Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Final update based on the scenarios put out by the league.  

Oregon has clinched a spot.  

Indiana will clinch a spot with a win over Ohio State this weekend.  
Reasons:

• The worst IU could do is 8-1 (if they lose to Purdue).  
• Ohio State could do no better than 7-2 (if they beat Michigan) so they are out. 
• The best PSU could do is 8-1 (if they win out) and they would lose the tie with IU based on IU beating and PSU losing to Ohio State.  

IF Ohio State beats Indiana then the Buckeyes, Hoosiers, and Nittany Lions are all alive.  At that point, for each:

Ohio State:
The Buckeyes control their own destiny.  If they beat the Wolverines they go.  Even if IU and PSU also finish 8-1 and even if Oregon also finishes 8-1 the Buckeyes go in any of those scenarios.  

Ohio State also has a mathematical chance with a loss to the Wolverines but they only make it if:

• Indiana loses to Purdue, and
• Penn State loses at least one of their last two games.  

Indiana/Penn State:
These teams need to win their last game(s) and hope for an Ohio State loss.  

In the event of a two-way tie between IU and PSU at 8-1, it would come down to "cumulative league record of league opponents".  Currently PSU leads that by 4.5 games (28-38 vs 23-42).  That is more than likely insurmountable so Penn State probably goes.  

So in a list of possible scenarios:

• IU beats tOSU, IU goes to CG.  NOTE, in all scenarios below it is assumed that tOSU defeated IU.  
• tOSU beats M, tOSU goes to CG.  NOTE, in all scenarios below it is assumed that M defeated tOSU.  
• PSU wins out, PSU goes to CG.  NOTE, in all scenarios below it is assumed that PSU lost at least one of their last two games.  
• IU beats PU, IU goes to CG.  NOTE, in all scenarios below it is assumed that PU defeated IU.  
• Ohio State goes to CG as the winner of a two (or three) way tie with IU (and PSU) at 7-2.  

Ahh. I think all that needs to be satisfied is that the tiebreaker produces one clear winner. What happens below is irrelevant.

I.e. if OSU is atop the conference percentages at 0.531, and nobody else is at 0.531 or higher, OSU goes.

However, if OSU and PSU were BOTH at 0.531, and Oregon was at 0.400 and IU at 0.354, there is no ONE clear winner. So you move to the next tiebreaker. You don't advance OSU & PSU because they were ahead of the other two.

Really?

I look at that the other way as well.  I would assume that means:

• tOSU and PSU win.  
• Ore and IU lose.  

Then you go to H2H between the Buckeyes and Nittany Lions to determine jersey color.  

Now I'm curious how they would handle that.  It isn't relevant this year because PSU's opponents can't catch tOSU's opponents but with this new non-divisional structure it is bound to happen eventually.  

For anyone else following this conversation, how would you read the tiebreakers in the event of a four-way tie that came down to "cumulative league record of league opponents" where:

• The tiebreaker produced two winners (in @betarhoalphadelta 's example, tOSU and PSU) but those two were tied.  
• The other two were behind them.  

I read that as tOSU and PSU go, ORE and IU are out.  Beta reads it as "no clear winner, move on to the next tiebreaker" (If I'm misstating your position please correct me).  Others?  

I read that as tOSU and PSU go, ORE and IU are out.  Beta reads it as "no clear winner, move on to the next tiebreaker" (If I'm misstating your position please correct me).  Others? 

I take it back. I was correct about the procedure if one is the clear winner, but not if [only] two are tied for the #1.

Full tiebreaker procedure is linked below (won't render as an embedded link for some reason). This is the section at the beginning of "three or more teams" being tied:

After the head-to-head competition among the tied teams, if a tiebreaker step produces standings with a clear No. 1 team by itself among the tied teams, that team is selected for the championship game and the remaining teams still in contention revert to the beginning of the applicable tiebreaker procedures (e.g., if there are three teams, the No. 1 team is in the championship game and the other two teams go to the first step of the two-team tiebreaker procedures; if there are four teams, the No. 1 team is in the 2 championship game and the other three teams go to the first step of the three-team tiebreaker procedures, etc.).

If a tiebreaker step produces results with two teams tied for No. 1, they are both selected for the championship game. To decide the ranking of the two teams, they will progress through the two-team tiebreaker procedures.

First paragraph supports the point I was right about. Second paragraph supports the point you are correct and I was wrong about.

My mistake.

https://assets.contentstack.io/v3/assets/bltca750cef518bc6e4/blt2bf0c27b5714240c/66cc95d319b683cdf2088edf/2024_Big_Ten_Football_Tiebreaker_-_FINAL[10][72].pdf

This new process, in a 3+ team tiebreaker, where you figure out the top team first,  then reset to figure out the 2nd seed from the remaining teams that are left,  seems to be the opposite of the old elimination method that I remember.

In the old tiebreaker procedures, I believe they would try to eliminate the bottom team as the first step,  then reset to figure out the tiebreaker among the top remaining teams that are still left.

This was my recollection and I think it is why I made the mistake of not realizing that, as @betarhoalphadelta quoted, the new rule specifies "one clear winner".  IIRC, the old rule said that you took teams out based on each tiebreaker.  If a team came off the top, they won, if a team came off the bottom, they were eliminated.  This new rule changes that slightly but consequentially.  

I'll wait for the league office to calculate the results of the tiebreaker

I'd guess they left the rules vague enough that they have some wiggle room to allow them to sway the results.

Maybe they should form a committee to pick the 2 teams for the CCG,  since that works so well for the CFP