Protected Rivalries

[FirstDownB]

Does anyone know why we cannot have protected rivalries in basketball to ensure games like Purdue vs. IU happen 2x every year? There are protected cross-divisional rivals in football. Wouldn't it be even easier to do it in basketball since there are more games and teams are not be locked into intra-division match ups?

Here, I did this is less than 5 minutes.. It preserves 2 rivals for each team. I quickly chose traditional rivalries and geographical matches where possible. I'm sure it could be tweaked to make it even better and more equitable. In most cases this would also result in less travel miles and more fan friendly ($$) match ups vs. a random schedule.
PU: IU, NW
IU: PU, ILL
ILL: IU, NW
Iowa: Min, Neb
UM: MSU, OSU
MSU: UM, Mary
OSU: UM, PSU
PSU: Rut, OSU
UW: Min, Neb
Min: UW, Iowa
Neb: Iowa, UW
NW: ILL, PU
Mary: MSU, Rut
Rut: Mary, PSU

 

[TC4THREE]

Actually, the only protected rivalry in Big Ten football is IU and Purdue.

 

[FirstDownB]

Actually, the only protected rivalry in Big Ten football is IU and Purdue.

You're right. But the other traditional rivalries were protected by virtue of the teams being put in the same division. Indiana (the state) was on the dividing line. The question remains, why not basketball?

 

[TC4THREE]

It wasn't even protected when we were at 11 or 12 teams I don't think. I wouldn't hold my breath on them doing it now that we have 14. If IU and Purdue wanted it to happen, I really think they could get it done. Historically, both are among the top programs in the conference. I doubt the other programs would really care if they miss IU/Purdue both one extra time in a rotation through the schedule.

What could/should happen is that in years where they are only scheduled once they could play one another in the Crossroads Classic and let Butler and Notre Dame play in the other game in those years.

 

[Dryfly88]

It wasn't even protected when we were at 11 or 12 teams I don't think. I wouldn't hold my breath on them doing it now that we have 14. If IU and Purdue wanted it to happen, I really think they could get it done. Historically, both are among the top programs in the conference. I doubt the other programs would really care if they miss IU/Purdue both one extra time in a rotation through the schedule.

What could/should happen is that in years where they are only scheduled once they could play one another in the Crossroads Classic and let Butler and Notre Dame play in the other game in those years.

I like the Crossroads idea.

Does anyone know if there is any B1G rule that would preclude PU/IU from doing this prior to the B1G season "officially" starting??

 

[Gold&Black]

They did it once before with the Booker team. Marketed it as "The Dual In The Dome".

 

[lbodel]

I like the Crossroads idea.

Does anyone know if there is any B1G rule that would preclude PU/IU from doing this prior to the B1G season "officially" starting??

The Crossroads Classic is literally what is wrong with college sports and why people need to grow up (and if that list includes Purdue, so be it).

Purdue ends up playing in a game in Indianapolis where a majority of fans are IU fans rooting against Purdue + the team we are playing rooting against Purdue. So we end up in a hostile environment every year to play a game we should be playing as a home/home to improve our home schedule yearly.

Why can't the Crossroads Classic be games played at the home arenas? All 4 schools have good atmospheres.

I just really don't like the Crossroads Classic because it puts us at a disadvantage every year and quite frankly, we should be playing these kind of games as home & homes. Who cares if we play at home first? Just start it already.

Throw in the Indiana game - it goes back to someone doesn't want to do it. When the play once thing happened first, it was played in Indianapolis the year Purdue played at home I believe - then the year IU played only at home, we didn't play a second time.

And no, I don't believe there's a rule that would prevent it - obviously it would not count as a conference game. It's no different than if 2 Big Ten teams were in a preseason tournament and happened to play.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

The Crossroads Classic is literally what is wrong with college sports and why people need to grow up (and if that list includes Purdue, so be it).

Purdue ends up playing in a game in Indianapolis where a majority of fans are IU fans rooting against Purdue + the team we are playing rooting against Purdue. So we end up in a hostile environment every year to play a game we should be playing as a home/home to improve our home schedule yearly.

