Glass pleased with divisional alignment

Fred Glass said he got just about everything he wanted from the Big Ten’s divisional alignment.

For the conference itself, he said, he was hoping for balance, something that made geographical sense, and something that maintained traditional rivalries, which were the three tenants that Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said he was trying to use as criteria. Glass said he thought the division split provided that.

“We wanted competitive balance, for the conference and for IU,” Glass said. “If we made it strictly geographic, we probably would’ve been in the same division as Penn State, Ohio State and Michigan, and I think that would’ve been competitively unfair.”

For his school itself, Glass said it was important to him to keep Purdue in IU’s division and to keep the Old Oaken Bucket game on the final weekend of the regular season. That was also achieved.

“I wanted to play them every year and I wanted it to be the last game,” Glass said. “And I think it’s good that we’re in the same pennant race, if you will.”

The rest of the division also worked out in Glass’s favor with Ohio State, Penn State, Illinois and Wisconsin. Ohio State and Illinois typically draw well because the schools are of short driving distance from Bloomington. Ohio State especially tends to bring a large fan base, which comes close to packing Memorial Stadium.

“I’m really really pleased about that,” he said. “That was sort of gravy. There’s no hiding from the big teams, the traditional powers in the conference. But if I’ve got to play one of the four on a regular basis, I’d sure like it to be Ohio State just because of the attendance.”

Glass’s one quibble with the schedule, though was that to make everything work, the conference had to mostly toss out the home-road rotations that had been in place through 2010. For that reason, the Hoosiers play at Ohio State in both 2010 and 2011.

“It’s kind of a drag to go to Columbus two years in a row both competitively and attendance wise,” Glass said. “But everyone has a story like that. In the big scheme of things, they wanted a balanced division and they did a nice job balancing that.”


  1. OK, let’s sell the PN St game for the next two years to the DC area, pocket $6 million, and add Towson as a permanent non-conference home game so we always have 8 home games! Just a suggestion.

  2. These divisions are an idiotic, contrived mess to satisfy media consultants. A simple East/West split solves ALL of the rivalry/scheduling issues and is much better for the fans. As to the ‘competitive imbalance’ IU traded Michigan for Wisconsin…..and that is better how?

    Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska are at least equivilent (actually better this season) to OSU, PSU, Michigan. The obvious answer was the right answer, instead we’ll have a confusing schedule and unappealling match-ups.

    Big 10 divisions = Big FAIL.

  3. Apparently the (experts) Delany, AD’S and Presidents don’t agree. What can be so confusing about the schedule when it is released to the fans months (if not years) in advance and the games are played one at a time. As far as media consultants are concerned, the only media that has to be in agreement and satisfied is BTN. In their vision they may have aligned the divisions as so to be more adaptable for future expansion.

Comments are closed.