Sort of a newbie question, but I know that rivalries have a lot to do with conference realignment. With Notre Dame in the Big Ten, you would assume that they would only join if they were in a division with Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue (their 3 rivals in the Big Ten). Of course, Ohio State is going to want to be in a division with Michigan and Indiana with Purdue.

However, this leaves Penn State out of the Big Ten's Eastern Division. This would put them in a division with Illinois, Northwestern, and the 3 heartland teams (Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota). They would still play 3 teams in the east on a yearly basis, just not every year.

Do you guys think this will ever happen or do you simply think ND will remain independent? Penn State gets screwed over travel wise, but is in an easier division.

The Big 10 is not going to cave to any of NDs demands. The Big 10 is in the drivers seat and will dictate how the divisions will be.

The only thing I would bet money on is that Penn State and ND will be playing the year end game. It would be a huge money maker and TV ratings bonanza and would preceed the OSU-Michigan game.

First, Notre Dame will remain an independent as long as NBC and the BCS continue to make it financially viable for them. Do I think in the long run that this is what both of those parties will do? No. But so far, there have been no signs from either side that the status quo is about to change.

However, if Notre Dame were to ever join the Big Ten, I thought of an interesting alignment that IMO could work:

Big Ten North: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame
Big Ten South: Northwestern, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State

There would be on permanent crossover game:
Michigan-Ohio State
Michigan State-Indiana
Notre Dame-Purdue
Wisconsin-Northwestern
Iowa-Illinois
Minnesota-Penn State

This keeps intact nearly all big rivalries and sets up some great possible championship games in the process. This also keeps travel reasonable for schools in both divisions. Any thoughts on this possible alignment?

Is that how the ACC does it? Permanent crossover games? I know that Miami and Florida State play each other every year, but they are in different divisions of the ACC. Never really understood that.

The question that can actually foster this discussion... can the Big Ten garner enough per school money such that each school actually out-earns Notre Dame?

After the SEC contract, I can't help but think this might be within the realm of possibility.

The ACC and the SEC have one permanent cross over game. The SEC used to have two permanent games but in 2002 (?) went to only one game

Auburn-Georgia
Alabama-Tennessee
Ole-Miss Vanderbilt
LSU-Florida
Mississippi State-Kentucky
Arkansas-South Carolina


Boston College-Virginia Tech
Clemson-Georgia Tech
Florida State-Miami
Maryland-Virginia
North Carolina State-North Carolina
Wake Forest-Duke

This is different than the Big 12. The Big 12 plays the 5 other universities in the same division (as does the SEC and ACC). However, the Big 12 rotates three schools from the opposite division every year home and away. So, every 4 years, they play all of the universities in the opposite division home and away. But this also leads to the fact that NU and OU do not play every year anymore.

I believe that the Big 10 universities already make more than ND - in terms of total money in payouts from TV, NCAA BB credits, bowl revenue, etc. They are in the $13 million range for just TV rights and that number will continue to rise as more and more cable companies sign up for the Big 10 Network.

ND makes $9 million from NBC (assuming that NBC reupped for the same amount even though NBC will be televising one more home game) and an estimated $2 million from the BEs ABC/ESPN and CBS basketball contract.

It is looking more likely that Missouri will become the 12th team in the Big 10, allowing a more traditional east-west alignment:

East - Penn St, Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St, Indiana, Purdue
West- Illinois, NW, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri

Here's how I would see it:

Big Ten "North": Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa

Big Ten "South": Illinois, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Indiana, Purdue, Penn State

Permanent Crossovers:
Michigan - Notre Dame
Ohio State - Penn State
Illinois - Iowa
Purdue - Michigan State
Minnesota - Indiana
Wisconsin - Northwestern

Here is my rationale:

I put "North" and "South" in parentheses since the divisions aren't really based on pure geography (which is the same case with the ACC, and for that matter, the NFL which has the Dallas Cowboys in the NFC East), but rather what would preserve the historic matchups along with balancing the power between the divisions.

The critical item at the top that I believe that has to be in place no matter what is that Michigan and Ohio State must be in the same division. There is no way that there can be a possibility that they would play their regular season-ending game and then turn around a week later to play again in the Big Ten championship game. That means that among the 4 "power" schools, Michigan and Ohio State would need to be in one division and Notre Dame and Penn State would be in the other. Michigan - Notre Dame and Ohio State - Penn State are natural crossover rivalries, so that works out well on that front. Illinois - Northwestern, Indiana - Purdue, and Minnesota - Iowa - Wisconsin are all naturally tied together, as well, so they are placed in the same divisions. As a whole, it made more sense to have Notre Dame with its fellow Indiana schools as well as its virtual Chicago market neighbors of Northwestern and Illinois, with Penn State being added on to get an annual ND - PSU divisional game.

I really doubt that Ohio State and Michigan would let themselves be put in the same division.
Both have the perception that they are perrenially #1 and #2 in football, and being in hte same division almost ensure that both could never go to the BCS bowls. This is PRECISELY what drove the current ACC alignment with Miami and Florida State in separate divisions.

I like the North-South alignment:
If Notre Dame is team #12, I think Dafoeberezin has the right alignment and the right cross-overs (see above). Notre Dame gets their annual games vs. MU, MSU, and Purdue, and Ohio State and Michigan can conceivably meet in the Championship Game for the trip to the Rose Bowl. Will Notre Dame join ??? I don't know. Part of the allure of independence is the money. If the BTN turns out to be a better deal than NBC, then they'll at least listen. Plus Notre Dame can have 4 OOC games (USC and 3 others in their preferred recruiting pastures).

