yes plz
Rooting for a Three-Way-Tie
Next week's MSU-NEB game is huge. If the Cornhuskers win, and by some miracle we win out and the scenario is a three-way tie between Mich, Sharty, and NEB (Mich 11-1, MSU 10-2, NEB 10-2), it could be good...
*******************
The road to the B1G Championship game is still long, but there is a lighter at the end of the tunnel.
Two-team ties will be broken by head-to-head record.
If three or more teams tie atop a division, the following methods will be used in order to determine a champion or reduce the glut to two, where a head-to-head tiebreaker then can be used:
• Records of the teams
• Records of the three tied teams compared within their division
• Records of the teams against the next-highest teams within the division
• Records against all common conference opponents
• The team ranked highest in the BCS standings after the regular season gets the league championship game berth unless it is ranked within one spot of another tied team. In this case, the head-to-head result of the two teams would determine the division champion.
• The team with the highest overall win percentage (outside of exempted games)
• The division champion will be chosen by random draw.
*******************
The road to the B1G Championship game is still long, but there is a lighter at the end of the tunnel.
Two-team ties will be broken by head-to-head record.
If three or more teams tie atop a division, the following methods will be used in order to determine a champion or reduce the glut to two, where a head-to-head tiebreaker then can be used:
• Records of the teams
• Records of the three tied teams compared within their division
• Records of the teams against the next-highest teams within the division
• Records against all common conference opponents
• The team ranked highest in the BCS standings after the regular season gets the league championship game berth unless it is ranked within one spot of another tied team. In this case, the head-to-head result of the two teams would determine the division champion.
• The team with the highest overall win percentage (outside of exempted games)
• The division champion will be chosen by random draw.
October 23rd, 2011 at 4:08 AM | 
conference losses
conference losses
October 23rd, 2011 at 4:08 AM |
conference losses
conference losses
yea, but Nebraska would have 2 conference losses (Wisconsin and, in this hypothetical, Michigan). they would not have a claim to the division title since UM and MSU would only have 1 loss in the division. MSU would break the tie with us.
October 23rd, 2011 at 8:01 AM |
Conference records don't mean anything...
Conference records don't mean anything...
These threads and posts are wrapped in assumptions - but this is clear - Conference records don't mean squat wrt Division finish - assuming the wording of the Big Ten web posting re: Tie Breaks is correct. I think that is the best source for this kind of prognostication.
- The records of the three tied teams will be compared against each other
- The records of the three tied teams will be compared within their division
- The records of the three teams will be compared against the next highest placed teams in their division in order of finish (4, 5, and 6)
- The records of the three teams will be compared against all common conference opponents;
- The highest ranked team in the first Bowl Championship Series Poll following the completion of Big Ten regular season conference play shall be the representative in the Big Ten Championship Game, unless the two highest ranked tied teams are ranked within one spot of each other in the BCS poll. In this case, the head-to-head results of the top two ranked tied teams shall determine the representative in the Big Ten Championship
- The team with the best overall winning percentage [excluding exempted games] shall be the representative
- The representative will be chosen by random draw.
Since Nebraksa - Michigan - Michigan State only share Ohio as a common opponent only that game would be germane to a Legends tiebreak (of these 3 teams.) This makes the OSU game relevant. If we lose that game it eliminates us by criteria 4 above (and the cavaet not block quoted above - but in the preamble to the 3 way tie break procedure above on the B1G webpage.)
If only two teams remain tied after any step, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.
Since we don't play Wisconsin - the Nebraska loss and last night's MSU victory don't mean squat except wrt to how they affect the fifth tiebreak criteria - BCS rankings. Trying to predict that system this early is beyond anyone's capability.
Purdue handed it to Illinois. We best think about them before counting these chickens.
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:29 AM |
Conference records don't mean
Conference records don't mean
Conference records don't mean squat wrt division finish? Hmmm, and hear I was thinking that conference records were the first thing considered before even getting to the tie breakers you mentioned.
"Is There Anybody Out There?" Pink Floyd, The Wall.
October 23rd, 2011 at 10:19 AM |
division record
division record
I would think division record is what counts first. if you beat every team in your division but lose two other conference games I don't think it makes sense to send a team that went 4-1 in the same division to the championship game. just thinking about teams with different schedules out of the division, there would not be a way to fairly compare them.
October 23rd, 2011 at 10:26 AM |
Conference record
Conference record
You would think that (it makes some sense), but you would be wrong. That's not how the Big Ten does it, and it's not how any conference in the nation does it.
I can see both points--a team that is 5-0 in-division but 5-3 in-conference may deserve to go to the championship game ahead of a team that is 4-1 in-division but 7-1 in-conference, but I think the championship game would be more interesting to potential TV viewers with the 4-1 / 7-1 team than with the 5-0 / 5-3 team.
