Penn State fans sound off on divisions
June, 17, 2010
6/17/10
4:00
PM ET
By
Adam Rittenberg | ESPN.com
Unless the Big Ten chooses to "act again" in expansion, the big question between now and September 2011 relates to division alignment in the new 12-team league.
Wednesday, I asked Penn State fans to weigh in on division alignment.
To review, here were the three questions:
Let's get some answers ...
Lance from Bedford, Pa., writes: I see some irony in you asking us the tough questions being that we are the Big Ten's stepchild. I do not feel that PSU has established a strong rivalry in the conference even after 17 seasons. Looking at the short history, it has been a win/loss see-saw with almost every team. We have established some dominance over Wisconsin and Michigan recently while being owned by Iowa. Ohio State may be the closest thing to a rivalry that we have and losing the nation's highest recruited quarterback to them a couple of years ago only stoked the fire. Nobody in the B10 has been as competitive recently with Ohio State as Penn State. Therefore, with Michigan struggling and OSU dominating Wiscy and Iowa, I don't see how you keep PSU and OSU in the same division. Agreed?
My take: Without giving too much away about my division proposal (coming Friday morning), I agree with your point about Penn State and Ohio State. Penn State is the only Big Ten team to have beaten Ohio State two times during the Buckeyes' dominant run. Iowa and Wisconsin fans should be proud of their teams, but neither squad has beaten Ohio State since 2004. That's a long drought. Penn State, meanwhile, has beaten Ohio State twice in the last five years. The Penn State-Michigan rivalry has some passion, but Michigan has dominated until the last two years. I think there's a ton of potential for a Penn State-Nebraska rivalry.
Jason from Tampa writes: Re: Question for PSU FansIf we could protect the annual game with OSU; I feel being in the same division with Nebraska, Iowa and Wisconsin would be great. Especially if we could set up the Nebraska game as our annual end of year rivalry (replacing MSU). This leaves us where we are now (in regards to Michigan rotating off every couple of years) and upgrades our overall schedule. As for 9 conference games...I am on the fence - if we don't update our OOC schedule...then it's fine. However, I still would like to play one or two BCS schools OOC and fill in with a cupcake or two.
My take: Whether it's Penn State-Nebraska, Wisconsin-Nebraska or Iowa-Nebraska, that game would be electric in late November. Going to nine conference games could really hurt nonconference scheduling for teams like Penn State, which drew criticism for its soft slate in 2009. Teams with massive stadiums can't afford to have only six home games in any given year, so the seasons where they have five Big Ten road games would need to be countered with three nonconference home games.
Scott from Philadelphia: 1. As much as I hate to admit it, Penn State is the awkward third wheel in the OSU-UM-PSU hate triangle. There have been some great games recently and Penn State certainly has a strong dislike for OSU and Michigan, the history is just not there. We have as much a history with Nebraska as Michigan, so I'd be ok with not being in the same division as OSU and Mich. as long as we had Nebraska (if you throw Iowa and Wisc. in there, that could be quite a strong division).2. Absolutely. The rivalry has been very good recently and if there was the option to preserve it, I say go for it. If I had to pick 1 big ten team to maintain a permanent rivalry with it would be OSU.3. So basically, it'd be like the big ten now with 2 teams every year that we don't play except they'd always be 2 teams in the other division? I like that. While it does take away 1 potential out of conference game, its not like Penn State is scheduling a lot of great OOC games. Maybe it will force them to only play 1 cupcake school each year.
My take: I agree Nebraska could be substituted nicely for Michigan, and the Ohio State-Penn State rivalry is worth preserving for a number of reasons. Would there be a need for protected rivalries with a nine-game conference schedule? Certainly not as much as there would be with an eight-game league slate.
Cameron from Toronto writes: To answer your first questions, I don't at all like the idea of Penn St. not being in the same division as Michigan and Ohio St., those are our two biggest rivalry games and to lose even one a season due to crossover schedules, in my eyes, is unacceptable. I realize there is already a chance due to the way the schedules are set now, but to make those chances even greater is again unacceptable. If you could guarantee a crossover game with OSU each season, the above scenario would be easier to swallow. I aligned the teams based on geography and I really like what I see: In the East - PSU, Michigan, OSU, MSU, Indiana, and Purdue. In the West - Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, and Northwestern. Wisconsin, Iowa, and Nebraska will be able to balance out the power football wise as they are perennially good teams (sometimes very underrated).
Adam Rittenberg: It sounds like the Ohio State rivalry means more to Penn State fans than any other in the Big Ten. Playing Michigan a little less would sting a bit, but probably not after seeing the rivalries with Nebraska, Iowa and perhaps Wisconsin grow. Now you make a good point about Wisconsin, Iowa and Nebraska balancing out things in the West. But could that bloc beat Ohio State on a somewhat regular basis?
Thanks to all the Penn State fans for their submissions.
Wednesday, I asked Penn State fans to weigh in on division alignment.
To review, here were the three questions:
- How would you feel about Penn State being in a division with Iowa, Nebraska and Wisconsin, but not Ohio State or Michigan?
- How would you feel if Penn State had a protected crossover rivalry with Ohio State, preserving an excellent annual series?
- How would the very real prospect of nine conference games impact your view of divisions? In this format, teams would play all but two conference foes every year, just like the current setup.
Let's get some answers ...
