Big 10 West Title

Donate To GopherHole

I don't care how much MN would lose by in the B1G championship. Winning the West in improbably fashion these last two weeks would be a FANTASTIC accomplishment. The chances are probably 5% or less...
 


GridironGus said:
Wouldn't the Gophers win a 3 way tie between MINN, WISC and PURD?

The following procedure will determine the representative from each division in the event of a tie:
If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.

If three or more teams are tied, steps 1 through 8 will be followed until a determination is made. If only two teams remain tied after any step (or sub-step), the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative. If three or more teams remain tied after any step, move to next step in tiebreaker with remaining tied teams.
1. The records of the three (or more) tied teams will be compared based on winning percentage in games between the tied teams.

(a) Example: East 1 is 2-0 in games between the tied teams with wins over East 2 and 3 - East 1 would be the representative.

2. The records of the three (or more) tied teams will be compared based on winning percentage within their division.

3. The records of the three (or more) teams will be compared against the next highest placed teams in their division in order of finish (4, 5, 6, and 7).

(a) When arriving at a group of tied teams while comparing records, use each team’s record against the collective tied teams as a group, rather than record against the individual teams.

4. The records of the three (or more) teams will be compared based on winning percentage against all common conference opponents.

5. The records of the three (or more) teams will be compared based on the best cumulative conference winning percentage of non-divisional opponents.

(a) Example: East 1 non-divisional opponents are 20-7, East 2 non-divisional opponents are 19-8, East 3 non-divisional opponents are 14-13 – East 1 would be the representative.

6. The records of the three (or more) teams will be compared against the highest placed non-divisional teams in their division order of finish (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7).

(a) When arriving at a group of tied teams while comparing records, use each team’s record against the collective tied teams as a group, rather than record against the individual teams.

(b) When comparing records against a single team or a group of teams, the record will prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e. 1-0 is better than 0-0, 2-0 is better than 1-0, etc.)

7. The team with the best overall winning percentage [excluding exempted games] shall be the representative.

8. The representative will be chosen by random draw.
Click to expand...
I think so but that requires Iowa losing two.
 

dumbgoph said:
Need to win the West to win the Big Ten
Click to expand...
People who don’t think winning the west meaning anything and then complaining we don’t win the west.

List of programs to win the program since East/West

Penn state
Michigan state
Ohio state

I guess no one else matters
 




Dakota2 said:
Winning the West is an ironclad requisite for winning the Big Ten but you call it dumb?
Click to expand...
dumbgoph said:
Need to win the West to win the Big Ten
Click to expand...
I thought it was clear I was talking about the supposed proposal the Big Ten is considering, which would do away with the divisions. They would just pick the best two (highest ranked, or whatever criteria) for the championship game.

I support that proposal, and hope it passes.
 

MplsGopher said:
I thought it was clear I was talking about the supposed proposal the Big Ten is considering, which would do away with the divisions. They would just pick the best two (highest ranked, or whatever criteria) for the championship game.

I support that proposal, and hope it passes.
Click to expand...
Sorry, wasn't clear to me. Maybe I missed earlier references. I hate the idea of dropping divisions. More teams have a chance to win something later in year also. And to you really want to lose 13th game at Indy?
 



MNVCGUY said:
The West is Wisconsin's to lose at this point and probably the only other team with a truly realistic shot of still coming out on top is Iowa. There will be scenarios where Purdue and Minnesota can win the West but those would all require a lot of chaos at this point. The reality is that the losses this week basically eliminated MN and PUR from the divisional race.

If Wisconsin wins out they get the West. If they drop a game and Iowa wins out then Iowa gets the West. Outside of that it would get really messy and there would be all kinds of tie breaker scenarios in play.

With Nebraska firing their offensive staff and losing one of their defensive leaders (JoJo Doman) to injury I don't like their chances of springing the upsets against Wisconsin or Iowa in the next two weeks. But has been a crazy year and anything can happen I guess.

Illinois at Iowa next week could be interesting. Illinois is just pesky enough to make things difficult and is coming off a bye week as well. Plus they clearly don't mind playing on the road having won at MN and PSU already this year.
Click to expand...
Illinois has a legit defense that will give IA problems plus a coach that actually plays to win and isn't risk averse. I think the Illini pull off the upset.
 

Dakota2 said:
Sorry, wasn't clear to me. Maybe I missed earlier references. I hate the idea of dropping divisions. More teams have a chance to win something later in year also. And to you really want to lose 13th game at Indy?
Click to expand...
This year, where OSU has progressed to …. guaranteed loss for whichever West team shows up.

Let that be Iowa.
 

mnhoopboy said:
Illinois has a legit defense that will give IA problems plus a coach that actually plays to win and isn't risk averse. I think the Illini pull off the upset.
Click to expand...
Illinois is more conservative than Mn this year

Saying things like Illinois plays to win and Minnesota doesn’t doesn’t make it true
 

Purdue takes care of Northwestern.
Illinois up 3 after the 1st quarter.
 



