Gophers 2024 and 2025 Big Ten opponents announced.

Donate To GopherHole
Ope3 said:
I was actually going to ask you if the "3 Unbeaten" thing had been figured out yet. Had a feeling that was an aspect of great interest to you. Just a hunch.

Thanks for posting it.
Click to expand...
Luckily someone did it for me.

It also is a potential issue as all of these could be 3 way ties with one loss too. Although tiebreakers of teams with a loss is much less controversial than if a 12-0 Iowa gets left out for 12-0 Michigan and penn state. (Which is possible in 2024)
 

Some guy said:
Luckily someone did it for me.

It also is a potential issue as all of these could be 3 way ties with one loss too. Although tiebreakers of teams with a loss is much less controversial than if a 12-0 Iowa gets left out for 12-0 Michigan and Penn state. (Which is possible in 2024)
Click to expand...
I just about everything I've read in past history (mostly HS football playoffs), the three way 1 loss is usually decided by 1) "common opponents," then 2) point differential, then (3) coin flip--including a simultaneous three coin flip...odd team winning.

For undefeated teams, #1 is out, so #2 becomes important. They also put a cap on the point differential of 13. A 26-13 win is the same as 65-0.

The B1G may go to "overall record" first, then down the line.

Anyone had a better idea?
 

highwayman said:
I just about everything I've read in past history (mostly HS football playoffs), the three way 1 loss is usually decided by 1) "common opponents," then 2) point differential, then (3) coin flip--including a simultaneous three coin flip...odd team winning.

For undefeated teams, #1 is out, so #2 becomes important. They also put a cap on the point differential of 13. A 26-13 win is the same as 65-0.

The B1G may go to "overall record" first, then down the line.

Anyone had a better idea?
Click to expand...
Divisions is a better idea but they already turned it down

I assume it’ll be similar to the pac 12 tiebreakers.

Last year Utah beat out Oregon because they played Washington state instead of cal


www.deseret.com

A detailed breakdown of why the 3-team Pac-12 championship game tiebreaker worked out in Utah’s favor

Utah will face USC in the Pac-12 championship game. Here’s the math on how the Utes won the three-team tiebreaker over Oregon and Washington.
www.deseret.com www.deseret.com
 

to amplify something that was briefly mentioned in another post:

as per the B1G, the new schedule was designed so that, during a four-year period, every B1G team will play at least one home game and one road game against every other team in the league.

so, if that matters to recruits, a coach can tell a player that "if you come to MN and stay for 4 years, you will visit every other school in the conference at least once." i.e., if MN is recruiting a kid from Illinois, they can promise them at least one game at Illinois during their 4 years.

(of course, if there is further expansion, that goes out the window......)
 

Some guy said:
Divisions is a better idea but they already turned it down

I assume it’ll be similar to the pac 12 tiebreakers.

Last year Utah beat out Oregon because they played Washington state instead of cal


www.deseret.com

A detailed breakdown of why the 3-team Pac-12 championship game tiebreaker worked out in Utah’s favor

Utah will face USC in the Pac-12 championship game. Here’s the math on how the Utes won the three-team tiebreaker over Oregon and Washington.
www.deseret.com www.deseret.com
Click to expand...
Strangely, none of those first 3 tiebreakers would work in a three-way undefeated situation. Getting screwed on #4 strength of schedule would be awful.
 


highwayman said:
Strangely, none of those first 3 tiebreakers would work in a three-way undefeated situation. Getting screwed on #4 strength of schedule would be awful.
Click to expand...
You go unbeaten and you get left out because you played Nebraska instead of Maryland.


Would suck ass.


The good news is: you’d be 12-0 and probably hosting a first round playoff game.
You wouldn’t get the bye by being conference champ in the top 4.

But you’d be screwed a lot less than you’d be screwed in the BCS system or 4 team playoff.




Really the whole thing is just going to the point that conference championships matter less than before. As conferences get bigger, it’s more about are you high enough in your conference to be top 8-12 in the country.



for the big ten teams, the goal shouldn’t really be a conference championship anymore as that is mathematically no longer in your control. The goal should be to win 10+ games as 10 PROBABLY gets you in the playoff. 11 almost certainly does.

I would feel better about it if the big ten made a rule that says if you tie for the best record in the conference but don’t make the championship you are awarded a co-championship though the winner of the conference championship will be submitted for CFP purposes.
 
Last edited:

highwayman said:
I just about everything I've read in past history (mostly HS football playoffs), the three way 1 loss is usually decided by 1) "common opponents," then 2) point differential, then (3) coin flip--including a simultaneous three coin flip...odd team winning.

For undefeated teams, #1 is out, so #2 becomes important. They also put a cap on the point differential of 13. A 26-13 win is the same as 65-0.

The B1G may go to "overall record" first, then down the line.

Anyone had a better idea?
Click to expand...
1686347713557.png
 

Personally I like the way the schedule plays out. 2024 will be tough, but if we build some momentum this year we should be laser focused for 2025. I really like our chances if AK develops like most of us believe he will. It will be amazing if we can make some national noise in the next few years with the 12 team BCS.
 

Some guy said:
Luckily someone did it for me.

It also is a potential issue as all of these could be 3 way ties with one loss too. Although tiebreakers of teams with a loss is much less controversial than if a 12-0 Iowa gets left out for 12-0 Michigan and penn state. (Which is possible in 2024)
Click to expand...
The Hawkeyes probably would lose to the Cyclones and be only 11--1.😀

It would really bug me if somehow a non-conference game somehow wound up impacting the Big 10 Championship participants (via a tiebreaker/overall CFP ranking). Even if it hosed the Badgers or Hawkeyes.
 



Ope3 said:
The Hawkeyes probably would lose to the Cyclones and be only 11--1.😀

It would really bug me if somehow a non-conference game somehow wound up impacting the Big 10 Championship participants (via a tiebreaker/overall CFP ranking). Even if it hosed the Badgers or Hawkeyes.
Click to expand...
The worst is if CFP tiebreaker does. Because then they basically just pick the two of the three in the tie who are the biggest TV draws.
 

Some guy said:
The worst is if CFP tiebreaker does. Because then they basically just pick the two of the three in the tie who are the biggest TV draws.
Click to expand...
With "Eye Test Bias", yes certainly a significant probability of that.

With unbalanced Home/Road splits, I would like to see such teams that may have had 5 road games get a tiebreaker edge against those that only had 4.
 

Ope3 said:
With "Eye Test Bias", yes certainly a significant probability of that.

With unbalanced Home/Road splits, I would like to see such teams that may have had 5 road games get a tiebreaker edge against those that only had 4.
Click to expand...
In the long turn the teams will adjust non conference schedules though and they’ll play their road games in a way where they usually end up 7 and 5.


I wish all the conference not named the SEC would’ve agreed upon a formula to rank the teams like the hockey pair wise type system. Objective criteria would be better than a committee. At least we have some auto bids for conference champs now.
 

double-checked the B1G website. in their schedule format announcement, all it said was

"tiebreaker procedures will be announced at a later date."

I have to imagine that schools would like to know sooner rather than later, but in reality, they don't have to come up with the tiebreaking procedure until the fall of 2024 - I would presume before the opening game of the season.

(If it was the MSHSL, they would appoint a committee to study the issue........)
 



short ornery norwegian said:
to amplify something that was briefly mentioned in another post:

as per the B1G, the new schedule was designed so that, during a four-year period, every B1G team will play at least one home game and one road game against every other team in the league.

so, if that matters to recruits, a coach can tell a player that "if you come to MN and stay for 4 years, you will visit every other school in the conference at least once." i.e., if MN is recruiting a kid from Illinois, they can promise them at least one game at Illinois during their 4 years.

(of course, if there is further expansion, that goes out the window......)
Click to expand...
Nobody is picking the gophers because they are going to be sure they get to play ….. Maryland.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
double-checked the B1G website. in their schedule format announcement, all it said was

"tiebreaker procedures will be announced at a later date."

I have to imagine that schools would like to know sooner rather than later, but in reality, they don't have to come up with the tiebreaking procedure until the fall of 2024 - I would presume before the opening game of the season.

(If it was the MSHSL, they would appoint a committee to study the issue........)
Click to expand...
The tiebreaker thing is going to be a pain.

The one thing I like about divisions, is that you know exactly what you need to do and you’re in full control of it.

In the old system, maybe Penn State is the second best team in the conference… but that also means they got their shot against Ohio State…

New system could be weird.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
The tiebreaker thing is going to be a pain.

The one thing I like about divisions, is that you know exactly what you need to do and you’re in full control of it.

In the old system, maybe Penn State is the second best team in the conference… but that also means they got their shot against Ohio State…

New system could be weird.
Click to expand...

If I was cynical - I might say this:

If there is a chance of a three-way or even four-way tie for the conference title -- with the top two teams advancing to the conference championship game -- that is going to generate a lot of interest, and potentially higher ratings for games late in the season.

so that is something that the B1G may want to happen, whether they admit it or not.

It might even get ESPN to stop talking about the SEC for five minutes.
 

The BIG tried divisions twice and the concept was a failure.
The West division did give a few West teams the chance to go to the championship game, where they always lost and in general provided an easier schedule for the West teams.
The reactionaries can wish divisions will come back, but they will not.
 


Plato said:
The BIG tried divisions twice and the concept was a failure.
The West division did give a few West teams the chance to go to the championship game, where they always lost and in general provided an easier schedule for the West teams.
The reactionaries can wish divisions will come back, but they will not.
Click to expand...
East vs west was pretty even overall. Obviously osu won a lot of championships though.

Ps...how are things at the Vatican?
 

Word said:
East vs west was pretty even overall. Obviously osu won a lot of championships though.

Ps...how are things at the Vatican?
Click to expand...
I had hopes but it seems Francis is recovering from abdominal surgery.
 

Ope3 said:
I was actually going to ask you if the "3 Unbeaten" thing had been figured out yet. Had a feeling that was an aspect of great interest to you. Just a hunch.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's not like he's been hammering that one small bit as if it was life or death for the conference, for over a year. Good hunch! :cool:
 

Some guy said:
I think that if they ever went to 18 or 20 they would need to go to some kind of divisional scheduling. Even if they didn’t name divisions. Even if they changed it every year.
But if they actually want a conference champ it would be mathematically necessary.




These three way ties would be great in number and there would also be 4 way ties too in an 18 or 20 team league.
Click to expand...
Well there you go, your obsession is confirmed.

It really doesn't surprise me that it's possible. Just is what it is with this type of method.

Looking at the Tweet graphic, there's only one of these that's even remotely plausible to happen:

2024 - Iowa, Michigan, Penn State

Could see it. But it still won't happen. Going undefeated, even just the nine game conference slate, let alone going undefeated for the season, is incredible hard to do. Weird stuff happens every week with games that teams "shouldn't" lose.
 

Absolute worst case for Gophers in a 3-way undefeated tie scenario: we get jobbed out of going to the Conf Championship game and are #3 in the conf.

We're still in the CFP. We likely get to host a first round game (hopefully in US Bank Stadium).

Opposite of sky is falling. Probably means we get to avoid a loss in Indy, to boot. And the Indy game has zero ramifications about going to Pasadena.

So who friggin cares?
 

The schedule method works out almost exactly like I was thinking, with one small change.


I was thinking it had to be 4-year cycles on the three yearly teams for each school. Because that would be playing every team in the conference both home and away.

But indeed, you can also just do 2-year cycles. Even faster turn-over. More "flexibility" (read: best chance to get Ohio State, Michigan, Penn St, and USC into the playoff each year).


I think it's a great format and I'm looking forward to it.

Our athletes will be guaranteed to visit every stadium in the conference over four year spans.


I'm hoping our 2-year cycles don't just alternate back and forth between Michigan and Nebraska. Neither is an ideal match up for us, long term. Would like to see Illinois get in there because of Bertie. And NW would be nice since we do a lot of Chicago recruiting (Fleck is from there).

USC and UCLA getting in there makes sense too, simple because of geography/practicality.
 
Last edited:

fmlizard said:
I'm surprised Purdue and Illinois is protected? I never knew of that as much of a rivalry.

Purdue and Illinois are the easy-schedule winners in this setup, as they get protected games with each other, plus Northwestern and Indiana.
Click to expand...
When it comes to rivals, real or imagined, quality doesn’t matter, as PRIDE is on the line, so you best buckle up that chinstrap laddy!
 


Goldmember said:
Penn State didn’t want any.
Iowa wanted three.
Click to expand...
The only "must have" for Penn State is to not play Ohio State yearly, ever again. They're so sick of being in the East with OSU.

The "Land Grant" trophy, I bet they're like "meh ... OK, sure we need something to play for on rivalry weekend when Michigan OSU is the game, and we've never had history with Rutgers or Maryland".
 

EG#9 said:
I want to see the "U" show that these rivalry games are actually important to them beyond lip service. We are currently on a school record 8 game losing streak to Iowa. Wisconsin just fired Paul Chryst who finished his career at 43-18 in the Big Ten.

The expectation should be to beat those programs. The resources should be made available to do so. If those are not the expectations and/or the resources will not be made available then we should not have protected the games. I believe the stat is something like we haven't swept Iowa and Wisconsin since like 1993? You'd think a MAC team would run in to a sweep in 30 years... In the next decade, I'd like to see at least an 11-9 combined record against Iowa and Wisconsin. I think Fleck is talented enough to do it, but not if we lag behind in administrative support.
Click to expand...
I'd say the athletic department has done a damn good job of giving this program as much as they can give it - football back on campus, athletes village, improved facilities, ongoing contract extensions for the coaches...aside from NIL what are you referencing?
 

Mr. 131 said:
I'd say the athletic department has done a damn good job of giving this program as much as they can give it - football back on campus, athletes village, improved facilities, ongoing contract extensions for the coaches...aside from NIL what are you referencing?
Click to expand...
Probably wanted/wants basketball coaches fired faster. I think there are good chunks of each fanbase that would agree.

Rest of the biggest revenue sports are in a pretty good place. Football (by far), men's hockey, and volleyball (to me this passes the threshold to be considered revenue sport, with our top 5 attendance in the nation). And a lot of the non-revenue sports are decently competitive.

Wrestling is probably the biggest disappointment currently.
 

If we go to 18 teams, we can keep the 4 year cycle of all conf teams home and home if we go to 10 conf games and maintain 3 yearly matchups.

If we go to 20 teams, we can get a 5 year cycle of all conf teams home and home if 10 conf games and 4 yearly matchups.
 
Last edited:

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom