What If Notre Dame (Or Another Team) Joined the Big Ten?

What if the Big 10 (11) added a 12th team and split into a two-division conference, much like the SEC, Big12, or the ACC?

Much has been discussed and speculated regarding who to add and whether a championship game is good for the league. However, very little has been discussed on how best to split twelve teams into two divisions. But with discussion of a league expansion on the back-burner, since Notre Dame turned down the Big 10's last offer, I guess we have plenty of time to discuss how the (eventual) expansion should be structured.

The way I see it, there are two ways to split the conference geographically: East v. West or North v. South. But there are major problems with the East v. West split--something that the Big12 Conference knows too well. All of the traditional "good teams" would be concentrated in one division, the East.

If the conference were split into East v. West divisions, here's what it would look like:

East:

1. Penn State
2. Ohio State
3. Michigan
4. Michigan State
5. Purdue
6. Indiana
   

West:

1. Wisconsin
2. Minnesota
3. Iowa
4. Illinois
5. Northwestern
6. [New Team Added Here]--Notre Dame, if added, would fit nicely here geographically since they are close to Chicago.

As you can see, the East is concentrated with the three most "storied" programs in the Big 10. And like the Big 12 SouthDivision, which includes Oklahoma and Texas and is almost always better than the Big 12 North Division, the Big 10 East would be a three-team race . . . most years. Then, the conference championship game would be one of the "big three" against Wisconsin or Notre Dame most of the time.

However, if split North v. South, here's how the divisions would look:

North:

1. Michigan
2. Michigan State
3. Wisconsin
4. Minnesota
5. Northwestern
6. [New Team Added Here]--Notre Dame also fits well here.
   

South:

1. Penn State
2. Ohio State
3. Illinois
4. Indiana
5. Purdue
6. Iowa

This configuration would be more balanced and more likely to generate quality championship games each year--i.e. Michigan, Wisconsin, or Notre Dame, against Ohio State or Penn State.

Even though this North/South configuration sets-up better for Penn State, I actually prefer the East/West divide. Assuming the Big 10 retains an 8-game conference schedule, it would ensure that Penn State plays Ohio State and Michigan every year, since the Nits would play each team in its division (5 games). Then, the rest of their Big 10 schedule would include a rotation of three Western division teams, ensuring that Penn State would play a team like Notre Dame 3 out of every 6 years, or so.

The Big 10 could also divide the conference based on perceived strength of programs, much like the ACC did with its Coastal and Atlantic divisions--whatever those labels mean. (Side Note: I've never been able to figure out the geographic rational behind the divisions, thus I assume geography did not enter into the calculation.) Either way, geographically or not, I think we could see some interesting pairings within the divisions.

Overall, I think it would be good for the league to add a 12th team. But don't hold your breath. It may be a long time until we see it. After all, a conference championship game makes winning the conference much hard. Plus, it would be harder for a Big 10 team to go undefeated and reach a BCS Championship game. Just ask the 2007 Ohio State team. I'm sure they will tell you that they did not mind sitting at home and waiting for teams ranked ahead of them to lose as they slid their way in the the BCS Championship game last year.

Sing It With Me: All I Want For Chirstmas Is A Dual-Threat QB (Updated)

Updated: December 7, 2008

Ok, so maybe I want a little more than just a Quarterback. Below is my wish list of recruits and my projected probability that Penn State lands each. We probably have 6 more scholarships available:

Quarterback

1. Kevin Newsome--75% (We'll see what happens now that he's been up for his official visit).
   
2. Tajh Boyd--5% (Boyd has now decommitted from both West Virginia and Tennessee, so who knows what team he will finally sign with, but Penn State is on his short-list).
   
3. P.J. Jones (2010)--85% (Newsome's decision won't effect P.J. who has to be PSU's #1 priority for 2010).
   

Running Back--None

Wide Receiver

1. Justin Brown--85% (Also rumored to be a "silent verbal," but I'd be shocked if it's not PSU in the end).
2. Antone Exum (Ath.)--60% (It's down to PSU and Va. Tech) .

