good advice for journalists trying to gently introduce readers to better basketball stats
Division Announcement Tonight
Filed under:
Got your torch? Pitchfork? Great:
A person familiar with the discussions says the Big Ten plans to announce Wednesday night how it will break up into two divisions.
The person, who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity because the conference hasn't released the information, says the process of putting six teams in each division was completed on Wednesday.
Random internet people at Frank The Tank's Slant, the unofficial home of expansion speculation are saying this is the breakdown:
THIS DIVISION
Michigan
Nebraska
Iowa
Michigan State
Minnesota
Northwestern
IS THE DUMBEST THING IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE DIVISION
Ohio State
Penn State
Wisconsin
Purdue
Indiana
Illinois
I'm not vouching for that at all, but I haven't seen anything suggesting people have come to their damn senses and put M and OSU in the same division.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:41 PM | 
I heard
I heard
September 1st, 2010 at 12:56 PM |
I agree
I agree
I think Mich/Nebraska is going to be a killer rivalry. And keeping M/tOSU the last week, if true, is better than a lot of other scenarios we've seen floating around.
No school is going to be 100% happy, but this doesn't seem that bad.
Wherever somebody's strugglin' to be free, wherever somebody's strugglin' to be free, you'll see me, you'll SEE ME. YOU'LL SEE ME
September 1st, 2010 at 12:43 PM |
Those Who Ignore History
Those Who Ignore History
This is what the Big12 did when they split into divisions. Worked REAL well for them.
Life should not be a journey to the grave to arrive safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What A Ride!" HST
September 1st, 2010 at 1:15 PM |
They had Oklahoma and
They had Oklahoma and
They had Oklahoma and Nebraska play every year as the last game of the season?
September 1st, 2010 at 9:23 PM |
that wasn't quite the same thing
that wasn't quite the same thing
because Texas was pulling the strings the whole time.
A better analogy would be the ACC splitting up Florida State and Miami ... and that really worked out for them, didn't it?
What's done is done, though. At least they did keep The Game at the end of the season. for now.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:43 PM |
RABBLE!!!
RABBLE!!!
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!
Florida Wolverines have dreadlocks...
September 1st, 2010 at 3:34 PM |
Dey took 'er jobs!
Dey took 'er jobs!
Dey took 'er jobs!
Space bitches, space.
Greg Robinson still sucks.
September 1st, 2010 at 3:58 PM |
(No subject)
(No subject)
September 1st, 2010 at 12:43 PM |
Well...
Well...
Well, if the reports are true that they are keeping Michigan/OSU as the final game, I'll take that as a satisfactory compromise. Granted, there will be problems with having Michigan and OSU in separate divisions and as the final game of the season (such as when a rematch the following week is likely), but that is better than having it in the middle of the season, in my opinion.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:49 PM |
I second the motion.
I second the motion.
If -- and I do mean if -- this is the bargain; this division versus that game (The Game), then I don't mind too much.
Thing is -- won't it screw up scheduling, to have M and OSU doing a rivalry thing on the last week of the regular season?
I had been led to believe that the choice was (1) either M and OSU together in the same division, preserving The Game in November at the cost of ever meeting in the Cialis Big Ten Championship, or (2) going to separate divisions and playing the game (lower case "t" and "g") in October.
Did the rabble win? Let's hear it, for torches and pitchforks!
"I poured my heart and soul into that [book] for three years...for them to trash the book really hurt." ~ A teary-eyed Michael Rosenberg, to Larry Foote; September 4, 2009. Three and Out, 183-184.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:50 PM |
If I have to prioritize
If I have to prioritize
I'd much rather keep the game on the last Saturday than keep us in the same division. It sucks that we'll probably end up crossing over to the hardest opponent every year, but at least the game will still feel like THE GAME. (i.e. freezing cold, frozen nuts, grey skies)
September 1st, 2010 at 12:53 PM |
One other thing, though...
One other thing, though...
Once we go to a nine game conference schedule, I think having a difficult crossover game will be diluted somewhat. Each team in the Big 10 will play all but two teams in the conference.
I agree it's not ideal, but I think it will be ok once we go to the nine game schedule.
September 1st, 2010 at 2:02 PM |
Um no
Um no
Um no, 2, don't forget to count yourself.
September 1st, 2010 at 3:02 PM |
Two, sind Michigan won't play
Two, sind Michigan won't play
Two, sind Michigan won't play itself.
September 1st, 2010 at 5:32 PM |
thank god
thank god
playing UofM would be a guaranteed loss every year
How can you kill that which has no life
September 1st, 2010 at 12:45 PM |
So The Game will still be The
So The Game will still be The
So The Game will still be The Game only it will be missing any, you know, real meaning whatsoever. Real bang-up job, guys.
or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:50 PM |
I disagree
I disagree
I disagree. I think that usually at least one of the two teams will be contending for a spot in the Big 10 championship. That will always present the opportunity for the other team to knock that team out of the championship. The Game will nearly always have big ramifications, so long as it's the final game.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:52 PM |
It's very difficult to knock
It's very difficult to knock
It's very difficult to knock a team out of the championship game if they're not in your division...
