ALTOONA, Pa. -- One of the most fascinating topics concerning the future of Penn State football centers around what will happen when the Big Ten does away with its current two-division format.
Which is coming in 2024, you can bank on it, once USC and UCLA join the league.
The best news is that Penn State no longer will play in the second-best division in college football, the Big Ten East, which includes annual games against Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State. Navigating the division gauntlet against a dominant Buckeyes program and a Michigan program that's once again a powerhouse would always be a major challenge.
So, who would the Nittany Lions end up playing every year in the conference?
That's where things get really interesting.
I'll give you my simple answer first, while also noting that none of this will in fact be simple.
Penn State should play Ohio State and Michigan State every season as protected rivalry games. Then the third such game should be against Rutgers.
There ya go. That's it. Thanks for stopping by and reading this story.
Wait, wait, before you go. There's a whole lot more to this discussion, so let's get into all of it, step by step.
• Penn State MUST play Ohio State every year. Period
Now, don't get confused here by thinking I'm suggesting the Lions actually want to play the Buckeyes every year. Who would want that? Because it's usually going to be a loss. Penn State has dropped six in a row and 10 of the last 11 against the Buckeyes, with the lone win coming on a miracle blocked field goal touchdown in 2016.
Believe me, James Franklin would love to have a schedule that doesn't include Ohio State every year. It would make the path to the College Football Playoff that much easier.
But the Big Ten needs that annual matchup. And that's really all there is to it.
The Penn State-Ohio State game this past season was the 10th-highest rated college football game of 2022. The 2021 meeting also ranked 10th that season. The 2020 meeting ranked seventh, while the 2019 meeting ranked sixth.
You get the idea. That annual contest is huge for business in the Big Ten, so the league and its broadcast partners must have it continue to be part of the inventory in their $1 billion a year TV deal.
• Penn State and Michigan State need each other
The Big Ten has been trying to force that rivalry upon us for years, and hey, I'll admit that it's worked. I like having the Lions and Sparty close the season against one another every year.
Ohio State and Michigan will have each other. Michigan and Michigan State will have each other. Michigan State needs Penn State as its second big protected game every year, and vice versa.
I see no reason to believe the Land Grant Trophy game would be nixed.
• The third protected game should be Rutgers, but ...
Rutgers needs Penn State because that would be the marquee game on the schedule every year for the Scarlet Knights. That's how all this works, too. The Big Ten has to throw every team a bone with a game that will be of huge interest to its fan base, and nobody would be better for Rutgers than Penn State.
But what about Maryland? The Terps would need a big rivalry opponent on their schedule. That would be Penn State also, but then it would leave Rutgers without its sexiest potential protected game.
And if the Lions are going to play Ohio State and Michigan State every year, shouldn't they get a break with the third protected game? I know, I know, Penn State is 42-3-1 all-time against Maryland, but still, the Terps figure to be a tougher out every year than Rutgers.
This is the kind of stuff the Big Ten has to figure out -- pleasing everyone to some degree but also keeping schedules balanced, all while delivering the best TV games possible to justify the massive broadcast deal.
It's gonna be a tangled web, for sure.
• The other six league games offer a whole lot of options
Penn State should get a crack at USC and UCLA every 2-3 years, with perhaps one trip to LA every other season if possible. All Big Ten teams are going to want that LA trip, so dividing those up will be challenging for the league.
Michigan wouldn't be on Penn State's schedule every season, and it could be every three years between meetings. That won't be ideal, but may be unavoidable trying to play everybody on occasion in a 16-team league.
Games against Iowa and Wisconsin may only happen every four years. In theory, the Big Ten should want every team to play each opponent at least once every four years, so that the players, you know, actually get to see the whole league.
• Here's a nutty idea
The Athletic reported last month that the Big Ten is considering an uneven number of protected games for teams. Maybe three for some teams, two for others and none for others.
Wow, that's just ... dumb!
In no way would that be fair to every team. Hey, I know, life isn't always fair. And all teams would still be getting their $90-plus million TV share every year no matter what.
But the Big Ten has to find a way to iron out a schedule that's equitable for all of its teams, even the bottom feeders. Or else you're going to have some upper-echelon, high-TV rating programs such as Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan or USC griping that they're getting screwed over in some way simply because the league is forcing them to play more tough games.
"Penn State might not clamor for any single opponent," The Athletic wrote in its story.
Sure, that might be true. As I've written about for several years, Franklin wants the easiest path to an undefeated season as possible -- including playing as many weak non-conference teams as he can -- so the Lions won't be out there asking to play Ohio State or Michigan all the time.
But that's where you've got to go back to my first topic above, about how Penn State and Ohio State are such a huge TV draw that the league would be foolish to ever take it away.
Regardless of whether Penn State or anybody else wants protected games or not, the Big Ten is obligated to deliver the best games it can, again in order to justify the TV deal.
• The Big Ten can't just hammer USC and UCLA with tons of tough games
Pretty much all teams are going to want to go to LA to play a game, if not every year, then every couple of years. How will the Big Ten navigate that aspect, while also keeping USC's and UCLA's schedules competitively balanced?
Those teams are going to have to come to Big Ten country for November games, too, when the weather gets crazy. But the Big Ten has to be cognizant of the fact -- especially with USC, which will be the stronger program perennially -- that the Trojans may need an adjustment period of a few years as opposed to just being thrown into Wisconsin and Minnesota both in a given November.
Also, the lesser programs in the Big Ten -- Rutgers, Indiana, Northwestern, etc. -- should get their shots at USC and UCLA. No, those games won't be major national draws, but if you're going to have a league, then everybody deserves to share the best fruit on the table.
• Could the Big Ten just stay with two divisions?
No.
It wouldn't make any sense. By doing that, it would be a disaster trying to schedule equitably and coming up with two balanced divisions.
The league already has a joke of a division breakdown as is, with the East far, far superior to the West, and the Big Ten has a chance to scrap all that nonsense. All other Power 5 leagues are expected to do away with divisions, too, so there's no reason for the Big Ten to dissent.
There can still be a conference championship game, with the top two teams overall advancing. The only drawback to that is the possibility of Ohio State and Michigan playing in the regular-season finale and then again the next week in the conference championship game. Yes, that possibility is real and wouldn't be ideal, but I honestly doubt it would happen very often.
• OK, so what IS going to happen?
Every team will get at least two protected games, and probably three.
Penn State's will be Ohio State and Michigan State, with the third up for discussion based on factors mentioned above.
Do you like that scenario? Let us know in the comments.