Tight End--None

Offensive Line--None

Defensive End

1. Jason Ankrah--20% (PSU staff may have cooled on him, but he's still the best the D-End prospect).
   
2. Lanford Collins--20% (He will visit soon, after that who knows).
   

Defensive Tackle

1. Raynard Randolph--25% (Big athletic tackle that has enough talent to thrive under Larry Johnson, Sr.)
   

Linebacker

1. Jelani Jenkins (OLB)--65% (I'd be surprised if he doesn't choose PSU in the end).
   

Defensive Back

1. Gerald Hodges (Saf.)--60% (Has not solidified his commitment to Rutgers since his recent visit and is coming to PSU for an official visit soon).
   

Rose Bowl Bulletin Board Material Keeps Coming

Stay tuned to Black Shoe Diaries for the latest bulletin board material from a disappointed USC team. This terrific Penn State sports blog is committed to re-publishing every USC comment that suggests that they are "too good for" the Rose Bowl, the Big Ten, or Penn State. It's only been three days since they got the inside track to the Rose Bowl (after Oregon State lost to Oregon on Saturday) and USC has already made over half a dozen comments that you would never hear out of any Penn State player to the media.

Actually, I'm pretty sure if our guys said ANYTHING like this, JoePa would shut-down all direct media communication with his players.

Four straight Rose Bowl appearances might get boring, but lock-it-up Trojans. As you can see, this is a team that doesn't just boarder the line of confidence and cockiness. USC actually thinks that they can talk all of this smack for over a month and get away with it. Like Penn State won't be listening? This is just the product of a team following its leader--Head Coach Pete Carroll--but that topic is for another day.

All I know is: "Get your popcorn ready" on New Years Day, 5:10 p.m., EST. The Trojans are going to face a motivated and focused Nittany Lion team.

Cheer Up USC: At Least You Are Home For The Holidays

It started, already. The "experts" have already written off Penn State's chances against USC in the Rose Bowl. Some are even calling it a consolation prize for USC, and they still need to beat UCLA next week to even make a BCS game (although nobody actually thinks they will lose that game).

What do I think about that?

Good. That's fine with me. I'd rather be a 10 point underdog, than a 3 point favorite ever day of the week and twice on Saturdays. Why? Three simple reasons:

1. Penn State plays better as an underdog, especially in bowl games. (Just ask the '82 Georgia Bulldogs, the '86 Miami Hurricanes, and the '05 Ohio State Buckeyes. Sure two of those games were over 20 years ago, but I would argue that being an underdog also bleeds into the next category.)
2. The team that plays better in a bowl game is usually the team that is excited to be there. (Penn State is excited to go to the Rose Bowl, unlike USC who thinks that they are better than the Rose Bowl and too good to play another Big Ten team. USC really wanted to play in the BCS Championship, Fiesta Bowl, or Sugar Bows against a Big-12 or an SEC team.)
3. Two words: Bulletin Board. (USC has already provided some pretty good bulletin board material for Penn State motivation. I can't imagine what they will say in the coming month. Also, no one in the media is going to give Penn State any credit for having enough speed or talent to keep up with the USC offense, or to score against the USC defense--ranked #1 nationally. Keep it coming guys, I'm sure JoePa will take all of the motivation he can get.)

What's the reality of a Penn State v. USC Rose Bowl? Penn State might not have enough speed or talent to compete with a USC team that has NFL athletes 3-Deep at every position. But this is a team game and it's not a best-of-seven series (thank god). We only need to win one game.

Win one game against a disappointed and unenthusiastic team who has heard for five weeks that they are supposed to beat another slow, run-of-the-mill Big Ten team? That USC team is beatable. No predictions here, not yet. I'm just saying... I like our chances.

P.S. To all USC fans (and media blowhards) who argue that they are the best one-loss team, and that USC should be playing in the BCS Championship game instead of Oklahoma, Texas, or Florida, I have a message for you: next time, DON'T LOSE TO OREGON STATE!!! USC (just like Penn State) can not lose to an average conference team, in an average conference, and hope to get respect in December when BCS voting really matters.