September 1st, 2010 at 12:56 PM |
But it's a lot easier when
But it's a lot easier when
But it's a lot easier when it's the final game. I believe it will be pretty rare for any team to make the conference championship when they loose their final game. Can you think of the last time one of the SEC or Big 12 championship teams lost their final season game? Not I. Maybe it's happened, but know it hasn't happened much.
September 1st, 2010 at 1:08 PM |
Interestingly enough I had a
Interestingly enough I had a
Interestingly enough I had a whole paragraph ready to post until I looked up how the SEC does it. Apparently (and I admit I was completely wrong about this) the first criteria for who goes to the championship game is not division record, but rather overall conference record. If the Big Ten adopts this system then Michigan Ohio State would matter much more every year, even without being in the same division. Sorry about that, I didn't know that's how it worked, my fault.
September 1st, 2010 at 1:14 PM |
I had just assumed
I had just assumed
That overall conference record would be what mattered. If divisional records were to be king, that would be mind-numbingly stupid no matter how the alignment panned out.
September 1st, 2010 at 2:04 PM |
And division record
And division record
is the second criteria? Give OSU their only loss, who beat PSU. Guess what, they still go to the BTCG.
September 1st, 2010 at 1:10 PM |
LSU
LSU
Um... Didn't this exact situation happen a few yrs ago when LSU lost to Arkansas then went on to play in the SEC championship and ultimately the BCS NCG?
September 1st, 2010 at 3:27 PM |
So
So
So, once in the near 20-year history? Seems like an outlier to me
Although, I wonder if it has ever happened to Florida. Losing to the Noles the week before their SECCG, but I dont think that would be relevant to this discussion as FSU is non conference for the Gators.
September 1st, 2010 at 1:06 PM |
Unless division standings are
Unless division standings are
Unless division standings are based on team's overall Conference Records, like the SEC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Championship_Game#Selection_criteria
I put up a tough front, but deep down I just want to be held.
September 1st, 2010 at 1:09 PM |
Yea I just found that out, I
Yea I just found that out, I
Yea I just found that out, I had no idea the did it that way, my fault
September 1st, 2010 at 1:12 PM |
No Worries
No Worries
I was actually trying to edit my reply but you responded too quickly.
I put up a tough front, but deep down I just want to be held.
September 1st, 2010 at 2:03 PM |
Not Quite True
Not Quite True
Your conference record is your conference record. There is no added weight to a loss whether they are in your division or not. A loss for Ohio State against Michigan is the same as a loss against someone in their own division. So you could knock Ohio State out of title game with a victory against them (Example: Ohio State and Wisconsin are both 7-1 going into the final weekend [assuming 9 conference games]; we beat Ohio State, and Wisconsin beats Iowa... Wisconsin in, Ohio State out.)
You do have a valid argument if we're going into tiebreakers though. In a tiebreaking situation, the division record will be a factor.
Edit: Yeah, I'm super slow. Sorry.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:54 PM |
And if we are both really
And if we are both really
And if we are both really good? It is essentially meaningless and will be played as such.
or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.
September 1st, 2010 at 1:00 PM |
Um, if we rematched the next
Um, if we rematched the next
Um, if we rematched the next week, I'd imagine we'd both be contending for a BCS bowl. So it wouldn't, at all, be meaningless.
wolverineliberationarmy.com/blog
September 1st, 2010 at 1:05 PM |
If we rematched the next
If we rematched the next
If we rematched the next week, no matter who won, then The Game would be meaningless right? Am I missing something?
or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.
September 1st, 2010 at 1:06 PM |
You are aware of the
You are aware of the
You are aware of the existence of something called the BCS, right?
And how they take at-large teams?
And how the B10 has frequently sent two teams?
And you understand how any loss late in the year can greatly hurt your BCS bid chances?
NAAAAAAHHHHHH - you're right. Meaningless.
wolverineliberationarmy.com/blog
September 1st, 2010 at 1:14 PM |
That wasn't a sarcastic
That wasn't a sarcastic
That wasn't a sarcastic question. That was a legit question I didn't know the answer to. You have a certain way about you that makes you come off as the single biggest piece of shit on this board. I realize it is difficult to read sarcasm through this medium, but every once in a great while someone does type an actual question and you still fail to internalize your inner fuckwad dying to rip out through your outter dickface. Congrats and well played, sir.
/tips hat
or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.
September 1st, 2010 at 1:22 PM |
Come on. You're not stupid.
Come on. You're not stupid.
Come on. You're not stupid. The answer to your question was in the post you responded to. I said that a BCS berth would be on the line, so it would not be meaningless. Then you asked if it would be meaningless. It seemed like a rhetorical question, not a genuine one.
I'm unclear what I've said to you in the past that makes you seemingly have a grudge against me. Whatever it was, I'm sorry.
wolverineliberationarmy.com/blog
September 1st, 2010 at 1:34 PM |
"Whatever it was, I'm
"Whatever it was, I'm
"Whatever it was, I'm sorry."
