Jump to content

B1G Protected Rivalries

AuroranHusker
 Share

Recommended Posts

AuroranHusker

AuroranHusker

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Entirety of the comment by Adam Rittenberg:

 

Purdue AD Mike Bobinski said basketball coaches have "unanimous support" for protected rivalries that would ensure biannual games. Purdue-Indiana and Michigan-Michigan State are the two big ones, and Northwestern-Illinois also was brought up. "I don't know if we'll be able to get to it for this year," Bobinski said, "but I think we'll get there for the reasonably near future, which is good."

HuskerFever

HuskerFever

Posted
Posted

So it would potentially be:

 

Indiana/Purdue

Michigan/Michigan State

Northwestern/Illinois

Minnesota/Wisconsin

 

Remaining teams would be:

Iowa, Maryland, Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers

 

And let me guess... we'll be paired up with Iowa because we're a border state and that automatically makes us rivals?

AuroranHusker

AuroranHusker

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, HuskerFever said:

So it would potentially be:

 

Indiana/Purdue

Michigan/Michigan State

Northwestern/Illinois

Minnesota/Wisconsin

 

Remaining teams would be:

Iowa, Maryland, Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers

 

And let me guess... we'll be paired up with Iowa because we're a border state and that automatically makes us rivals?

 

I'm not sure it will be an "every school, every year" type of deal. But if forced to choose: personally, I'd rather have it be Wisconsin than Iowa.

 

Edited by AuroranHusker
MichHusker

MichHusker

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, AuroranHusker said:

 

That goes without saying. I'm all for KU & OU in The B16.

That's funny, the Metro Detroit sports talk show was taking about this yesterday since it looks like Notre Dame is going to the ACC. The host and producer were pretty much in agreement that they want Oklahoma and Texas to join the Big 10 to balance out the west in football and be decently competitive in football. When the idea of bringing in Kansas instead of Texas was brought up, well...let's just say it was met with an emphatic no. I'm in favor of Oklahoma and Kansas btw

Edited by MichHusker
AuroranHusker

AuroranHusker

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, MichHusker said:

That's funny, the Metro Detroit sports talk show was taking about this yesterday since it looks like Notre Dame is going to the ACC. The host and producer were pretty much in agreement that they want Oklahoma and Texas to join the Big 10 to balance out the west in football and be decently competitive in football. When the idea of bringing in Kansas instead of Texas was brought up, well...let's just say it was meant with an emphatic no. I'm in favor of Oklahoma and Kansas btw

 

I'm sure the Big Ten would rather have Texas as well. I just have a hard time believing the 'Horns will ever give up on the Longhorn Network & their presumed birthright of leading a ten-team Texas League any time soon!

kldm64

kldm64

Posted
Posted
On ‎5‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 5:21 PM, AuroranHusker said:

 

I'm sure the Big Ten would rather have Texas as well. I just have a hard time believing the 'Horns will ever give up on the Longhorn Network & their presumed birthright of leading a ten-team Texas League any time soon!

 

I agree the Big Ten would prefer to get both Texas and OU as any conference would want those two school to join.  It would be huge if Big 10 could land both those schools.  I'd love to have both Texas and OU in our conference again.  The Big 10 would have 2 of the biggest games every year with Ohio State/Michigan and Texas/OU.  Gotta love built in rivalry games like that. 

HuskerFever

HuskerFever

Posted
Posted

We saw some of the university's (and conference's) cards during the giant overblown conference realignment shuffle back in 2010 . If I recall (and correct me if I'm wrong):

 

- Kansas and Kansas State were outward about being tied at the hip and it was a 'take us both or none of us'

- Oklahoma was a little more lenient about leaving Oklahoma State's side

- Texas was going to call the shots (i.e. take a non-equal media deal) wherever they went and the Pac-10 wasn't going to allow it

- The Big Ten was very adamant about "equal" (fair?) sharing among the Big Ten schools

Silverbacked1

Silverbacked1

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, colhusker said:

The only way I would be okay with Texass joining would be if they were told right up front "your ego has ruined two conferences, you will NOT make the rules here".  

 

The only way I will be okay with Texas in a conference with us again is after I am dead.

Edited by Silverbacked1
cipsucks

cipsucks

Posted
Posted

I really dislike Texas.  It's their attitude, that and the fact we didn't beat them very often in most sports.  For our younger posters, who weren't born back in the mid 1990's when the Big Eight conference was kind enough to let 4 schools from the failed SWC into our league, here's the skinny.  On almost every vote when it came to determining conference rules and guidelines, whenever it was Texas vs Nebraska, the other seven Big Eight schools always sided with Texas.  At that time, they couldn't beat NU in football, so they decided to bring us down legislatively.

 

Texas is definitely a villain.  The 7 remaining Big 8 schools, especially Missouri and OU, are pussies.

 

This crap has been building up inside of me for over 20 years.   ;)

kldm64

kldm64

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, cipsucks said:

I really dislike Texas.  It's their attitude, that and the fact we didn't beat them very often in most sports.  For our younger posters, who weren't born back in the mid 1990's when the Big Eight conference was kind enough to let 4 schools from the failed SWC into our league, here's the skinny.  On almost every vote when it came to determining conference rules and guidelines, whenever it was Texas vs Nebraska, the other seven Big Eight schools always sided with Texas.  At that time, they couldn't beat NU in football, so they decided to bring us down legislatively.

 

Texas is definitely a villain.  The 7 remaining Big 8 schools, especially Missouri and OU, are pussies.

 

This crap has been building up inside of me for over 20 years.   ;)

 

So based on that, Nebraska was the only school that disagreed with the rest of the schools in the conference.  So how is that Texas or the other schools fault if they all vote a one way and NU is the only school to vote a different way?  Just because the voted a certain way doesn't mean it was to side with Texas.

cipsucks

cipsucks

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, kldm64 said:

 

So based on that, Nebraska was the only school that disagreed with the rest of the schools in the conference.  So how is that Texas or the other schools fault if they all vote a one way and NU is the only school to vote a different way?  Just because the voted a certain way doesn't mean it was to side with Texas.

 

You make a valid point.  Prior to World War II, most of the world sided with Neville Chamberlain over Winston Churchill.  Doesn't mean they sided with Hitler....   ;)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...