The Very Big Question That The Big Ten Still Hasn't Answered For 2024

Donate To GopherHole
RememberMurray

RememberMurray

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
8,530
Reaction score
8,052
Points
113
In deciding which two teams will play in the B1G championship game, how will the conference break ties in the standings?

Guesses are fine in response, but please label any guess as such rather than leave doubt that it might represent an established fact.

 


To me, Iowa and PSU have the weakest schedules. I don't think a one Loss team who only plays one upper level team should count more than a two-loss team with a more difficult schedule. I hope they develop a formula that takes that into account.
 

Normally one would say the usual tiebreakers apply:head to head, common opponents, overall winning percentages coin flip. AFAIK the Big Ten has mysteriously not published a new tiebreaker post-divisions.

However, look at who’s in charge. Tony Pettiti is a career Queens, NY sports TV attorney and executive with no prior links to Big Ten athletics or college football. He has worked primarily in the business side of baseball, sports gaming, network TV, and most recently he was head of NFL-related site The 33rd team. The primary directive of this type of lizard brain person is revenue. Last year we heard of a concept called “best teams, not most deserving teams” when determining the playoff field.

It would not surprise me to see the same concept of pro sports-style “sports entertainment” rather than old school black and white on-field results applied to the Big Ten and the future playoff field. In the case of a spreadsheet athlete like Pettiti he’s going to, maybe, rationalize trying to put the two “best” ie biggest fan bases or otherwise best for Big Ten playoff revenue interests rather than most deserving into the Big Ten championship and playoff field. Tell me I’m wrong.



.
 
Last edited:

Pompous Elitist said:
It would not surprise me to see the same concept of pro sports-style “sports entertainment” rather than old school black and white on-field results applied to the Big Ten and the future playoff field. In the case of a spreadsheet athlete like Pettiti he’s going to, maybe, rationalize trying to put the two “best” ie biggest fan bases or otherwise best for Big Ten playoff revenue interests rather than most deserving into the Big Ten championship and playoff field. Tell me I’m wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes, you did a good job of articulating exactly what it is that I fear, and more or less what I was getting at in posting this thread. I hate the idea of some subjective ruling from on high, rather than an objective method, in determining the two finalists for the B1G Championship game.

Also, with the addition of more teams to the conference it seems more likely that ties might occur.

This is the main reason I regret the loss of divisions.
 


My guess is 2 best records, tiebreaker being who has the best CFP ranking.
 

matt said:
My guess is 2 best records, tiebreaker being who has the best CFP ranking.
Click to expand...

Well, 2 best records is pretty obvious and easy, providing there are no ties. Having two (or more) teams tie seems like a very real possibility, though. And how any future ties are broken — especially if more than two teams happen to tie — is the question here.

I find it both interesting and disquieting that the B1G hasn't spelled this out yet.

Then again, I suppose there's no need to hurry; we still have, what... 12 days until the opener? No rush! Theoretically, they don't really have to commit until after the last regular season game is concluded. At that point in time the corporate haircuts can pick any old format that suits them. Maybe that way they will get the two teams they wanted all along! Call it a win-win.

As far as using rankings is concerned ... I hate it. Way too subjective.

What if the NFL chose playoff teams by rankings? What if the NFL didn't spell out their qualifying format for the playoffs until after the regular season started?
 
Last edited:

RememberMurray said:
Well, 2 best records is pretty obvious and easy, providing there are no ties. Having two (or more) teams tie seems like a very real possibility, though. And how any future ties are broken — especially if more than two teams happen to tie — is the question here.

I find it both interesting and disquieting that the B1G hasn't spelled this out yet.

Then again, I suppose there's no need to hurry; we still have, what... 12 days until the opener? No rush! Theoretically, they don't really have to commit until after the last regular season game is concluded. At that point in time the corporate haircuts can pick any old format that suits them. Maybe that way they will get the two teams they wanted all along! Call it a win-win.

As far as using rankings is concerned ... I hate it. Way too subjective.

What if the NFL chose playoff teams by rankings? What if the NFL didn't spell out their qualifying format for the playoffs until after the regular season started?
Click to expand...


Yeah, it’s pretty obvious they are keeping quiet so they they can either

1) avoid controversy with a clear cut #1 and #2
2) institute a format on the fly, screwing certain programs in the event of a tie or mitigating circumstances ala FSU last season

There is no benefit to leadership by going public with a wildly unpopular format now. Later, they can rationalize it in the heat of the moment and people will soon forget, move on. If they announce a controversial format now they’ll have to you know, field uncomfortable questions all year.

