re: Anybody else think the B1G messed up the new divisions set to begin in 2014?

quote:

---

as we've seen in the Big 12 that's something that should be considered.

---

When the Big XII started, the balance of power was in the North, it shifted to the South because Texas and OU were underachieving and hired good coaches, while Nebraska didn't. Colorado imploded due to scandals, plus they don't have a natural recruiting base that really wouldn't change if OU and Texas were in different divisions. Synder retired from KSU. What is there to consider? How would different divisions have changed any of that?

quote:

---

I don't want to gerrymander the system to give teams that are less deserving a better chance to win. that's a dishonest way of attempting to claim there's more parity than there is.

---

Well, they've set up the divisions in the B1G geographically, it seems some of you are arguing they should gerrymander the divisions in order to distribute the historically dominant programs. In the end I really don't get the what the issue is, other that saying maybe the East will win the B1G CG more often.

2 other things to consider; Ohio State and Michigan is a rivalry that needs to be protected, if they are in different divisions, you would have to have permanent opponents, which is not ideal and can lead to having teams in the same conference not playing each other for up to 8 years which is absurd. Next from a conference perspective, if you top teams do play twice, you run the risk of knocking one of them out of the playoff or better bowl position.