The W
Views: 100073228
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
26.10.14 0400
The W - Football - Big 10 tiebreaker
This thread has 51 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 6.11
Pages: 1
(1581 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (15 total)
Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: The Moon

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 9 hours
AIM:  
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.74
Just curious what the tiebreaker is should Michigan and Wisconsin finish the Big 10 schedule unbeaten. Common sense says that the team with the best overall record would win, which would be Wisconsin. But I remember the three way tie for the SEC East last year could've been broken with an overall record tiebreaker, but that wasn't what the tiebreaker was. I sure hope that the undefeated Wisconsin would get the nod over the once beaten Wolverines.



Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
Promote this thread!
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 1 day
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
http://bigten.collegesports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/102204aad.html

3) If there is a tie for the championship, the winner of the game between these two teams shall represent the Conference.

4) If there is still a tie, or if the tied teams did not play each other, the representative shall be determined on the percentage basis of all games played in the traditional 11-game schedule, or in certain years (2002 and 2003) 12-game schedule.

5) If there is still a tie, the most recent team earning BCS automatic selection shall be eliminated.





The Catastrophic Annihilation War Room
And now, for a limited time only, it rhymes with "door hinge!"

bash91
Merguez








Since: 2.1.02
From: Plain Dealing, LA

Since last post: 801 days
Last activity: 4 hours
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.10
Technically, they would be co-champs. If the BCS "National Championship" isn't involved, the tiebreaker for the Rose Bowl would be who has most recently been to the Rose Bowl. In this case, I believe Wisconsin would go to the Rose Bowl and Michigan would be looking for an at large BCS bid.

Tim

Edit: Yeah, what Zeruel said cause he types faster than I do.

Tim

(edited by bash91 on 2.11.04 1835)


People who say they don't "play politics" merely play politics badly. -- David Drake
Sec19Row53
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Oconomowoc, WI

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 1 day
Y!:
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.23
    Originally posted by bash91
    If the BCS "National Championship" isn't involved, the tiebreaker for the Rose Bowl would be who has most recently been to the Rose Bowl.


They changed this a few years ago. Not sure if that was clear after your edit (and Zeruel's response), but the tiebreaker is overall record. Having gone to the Rose Bowl more recently doesn't enter into the equation.



[It's where I sit]
SC
Potato korv








Since: 11.12.01
From: Valparaiso, IN

Since last post: 1330 days
Last activity: 664 days
AIM:  
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.80
The tiebreaker is, indeed, overall record, which most find stupid because they play such different non-conference schedules.

If UM and Wisconsin do both run the table, Wisconsin gets at least the Rose Bowl. This is what they did non-conference:

MICHIGAN
W-Miami (OH) 43-10
L-Notre Dame 20-28 (@ ND)
W-San Diego State 24-21
COMBINED: 13-12

But Michigan hasn't even been particularly impressive until they STARTED the Big Ten schedule and Michael Hart took over at tailback and went crazy.

WISCONSIN
W-Central Florida 34-6
W-UNLV 18-3
W-Arizona 9-7 (@ AZ)
COMBINED: 3-21

Very different. As far as their Big Ten schedules go, Michigan also doesn't play Penn State, Wisconsin also doesn't play Indiana, so that's pretty much a wash.

However, if both run the table and with the schedule coming up for teams that are currently in better position than Michigan, both could end up in BCS bowls anyway. Michigan is a huge draw even if Wisconsin takes the Rose spot.

And for what it's worth, remaining games:

MICHIGAN
11/13: v. Northwestern (4-4, 3-2)
11/20: at Ohio State (5-3, 2-3)

WISCONSIN
11/06: v. Minnesota (6-3, 3-3)
11/13: at Michigan State (4-4, 3-2)
11/20: at Iowa (6-2, 4-1)

Those are two really tough closing road games for both, and open up a whole other scenario, possibly:

Michigan beats Northwestern, loses to Ohio State
Wisconsin beats Minnesota and MSU, loses to Iowa
Iowa wins out

Then you've got three-way official Big Ten champions. Iowa has a win over Wisconsin, Michigan has a win over Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin didn't play, and Wisconsin has the best overall record. As for that, I'm not sure what they'd do. Flip a coin maybe. A three-sided coin.



