header pic

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

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
Author

Topic: B1G-E race

 (Read 2745 times)

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
B1G-E race
« on: October 16, 2017, 04:22:48 PM »
This is certainly a lot more entertaining than the non-race in the B1G-W.  Standings:
  • 4-0 Ohio State
  • 3-0 Penn State
  • 3-0 Michigan State
  • 2-1 Michigan
  • 1-2 Maryland
  • 1-2 Rutgers
  • 0-3 Indiana
I believe that the Hoosiers are the next best team after the top-4 but their schedule has been brutal so far so they are already effectively eliminated.  

Maryland and Rutgers each have two losses so they are in it mathematically but as a practical matter they already have a tie-breaker loss to and neither was competitive with Ohio State so they are effectively out.  

As I see it, the PSU/M game this weekend is effectively an elimination game for the Wolverines.  Meanwhile, if Penn State wins it sets up a huge 4-0 v 4-0 game in Columbus next weekend.  

The Spartans should be favored in their next two games and if they win them both it sets up humongous games the first two Saturdays in November vs PSU and at Ohio State.  

The two-team tiebreaker is, of course, H2H.  In case it matters, here is the multiple team tiebreaker from the B1G website (note that if only two teams remain after any step, the winner of the game between those two goes to Indy):
  • H2H...2H
  • Divisional record
  • Record against the next highest placed team(s) in the division in order of finish
  • Record among all common conference opponents
  • Best cumulative conference winning percentage of B1G-W opponents
  • Record against highest placing B1G-W team, then next highest, etc
  • Overall winning percentage
  • Random Draw

I would posit that the most likely three-way tie would be a 8-1 tie where the three teams beat each other.  In that situation tiebreakers #1, #2, #3, #4, and #6 will not help leaving us with #5 and #7.  

Note that this has changed since last year.  The B1G-W opponents of the potentially relevant teams (and their current records) are:
Ohio State: (3-7)
  • Iowa (1-2)
  • Nebraska (2-2)
  • Illinois (0-3)
Penn State: (4-6)
  • Iowa (1-2)
  • Nebraska (2-2)
  • Northwestern (1-2)
Michigan State: (2-7)
  • Iowa (1-2)
  • Minnesota (0-3)
  • Northwestern (1-2)
Michigan: (4-5)
  • Wisconsin (3-0)
  • Purdue (1-2)
  • Minnesota (0-3)

As of right now the winners of a multi-team tie decided by records of B1G-W opponents would therefore be:
  • Michigan
  • Penn State
  • Ohio State
  • Michigan State
« Last Edit: October 17, 2017, 03:53:44 PM by medinabuckeye1 »
Logged

Temp430

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 2503
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2017, 08:19:11 AM »
To win the B1G-E outright Michigan needs to win out and Sparty has to loose two Big Ten games. Hard to see that happening given the remaining teams on the schedule. 

Sparty still has to play Indiana, @Northwestern, Penn State, @Ohio State, Maryland, and Rutgers so there's likely a loss or two in there.  Penn State has Michigan, @Ohio State, @Michigan State the next three weeks.  If they get through that with just one loss they may win the B1G-E. 
Logged
A decade of Victory over Penn State.

All in since 1969

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 20280
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2017, 09:07:10 AM »
If MSU can get through the remainder with less than 2 more losses, MD should win coach of the year in a landslide.  I'd be ecstatic to get to 9-3, and pretty damn happy with 8-4.
Logged

TresselownsUM

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 233
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2017, 01:03:08 PM »
if Michigan St can play their next 6 games in a monsoon, book it, they are going to indy
Logged

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2017, 02:36:38 PM »
What does everyone think of cumulative winning percentage of opposite-division opponents as a tiebreaker?  