Why can't the Crossroads Classic be games played at the home arenas? All 4 schools have good atmospheres.

I just really don't like the Crossroads Classic because it puts us at a disadvantage every year and quite frankly, we should be playing these kind of games as home & homes. Who cares if we play at home first? Just start it already.

Throw in the Indiana game - it goes back to someone doesn't want to do it. When the play once thing happened first, it was played in Indianapolis the year Purdue played at home I believe - then the year IU played only at home, we didn't play a second time.

And no, I don't believe there's a rule that would prevent it - obviously it would not count as a conference game. It's no different than if 2 Big Ten teams were in a preseason tournament and happened to play.

+ Bazillion on this.....

As to the Crossroads Classic opponent issue......IIRC, this came up in a thread earlier this year. Yes, Purdue and Indiana did play a non-conference game at the "dome" under the "old" version of the Big Ten (11, 12, and now 14) unbalanced schedule when they were scheduled to meet just once during conference season. My understanding is that under the Crossroads Classic contractual relationship, which I think runs through 2019, Purdue and Indiana cannot play....nor can they play a non-conference game. It's either Butler/Purdue or Butler/Indiana and Notre Dame/Indiana or Purdue/Notre Dame. Notre Dame and Butler aren't allowed to play against each other either from my understanding.

 

[TC4THREE]

The Crossroads Classic is literally what is wrong with college sports and why people need to grow up (and if that list includes Purdue, so be it).

Purdue ends up playing in a game in Indianapolis where a majority of fans are IU fans rooting against Purdue + the team we are playing rooting against Purdue. So we end up in a hostile environment every year to play a game we should be playing as a home/home to improve our home schedule yearly.

Why can't the Crossroads Classic be games played at the home arenas? All 4 schools have good atmospheres.

I just really don't like the Crossroads Classic because it puts us at a disadvantage every year and quite frankly, we should be playing these kind of games as home & homes. Who cares if we play at home first? Just start it already.

Throw in the Indiana game - it goes back to someone doesn't want to do it. When the play once thing happened first, it was played in Indianapolis the year Purdue played at home I believe - then the year IU played only at home, we didn't play a second time.

And no, I don't believe there's a rule that would prevent it - obviously it would not count as a conference game. It's no different than if 2 Big Ten teams were in a preseason tournament and happened to play.

This is like an NCAA tournament game. You have your fans. The other team has their fans. Other fans are there and they may cheer for you, against you, or not care at all about your game. I've been to this event three times and have never felt like a road team. When we have been the late game, hardly any fans from the early game stuck around to the end of our game. Last season, hardly any of our fans stuck around for all of our game.
Nothing wrong with this event. Events like this have been going on as long as I can remember dating all the way back to the Big 4 Classic (IU/ND vs KY/Lville) in the 1980's. It's not as if early season neutral court games just started happening in the past few years.

 

[TC4THREE]

+ Bazillion on this.....

As to the Crossroads Classic opponent issue......IIRC, this came up in a thread earlier this year. Yes, Purdue and Indiana did play a non-conference game at the "dome" under the "old" version of the Big Ten (11, 12, and now 14) unbalanced schedule when they were scheduled to meet just once during conference season. My understanding is that under the Crossroads Classic contractual relationship, which I think runs through 2019, Purdue and Indiana cannot play....nor can they play a non-conference game. It's either Butler/Purdue or Butler/Indiana and Notre Dame/Indiana or Purdue/Notre Dame. Notre Dame and Butler aren't allowed to play against each other either from my understanding.

It would seem the contract is likely between the schools involved and if all four thought it made sense to change it then they probably could unless I'm missing something. The issue is probably that IU and Purdue don't want to play one another outside of the conference schedule. Two years ago I know I was fine with playing IU only once at our place when our team wasn't very good. Most IU fans are probably ok with not having to come to Mackey this year when we look like we have a very good team and they look like another non-Zeller Crean year.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

It would seem the contract is likely between the schools involved and if all four thought it made sense to change it then they probably could unless I'm missing something. The issue is probably that IU and Purdue don't want to play one another outside of the conference schedule. Two years ago I know I was fine with playing IU only once at our place when our team wasn't very good. Most IU fans are probably ok with not having to come to Mackey this year when we look like we have a very good team and they look like another non-Zeller Crean year.