| .com | oriole blue | tcf.com |
Reverend J Shaft
Liverwurst








Since: 25.6.03
From: Home of The Big House

Since last post: 16 days
Last activity: 16 hours
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.26
    Originally posted by ScottChrist
    And for what it's worth, remaining games:

    MICHIGAN
    11/13: v. Northwestern (4-4, 3-2)
    11/20: at Ohio State (5-3, 2-3)

    WISCONSIN
    11/06: v. Minnesota (6-3, 3-3)
    11/13: at Michigan State (4-4, 3-2)
    11/20: at Iowa (6-2, 4-1)

    Those are two really tough closing road games for both, and open up a whole other scenario, possibly:

    Michigan beats Northwestern, loses to Ohio State
    Wisconsin beats Minnesota and MSU, loses to Iowa
    Iowa wins out

    Then you've got three-way official Big Ten champions. Iowa has a win over Wisconsin, Michigan has a win over Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin didn't play, and Wisconsin has the best overall record. As for that, I'm not sure what they'd do. Flip a coin maybe. A three-sided coin.


Check me if I'm wrong, but I think you answered your own question.

    Originally posted by ScottChrist
    The tiebreaker is, indeed, overall record, which most find stupid because they play such different non-conference schedules.


Wisconsin would be 10-1, Michigan would be 9-2 and Iowa would also have, at the best, a 9-2 record. This is since no 2 teams have a win over the third and no one team has a win over the other two.

I think. Of course, it's all moot since there's no way U-M is losing to OSU...

Cue Whatever....



(edited by Reverend J Shaft on 4.11.04 1411)
SC
Potato korv








Since: 11.12.01
From: Valparaiso, IN

Since last post: 1330 days
Last activity: 664 days
AIM:  
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.80
    Originally posted by Reverend J Shaft
    Wisconsin would be 10-1, Michigan would be 9-2 and Iowa would also have, at the best, a 9-2 record. This is since no 2 teams have a win over the third and no one team has a win over the other two.


I'm thinking the same thing, but you've got the extra crap thrown in with the wins and then the no-game and ties within the tie, and a tie within the ties...

Either they'd stick to best overall record, which is ludicrous in that situation, or just use the BCS ranking, which is silly but at least has some sort of thought put into it, I guess.



| .com | oriole blue | tcf.com |
Reverend J Shaft
Liverwurst








Since: 25.6.03
From: Home of The Big House

Since last post: 16 days
Last activity: 16 hours
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.26
    Originally posted by ScottChrist
      Originally posted by Reverend J Shaft
      Wisconsin would be 10-1, Michigan would be 9-2 and Iowa would also have, at the best, a 9-2 record. This is since no 2 teams have a win over the third and no one team has a win over the other two.


    I'm thinking the same thing, but you've got the extra crap thrown in with the wins and then the no-game and ties within the tie, and a tie within the ties...

    Either they'd stick to best overall record, which is ludicrous in that situation, or just use the BCS ranking, which is silly but at least has some sort of thought put into it, I guess.


Actually, I got it from the link Zeruel provided above...

(edited by Reverend J Shaft on 4.11.04 1548)
Eddie Famous
Andouille








Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 337 days
Last activity: 330 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.48

Deleting a wrong guess-never mind.


(edited by Eddie Famous on 4.11.04 2018)


"In the sky. Lord, in the sky..."
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 482 days
Last activity: 482 days
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.95
    Originally posted by ScottChrist
    However, if both run the table and with the schedule coming up for teams that are currently in better position than Michigan, both could end up in BCS bowls anyway. Michigan is a huge draw even if Wisconsin takes the Rose spot.






Michigan could run the table and be on the outside looking in. The scenario for that is Wisconsin wins the Big 10 tie-breaker and gets the automatic berth. USC goes unbeaten as well as either Auburn or Oklahoma, while California runs the table. Rose Bowl will go for the traditional Big 10/Pac 10 match-up and pick California as an at-large team. ACC and Big East champs both get automatic spots, meaning Miami/SEC Champ-Big 12 Champ in the Sugar Bowl and Big East Champ vs. at large Utah in the Fiesta, should Utah maintain its automatic Top 6 spot.