So that's how they do it--overall conference record comes first.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:04 AM |
It's a common misconception
It's a common misconception
But there isn't a league I can think of that uses divisional record first in determining standings. It also doesn't really make sense to me. If the Tigers were 72-90 overall, 62-10 in thier division, and 10-80 against other divisions I don't think they should be considered divisional champs and make the playoffs.
MLB, NBA, NHL, NFL all use overall record to seed within division, then use head to head record to break a tie, then use divisional record if head to head is a tie.
I would like somone to name a league of any sport that uses division record first, maybe some HS FB Conferences? I'm just curios where the idea comes from, I fell for it myself until I thought about it just a little.
I write my own quotes. Except this one. I obviously stole this from somebody really clever.
October 23rd, 2011 at 5:48 PM |
Wins & Losses don't mean anything
Wins & Losses don't mean anything
Oh, wait.
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:20 AM |
The problem is, you're
The problem is, you're
The problem is, you're showing how a tie-break works. But the original criteria before any of the tie-breakers take place is still the conference record. So that means that even if MSU loses to Nebraska, and wins the rest of they're games, they're still be 7-1 in the conference. Which means if we win out, we would be 7-1 in the conference as well, but even if Nebraska then wins the rest of their games, they would be 6-2, and thus we would have to look at the rules for a 2-way tiebreaker instead of a 3-way. And then, the first criteria is head-to-head, which MSU would win. So basically we need MSU to lose 2 more games, or we're out of the running for the division.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:48 PM |
I misread this. I admit
I misread this. I admit
I misread this. I admit it.
Why would they look at divisional record as the second criteria in a tie break otherwise.
I hate being wrong...it happens too often.
Thanks for the correction.
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:20 AM |
Thats only in the event of a
Thats only in the event of a
Thats only in the event of a 3-way tie. A two way tie is determined by the head to head matchup. What he's saying is that if we win out, Nebraska will have 2 conference losses, so they would not be able to create a 3-way tie with Michigan and MSU, who would only have 1 conference loss.
The only way we win our division at this point is if we win out, and Sparty somehow drops 2 games.
COYS and lets go Detroit FC!
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:25 AM |
Not the only way but
Not the only way but
Not the only way but definitely the most straight forward. There could be a three way tie at 5-3 but that is not extremely likely.
Here's hoping for a bright future. This team does try hard and I will continue to support them.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:25 AM |
Not the only way but
Not the only way but
Not the only way but definitely the most straight forward. There could be a three way tie at 5-3 but that is not extremely likely.
Here's hoping for a bright future. This team does try hard and I will continue to support them.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:29 AM |
Ignore Double
Ignore Double
Ignore Double
Here's hoping for a bright future. This team does try hard and I will continue to support them.
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:25 AM |
Conference records mean everything.
Conference records mean everything.
I think you miss the fundamental point, though--conference records are how teams are ranked initially.
So...let's say Michigan wins out. Nebraska wins out (except for a loss to Michigan) and Michigan State wins out (except for a loss to Nebraska).
The division standings would be...
1 (tie). Michigan & Michigan State (7-1)
3. Nebraska (6-2)
Michigan State would go to the championship game based on the head-to-head tiebreaker.
So the original poster's assumption (i.e., that Michigan would win the tiebreaker if Michigan finished 11-1 overall with a loss to Michigan State, Michigan State finished 10-2 overall with losses to Notre Dame & Nebraska, and Nebraska finished 10-2 overall with losses to Wisconsin & Michigan) was incorrect. The only way Michigan gets to the championship game is if Michigan State loses 2 games.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:04 PM |
yea, all we can hope is MSU
yea, all we can hope is MSU
yea, all we can hope is MSU to lose to Nebraska and another game. That's assumed that we win out all of our remaining games.
Playing football on Wall Street
October 23rd, 2011 at 4:19 AM |
MSU in the rose bowl
MSU in the rose bowl
MSU in the rose bowl against....oregon or stanford? lol good luck sparty
October 23rd, 2011 at 4:40 AM |
After they just beat
After they just beat
After they just beat WIsconsin I don't think its a stretch to say they can play with those teams and possibly keep it competitive.
Also, how childish is it to laugh at MSU if they get blown out in the Rose Bowl? If Michigan lost the Rose Bowl in blowout fashion this year I would still consider 2011 a success....
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:22 AM |
Give it up! Before last
Give it up! Before last
Give it up! Before last night there were a lot of "MSU against Wisky.... good luck sparty" type comments.
"Is There Anybody Out There?" Pink Floyd, The Wall.