I think the conference schedule nuances works out fine over time.....what can you do with ten.....errrrr......fourteen teams?

It would seem the contract is likely between the schools involved and if all four thought it made sense to change it then they probably could unless I'm missing something. The issue is probably that IU and Purdue don't want to play one another outside of the conference schedule. Two years ago I know I was fine with playing IU only once at our place when our team wasn't very good. Most IU fans are probably ok with not having to come to Mackey this year when we look like we have a very good team and they look like another non-Zeller Crean year.

TC,

I see your side to it and respect it, and that's not to say there aren't some benefits, but let's face it......Notre Dame can and does use its leverage in football and to a lesser extent basketball, and Indiana can certainly do that with basketball. Purdue pretty much has to go along......to get along......especially under the recent administrations. Most of what I am saying is that I think Purdue would be better off doing home/home in this series. In an alternate/parallel dimension, maybe Purdue could get some kind of agreement with Louisville and Kentucky for future home/home (probably unlikely) or get them to Indianapolis, then they could say we're done with the Crossroads after 2019 unless you want to change the format. JMHO, you need somebody other than Mr. Burke to get that kind of stuff done. Maybe I'm just bloviating, but I have always felt Purdue was at a disadvantage in the Crossroads Classic, but perhaps I'm just overreacting to Purdue's ineffectiveness in those games (0-4).

As to the unbalanced schedule in conference......no use trying to manipulate around it......it works itself out over a period of years, and that's just the way it is now with re-alignment. On the flip side, Purdue, being in the West division for football and getting only one East division opponent outside of Indiana is a windfall....well it should be........would be.......could be......might be......oops......it isn't.....another story for another board.

 

[lbodel]

This is like an NCAA tournament game. You have your fans. The other team has their fans. Other fans are there and they may cheer for you, against you, or not care at all about your game. I've been to this event three times and have never felt like a road team. When we have been the late game, hardly any fans from the early game stuck around to the end of our game. Last season, hardly any of our fans stuck around for all of our game.
Nothing wrong with this event. Events like this have been going on as long as I can remember dating all the way back to the Big 4 Classic (IU/ND vs KY/Lville) in the 1980's. It's not as if early season neutral court games just started happening in the past few years.

Do I mind a neutral site game? Absolutely not.

However, look back at the Wooden Tradition - Purdue played opponents it otherwise would really not. We played the #1 team in the country in that event (Arizona). The chances of us having a home and home series with Arizona is not likely. We also played Louisville, Davidson (when they were good), Xavier, Cincinnati, etc.

But that's the point of neutral site games - to play teams you wouldn't normally play regularly. The Crossroads Classic is playing the same team every other year - alternating between two teams. Just play the damn games at each school, considering schools complain regularly they can't schedule good home non-conference games!

 

[FirstDownB]

Good responses. I guess I was assuming that Purdue and Indiana could not just go to the conference and say we want to play each other 2x every year or it would be done by now. I also assumed IU and Purdue fans alike enjoyed the rivalry to the point where everyone would want to see the rival come into their house every year. Apparently part of the answer to my question may be that the rivalry is just not that important anymore.

 

[Dryfly88]

The Crossroads Classic is literally what is wrong with college sports and why people need to grow up (and if that list includes Purdue, so be it).

Purdue ends up playing in a game in Indianapolis where a majority of fans are IU fans rooting against Purdue + the team we are playing rooting against Purdue. So we end up in a hostile environment every year to play a game we should be playing as a home/home to improve our home schedule yearly.

Why can't the Crossroads Classic be games played at the home arenas? All 4 schools have good atmospheres.

