in the days where teams would try to hold the ball for the entire half with a 16-15 lead because there was no shot clock. MSU, UM, Illinois, and OSU all have more Big 10 titles since 1940 than Purdue does.

[SouthSideRyan]

Louisville doesn't have the academics.

[CubColtPacer]

 

Geographically, it works fairly well (almost as well as ND, but further south) and gives the conference a slightly warmer place to have games in November, with the Conference Championship to be played at Soldier Field (I would assume).

 

I don't want to create a firestorm here, but I'm guessing that if the Big 10 had to pick only one site to hold the game every year they would put it at Lucas Oil. Soldier Field could have bad field conditions by the first week in December (unless they put in the turf) and the Big 10 probably doesn't want the perception of having potentially horrible weather in their championship games. We already know the conference likes Indianapolis. Plus Lucas Oil is just a tiny bit bigger so more tickets can be sold.

 

I'm not sure if the Big 10 would follow the SEC model of picking one site or the Big 12 model of moving it around though.

[CubbieBum]

At this point I think he's been watching basketball for about three years. There is no way you can argue Purdue over any of that other four.

I don't know as much about the other schools, but I know that Illinois hasn't been playing as long as Purdue. Yet we have, more wins, a better winning percentage, more final fours, more big ten tourny titles. Plus since World War two we have more Big Ten regular season titles. All of that and I would have us about 3rd or 4th in Big Ten history.

 

I would think his argument would rest solely on winning the most Big Ten titles of any team, but as I pointed out above, 13 of their 21 titles happened before 1940, meaning they were back in the days where teams would try to hold the ball for the entire half with a 16-15 lead because there was no shot clock. MSU, UM, Illinois, and OSU all have more Big 10 titles since 1940 than Purdue does.

 

I said historically and historically Purdue has won the Big Ten more than anyone. However, basketball also includes women where Purdue, along with Ohio State, have been by a wide margin the best in the Big Ten.

 

Also since 1980 men's Purdue has won 6 Big Ten titles. Only Indiana (8) has more with Michigan State, Illinois and Ohio State each having six as well.

[XZero771679666304]

At this point I think he's been watching basketball for about three years. There is no way you can argue Purdue over any of that other four.

I don't know as much about the other schools, but I know that Illinois hasn't been playing as long as Purdue. Yet we have, more wins, a better winning percentage, more final fours, more big ten tourny titles. Plus since World War two we have more Big Ten regular season titles. All of that and I would have us about 3rd or 4th in Big Ten history.

 

I would think his argument would rest solely on winning the most Big Ten titles of any team, but as I pointed out above, 13 of their 21 titles happened before 1940, meaning they were back in the days where teams would try to hold the ball for the entire half with a 16-15 lead because there was no shot clock. MSU, UM, Illinois, and OSU all have more Big 10 titles since 1940 than Purdue does.

 

I said historically and historically Purdue has won the Big Ten more than anyone. However, basketball also includes women where Purdue, along with Ohio State, have been by a wide margin the best in the Big Ten.

 

Also since 1980 men's Purdue has won 6 Big Ten titles. Only Indiana (8) has more with Michigan State, Illinois and Ohio State each having six as well.

 

No one cares about the old stuff. Realistically, Purdue is no more "prestigious" than Illinois, UM, MSU or OSU. Trying to portray the Boilers as being on some elite tier with Indiana is humorous.

[CubbieBum]

 

I said historically and historically Purdue has won the Big Ten more than anyone. However, basketball also includes women where Purdue, along with Ohio State, have been by a wide margin the best in the Big Ten.

 

Also since 1980 men's Purdue has won 6 Big Ten titles. Only Indiana (8) has more with Michigan State, Illinois and Ohio State each having six as well.

 

No one cares about the old stuff. Realistically, Purdue is no more "prestigious" than Illinois, UM, MSU or OSU. Trying to portray the Boilers as being on some elite tier with Indiana is humorous.