Standard OP.
 

RememberMurray said:
In deciding which two teams will play in the B1G championship game, how will the conference break ties in the standings?

Guesses are fine in response, but please label any guess as such rather than leave doubt that it might represent an established fact.

Click to expand...
It's already decided, Ohio State and Oregon will play for B1G championship. Didn't you get the memo?
 



Wally said:
It's already decided, Ohio State and Oregon will play for B1G championship. Didn't you get the memo?
Click to expand...
Well as long as Oregon is in the championship game I'm happy. I'd be happy if it's the gophers and the Ducks. Go kick some butt....
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Normally one would say the usual tiebreakers apply:head to head, common opponents, overall winning percentages coin flip. AFAIK the Big Ten has mysteriously not published a new tiebreaker post-divisions.

However, look at who’s in charge. Tony Pettiti is a career Queens, NY sports TV attorney and executive with no prior links to Big Ten athletics or college football. He has worked primarily in the business side of baseball, sports gaming, network TV, and most recently he was head of NFL-related site The 33rd team. The primary directive of this type of lizard brain person is revenue. Last year we heard of a concept called “best teams, not most deserving teams” when determining the playoff field.

It would not surprise me to see the same concept of pro sports-style “sports entertainment” rather than old school black and white on-field results applied to the Big Ten and the future playoff field. In the case of a spreadsheet athlete like Pettiti he’s going to, maybe, rationalize trying to put the two “best” ie biggest fan bases or otherwise best for Big Ten playoff revenue interests rather than most deserving into the Big Ten championship and playoff field. Tell me I’m wrong.



.
Click to expand...
I find "pro sports-style" to be an interesting term to use there. I hear what you are saying as a general observation about the direction of college football, but on this issue, the pro sports leagues all have very cut and dry objective measures for who makes playoffs and how they are seeded. That would be my preference.
 








SEC has announced their tiebreakers

In the event of a tie between teams competing for a spot in the SEC championship game, the following procedures will be used in descending order until the tie is broken:

  • A. Head-to-head competition between the tied teams.
  • B. Record versus all common conference opponents among the tied teams.
  • C. Record against highest (best) placed common opponent in the conference standings and proceeding through the standings among the tied teams.
  • D. Cumulative conference winning percentage of all conference opponents among the tied teams.
  • E. Capped relative scoring margin versus all conference opponents among the tied teams. Formula will include a cap of 42 points scored on offense and 48 points allowed on defense.
  • F. Random draw of the tied teams.
If the regular-season standings determine a clear conference champion and two or more teams are tied for second place, the conference champion will be the home team in the SEC championship game and the tiebreaking procedures will be used to determine its opponent.

If a tiebreaking step produces standings with two teams tied for first place in the conference, both will qualify for the SEC championship game. To decide the seeding, both teams will progress through the two-team tiebreaking procedures until the tie is broken, which will determine home/away designation for the SEC championship. The game will be played on Dec. 7 at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta.
 


I really hope it isn’t ever going to involve committee.

SEC using point spread vs common opponents as one is interesting as it is going to incentivize running up the score in conference games
 

UMwolverine said:
To me, Iowa and PSU have the weakest schedules. I don't think a one Loss team who only plays one upper level team should count more than a two-loss team with a more difficult schedule. I hope they develop a formula that takes that into account.
Click to expand...

Not a chance. They will consider all teams equal and it will be best record, head to head, common opponents and eventually a coin flip. Much like the SEC shared yesterday.
 

I'm no mathematician, so I can't calculate the odds of it happening - but in the SEC system, if it actually came down to "random draw" - i.e. drawing a name out of a hat - the reactions would be something to watch.

I'm not a conspiracy person. I assume the B1G has a system or is adopting a system. It's possible that a system is being or has been developed and is awaiting final approval at some meeting of AD's or the Presidents/Administrators. the fact that this has not been publicized I put down to the B1G having piss-poor communications and public relations skills.

but this is one drawback of a mega-conference with no divisions - some factor other than true head-to-head competition has be to used to determine a conference championship, or the opportunity to play for a conference championship.
 