The Ottoman Empire is coming. The Ottoman Empire is coming. Hide the couches.
The Thrill
Banger








Since: 16.4.02
From: Green Bay, WI

Since last post: 192 days
Last activity: 38 days
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.25
Catch The Thrill on "Pick of the Week": taped Tuesdays at Planet Magic in Denmark, WI; on the air Sundays @ 1 am on WB-14!

Right now, the Badgers are just focused on getting Paul Bunyan's goddamn Axe back from the f'n Gophers.

But lemme be the first to say I don't trust the BullCrapSystem, even if the Badgers win out, to give 'em their legit title shot. Hell, this is the same system that rewarded the Badgers for beating Northwestern handily and remaining unbeaten...by moving them DOWN in the polls.

One win at a time, Bucky, one win at a time. Screw the Wolverines.



Star wipe, and...we're out.
Thrillin' ain't easy.



THE THRILL
ACW-NWA Wisconsin
Home Video Technical Director...&
A2NWO 4 Life!
(Click the big G or here to hear the Packers Fight Song in RealAudio...or try .AU, .WAV or .MIDI!)
BigSteve
Pepperoni








Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2844 days
Last activity: 2572 days
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.30
Question a little off-topic.....but was there not a change in the system over the offseason that if neither is going to the designated championship game, then the Big 10 and Pac 10 champs will automatically go to the Rose? Or was that always the rule? Or never has been the rule?
Sec19Row53
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Oconomowoc, WI

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 1 day
Y!:
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.37
    Originally posted by BigSteve
    Question a little off-topic.....but was there not a change in the system over the offseason that if neither is going to the designated championship game, then the Big 10 and Pac 10 champs will automatically go to the Rose? Or was that always the rule? Or never has been the rule?

I believe the Rose Bowl has stated that if neither team is involved in the BCS Championship game, they will do their best to pick those two teams for their game. Being a Big Ten fan, that game really loses something if it's any other match-up.



[It's where I sit]
SC
Potato korv








Since: 11.12.01
From: Valparaiso, IN

Since last post: 1330 days
Last activity: 664 days
AIM:  
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.80
    Originally posted by The Thrill
    But lemme be the first to say I don't trust the BullCrapSystem, even if the Badgers win out, to give 'em their legit title shot.


I'd like to be the first to say that if Wisconsin, Auburn, Oklahoma and Southern Cal are all undefeated, one of them is by far the weakest team, and it's Wisconsin. That's not meant to be a shot at them or their team, they're very good and in fact the games I've watched with them give me a warm rememberance of the '97 Michigan team that always has an open invitation to party on my tab, but the other three teams play better schedules in tougher conferences, and OU and USC played much better non-conference schedules, though Auburn's three-game carousel of softies (all at home, to boot) was pretty Snyderian.

Now, if they go undefeated and are one of two remaining undefeated teams with one of those other three, they'll get in. The way it is right now, it would be almost impossible for them to not.

(edited by ScottChrist on 6.11.04 0939)


| .com | oriole blue | tcf.com |
Reverend J Shaft
Liverwurst








Since: 25.6.03
From: Home of The Big House

Since last post: 16 days
Last activity: 16 hours
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.77
    Originally posted by The Thrill
    Hell, this is the same system that rewarded the Badgers for beating Northwestern handily and remaining unbeaten...by moving them DOWN in the polls.

    One win at a time, Bucky, one win at a time. Screw the Wolverines.


...and screw the Badgers. Another year in which the Badgers could go to the Rose Bowl, and another year in which they didn't beat the Wolverines. At least they'd didn't play them this year - whereas the last two seasons that Wisconsin went to the Rose Bowl, they were beaten by Michigan.

I'd still worry about those last two games on the road if I were a Wisconsin fan... which thankfully I am not.

(Posted after Wisconsin's beating at the hands of MSU)
SEE!!?!?!? TOLD YA!!!!


(edited by Reverend J Shaft on 14.11.04 1142)


Thread rated: 6.11
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: Week 9 playoff seedings (Post-MNF and two huge corrections)
Next thread: TO Blasts Ray Lewis
Previous thread: And Then There Were None
(1581 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Jesus, what an idiot. First, the "I only play when I want to" business. Then, he dogs his way through an 0-3 start, during which his effort has been half-assed at best (ESPN broke it down really nicely on Sunday's SportsCenter).
- Stephanie, Randy Moss was arrested (2002)
The W - Football - Big 10 tiebreakerRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.586 seconds.