If Missouri comes on as a football power, they might be attractive. Missouri's population is 5 million (more than Iowa or Nebraska). I think they would jump conferences, if offered.
They offer a rivalry with Illinois.
If you add Missouri -
North - Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Michigan, Northwestern
South - Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, OSU, PSU

Cross-overs:
Michigan - Ohio State
Mich. St. - Penn State
Minnesota - Indiana
Wisconsin - Purdue
Iowa - Missouri
Northwestern - Illinois

The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th cross-overs could stand some tweaking, perhaps.

The Big Ten could theoretically trade PSU to the Big East for UC and ND, then grab ISU and Mizzou from the Big 12 (the latter adds 2 things - stakes would be higher in meetings between Iowa and ISU, and the Big Ten gains the St. Louis TV market).

So the divisions could be:
East: Cincinnati, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Purdue
West: Illinois, Iowa, Iowa State, Minnesota, Missouri, Northwestern, Wisconsin

And once these 2 schools build 1-A caliber FB programs, put Xavier in the East and Saint Louis in the West

The way I read it, Notre Dame is probably the best school for the Big Ten. With Missouri, you have to realize that the universities two major markets (Saint Louis and Kansas City) are very much in play to the Illinois Illini and the Kansas Jayhawks. Admittedtly, more Kansas City than Saint Louis.

Notre Dame, on the other hand, is incredibly relevant amoung the Catholic population in two of the largest media markets in the world: New York City (a market still VERY much in play, even with the metoric rise [and fall] of rutgers) and Chicago (though they have to compete with Illinois). This is why any Notre Dame team is basically handed a BCS berth whenever the school reaches nine wins.

However, would Notre Dame give up the exposure and extra monetary bonus given by that 'free and often undeserved' automatic BCS berth if it only had 3 million yearly to gain? I think Notre Dame's ability to appeal to a national footprint consisting of catholics everywhere coupled with national regoconition beats out what would be [sadly] peanuts to a major college football program. Get this: There is a small following in the BYU program to trek down the independent route solely because of the sucess Notre Dame has achieved.

However, what if Notre Dame continues with misearable seasons and accelarates in its fall from grace? That 3 million extra per year the Big Ten can give Notre Dame, or more if the Notre Dame's next tv check is less than 10 million yearly, suddenly looks alot more financially feasible. However, would Notre Dame still be a media hot ticket in an ever-tougher big Ten? Or would they become the second coming of Northwestern? Stay Tuned.

I'm a Big Ten guy and I can't emphasize enough that Michigan and Ohio State are tied at the hip and those schools will block any measure that would separate them - if there's one thing that would be guaranteed if the Big Ten ever went to divisions, it would be that those two schools are going to be together. The main point is that they will always play the last regular season game of the season no matter what (because Michigan and Ohio State will not agree to anything less), which means from a practical standpoint there cannot be a scenario where they would turn around and play again a week later in a conference championship game. The Miami/FSU comparison in the ACC is a bit different because (1) Miami only joined the conference a few years ago, (2) FSU's #1 rival is Florida, and (3) Miami and FSU play their rivalry game early in the season, so there's no chance that they would play in a conference title game a week after their regular season game. The proper comparison here would be the Michigan/Notre Dame rivalry, where they play early in the season and the Big Ten would be more than happy to have them playing each other in a potential conference title game two months later. While I think that the Big Ten is willing to move away from "traditions" much more than the general public gives them credit for, Michigan and Ohio State playing on the last weekend of the season is probably the one thing that is sacrosanct - there is absolutely no way at all that the game would be moved to a date earlier in the year, which means there's no way that the conference would risk having a Michigan/OSU matchup two straight weeks in a row. The more apt comparisons are with the Big 12, where Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma are all in the same division, and the SEC, where Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee are all in the same division. The Big 12 and SEC in theory would probably benefit the most financially from a pairing of two of their respective division mates in a conference title game, but there is a certain limit as to how far things any conference would be willing to shake things up even with a lot of money involved. The bottom line is that Michigan and Ohio State will always meet the last week of the season no matter what and the last week of the season for any conference with divisions need to be reserved for intra-divisional matchups so that there isn't a way that two teams would end up playing each other two weeks in a row.

I've also posted elsewhere that I really don't believe that the Big Ten has any valid interest in Missouri. In short, if the Big Ten ultimately decides to give an invitation to a school other than Notre Dame, it will be to either Syracuse or Rutgers so that the conference can pair that school up with Penn State and claim that it's the top conference in the Northeast as well as the Midwest (which is a whole lot more valuable just when you look at how the Big Ten Network makes its money, which is to simply get into as many households as possible regardless of how many people actually watch it).

The Big Ten trading PSU to the Big East for UC is the equivalent of the SEC trading Florida to the Big East for USF (and therefore, about as likely). I still have a hard time wondering why anyone would actually think that the Big Ten is just going to give up the most powerful football school on the East Coast in the 6th largest state in the country by population and draws over 100,000 fans per game in exchange for some schools that aren't even the most popular schools in their own smaller states. As I've pointed out elsewhere, the state of Pennsylvania has a larger population than the Missouri, Iowa, and Nebraska combined. When the profits of the Big Ten Network depend upon being in the most households possible, one Penn State is worth 10 Nebraskas (which is a school that actually dominates its own market, unlike Cincinnati or Iowa State). There needs to be a moratorium on the notion that the Big Ten wants to be a "Midwestern" conference. The fact of the matter is that the Big Ten has made moves to put itself in position to be the dominant conference in the Northeast, as well, which would be achieved through adding the national fan base of Notre Dame or taking Syracuse or Rutgers from the Big East.

IBD,

Good point on Mich-Ohio St being in same division and not having to play twice in a row.

Myopia, however, on the attraction of Missouri. Most sources disagree.