October 23rd, 2011 at 4:36 AM |
We need two MSU losses for a
We need two MSU losses for a
We need two MSU losses for a three way tie to happen so... let's just win out and take the division outright.
October 23rd, 2011 at 8:26 AM |
Even if
Even if
we win out, we'd still not win the division if MSU did the same. MSU needs to lose 2 games whilst we win out. Neither scenario is likely. It is possible, but IMO, not likely.
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:08 AM |
Two losses?
Two losses?
How do you figure? If we win out we have one loss and two losses by MSU would give us the division.
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:16 AM |
MSU would only have 1
MSU would only have 1
MSU would only have 1 conference loss, which is the only thing that matters. They would win the division by their head to head victory.
COYS and lets go Detroit FC!
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:43 AM |
I'm saying we need two Sparty
I'm saying we need two Sparty
I'm saying we need two Sparty losses regardless. So rooting for that to happen and us to lose one to get the three way tie is dumb.
October 23rd, 2011 at 4:47 AM |
A lighter?
A lighter?
"The road to the B1G Championship game is still long, but there is a lighter at the end of the tunnel."
Zippo? Bic?
In all seriousness, I don't care about B1G Champ Game scenarios right now. I just want to focus on us winning. Well, ok, I want the coaches to focus on us winning, game by game. I'm pretty sure they already do this, judging by the way they talk in press conferences and such, but I like to keep my focus the same, especially in a year full of building a new "system".
October 23rd, 2011 at 4:51 AM |
Sparty's having a good
Sparty's having a good
Sparty's having a good season, so give that to them. If we don't suffer a complete collapse down the stretch like the last two seasons and meet/exceed the 9-3 goal that many of us had predicted, I'll consider it a good season and fantastic start to the Hoke era.
October 23rd, 2011 at 6:35 AM |
Three-Way CF
Three-Way CF
The only way to avoid a divisional CF in early December from our perspective is to win out at this point. Doesn't seem like a likely scenario, but let's go for it, all the same - this is, after all, Michigan.
Fergodsakes.
"Funny isn't it, how naughty dentists always make that one fatal mistake."
Follow the random tweets of a Michigan alum - http://twitter.com/#!/LorneEC3
October 23rd, 2011 at 8:47 AM |
I'm with airmanwolverine on this one.
I'm with airmanwolverine on this one.
I don't really care what anyone else does as long as Michigan takes care of business, competes, and wins games.
October 23rd, 2011 at 8:55 AM |
If that happens, Michigan
If that happens, Michigan
If that happens, Michigan will be in the discussion in this race. There is surely some toe-stubbing to be done by some of these "locks". Did anyone see Texas Tech last night? How about Notre Dame and their annointed automatic 10-game winning streak and BCS invite?
Heck our game last week now seems like a lucky bounce or two away from being a win.
"because character wins in life and character wins on the football field....." 1-11-11
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:37 AM |
We need to win one game at
We need to win one game at
We need to win one game at a time. Purdue was nearly flawless in the first half against Illinois with a very diverse offensive scheme. Let's hope we get them the way they played the second half. Either way they are not a push over. We need to play better than we did against state.
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:38 AM |
Man...
Man...
3-ways are always complicated.....
Florida Wolverines have dreadlocks...
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:45 AM |
Yes Indeed
Yes Indeed
TWSS
"Funny isn't it, how naughty dentists always make that one fatal mistake."
Follow the random tweets of a Michigan alum - http://twitter.com/#!/LorneEC3
October 23rd, 2011 at 10:08 AM |
TWHS
TWHS
TWHS
October 23rd, 2011 at 7:16 PM |
I always root for a 3-way,
I always root for a 3-way,
but it never seems to happen
"Everyone gets dumped Gabe. Let me give you some advice: a little coverup on your Adams Apple will make it appear smaller. Which will make you appear less like a transvestite."
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:38 AM |
I'm lost here ...
I'm lost here ...
If we win out and Sparty loses to the Cornhuskers they would have lost 2 games and we only have one. So overall record we would be better but they get to play for the BiG? So why do we play out of conference games?
Thats how I roll!
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:54 AM |
Green
Green
$.
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:46 AM |
I think we should just
I think we should just
I think we should just concentrate on beating Purdue at homecoming. Purdue just yanked a big win out of their ear over Illinois. Purdue's defense kept Scheelhaase off the board in the first half. We aren't good enough to look past anyone, in my opinion.
Worrying about Sparty isn't healthy and is very.....Spartanesque (I should know, I am more guilty of it than probably 99% of the people here. I really hate watching their success). They still have to go on the road, and that's no easy task.
