Bats Explanation Redux
Okay. Complaints about a lack of clarity in the 16-team bats scenario have been lodged and heeded. Let's walk through an example of the "backwards scenario," which I will dub "Dynamic Crossover" because it sounds cool.
Yes, this is all irrelevant for at least a year now, and given the accuracy of media speculation to date the Big Ten will probably end up kicking everyone except Illinois and Northwestern out, and the chances that the Big Ten will adopt anyone's loony internet proposal are dim indeed. It's April 22nd. Minds will wander. On with show.
Show
Let's say the final standings of each eight team division are like so:
Bo | Record | Woody | Record |
---|---|---|---|
Ohio State | 7-0 | Penn State | 6-1 |
Nebraska | 5-2 | Iowa | 6-1 |
Michigan | 5-2 | Pitt | 5-2 |
Michigan State | 4-3 | Wisconsin | 4-3 |
Illinois | 3-4 | Minnesota | 3-4 |
Northwestern | 2-5 | Missouri | 3-4 |
Purdue | 1-6 | Rutgers | 1-6 |
Indiana | 1-6 | Notre Dame | 0-7 |
We now break the conference into four groups:
Paterno | Osborne | Colleto | Dinardo |
---|---|---|---|
Ohio State | Penn State | Illinois | Minnesota |
Iowa | Nebraska | Missouri | Northwestern |
Pitt | Michigan | Rutgers | Purdue |
Michigan State | Wisconsin | Indiana | Notre Dame |
"Paterno" and "Osborne" are the good teams, "Colleto" and "Dinardo" the bad ones. Now we play games that haven't already been played in each group. Hypothetical focus on Paterno:
- Ohio State has already played Michigan State, with OSU winning. (They dominated in yardage but a series of fluky turnovers made it look closer than it was.)
- Iowa beat Pitt 6-5.
In week one:
- Ohio State plays at Pitt. Pitt wins.
- Michigan State plays at Iowa. Iowa wins.
In week two:
- Pitt plays at Michigan State. Pitt wins.
- Iowa plays at Ohio State. Ohio State wins.
The final standings:
Paterno | Group | Conference |
---|---|---|
Ohio State | 2-1 | 8-1 |
Iowa | 2-1 | 7-2 |
Pitt | 2-1 | 7-2 |
Michigan State | 0-3 | 4-5 |
Ohio State advances to the conference championship game by virtue of its overall record. You'll note that it is hard or even impossible for third or fourth place teams to win through—Pitt won both of its crossover games and still didn't make it—but this seems like a good compromise between keeping a lot of teams involved and making sure the totality of the regular season is weighed appropriately.
Simple Variant
If this is too complicated or falls foul of the NCAA's bylaws that restrict conference championship games to conferences that play round robin in two separate divisions, you can get rid of the group concept but leave the crossover games dynamic. The scheduling remains the same—#1 and #4 play #2 and #3 from the other division—but the winner is just the team in each division with the best record.
Pros
- Crossover games are equitable, important, and high profile.
- Guarantees two weeks of hyped games between good teams, culminating in a championship game.
- Eliminates unbalanced scheduling complaints.
Cons
- Leaves two weeks of the season uncertain. Although you know you'll be playing you don't know where or against who.
- Increases the chance of a championship game rematch.
- Increased connectivity between top teams will add extra losses and may hurt chances at additional BCS bids.
April 22nd, 2010 at 11:21 PM ^
Comments