Now, I can tell you're married.
Give it to Wheatley!
September 1st, 2010 at 1:46 PM |
Nothing against you. You have
Nothing against you. You have
Nothing against you. You have never replied to my posts in this way, I assume because most of my posts are just simple dick jokes of some kind. Your comments just have a certain snarky, anger filled venom, IME.
On the topic, I didn't even think about the overall record. I was thinking in terms of conference championship. If we are both in the conference championship before the end regular season game it would be meaningless to deciding the conference champion. Unless of course they go by overall record, which some conferences do.
/no hard feelings , chap
//typed "hard feelings" to another man on the internet
///feels weird about it
or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.
September 1st, 2010 at 2:51 PM |
don't be so hard on yourself
don't be so hard on yourself
your dick jokes are often complex and well-crafted, such as in the subject box above...
Auwê ka hua`i lâ
September 1st, 2010 at 1:27 PM |
Think of it this way. If
Think of it this way. If
Think of it this way. If either team is undefeated, the other team gets two shots at ruining a perfect season. If we ruin their perfect season in the first game, the second one becomes a revenge game. If we lose in the first game and rematch against them, when we ruin their perfect season, we also steal the rose bowl bid which means they need to get picked up by another BCS game as an at-large.
Most of the time, though both teams won't have their divisions locked up, so someone is playing for a right to go to the BTCG in the first place, maybe even both.
September 1st, 2010 at 3:52 PM |
I am willing to bet all of my MGoPoints that UM and
I am willing to bet all of my MGoPoints that UM and
OSU will meet 3 times or less per decade in the Big Ten Championship game. The loser of THE GAME will likely be out.
"I hate losing more than I like winning." - Zack
September 1st, 2010 at 1:59 PM |
Since the two teams are in differnt divisions
Since the two teams are in differnt divisions
Most likely a cross over loss would be less significant in the standings. So if M beats OSU for their only loss, OSU would still make the BTCG (and vice versa). That team wins the BTCG, goes to the BCS title game with one loss (ala Oklahoma), and wins the national title. The Game is meaningless.
In the now "old days" you could not lose the last game of the year in the Big Ten amd make it to the naional title.
September 1st, 2010 at 2:08 PM |
You're requriring both teams
You're requriring both teams
You're requriring both teams to go into the last week of the season unefeated, which has happened once in 20 years. Over the last 20 years, if we use the SEC's criteria for championship selection, Michigan and Ohio state would have met there 6 times (91, 92, 98, 03, 06, 07). I'll take 6 times over 20 years, but maybe that's just me.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:48 PM |
Is this like Yatzee? Can I
Is this like Yatzee? Can I
Is this like Yatzee? Can I just pick up all the teams and re-roll?
September 1st, 2010 at 1:03 PM |
Only if you wave your hands and yell Yahtzee!
Only if you wave your hands and yell Yahtzee!
This is home...
September 1st, 2010 at 12:49 PM |
i'd rather The Game be the
i'd rather The Game be the
i'd rather The Game be the last game than be in the same division, if i had to make a choice.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:51 PM |
That's the thing, we didn't
That's the thing, we didn't
That's the thing, we didn't have to choose. The three options were different division, move the game...different division, keep the game last....same division, keep the game last. I don't recall anyone talking about same division, moving the game.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:58 PM |
right, they didn't have to
right, they didn't have to
right, they didn't have to choose. but accepting the reality that it might have to be one or the other, i prefer The Game be the last game than being in the same division.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:50 PM |
Looking at those divisions is
Looking at those divisions is
Looking at those divisions is very derpressing. They stripped the game of any meaning, I think it could have continued as a defacto divisional championship game and I'd have felt fine. Looking at those division makes me sick.
September 1st, 2010 at 1:03 PM |
How will it not mean a thing?
How will it not mean a thing?
How will it not mean a thing? Have you heard of the BCS?
wolverineliberationarmy.com/blog
September 1st, 2010 at 1:31 PM |
You don't need the BCS for it
You don't need the BCS for it
You don't need the BCS for it to mean something. A loss to OSU would either be our second in conference, which would push us out of the BTCG, or we would have just lost a potential undefeated season.
September 1st, 2010 at 1:13 PM |
Last week, I learned that
Last week, I learned that
Last week, I learned that moving the OSU/Michigan game would ruin not only the future but the also the past and be the stupidest stupid thing ever. This week I learn that even if you don't move the OSU/Michigan game, it's still the worst of all worlds.
IS THIS THE KOBAYASHI NO WIN SCENARIO?
WE NEED CAPTAIN KIRK TO SAVE THE WORLD!
Give it to Wheatley!
that they're going to keep Michigan-OSU as the last game. If that's the case, I can live with this breakdown. We get the Brown Jug game every year and have the potential to build a new rivalry with Nebraska. FWIW, if God forbid, they do try to move The Game, my preference would be to have Nebraska as the last game.