B1G tiebreaking rules don't help the Hawks if Wisconsin is involved (SIAP)

[AuroraHawk]

I was speculating with a colleague earlier today that an Iowa loss to Penn State wouldn't take the Hawkeyes out of divisional contention and suggested that Iowa might actually benefit from a three-way tie with Purdue and Wisconsin (all three having 2 B1G losses).

I just checked the tiebreak rules and determined my speculation was wrong.

First tiebreak is head-to-head. Under my scenario, Wisconsin beat Iowa; Iowa beating Purdue and Purdue beating Wisconsin would have all three teams 1-1 against one another.

Second tiebreak is divisional record. This is what would kill Iowa under the "lose to PSU/beat Purdue" scenario. Assuming all three teams had 2 losses, Wisconsin would only have one loss in the division; Iowa would only have one loss in the division but Purdue would have two losses in the division.

Because of that, Purdue drops out and you start over with just Wisconsin and Iowa.

Wisconsin wins tiebreak based upon head-to-head victory. Blah.

So . . . I then looked at a Wisconsin, Iowa and Northwestern three way tie.

1. Head-to-head: would be 1-1 each (if Iowa beats NW and NW beats Wisconsin).
2. Divisional records: would be the same (NW and Wisconsin would have lost to Michigan; Iowa would have lost to PSU)
I'm not sure I fully understand number 3 but this is what I think to be the case:
3. Records against "common" conference opponents: in order to be a "common" opponent, do all three teams need to play that team? Northwestern's cross over games are: Michigan, MSU and Rutgers. Iowa's cross over games are: PSU, Maryland and Indiana. Wisconsin's cross over games are: Michigan, PSU and Rutgers. Iowa, Wisconsin and Northwestern would have no East Division opponents "common" with one another. I think that means the next tiebreak comes into play.
4. "Cumulative conference winning percentage of non-divisional opponents:" Look again at cross-over games. Wisconsin and Northwestern are helped by playing Michigan but hurt badly by playing Rutgers. Indiana isn't helping Iowa and I suspect that PSU will have a better record than Maryland. As it currently stands, Wisconsin and NW's non-divisional conference opponents are 7-7. Iowa's non-divisional opponents are 5-8. If it got to this point, Iowa would likely drop out of contention. It would then boil down to who has a better record between PSU and MSU. If PSU > MSU, Wisconsin would be division champs. If MSU > PSU, Northwestern would be champs. If PSU=MSU, then it would go back to head-to-head (because Iowa drops out) and NW would be champs by virtue of a win over Wisconsin.

Bottom line? Three way tiebreakers involving Wisconsin aren't going to help Iowa. They need to get ahead of Wisconsin in the standings.

 

[Ray Kinsella]

Bummer. Was hoping one of the 3-way-tie scenarios would benefit Iowa. Thanks for researching.

 

[El Simbolo]

Go Maryland and IU, and go PSU come November!

 

[markfromj]

Once again, a 3 way escapes me.

 

[BioHawk]

We just need to start getting used to the idea that playing in Indy this year is a long shot at best. Fortunately, most of the team will be back next year, hopefully hungry for a conference championship.

 

[KuwaitHawk]

Look at the bright side - Wisconsin could go an immediate probation.

 

[Birky]

I’ll say it again. Wisconsin is losing more than one more game.

 

[Hawks2405]

Yes, this all adds up. Wisconsin beat us.

 

[citizenHawk]

Iowa isn't losing to PSU.
Iowa isn't losing to PSU.
Iowa isn't losing to PSU.

Pretty sure I just invoked some Halloween witchcraft. Hopefully not to be repaid until at least December.

 

[GarryO37]

If we go through the regular season and our only slip up is Wisconsin and we don't make the conference championship game, then I can accept that.

 

[JJameshawk27]

This isn't accurate. If there is a 3-way tie the 1st tiebreaker is overall record, which would favor Iowa in any scenario since, Purdue, Wisconsin and Northwestern have OOC losses.

http://btn.com/big-ten-football-division-tiebreakers/

"(b) If three or more teams are tied, steps 1 through 7 will be followed until a determination is made. If only two teams remain tied after any step, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.
1. The records of the three tied teams will be compared against each other......"

 

[Ray Kinsella]

This isn't accurate. If there is a 3-way tie the 1st tiebreaker is overall record, which would favor Iowa in any scenario since, Purdue, Wisconsin and Northwestern have OOC losses.

http://btn.com/big-ten-football-division-tiebreakers/

"(b) If three or more teams are tied, steps 1 through 7 will be followed until a determination is made. If only two teams remain tied after any step, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.
1. The records of the three tied teams will be compared against each other......"

I read that as the head-to-head records will be compared to each other, not the overall records. So if one team beat the other two teams, that team would win the division. I'd compare it to the 1990 season when Iowa finished in a 4-way tie for 1st, but since they beat the other 3 teams, they got the Rose Bowl bid.

 

[BioHawk]

If we go through the regular season and our only slip up is Wisconsin and we don't make the conference championship game, then I can accept that.

I'll still be really pissed about it though. Hopefully the team would be pissed too and take out their frustrations on whichever team they end up playing on New Year's Day.

 

[MeetTheFerentz]

If we go through the regular season and our only slip up is Wisconsin and we don't make the conference championship game, then I can accept that.

I totally agree. Of course we'd all be saying "what-if," but that is a Citrus Bowl season at worst, maybe even a Peach or Fiesta.

 

[Kurt Warner]

That made my head hurt

 

[dawgs_04]

This isn't accurate. If there is a 3-way tie the 1st tiebreaker is overall record, which would favor Iowa in any scenario since, Purdue, Wisconsin and Northwestern have OOC losses.

http://btn.com/big-ten-football-division-tiebreakers/

"(b) If three or more teams are tied, steps 1 through 7 will be followed until a determination is made. If only two teams remain tied after any step, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.
1. The records of the three tied teams will be compared against each other......"

The rules you linked are outdated. https://bigten.org/news/2011/8/10/Big_Ten_Conference_Football_Divisional_Tiebreaker.aspx

Why would they have #7 overall winning percentage if #1 was overall record? Are you sure #1 isn't each team's record against the other two teams?

7. The team with the best overall winning percentage [excluding exempted games] shall be the representative.

Edit: confirmed you're overthinking this. The first tiebreaker of a division is not going to be based on overall record (essentially non-conf record). The criteria are clearly going down the line from against each other, to against division opponents, to against non-division opponents, to overall record (aka non-conf), and finally random draw.

 

[scotthawk1964]

I read that as the head-to-head records will be compared to each other, not the overall records. So if one team beat the other two teams, that team would win the division. I'd compare it to the 1990 season when Iowa finished in a 4-way tie for 1st, but since they beat the other 3 teams, they got the Rose Bowl bid.

Back then I heard the team that had the most years between rose bowl bids got the Rose Bowl. So if Ohio State won the Big ten the year before and Iowa and tOSU tied, then Iowa would get the bowl invite. Besides, if we don't lose another game we are going to win out and be the BIG West champs. LOL Bucky will lose again.

 

[dawgs_04]

A lot of important games still to be played to be worrying about tiebreakers. I could realistically see each team facing 3 losses just as much as there being a team that wins out.

NW: plays WI, IA
Purdue: plays MSU, IA, WI
IA: plays PSU, Purdue, NW
WI: plays NW, PSU, Purdue

 

[Ray Kinsella]

Back then I heard the team that had the most years between rose bowl bids got the Rose Bowl. So if Ohio State won the Big ten the year before and Iowa and tOSU tied, then Iowa would get the bowl invite. Besides, if we don't lose another game we are going to win out and be the BIG West champs. LOL Bucky will lose again.

In 1981 Iowa and Ohio State finished tied for 1st. They were the only teams that didn't face each other in the Big Ten. The next tiebreaker was overall record, and they were the same. Finally it vame down to who was there most recently.

 

[BCRoss89]

So walking out of the stadium after losing to Wisky, I thought, they have to loose one more then we do, here on out.

I never thought for a second that we would win any kind of a tie breaker with Wisconsin after losing to them head to head. With Michigan, PSU, NU and Purdue on their schedule, knowing we should have beat them, and now seeing them lose to Michigan & Purdue wip OSU, I am even more confident Wisky will lose at least one more game. I mean, at NU, at Penn State, at Purdue???

But I never thought we we could afford to lose to PSU (no longer even a remote option), Purdue or NU (in case of a tie breaker with them) to have a chance. I thought 10-1 for sure, we are in, 9-2 maybe if Wisky loses 3. Never confused on that point (assuming all along that for a division championship and trip to Indy would require wins against Minnesota, Indiana, Maryland, Illinois and Nebraska).

Hey, if it were easy, everyone could do it. I think we have that kind of team.

 

[Birky]

In 1981 Iowa and Ohio State finished tied for 1st. They were the only teams that didn't face each other in the Big Ten. The next tiebreaker was overall record, and they were the same. Finally it vame down to who was there most recently.

Are you sure overall record was a part of it? I thought it went straight to who had the longest Rose Bowl drought.

 

[Ray Kinsella]

Are you sure overall record was a part of it? I thought it went straight to who had the longest Rose Bowl drought.

That's how it's remembered because that's what it finally came down to. I base this off a Big Ten Guide I downloaded years ago.

For 1974 (and there are no subsequent entries amending this prior to 1981), it says

December 3 – Joint Group voted to amend the Rose Bowl Selection
procedure so that if there is a tie for the Conference championship, the
winner of the game between the two tied teams will represent the
Conference. If the two teams played a tie game, or if the two teams did
not meet during the season, the representative will be determined on a
percentage of all games played. If there is still a tie, the most recent
team representing the Conference in the Rose Bowl is eliminated.
Other guidelines were also established if more than two teams tied for
the Conference championship.

 

[hwk23]

We need to win out. If we don’t win out our next best bet is for Wisconsin to lose two and make sure to beat NW and Purdue so we win any two team tiebreaker.

 

[Birky]

That's how it's remembered because that's what it finally came down to. I base this off a Big Ten Guide I downloaded years ago.

For 1974 (and there are no subsequent entries amending this prior to 1981), it says

December 3 – Joint Group voted to amend the Rose Bowl Selection
procedure so that if there is a tie for the Conference championship, the
winner of the game between the two tied teams will represent the
Conference. If the two teams played a tie game, or if the two teams did
not meet during the season, the representative will be determined on a
percentage of all games played. If there is still a tie, the most recent
team representing the Conference in the Rose Bowl is eliminated.
Other guidelines were also established if more than two teams tied for
the Conference championship.

Makes sense.

 

[scotthawk1964]

Well, if we win out we lessen our chances of having to worry about it. LOL Win and pray Bucky goes down for the deep six sometime before the end of the season.

 

[Bro D]

JWB

 

[AuroraHawk]

The rules you linked are outdated. https://bigten.org/news/2011/8/10/Big_Ten_Conference_Football_Divisional_Tiebreaker.aspx

Why would they have #7 overall winning percentage if #1 was overall record? Are you sure #1 isn't each team's record against the other two teams?

7. The team with the best overall winning percentage [excluding exempted games] shall be the representative.

Edit: confirmed you're overthinking this. The first tiebreaker of a division is not going to be based on overall record (essentially non-conf record). The criteria are clearly going down the line from against each other, to against division opponents, to against non-division opponents, to overall record (aka non-conf), and finally random draw.

This is correct. Overall record, including non-conference games, is the 7th tie-breaker. The general focus of the tie-breaker is head-to-head and conference games.

JJames wasn’t reading the rules correctly.

I’d also add that Wisconsin and Northwestern control their own fates. Win out and go to Indy. Purdue and Iowa need help. If Northwestern wins Saturday, Iowa controls its fate. If Wisconsin wins Saturday, Purdue controls its fate.

 

[AuroraHawk]

We need to win out. If we don’t win out our next best bet is for Wisconsin to lose two and make sure to beat NW and Purdue so we win any two team tiebreaker.

This is correct as well. The only loss Iowa can absorb is one to PSU and it needs to be accompanied by a Wisconsin collapse. Even though Northwestern leads division and still has “cake” games against Illinois and the Boat Rowers, I think Iowa fans should want Northwestern to knock off Wisconsin.

 

[ichawk24]

 

[David1979]

I was speculating with a colleague earlier today that an Iowa loss to Penn State wouldn't take the Hawkeyes out of divisional contention and suggested that Iowa might actually benefit from a three-way tie with Purdue and Wisconsin (all three having 2 B1G losses).

I just checked the tiebreak rules and determined my speculation was wrong.

First tiebreak is head-to-head. Under my scenario, Wisconsin beat Iowa; Iowa beating Purdue and Purdue beating Wisconsin would have all three teams 1-1 against one another.

Second tiebreak is divisional record. This is what would kill Iowa under the "lose to PSU/beat Purdue" scenario. Assuming all three teams had 2 losses, Wisconsin would only have one loss in the division; Iowa would only have one loss in the division but Purdue would have two losses in the division.

Because of that, Purdue drops out and you start over with just Wisconsin and Iowa.

Wisconsin wins tiebreak based upon head-to-head victory. Blah.

So . . . I then looked at a Wisconsin, Iowa and Northwestern three way tie.

1. Head-to-head: would be 1-1 each (if Iowa beats NW and NW beats Wisconsin).
2. Divisional records: would be the same (NW and Wisconsin would have lost to Michigan; Iowa would have lost to PSU)
I'm not sure I fully understand number 3 but this is what I think to be the case:
3. Records against "common" conference opponents: in order to be a "common" opponent, do all three teams need to play that team? Northwestern's cross over games are: Michigan, MSU and Rutgers. Iowa's cross over games are: PSU, Maryland and Indiana. Wisconsin's cross over games are: Michigan, PSU and Rutgers. Iowa, Wisconsin and Northwestern would have no East Division opponents "common" with one another. I think that means the next tiebreak comes into play.
4. "Cumulative conference winning percentage of non-divisional opponents:" Look again at cross-over games. Wisconsin and Northwestern are helped by playing Michigan but hurt badly by playing Rutgers. Indiana isn't helping Iowa and I suspect that PSU will have a better record than Maryland. As it currently stands, Wisconsin and NW's non-divisional conference opponents are 7-7. Iowa's non-divisional opponents are 5-8. If it got to this point, Iowa would likely drop out of contention. It would then boil down to who has a better record between PSU and MSU. If PSU > MSU, Wisconsin would be division champs. If MSU > PSU, Northwestern would be champs. If PSU=MSU, then it would go back to head-to-head (because Iowa drops out) and NW would be champs by virtue of a win over Wisconsin.

Bottom line? Three way tiebreakers involving Wisconsin aren't going to help Iowa. They need to get ahead of Wisconsin in the standings.

So Iowa needs to win out and Wisconsin needs to drop one or Wisconsin needs to drop two so there aren't any tiebreakers with them.