Sparlimb said:
Not a chance. They will consider all teams equal and it will be best record, head to head, common opponents and eventually a coin flip. Much like the SEC shared yesterday.
Click to expand...
I think the more likely comp/worry would be one team 9-0 and two teams 8-1 with losses to the 9-0 team. If one team played and beat, say, the 4th-11th teams and the other beat 11th-18th, it would be pretty interesting to see ESPN have a hay day with it. The mega conferences will make it interesting if/when we have to move down the tie breaker chain. It was a little different when you’d at least played everybody in your division and so there were always quite a few teams under comparison when the tie breaker was needed
PSU and Oregon both play OSU this year. They share a bunch of opponents and the only difference is Michigan, Mich St (Oregon) versus Minnesota, USC (PSU). If that came to be, by SEC rules, the runner up is determined by those two’s combined conference records and that’s a reasonably possible outcome this year
 
Last edited:

Pompous Elitist said:
It would not surprise me to see the same concept of pro sports-style “sports entertainment” rather than old school black and white on-field results applied to the Big Ten and the future playoff field.
Click to expand...
College FB post season has always been subjective rather than based on on field results. Pro sports post seasons are determined by onfield results. Although I'm an unabashed sentimentalist and traditionalist, given all the changes in the game, CFB would benefit from an NFL style playoff with regional representation. The Big 10 in particular is at a point where it should implement a conference semifinal round and then conference championship game. Eliminate one non-conference game. Then the last week can be a semi-final round with the other non-semifinalists seeded and then assigned a non-counter conference game.
 

upnorthkid said:
SEC has announced their tiebreakers

In the event of a tie between teams competing for a spot in the SEC championship game, the following procedures will be used in descending order until the tie is broken:

  • A. Head-to-head competition between the tied teams.
  • B. Record versus all common conference opponents among the tied teams.
  • C. Record against highest (best) placed common opponent in the conference standings and proceeding through the standings among the tied teams.
  • D. Cumulative conference winning percentage of all conference opponents among the tied teams.
  • E. Capped relative scoring margin versus all conference opponents among the tied teams. Formula will include a cap of 42 points scored on offense and 48 points allowed on defense.
  • F. Random draw of the tied teams.
If the regular-season standings determine a clear conference champion and two or more teams are tied for second place, the conference champion will be the home team in the SEC championship game and the tiebreaking procedures will be used to determine its opponent.

If a tiebreaking step produces standings with two teams tied for first place in the conference, both will qualify for the SEC championship game. To decide the seeding, both teams will progress through the two-team tiebreaking procedures until the tie is broken, which will determine home/away designation for the SEC championship. The game will be played on Dec. 7 at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta.
Click to expand...

short ornery norwegian said:
I'm no mathematician, so I can't calculate the odds of it happening - but in the SEC system, if it actually came down to "random draw" - i.e. drawing a name out of a hat - the reactions would be something to watch.

I'm not a conspiracy person. I assume the B1G has a system or is adopting a system. It's possible that a system is being or has been developed and is awaiting final approval at some meeting of AD's or the Presidents/Administrators. the fact that this has not been publicized I put down to the B1G having piss-poor communications and public relations skills.

but this is one drawback of a mega-conference with no divisions - some factor other than true head-to-head competition has be to used to determine a conference championship, or the opportunity to play for a conference championship.
Click to expand...

The SEC system seems reasonable.

While we should never ascribe to conspiracy what can be attributed to stupidity there is precedent for seeding decisions based on things other than record. If, say, the Big Ten implements a tiebreaker utilizing CFP rankings the committee has shown a willingness to work with TV networks to move ranking numbers around in controversial fashion to try and garner better ratings. It wouldn’t surprise me to see a lifelong media executive see value in something other than on-field results in certain scenarios.
 

Tiebreakers were announced today:


  1. The tied teams will be compared based on head-to-head matchups during the regular season.
  2. The tied teams will be compared based on record against all common conference opponents.
  3. The tied teams will be compared based on record against common opponents with the best conference record and proceeding through the common conference opponents based on their order of finish within the conference standings.
  4. The tied teams will be compared based on the best cumulative conference winning percentage of all conference opponents.
  5. The representative will be chosen based on the highest ranking by SportSource Analytics (team Rating Score metric) following the regular season.
  6. The representative will be chosen by random draw among the tied teams conducted by the Commissioner or designee.
 

Would it be advantageous to use this formula to skip the championship game, determine CFP entrants and skip the wear and tear on rosters. One less conference game has not hurt the SEC.

Due to tv revenue considerations probably not.

Does the CFP committee use “Sports Analytics”? First I’ve heard of this company.
 

My guess:

Eighteen ADs gather in Indianapolis and draw straws. Schools with the four longest straws playoff. 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3. (1 = longest straw, 4 = shortest of top 4) Winner of those games go to conference championship. Sponsored by the new Nike Straw Drawing Game.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom