Big Ten is planning on 20 game schedule; only 15 of its 18 teams in the Big Ten Tournament starting in 2025.


MaxyJR1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
11,491
Reaction score
5,608
Points
113
No problem with this. Would have liked 22 or 24 games to eliminate a couple non conference games. Having the 16th-18th not qualify for tournament likely just gives them a 1-2 week head start on hiring a new coach in this climate of college sports.
 


Gophers7633

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2017
Messages
1,457
Reaction score
1,664
Points
113
I don't really understand why it makes sense to do 15 instead of 16? With 16, you have the perfect bracket format, like the Big East used to have, and you'd then have 4 games on that opening day. Is it all so the #9 seed doesn't have to play an extra game?
 



MUgopher32

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
2,160
Reaction score
1,243
Points
113
I don't really understand why it makes sense to do 15 instead of 16? With 16, you have the perfect bracket format, like the Big East used to have, and you'd then have 4 games on that opening day. Is it all so the #9 seed doesn't have to play an extra game?

Im guessing so.

Basically from a "deserves" stand point.

The 9 seed technically finishes in the top half of the conference. Id say they are more deserving of the opportunity to try and win 4 in 4 days(tough but doable) with the first game against a mehh team.

Than the 16 is to be able to play a game(and likely 1 at that) when they proved all year long they were only better than 2 out of 18 teams.

Better chance to maximize bids too. Making that 9 seed play a 16 in the first round in addition to the 10/15. Opens potential for catastrophe to ruin bids.
 







MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
18,285
Reaction score
17,907
Points
113
I don't really understand why it makes sense to do 15 instead of 16? With 16, you have the perfect bracket format, like the Big East used to have, and you'd then have 4 games on that opening day. Is it all so the #9 seed doesn't have to play an extra game?
15 seems like an odd number of teams to settle on as well when 16 would be a lot cleaner. Seems like you could also just take the bottom 4 and have 2 play in games to get the 15th and 16th seeds in order to have every team involved in some way.

Will be interesting to see what the format of the tournament looks like when they release it. Looking at some 15 team, single elimination brackets it would seem that you would give the #1 seed a bye in round 1 to make it work.
 


SelectionSunday

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
24,079
Reaction score
3,762
Points
113
15 seems like an odd number of teams to settle on as well when 16 would be a lot cleaner. Seems like you could also just take the bottom 4 and have 2 play in games to get the 15th and 16th seeds in order to have every team involved in some way.

Will be interesting to see what the format of the tournament looks like when they release it. Looking at some 15 team, single elimination brackets it would seem that you would give the #1 seed a bye in round 1 to make it work.
I'm sure it will look the same as the current 15-team ACC Tournament format.

Weakling Wednesday (but not The Three Stooges)
#12 vs. #13
#10 vs. #15
#11 vs. #14

Thursday (2nd round)
#8 vs. #9
#5 vs. #12/#13 winner
#7 vs. #10/#15 winner
#6 vs. #11/#14 winner

Friday (Quarterfinals)
#1 vs. #8/#9 winner
#4 vs. #5/#12/#13 winner
#2 vs. #7/#10/#15 winner
#3 vs. #6/#11/#14 winner

Saturday semfinals, Sunday title game
 



Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
8,142
Reaction score
5,876
Points
113
I'm sure it will look the same as the current 15-team ACC Tournament format.

Weakling Wednesday (but not The Three Stooges)
#12 vs. #13
#10 vs. #15
#11 vs. #14

Thursday (2nd round)
#8 vs. #9
#5 vs. #12/#13 winner
#7 vs. #10/#15 winner
#6 vs. #11/#14 winner

Friday (Quarterfinals)
#1 vs. #8/#9 winner
#4 vs. #5/#12/#13 winner
#2 vs. #7/#10/#15 winner
#3 vs. #6/#11/#14 winner

Saturday semfinals, Sunday title game
This Athletic Article confirms your intuition on the format.


As much as I like the term Weakling Wednesday (I think I was in your presence at the United Center when it was coined) I am not sure it will fit in 2025 and beyond.

Multiple teams playing Wednesday will be firmly in the middle of the pack. I can certainly see a few being firmly on the bubble or even solidly in the dance.

On the other hand we're referencing a conference name/branded The Big 10 that has had at least 11 teams for over 3 decades. It's almost doubled, so maybe WW survives.
 

SelectionSunday

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
24,079
Reaction score
3,762
Points
113
This Athletic Article confirms your intuition on the format.