From my perspective as a tOSU fan:
I'm somewhat ambivalent.  It makes sense if one of the three tied teams played a substantially more difficult cross-over schedule but I'm still going to be ticked if Ohio State loses on this some year by a slim margin.  Ie, if you end up tied for first in the B1G-E at 8-1 it really doesn't make much difference whether you played a 3-6 or a 2-7 B1G-W team.  
Logged

TresselownsUM

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 233
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2017, 02:53:10 PM »
my guess is they went with the cross over schedules vs what some conferences did in the past which was use the formerly BCS rankings. You could use the bowl playoff committee, AP rankings etc, but in my opinion that's going to be weighted toward helmet schools.

I really don't like using OOC schedules because you would have a team playing 3 power 5 schools go 2-1 lose a tiebreaker to a team that played 3 FCS schools and go 3-0 and that would hardly seem fair, and would be bad for scheduling in general to simply promote the best record OOC.

the cross over schedules are obviously not equal, look at Wisconsin had last year vs this year. this year is obviously a much easier road. the unbalanced schedules are a toss up too, sometimes you get 5 home games, sometimes 4.

I don't see an obvious resolution, so I guess the cross over while not equal, is what it is. I guess maybe you would start with common crossover opponents, then move to total cross over record, but I'm not sure that changes it much.

so I'm not sure how else you'd do it. maybe every team's punter gets 1 kick, longest punt wins. broadcast it live, the losing team's punter will have to change his name and transfer as his life is ruined.
Logged

TresselownsUM

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 233
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #6 on: October 17, 2017, 02:55:56 PM »
actually, i'll steal one from soccer. point differential in division.

plus the last week or two of the year, we'd have some teams just trying to murder each other by 100. sorry Rutgers.

some coaches would probably take the high road and not run it up, their fan bases would then have them fired.
Logged

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71156
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #7 on: October 17, 2017, 03:09:41 PM »
I think I am seeing Ohio State "mature" on offense to the point they are very dangerous.

Logged

PortlandSpartan

  • Recruit
  • **
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 98
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #8 on: October 17, 2017, 03:31:30 PM »
Quote from: ELA on October 17, 2017, 09:07:10 AM
If MSU can get through the remainder with less than 2 more losses, MD should win coach of the year in a landslide.  I'd be ecstatic to get to 9-3, and pretty damn happy with 8-4.
Coming into the season I would have been over the moon with 8-4. Seeing how the team has performed, I would still be pretty damn happy with that but IMO we should finish no worse than 9-3.

Lots left to go, but so far, this is looking like a COTY season for MD.
Logged

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #9 on: October 17, 2017, 03:52:09 PM »
Quote from: TresselownsUM on October 17, 2017, 02:53:10 PM
my guess is they went with the cross over schedules vs what some conferences did in the past which was use the formerly BCS rankings. You could use the bowl playoff committee, AP rankings etc, but in my opinion that's going to be weighted toward helmet schools.

I really don't like using OOC schedules because you would have a team playing 3 power 5 schools go 2-1 lose a tiebreaker to a team that played 3 FCS schools and go 3-0 and that would hardly seem fair, and would be bad for scheduling in general to simply promote the best record OOC.

the cross over schedules are obviously not equal, look at Wisconsin had last year vs this year. this year is obviously a much easier road. the unbalanced schedules are a toss up too, sometimes you get 5 home games, sometimes 4.

I don't see an obvious resolution, so I guess the cross over while not equal, is what it is. I guess maybe you would start with common crossover opponents, then move to total cross over record, but I'm not sure that changes it much.

so I'm not sure how else you'd do it. maybe every team's punter gets 1 kick, longest punt wins. broadcast it live, the losing team's punter will have to change his name and transfer as his life is ruined.
They left overall winning percentage in the mix but demoted it to tiebreaker #7 (only ahead of random draw).  I like that because I, like you, don't like the idea that a school going 2-1 against three P5 loses on that to a school that goes 3-0 against FCS.  
They do have common crossover opponents in there but I worded it wrong in my OP.  I'll go fix that.  Tiebreaker #4 should be "Record among all common conference opponents".  Effectively that is "record against common crossover opponents because it comes after divisional record so any three+ teams that get to that step already have equal records overall, H2H...2H, and within the division.  
Quote from: TresselownsUM on October 17, 2017, 02:55:56 PM
actually, i'll steal one from soccer. point differential in division. 

