Big Ten Race
I was reading Doc Saturday's post on the Big Ten's conference race and I was a little perplexed about something. I did some research so I think it is correct , but if I'm mistaken please correct me as this is part information post part venting.
So the scenario of Iowa, Wis and MSU tying for the title seems to be favoring MSU as the winner due to this breakdown.
They all split the head to head so they go to out of conference records which eliminates Iowa for losing to Arizona. Then they go back to head to head between Wisc and MSU and it goes to MSU.
Using OOC records to determine a conference champion is insane.
If you don't play everyone in conference you need to look at the conference records of the opponents. This isn't a pile on Sparty post, I just think it is stupid regardless of who the team is, you can't have the easiest in conference schedule and the easiest non-conference schedule and win on tiebreakers.
Does. Not. Compute.
Well this is the last year of this format so it won't matter moving forward, but that is a pretty cheap way to back yourself into a Rose Bowl if you ask me.
November 1st, 2010 at 8:40 PM ^
You have the scenario correct. It's definitely not the perfect way to decide it, but can you think of a better way to do it? Everything else would have to be based on some ranking. RIght? Also, we've backed into our share of Rose Bowls.
If Wisconsin loses and Sparty finishes tied with anyone else, they don't go to the Rose Bowl.
November 1st, 2010 at 8:51 PM ^
This makes the "Bama 2012 game even more perplexing. Why not just schedule Duke, BGSU, and Del state every year if this is the system?
I like the 'Bama game, but the system is...are you ready?...FLAWED!
November 2nd, 2010 at 12:32 AM ^
I assume the system will change once we have divisions, partly because the "can't break by head-to-head" stuff will be rarer and partly because there are obvious tiebreakers to use that don't work so well in a non-divisional setup.
However, it should be noted that good scheduling isn't necessarily punished by this. It's a risk-reward scenario: if you schedule up and win, you probably move to the front of the line if it goes to the BCS standings. If you schedule all cupcakes, you'll never finish ahead of someone who schedules a real team and wins.
November 2nd, 2010 at 1:04 AM ^
Also don't forget that the conference championship will add a high profile, highly ranked opponent at the end of the season. There are millions of scenarios that a one loss big ten team (losing to bama in this instance) can win a conference championship and still play for a MNC. In fact, there's a very good possibility that Bama will prove that this year.
November 2nd, 2010 at 5:33 AM ^
There will never be a tie for the conference title, as the title game will determine a single winner.
The problem could come up if there's a three- or more-way tie for a division title, but overall record would follow conference record, head-to-head record and division record. Shouldn't happen often, and overall record including nonconference games seems like a reasonable tiebreaker after conference record, head-to-head record and division record.