Lance from Bedford, Pa., writes: I see some irony in you asking us the tough questions being that we are the Big Ten's stepchild. I do not feel that PSU has established a strong rivalry in the conference even after 17 seasons. Looking at the short history, it has been a win/loss see-saw with almost every team. We have established some dominance over Wisconsin and Michigan recently while being owned by Iowa. Ohio State may be the closest thing to a rivalry that we have and losing the nation's highest recruited quarterback to them a couple of years ago only stoked the fire. Nobody in the B10 has been as competitive recently with Ohio State as Penn State. Therefore, with Michigan struggling and OSU dominating Wiscy and Iowa, I don't see how you keep PSU and OSU in the same division. Agreed?
My take: Without giving too much away about my division proposal (coming Friday morning), I agree with your point about Penn State and Ohio State. Penn State is the only Big Ten team to have beaten Ohio State two times during the Buckeyes' dominant run. Iowa and Wisconsin fans should be proud of their teams, but neither squad has beaten Ohio State since 2004. That's a long drought. Penn State, meanwhile, has beaten Ohio State twice in the last five years. The Penn State-Michigan rivalry has some passion, but Michigan has dominated until the last two years. I think there's a ton of potential for a Penn State-Nebraska rivalry.
Jason from Tampa writes: Re: Question for PSU FansIf we could protect the annual game with OSU; I feel being in the same division with Nebraska, Iowa and Wisconsin would be great. Especially if we could set up the Nebraska game as our annual end of year rivalry (replacing MSU). This leaves us where we are now (in regards to Michigan rotating off every couple of years) and upgrades our overall schedule. As for 9 conference games...I am on the fence - if we don't update our OOC schedule...then it's fine. However, I still would like to play one or two BCS schools OOC and fill in with a cupcake or two.
My take: Whether it's Penn State-Nebraska, Wisconsin-Nebraska or Iowa-Nebraska, that game would be electric in late November. Going to nine conference games could really hurt nonconference scheduling for teams like Penn State, which drew criticism for its soft slate in 2009. Teams with massive stadiums can't afford to have only six home games in any given year, so the seasons where they have five Big Ten road games would need to be countered with three nonconference home games.
Scott from Philadelphia: 1. As much as I hate to admit it, Penn State is the awkward third wheel in the OSU-UM-PSU hate triangle. There have been some great games recently and Penn State certainly has a strong dislike for OSU and Michigan, the history is just not there. We have as much a history with Nebraska as Michigan, so I'd be ok with not being in the same division as OSU and Mich. as long as we had Nebraska (if you throw Iowa and Wisc. in there, that could be quite a strong division).2. Absolutely. The rivalry has been very good recently and if there was the option to preserve it, I say go for it. If I had to pick 1 big ten team to maintain a permanent rivalry with it would be OSU.3. So basically, it'd be like the big ten now with 2 teams every year that we don't play except they'd always be 2 teams in the other division? I like that. While it does take away 1 potential out of conference game, its not like Penn State is scheduling a lot of great OOC games. Maybe it will force them to only play 1 cupcake school each year.
My take: I agree Nebraska could be substituted nicely for Michigan, and the Ohio State-Penn State rivalry is worth preserving for a number of reasons. Would there be a need for protected rivalries with a nine-game conference schedule? Certainly not as much as there would be with an eight-game league slate.
Cameron from Toronto writes: To answer your first questions, I don't at all like the idea of Penn St. not being in the same division as Michigan and Ohio St., those are our two biggest rivalry games and to lose even one a season due to crossover schedules, in my eyes, is unacceptable. I realize there is already a chance due to the way the schedules are set now, but to make those chances even greater is again unacceptable. If you could guarantee a crossover game with OSU each season, the above scenario would be easier to swallow. I aligned the teams based on geography and I really like what I see: In the East - PSU, Michigan, OSU, MSU, Indiana, and Purdue. In the West - Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, and Northwestern. Wisconsin, Iowa, and Nebraska will be able to balance out the power football wise as they are perennially good teams (sometimes very underrated).
Adam Rittenberg: It sounds like the Ohio State rivalry means more to Penn State fans than any other in the Big Ten. Playing Michigan a little less would sting a bit, but probably not after seeing the rivalries with Nebraska, Iowa and perhaps Wisconsin grow. Now you make a good point about Wisconsin, Iowa and Nebraska balancing out things in the West. But could that bloc beat Ohio State on a somewhat regular basis?
Thanks to all the Penn State fans for their submissions.
Adam Rittenberg | email
College Football- ESPN.com Big Ten blogger
- Joined ESPN.com in 2008
- Wrote for Arlington Heights (Ill.) Daily Herald
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Adam Rittenberg
Rittenberg joined ESPN.com in 2008 after four years at the Arlington Heights (Ill.) Daily Herald, where he covered sports at Notre Dame, Northwestern, DePaul and several other colleges. He lives in Chicago.
Brian Bennett
Bennett joined ESPN.com in August 2008 after nine years at The Courier-Journal in Louisville, Ky., where he covered college sports and the University of Louisville beat. He lives in Louisville.
BIG TEN TEAM COVERAGE
RECRUITING NATION
Michigan: WolverineNation
Follow everything Michigan at WolverineNation: Michigan Wolverines football, basketball, news, recruiting and more.
You must be signed in to post a comment