"the Spirit of Michigan...is based on a deathless loyalty to Michigan and all her ways....and a conviction that nowhere is there a better university, in any way, than this Michigan of ours" - Fielding Yost
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:58 AM |
It's too early to be worrying
It's too early to be worrying
It's too early to be worrying about this stuff. Let's hope we can win out. MSU and Nebraska have some road trips to make that could change the complexion of the race.
October 23rd, 2011 at 10:27 AM |
Sharty?
Sharty?
Really? No, we do not do this.
October 23rd, 2011 at 10:30 AM |
Nobody Does
Nobody Does
It is rather sharty to resort to "Sharty".
"Funny isn't it, how naughty dentists always make that one fatal mistake."
Follow the random tweets of a Michigan alum - http://twitter.com/#!/LorneEC3
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:17 AM |
hate to be a wet blanket and all
hate to be a wet blanket and all
but did anyone see what Purdue did to Illinois yesterday? While the enthusiasm is admirable, I think the biggest lesson learned from last weekend is not to get ahead of ourselves, fun though it may be.
I just think any other approach is bad juju. Thats just me. I have as many, if not more superstitions regarding Michigan football than any other resident of Ohio, so take this with a grain of crazy internet guy psychosis.
ALWAYS remember the golden rule: He who has the gold, makes the rules
October 23rd, 2011 at 2:49 PM |
Instead of Purdue being good,
Instead of Purdue being good,
It might just be that Illinois is bad instead. Maybe we got ahead of ourselves thinking that Illinois was good.
Yep, that's Simba made out of a pineapple.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:06 AM |
I'm gonna hope Nebraska beats
I'm gonna hope Nebraska beats
I'm gonna hope Nebraska beats MSU and then count on Sparty spartying away another game ala MSU-Iowa last year.
Rudy watches inspirational movies about Shawn Hunwick
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:27 AM |
Sparty needs to lose two more
Sparty needs to lose two more
Sparty needs to lose two more games and we need to win out.
This would give State and Nebraska 2 conference losses, and we would only have 1.
The only game we can "afford" to lose would be to Illinois since they aren't a common opponent. That would create the 3-way tie, which is a mindfuck.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:42 AM |
How does anybody
How does anybody
Watch this team and have the idea of "winning out" even come close to
popping in their head? Look guys, we've come a long way and winning 8 or 9 games and going to a new years day bowl would be a huge accomplishment, let's concentrate on purdue and then worry about the B1G championship and tie breakers at the end of Nov. If it's still an issue.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:57 PM |
since we are on this subject,
since we are on this subject,
since we are on this subject, what if MSU makes the B1G Championship and beats whoever makes it from the Leaders division (most likely Wisconsin). If they beat Wisconsin twice they are obviously in the Rose Bowl or BCS Bowl of some kind. If Michigan we to win out, would the BCS take an 11-1 Michigan team over a 2 loss Wisconsin team? Or would there only be one Big Ten team in the BCS?
October 23rd, 2011 at 4:57 PM |
If Boise/Houston makes it,
If Boise/Houston makes it,
If Boise/Houston makes it, there are three at-large spots. Alabama or LSU takes one of them, other than that, us, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and PSU are the most attractive in the current polls (USC is still on their bowl ban). It's just a matter of which of those teams can get eligible and into the BCS top-14.
Also, the BTCG winner goes to the Rose, just like before. Whoever wins that game will either play in the BCS title game or the Rose. Almost certainly the Rose this year.
Go Blue!
October 23rd, 2011 at 5:45 PM |
Nebraska & Iowa still control their own destiny
Nebraska & Iowa still control their own destiny
w/ their games against MSU still to be played.
We don't. All Michigan-wins-the-Bo-division scenrios require two MSU losses. If MSU loses two and we win out, we take it. If MSU loses two and we go 4-1, we'd need either Nebraska or Iowa to also go 6-2 and the right combination of tie-breakers.
Don't look now, but the other thing the Wiscy loss does is put tOSU back in control of it own Woody division destiny.
October 23rd, 2011 at 10:48 PM |
Let's win some more road games
Let's win some more road games
Still a lot of football to go. I think this team is capable of winning all the remaining games on the schedule, but I also think it's capable of dropping all of them, too. The main takeaway I have at this point in the season is that Wisky and MSU are pretty good, and everyone else in the conference, us included, are too inconsistent to make generalizations about (other than Minn and Indy; awful).
The next five weeks will determine how we look back on this season. Really hoping we get to Ohio week smiling. In the meanwhile, let's cook the Boilers!
Moeller v. Excalibur Restaurant -- Fight!
yea, but Nebraska would have 2 conference losses (Wisconsin and, in this hypothetical, Michigan). they would not have a claim to the division title since UM and MSU would only have 1 loss in the division. MSU would break the tie with us.