I just really don't like the Crossroads Classic because it puts us at a disadvantage every year and quite frankly, we should be playing these kind of games as home & homes. Who cares if we play at home first? Just start it already.

Throw in the Indiana game - it goes back to someone doesn't want to do it. When the play once thing happened first, it was played in Indianapolis the year Purdue played at home I believe - then the year IU played only at home, we didn't play a second time.

And no, I don't believe there's a rule that would prevent it - obviously it would not count as a conference game. It's no different than if 2 Big Ten teams were in a preseason tournament and happened to play.

"What is literally wrong with college sports and why people need to grow up"

I've read your post 3 times and I still don't understand what your problem is other than you don't like IU fans cheering against us. How about we man up and just win the game? I have been to 2 of them and I didn't feel like we were at a disadvantage because of the crowd, we just played poorly. The one year there weren't enough fans left from the previous game to make any difference.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

"What is literally wrong with college sports and why people need to grow up"

I've read your post 3 times and I still don't understand what your problem is other than you don't like IU fans cheering against us. How about we man up and just win the game? I have been to 2 of them and I didn't feel like we were at a disadvantage because of the crowd, we just played poorly. The one year there weren't enough fans left from the previous game to make any difference.

Dry,

I appreciate your response and follow-up on this post. I'm responding because I wholeheartedly agreed with a lot of what lbodel stated. It's good to hear you were able to attend some of the games and had a good experience (except for the outcomes of the games of course). I jumped in maybe because this just happens to be a sore point with me (and maybe I'm being irrational or responding emotionally). If we are talking BTT or NCAA tournament (2nd/3rd rounds or regionals), I think Indianapolis is a great venue for Purdue. I just think vis-a-vis Indiana especially (but even ND or Butler), Purdue would be better off playing the game at home, and then away.

The Indianapolis media has had an overwhelming bias in favor of Indiana.....I get there are many more Indiana Alumni in and around Indianapolis.....so fine.....that's the way it is......"but why cater to it?" was part of my thinking.

And of course, we know Purdue has rarely played in South Bend (thanks to Richard Phelps).....and maybe that's another source of irritation on this.

Interestingly, the Indiana/Kentucky series halted over this same issue. UK wants a neutral site, and Indiana wants home/home.

Maybe I would just like to see someone with Purdue Administration or the Athletics department be able to use more leverage or be out in front rather than at least appearing to go along. Maybe I'm wrong about that or maybe I'm just not paying enough attention. I get it that there are positives, and it's a nice draw, etc. But if it's a choice between home/home in alternating years.......I'd rather do that......maybe that's what I should have said in the first place.

Sorry for the rant, guys.

Happy Holidays.

 

[lbodel]

"What is literally wrong with college sports and why people need to grow up"

I've read your post 3 times and I still don't understand what your problem is other than you don't like IU fans cheering against us. How about we man up and just win the game? I have been to 2 of them and I didn't feel like we were at a disadvantage because of the crowd, we just played poorly. The one year there weren't enough fans left from the previous game to make any difference.

You don't understand my distaste for ruining rivalries and the true atmosphere of college sports? OK.

There are longstanding rivalries that have all but disappeared out of nothing more than immaturity over the last several years in college sports. Last week, I was able to go to the Syracuse/Georgetown basketball game - one of the better rivalries in college basketball that was halted due to conference realignment. The two schools manned up and agreed to play a new series - on each other's home court. Why do we have to alternate playing 2 in-state schools that we could very well be playing as home/home series?

Also, one of the most consistent complaints you hear about college basketball is there's no good non-conference home games. This board has complained about the quality of non-conference schedule for years. So again, we're not playing Arizona in the Crossroads Classic - it's 2 local schools that we should be playing home/home series against.

But instead we lock ourselves into a contract that forbids us from scheduling games with our arch-rival and we play the second tier game in an event we don't have a good showing at. Sounds a lot better than playing Notre Dame and Butler every other year in Mackey.

 

[IUhaterade]

They did it once before with the Booker team. Marketed it as "The Dual In The Dome".