 

When deciding divisions that will be extremely hard to change if not impossible you need to take some of the old stuff into account. As I said deciding divisions based solely on who is good at this exact moment would be a mistake.

 

Oh and when including women Purdue is on Indiana's level. Women are half the basketball equation. Acting like the men are the only one's that matters is sexist and dumb. In women Indiana has one Big Ten title, which was the first year and shared with two other schools, plus one Big Ten Tournament title. Purdue has 7 (second most), plus has 7 of the 15 Big Ten Tournament titles (no one has more than 2), 3 of the conferences 8 Final Four berths (no one else has more than 1) and the conferences only National Championship (plus a runner-up).

[Magnetic Curses]

dude, purdue is nothing special, historically or not.

[USSoccer]

Also, no one gives a damn about women's collegiate sports except the participants, and maybe people trying to use them to bolster a bad argument.

[Derwood]

Also, there wouldn't be divisions for basketball, so who cares?

[SouthSideRyan]

So if we're worried about how teams are going to be years down the line, the best way to determine who'll be good is by looking at results from 70 years ago.

[UMFan83]

So if we're worried about how teams are going to be years down the line, the best way to determine who'll be good is by looking at results from 70 years ago.

 

And the women's teams.

[cubsfan]

We should avoid putting Purdue and Indiana in the same division because that division would automatically be awful in football.

[Sosa21MVP]

Also, no one gives a damn about women's collegiate sports except the participants, and maybe people trying to use them to bolster a bad argument.

 

Yeah I was thinking the exact same thing. :-))

[SouthSideRyan]

We should avoid putting Purdue and Indiana in the same division because that division would automatically be awful in football.

 

Indiana went to the Rose bowl like 50 years ago, and since we need to try and project teams going forward, I think we can assume Indiana will be an elite football team.

[bukie]

Really, when setting up divisions, the last thing to be looking at is how good the programs are, especially historically.

 

IMO, the only things you don't break up are Indiana-Purdue and Michigan-MSU-OSU-PSU. Problem is, between Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, and Illinois, there aren't really many "huge" rivalries, but there are also no good geographical dividing lines.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Really, when setting up divisions, the last thing to be looking at is how good the programs are, especially historically.

 

IMO, the only things you don't break up are Indiana-Purdue and Michigan-MSU-OSU-PSU. Problem is, between Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, and Illinois, there aren't really many "huge" rivalries, but there are also no good geographical dividing lines.

 

To compare to the Big 12, the only big rivalry in the North is Mizzou/Kansas, and both those schools were horrible when the conference was made. Maybe Nebraska/Colorado too. Plus they separated the Nebraska/OU rivalry, and things have turned out alright.

[CubbieBum]

I love all the people here acting as if women's basketball isn't important and thus shouldn't factor in on divisions. I don't care much about women's basketball but when determining divisions they should have equal weight (if basketball goes to divisions).

 

I also don't understand why anyone would say how good teams are shouldn't factor into who goes in what division. Having lopsided divisions ruins the whole point of a championship game. The Big 12 hasn't had many good title games because for the most part the South has been a lot better than the North this decade.

[UMFan83]

Really, when setting up divisions, the last thing to be looking at is how good the programs are, especially historically.

 

IMO, the only things you don't break up are Indiana-Purdue and Michigan-MSU-OSU-PSU. Problem is, between Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, and Illinois, there aren't really many "huge" rivalries, but there are also no good geographical dividing lines.

 

Does PSU need to be in the UM-MSU-OSU group? I mean the teams are usually good and close geographically but as a UM fan, I don't feel any more of a rivalry with PSU than like Wisconsin. I feel a bigger rivalry with Minnesota being a trophy game than PSU. I have no problem with them being in the same division but I don't think of them as a rivalry that has to be maintained. The problem is if you break it up East/West, it's impossible to put PSU in a division with Iowa, Minnesota,etc.