MplsGopher said:
"Winning" the "West" and "East" is dumb anyway.

Win the Big Ten, once in my lifetime. I can get behind that.
Click to expand...
This is a little like saying the trophy games are dumb trinkets too. But there’s no realistic path to loftier goals if the Gophers can’t beat teams like Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Penn State, and Nebraska. Those are the teams that need to be passed up to win the West and challenge for the overall title.

It’s all incremental progress
 

fmlizard said:
This is a little like saying the trophy games are dumb trinkets too. But there’s no realistic path to loftier goals if the Gophers can’t beat teams like Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Penn State, and Nebraska. Those are the teams that need to be passed up to win the West and challenge for the overall title.

It’s all incremental progress
Click to expand...
Divisions in college were nothing more than fake constructs to enable conference championship games for TV.

Don't need them (divisions) to do that, anymore. Get rid of them.

Winning the conference was always the only thing that actually mattered.


We need to do that again. One day.
 

MplsGopher said:
Divisions in college were nothing more than fake constructs to enable conference championship games for TV.

Don't need them (divisions) to do that, anymore. Get rid of them.

Winning the conference was always the only thing that actually mattered.


We need to do that again. One day.
Click to expand...
Divisions were created as a result of expansion. CCG to avoid the weird votes that occurred in the 20th century to decide who went to the Rose Bowl. Winning the conference can be the only thing that matters, but the path has changed. Winning the West is now a pre-requisite. Considering we haven't done that once, that needs to be accomplished first.
 

MplsGopher said:
Divisions in college were nothing more than fake constructs to enable conference championship games for TV.

Don't need them (divisions) to do that, anymore. Get rid of them.

Winning the conference was always the only thing that actually mattered.


We need to do that again. One day.
Click to expand...
So would you go back to no playoffs in baseball - just the AL winner and the NL winner after the regular season meeting in the World Series?
 

dumbgoph said:
Divisions were created as a result of expansion.
Click to expand...
Yes
dumbgoph said:
CCG to avoid the weird votes that occurred in the 20th century to decide who went to the Rose Bowl.
Click to expand...
No.

Originally, before big TV money was a thing, the SEC simply picked a certain way and got the NCAA to encode it as "the" way.

That's why the Big Ten had to expand to 12 (with Nebraska), in the first place, to be able to hold a CCG.

Then the NCAA updated that rule. Hence why the Big XII (and others now) could start holding a CCG without having divisions.

All conferences are starting to realize: having divisions doesn't actually benefit us that much.


If anything, it just makes the conference feel split apart. I think the TV crew noted that it was the first time the Gophers had been to Bloomington since 2013???

That's silly, if they truly are in the same conference.
 

discochris said:
So would you go back to no playoffs in baseball - just the AL winner and the NL winner after the regular season meeting in the World Series?
Click to expand...
No one would.

And that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
 

MplsGopher said:
Yes

No.

Originally, before big TV money was a thing, the SEC simply picked a certain way and got the NCAA to encode it as "the" way.

That's why the Big Ten had to expand to 12 (with Nebraska), in the first place, to be able to hold a CCG.

Then the NCAA updated that rule. Hence why the Big XII (and others now) could start holding a CCG without having divisions.

All conferences are starting to realize: having divisions doesn't actually benefit us that much.


If anything, it just makes the conference feel split apart. I think the TV crew noted that it was the first time the Gophers had been to Bloomington since 2013???

That's silly, if they truly are in the same conference.
Click to expand...
Well, with 14 teams in the conference, you're bound to not see some of them for awhile.

The strangest thing in this regard is the SEC. They've never, going back decades, done any kind of balanced scheduling, so there are examples of teams in the same conference almost never playing each other over the years.
 

MplsGopher said:
This year, where OSU has progressed to …. guaranteed loss for whichever West team shows up.

Let that be Iowa.
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced Michigan is a guaranteed W for OSU yet. They'll probably win, but I think Michigan can make it a game at home with a break or 2.
 

mnsportsgeek said:
I'm not convinced Michigan is a guaranteed W for OSU yet. They'll probably win, but I think Michigan can make it a game at home with a break or 2.
Click to expand...

Michigan is a much better matchup for OSU than MSU. Michigan actually has a defense and an offense that can drain the clock. Regardless, I'd probably take OSU and the -8 spread.
 

discochris said:
Well, with 14 teams in the conference, you're bound to not see some of them for awhile.

The strangest thing in this regard is the SEC. They've never, going back decades, done any kind of balanced scheduling, so there are examples of teams in the same conference almost never playing each other over the years.
Click to expand...
Fair points, but this is supposedly the proposal the Big Ten is considering:

- 8 conference games
- each team has 3 locked in teams they play every year (so you're home/home every 2 years)
- that leaves 10 teams out of 14, and 5 conference games per year
- meaning you can cycle through all 10 of the remaining teams home/home every 4 years
- the CCG then is simple the "best two teams" every year, by some explicit criteria

I vote yes on this.