plus the last week or two of the year, we'd have some teams just trying to murder each other by 100. sorry Rutgers.

some coaches would probably take the high road and not run it up, their fan bases would then have them fired.
I am in favor of a modified version of this.  I am opposed to overall point differential for two reasons:
  • Sportsmanship:  I do not think it is a good idea to encourage Urban Meyer, Jim Harbaugh, etc to run up humongous scores against hapless opponents.  
  • Predictive value:  I do not think that Ohio State's or Penn State's ability to score 90 rather than 60 points against Rutgers really proves anything about either team.  
The modified version that I would favor would be point differential among the tied teams.  The most famous three-way tie for a divisional crown that would have been settled by a tiebreaker this far down the list was the Texas/Oklahoma/Texas Tech three-way 7-1 tie for the B12-S back in 2008:
  • Texas beat Oklahoma by 10, 45-35 on October 11.  
  • Texas Tech beat Texas by 6, 39-33 on November 1.  
  • Oklahoma beat Texas Tech by 44, 65-21 on November 22.  
My proposal would break that tie as follows:
  • 34  Oklahoma (44-10)
  • 4  Texas (10-6)
  • -38  Texas Tech (6-44)

Similarly, if Michigan had defeated Iowa last year to create a 3-way tie atop the B1G-E I would have looked at the games among the tied teams:
  • Michigan beat Penn State by 39, 49-10 on September 24.  
  • Penn State beat Ohio State by 3, 24-21 on October 22.  
  • Ohio State beat Michigan by 3, 30-27 on November 26.  
Thus, I would have broken that hypothetical tie as follows:
  • 36  Michigan (39-3)
  • 0  Ohio State (3-3)
  • -36  Penn State (3-39)
Logged

LittlePig

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1357
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #10 on: October 17, 2017, 05:15:32 PM »
I am not a big fan of point differential because it favors teams with high powered offenses like OSU and is unfavorable to teams like MSU which wins close games with ball control and defense.

I watched the entire Iowa-MSU game and felt like Iowa was totally dominated even though MSU only won by 7.  Yes I know turnovers can make a big difference,  but thats true in any game
Logged

LittlePig

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1357
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2017, 05:17:39 PM »
In general I have the same attitude about tie breaker rules as I do about overtime rules.  If you don't like the rules, then win the damn thing without finishing in a tie.
Logged

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #12 on: October 17, 2017, 05:37:54 PM »
Quote from: LittlePig on October 17, 2017, 05:15:32 PM
I am not a big fan of point differential because it favors teams with high powered offenses like OSU and is unfavorable to teams like MSU which wins close games with ball control and defense.

I watched the entire Iowa-MSU game and felt like Iowa was totally dominated even though MSU only won by 7.  Yes I know turnovers can make a big difference,  but thats true in any game
I think that problem is at least partially solved by having it as point differential among the tied teams only.  Against Rutgers the Buckeyes are likely to have a bigger win just due to style.  However, against a relative equal such as MSU, M, or PSU this is much less of an issue.  
Logged

LittlePig

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1357
  • Liked:
Re: B1G-E race
« Reply #13 on: October 17, 2017, 05:52:20 PM »
 Yup if you project out final cross-division opponent records, Mich would still win any final 8-1 3-way ties.

Ohio State: (9-18)

Penn State: (12-15)

Michigan State: (10-17)

Michigan: (14-13)


What would be more interesting is if OSU, MSU, PSU end in 3-way tie.  PSU would win if NW > ILL,  but OSU would win if ILL > NW.  Imagine going into the last weekend, ILL and NW are tied with 1-7 records.  
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »
 
Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.
WeatherPROOF Sign Single Sided

WeatherPROOF Sign Single Sided