As much as I like the term Weakling Wednesday (I think I was in your presence at the United Center when it was coined) I am not sure it will fit in 2025 and beyond.

Multiple teams playing Wednesday will be firmly in the middle of the pack. I can certainly see a few being firmly on the bubble or even solidly in the dance.

On the other hand we're referencing a conference name/branded The Big 10 that has had at least 11 teams for over 3 decades. It's almost doubled, so maybe WW survives.
Was thinking about that same thing, Ope.

The jump to 18 teams will negate the "impact" (mockery) of Weakling Wednesday and seems like the perfect jumping point to move the focus of our ridicule to those who don't even "make it to "Wednesday".

Thus, starting next season, the term Weakling Wednesday shall be officially retired, may it rest in peace effective March 13, 2024, then go forward with a TBD name for the 3 non-qualifiers. The early leaders in the clubhouse are "The Three Stooges" and "The Three Amigos".
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
8,142
Reaction score
5,876
Points
113
Was thinking about that same thing, Ope.

The jump to 18 teams will negate the "impact" (mockery) of Weakling Wednesday and seems like the perfect jumping point to move the focus of our ridicule to those who don't even "make it to "Wednesday".

Thus, starting next season, the term Weakling Wednesday shall be officially retired, may it rest in peace effective March 13, 2024, then go forward with a TBD name for the 3 non-qualifiers. The early leaders in the clubhouse are "The Three Stooges" and "The Three Amigos".
I will throw this name in the hopper: Three Little B1Gs
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
22,418
Reaction score
11,674
Points
113
I don't really understand why it makes sense to do 15 instead of 16? With 16, you have the perfect bracket format, like the Big East used to have, and you'd then have 4 games on that opening day. Is it all so the #9 seed doesn't have to play an extra game?
9 seed is a bubble team most of the time.
The 9-16 game provides only downside for the conference. A bad loss.
 


MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,704
Reaction score
9,823
Points
113
This would mean Weakling Wednesday expanding from 4 to 6 teams!

But that means we need a name for the bottom 3 that don't even make the tournament.

I'm rolling with "The Turrible Turds".
Really Weak Tuesday. So weak they couldn't even get out of bed
 

mngolf

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
1,261
Reaction score
964
Points
113
This would mean Weakling Wednesday expanding from 4 to 6 teams!

But that means we need a name for the bottom 3 that don't even make the tournament.

I'm rolling with "The Turrible Turds".
If Ben is still here, it might be called Gophers. :(
 





Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
8,142
Reaction score
5,876
Points
113
For the 20 game schedule aspect of the announcement, that means there will only be 3 home and homes each season. That's assuming they want everyone to play each other at least once.

I hope they lean strong towards geography for those. Let the PAC 4 play each other twice. Gophers should play Wisconsin & Iowa and rotate some other Big 10 West school for the 3rd.
 




short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
19,266
Reaction score
12,863
Points
113
another possibility - there is a web site I visit that talks about movies. they like to make fun of bad movies, and one of their segments is titled

"The Wheel of the Worst."
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
22,418
Reaction score
11,674
Points
113
For the 20 game schedule aspect of the announcement, that means there will only be 3 home and homes each season. That's assuming they want everyone to play each other at least once.

I hope they lean strong towards geography for those. Let the PAC 4 play each other twice. Gophers should play Wisconsin & Iowa and rotate some other Big 10 West school for the 3rd.
Agree:
Groups of that all lock up to create rivalry aspects. Also alleviated travel for west coast teams a bit.

USC/UCLA/Washington//Oregon
All lock each other:
Michigan state - Michigan, +2
Michigan - Michigan State, Ohio state, +1
Ohio State - Michigan, +2
Indiana - Purdue, +2
Purdue - Indiana, +2
Illinois - Northwestern, +2
Northwestern - Illinois, +2
Minnesota - Iowa, Wisconsin, +1
Wisconsin - Minnesota, Iowa, +1
Nebraska - iowa, +2
Iowa - Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin
Maryland - +3
Rutgers - +3
Penn State - +3


If they wanted, This would also make it so no team plays more than two games on the west coast in the same season. And if they were smart they would schedule them for a lot of W/Th + Sat/Sun
Or
Sat/Sun + Mon/Tues

So teams knock out both games in one 4-5 day road trip.
It also would mean that the west coast teams would only have 7 conference games outside the pacific time zone. And if they had 2-3 game road trips they could get that down to just 2-3 cross country flights. For instance play Northwestern Thursday and Illinois Sunday.
 




Top Bottom