Duel*
Sorry, couldn't help myself

 

[Dryfly88]

You don't understand my distaste for ruining rivalries and the true atmosphere of college sports? OK.

There are longstanding rivalries that have all but disappeared out of nothing more than immaturity over the last several years in college sports. Last week, I was able to go to the Syracuse/Georgetown basketball game - one of the better rivalries in college basketball that was halted due to conference realignment. The two schools manned up and agreed to play a new series - on each other's home court. Why do we have to alternate playing 2 in-state schools that we could very well be playing as home/home series?

Also, one of the most consistent complaints you hear about college basketball is there's no good non-conference home games. This board has complained about the quality of non-conference schedule for years. So again, we're not playing Arizona in the Crossroads Classic - it's 2 local schools that we should be playing home/home series against.

But instead we lock ourselves into a contract that forbids us from scheduling games with our arch-rival and we play the second tier game in an event we don't have a good showing at. Sounds a lot better than playing Notre Dame and Butler every other year in Mackey.

Obviously you and Tex have a much stronger feeling about this than I do. I just think your attitude further leads to people accusing us of "little brother" syndrome. I'd rather have the attitude of playing anyone anywhere.

Had a great time (other than outcome) both times there and would be going again this year if I didn't have a Son graduating that day.

Still don't get why you keep using words like "grow up" and "immaturity". If anything it has to do with Money not attitude.

Again, I'm not as passionate about the subject so that's it for me.

 

[syc70]

1. Should Purdue & IU play twice a year....yes, but remember there is the opportunity to play a 3rd time in the Big Ten Trny too.
2. The Crossroads Classic is a good thing for all parties involved. The only thing to make it better would be to have all 4 teams play everyone in a 3 year cycle. Purdue & IU would want to sync that cycle to years that they only play once in conference play. All kinds of things can be manipulated w/ contracts.
3. The Crossroads Classic is as much about recruiting, fan bases, & playing in Indy as anything. Notre Dame is not coming to WL in basketball. Playing in Bankers Life is a win/win for all 4 schools. It puts all 4 on national TV, against a quality opponent in what amounts to a "bragging rights game." In recruiting they are looking at the same kids for the most part....Maybe Notre Dame being the outlier there. Bottom line this is a good thing. The alumni base gets to see it around the holidays & it showcases basketball in the Hoosier State.

Anyone that thinks the Crossroads Classic should be on campus is foolish. Anyone that thinks it does not help, is naive. The positives of it far outweigh the negatives. It is good for basketball in the state. It is good for the 4 schools involved.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

great post syc. I'd like to add that maybe we should just concentrate on actually WINNING a game at this thing. I'm tired of watching us get trampled like deer in headlights by teams that want it more.

 

[FirstDownB]

1. Should Purdue & IU play twice a year....yes, but remember there is the opportunity to play a 3rd time in the Big Ten Trny too.
2. The Crossroads Classic is a good thing for all parties involved. The only thing to make it better would be to have all 4 teams play everyone in a 3 year cycle. Purdue & IU would want to sync that cycle to years that they only play once in conference play. All kinds of things can be manipulated w/ contracts.
3. The Crossroads Classic is as much about recruiting, fan bases, & playing in Indy as anything. Notre Dame is not coming to WL in basketball. Playing in Bankers Life is a win/win for all 4 schools. It puts all 4 on national TV, against a quality opponent in what amounts to a "bragging rights game." In recruiting they are looking at the same kids for the most part....Maybe Notre Dame being the outlier there. Bottom line this is a good thing. The alumni base gets to see it around the holidays & it showcases basketball in the Hoosier State.

Anyone that thinks the Crossroads Classic should be on campus is foolish. Anyone that thinks it does not help, is naive. The positives of it far outweigh the negatives. It is good for basketball in the state. It is good for the 4 schools involved.

And I would add that this is perhaps the most effective solution to the whole "Indy is an IU town" issue. Consistently bring good Purdue teams to their doorstep to compete and win over rival teams. I don't think the problem has been the event. The problem has been losing.