I also laid out a proposal of a possible permutation of which three teams each team in the Big Ten could play every year, and it seemed reasonable and captured most of the important rivalries. I believe the main trophy missing was the Illibuck, but I doubt too many were going to miss that one.
 

FormerFatOL said:
Michigan is a much better matchup for OSU than MSU. Michigan actually has a defense and an offense that can drain the clock. Regardless, I'd probably take OSU and the -8 spread.
Click to expand...
Then why did Michigan lose to Mich State?
 

MplsGopher said:
Then why did Michigan lose to Mich State?
Click to expand...
Rivalry game....Michigan was dominating that game till late in the 3rd quarter when they fell apart and allowed MSU to outscore them 23-3 to close out the game with the comeback win. Michigan is the better team of the two but MSU got it done in the 4th quarter of that game to get the win.

Michigan State is solid this year but they are very fortunate to be 9-2 and Ohio State really exposed them as being nowhere close to ready to hang with the best. They made the quick jump this year by bringing in a ton of transfers, will be interesting to see if Tucker can maintain a high level of success going forward to justify the massive contract they are going to give him.
 

FormerFatOL said:
Michigan is a much better matchup for OSU than MSU. Michigan actually has a defense and an offense that can drain the clock. Regardless, I'd probably take OSU and the -8 spread.
Click to expand...
Michigan is actually a good team too.
Michigan state’s best win is Michigan. Their second best win is either 5-6 Maryland, 5-6 Rutgers, or 6-5 Miami


when you play in the east and get a good draw, your schedule is MUCH easier than the west.
Crossovers:
Purdue - loss
Northwestern - win
Nebraska - win in OT

If Michigan state played in the west and crossed over against Ohio State, Maryland, and Indiana, they’d probably be a 4 or 5 loss team this year IMO
 

MNVCGUY said:
Rivalry game....Michigan was dominating that game till late in the 3rd quarter when they fell apart and allowed MSU to outscore them 23-3 to close out the game with the comeback win. Michigan is the better team of the two but MSU got it done in the 4th quarter of that game to get the win.

Michigan State is solid this year but they are very fortunate to be 9-2 and Ohio State really exposed them as being nowhere close to ready to hang with the best. They made the quick jump this year by bringing in a ton of transfers, will be interesting to see if Tucker can maintain a high level of success going forward to justify the massive contract they are going to give him.
Click to expand...
Michigan coaching outcoached themselves in that game. up 33-30 with the ball on your own 45 after a big stop. 7 min left in the game. Harbaugh for whatever reason decides to sub McNamara (who'd been having probably the best game of his career to that point) for McCarthy (true freshman but super talented) who promptly coughs up the ball. The doubly confusing part is it wasn't like McCarthy had been in much or been wildly successful running the ball to that point (finished with 3 carries for 7 yards) and they'd been moving it all game without him. Couple that with another move that always confuses me in college with spiking the ball after a first down (you should have 4-5 base route combos you can call from the sideline and have ready to go, the clock is stopped to move the chains) that cost them a down when they turned over on downs inside the Mich St 40 with over 2 minutes left. Harbaugh really isn't a great big game coach and he cost them that game IMO
 

MNVCGUY said:
Rivalry game....Michigan was dominating that game till late in the 3rd quarter when they fell apart and allowed MSU to outscore them 23-3 to close out the game with the comeback win. Michigan is the better team of the two but MSU got it done in the 4th quarter of that game to get the win.

Michigan State is solid this year but they are very fortunate to be 9-2 and Ohio State really exposed them as being nowhere close to ready to hang with the best. They made the quick jump this year by bringing in a ton of transfers, will be interesting to see if Tucker can maintain a high level of success going forward to justify the massive contract they are going to give him.
Click to expand...
Good post. I believe it.

But I don't believe Michigan will do significantly better than MSU, vs OSU. We will see though.
 

MplsGopher said:
Good post. I believe it.

But I don't believe Michigan will do significantly better than MSU, vs OSU. We will see though.
Click to expand...
OSU will almost certainly win but Michigan will at least make a game of it. MSU got outclassed in every way. If OSU had wanted to they could have hung 100 on Michigan State's defense.
 

MNVCGUY said:
OSU will almost certainly win but Michigan will at least make a game of it. MSU got outclassed in every way. If OSU had wanted to they could have hung 100 on Michigan State's defense.
Click to expand...
I have thought OSU on another than anyone else since about week 4 second half. They figured it out. They will beat Michigan going away I think. But Michigan is a much better matchup. Michigan will try to keep OSU off the field. Michigan might attempt to cover wideouts…Michigan state never tried the second tactic
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom