Sconnie can go 3-5 and qualify for championship game...Indiana could, too

Donate To GopherHole
highwayman

highwayman

Knows Less Than PJ Fleck
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
8,010
Reaction score
1,708
Points
113
Wisc 6-6 Overall 3-5 B1G
L at Ind
L OSU
L at PSU

Indiana 4-8, 2-6
L Iowa
W Wisc
L at PSU
L at Pur

Wisc clinches if they beat the Hoosiers in two weeks. But, if Indiana beats Wisc and anyone else--and Wisc loses all three--Indiana goes to the championship game with the head to head tiebreaker. The Hoosiers could be 5-7 and in the championship game. The Nov. 10 game could be their "bowl game".

Another black eye for the "competitive" alignment plan. If Wisc was in the Legends and Mich in the Leaders, this isn't an issue...at least on the surface.
 

What's wrong with stipulating that to play in the Title Game a team has to be off probation and above .500 both overall and in the Big Ten. If a Division can'r provide that the team with the 2nd Best record in the other Division plays?
 

Assume all of the above happens, as unlikely as it is, and Indiana goes to the Big Ten Championship game with a 5-7 record. If they were to somehow beat Nebraska (or whoever) in Indianapolis they would be Rose Bowl bound with a 6-7 record! Can you imagine that line in the Rose Bowl...Oregon (-55)!
 

highwayman said:
Wisc 6-6 Overall 3-5 B1G
L at Ind
L OSU
L at PSU

Indiana 4-8, 2-6
L Iowa
W Wisc
L at PSU
L at Pur

Wisc clinches if they beat the Hoosiers in two weeks. But, if Indiana beats Wisc and anyone else--and Wisc loses all three--Indiana goes to the championship game with the head to head tiebreaker. The Hoosiers could be 5-7 and in the championship game. The Nov. 10 game could be their "bowl game".

Another black eye for the "competitive" alignment plan. If Wisc was in the Legends and Mich in the Leaders, this isn't an issue...at least on the surface.
Click to expand...


Competitive alignment? It's not that bad. Arguably, the 2 best teams right now (OSU and PSU) are in the Leaders division. When they aligned the divisions, they did not anticipate both programs would be ineligible this year. Last year, with everyone eligible, the team from the Leaders division won the title game, did they not?

Long term, the divisions are as balanced as they're going to get because they want to keep the possbility OSU and Michigan in the title game every year.
 

Leaders vs. Legends (through Friday, Nov. 2, 2012)

Head-to-head matchups since the divisions were announced.

2011
Illinois over Northwestern
Iowa over Indiana
Iowa over Purdue
Michigan over Illinois
Michigan over Ohio State
Michigan over Purdue
Michigan State over Indiana
Michigan State over Ohio State
Michigan State over Wisconsin
Minnesota over Illinois
Nebraska over Ohio State
Nebraska over Penn State
Northwestern over Indiana
Penn State over Iowa
Penn State over Northwestern
Purdue over Minnesota
Wisconsin over Michigan State (B1G Championship Game)
Wisconsin over Minnesota
Wisconsin over Nebraska
2011 Totals: Legends 12, Leaders 7

2012
Michigan over Illinois
Michigan over Purdue
Michigan State over Indiana
Michigan State over Wisconsin
Minnesota over Purdue
Nebraska over Wisconsin
Northwestern over Indiana
Ohio State over Michigan State
Ohio State over Nebraska
Penn State over Iowa
Penn State over Northwestern
Wisconsin over Minnesota
2012 Totals: Legends 7, Leaders 5

Overall Totals: Legends 19, Leaders 12

Still to be Played in 2012 (7)
Illinois @ Northwestern
Iowa @ Indiana
Michigan @ Ohio State
Minnesota @ Illinois
Penn State @ Nebraska
Purdue @ Iowa
B1G Championship Game
 


MinnesotaBoiler99 said:
Competitive alignment? It's not that bad. Arguably, the 2 best teams right now (OSU and PSU) are in the Leaders division. When they aligned the divisions, they did not anticipate both programs would be ineligible this year. Last year, with everyone eligible, the team from the Leaders division won the title game, did they not?

Long term, the divisions are as balanced as they're going to get because they want to keep the possbility OSU and Michigan in the title game every year.
Click to expand...

We'll see how "competitive" Leaders is when OSU goes to the title game 10 years in a row starting in 2013.

This was not about being competitive. It was about giving Michigan a shot at the title game.
 

highwayman said:
Wisc 6-6 Overall 3-5 B1G
L at Ind
L OSU
L at PSU

Indiana 4-8, 2-6
L Iowa
W Wisc
L at PSU
L at Pur

Wisc clinches if they beat the Hoosiers in two weeks. But, if Indiana beats Wisc and anyone else--and Wisc loses all three--Indiana goes to the championship game with the head to head tiebreaker. The Hoosiers could be 5-7 and in the championship game. The Nov. 10 game could be their "bowl game".

Another black eye for the "competitive" alignment plan. If Wisc was in the Legends and Mich in the Leaders, this isn't an issue...at least on the surface.
Click to expand...


Lets say that 5-7 IU plays in the B1G title game and wins. Do they automatically go to rose bowl? That would be embarrassing
 


This same thing happened in the Pac12 last year when 6-6 UCLA play in the conference championship because USC was ineligible. Needless to say, UCLA didn't stand much of a chance against #5 Oregon.
 



Just imagine how funny it would have been if one of the teams went 0 for 4 in NC. It could be possible for a 3 or 4 total win team to win their division, win the championship game, then not be Bowl eligible.

I looked up the rules and the only stipulation is that a team can't play if it is not eligible due to sanctions. I'm guessing they never considered the possibility that a division champion would be post-season ineligible due to win total. My gut says they would either take a post-season eligible team from that division or if there isn't one then second place from the other division, but who knows.
 

Lakeville Goldy said:
Just imagine how funny it would have been if one of the teams went 0 for 4 in NC. It could be possible for a 3 or 4 total win team to win their division, win the championship game, then not be Bowl eligible.

I looked up the rules and the only stipulation is that a team can't play if it is not eligible due to sanctions. I'm guessing they never considered the possibility that a division champion would be post-season ineligible due to win total. My gut says they would either take a post-season eligible team from that division or if there isn't one then second place from the other division, but who knows.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure a team who wins their conference championship game goes to a bowl game automatically regardless of their record.
 


Here's my quixotic preference: Dump the divisions -- they're merely there to promote a money-making playoff game and award more trophies in this era of every-kid's-a-winner. Schedule each Big10 team to play each of the other eleven conference teams alternating home and away by year. This would result in as equal strength of schedule as possible, set up eleven important games every year for each conference team, and establish an uncompromised champion. By scheduling a warm-up game the first week, a team would need to win only five of their eleven conference games to be bowl-eligible (a dumb rule in the first place.) And if I've figured this correctly, it's certain that six conf teams will win at least six conf games -- so it's likely we'd have seven bowl-eligible teams every year. Critique my math but be gentle with the proposal.
 



highwayman said:
You are correct.
Click to expand...

For example, in 2001 North Texas won the Sun Belt Conference after going 5-1 in the conference and 0-5 in non-conference games. They still got to go to the New Orleans Bowl as the Sun Belt Champs. In the highly anticipated match-up with 6-5 Colorado State, they lost 45-20.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom