It is absolutely no sure thing. I hope the shooting stays hot. If I'm Sandfort, I'm blowing kisses to the Carver crowd at some point. 😆
BTT double-bye officially one win away
- Thread starter Adam Jacobi
- Start date
Iowa has a very good shot at finishing 2nd in the BT (Nebraska is no gimmee, but they are not as good as other teams we've beaten in Carver)
And it's not just because of Kris Murray - Kris Murray did Kris Murray things all year, and played to his expectations.
They did it because guys like Tony Perkins and Filip Rebraca and Peyton Sandfort and Connor McCaffrey (and others) stepped up and put in some big big games.
I really wish Iowa guards/forwards would work more on those short/midrange jumpers, because they regularly are able to penetrate into the paint, but then just dribble back out because they cannot identify a cutter to pass to, and don't drop that short-2 runner in because they don't have confidence in the shot. Only Perkins has done this regularly - having the rest of the team perfect that shot means defenses have to collapse faster to defend it, which means more opps for layup-assists and kick-outs for open threes. The unwillingness to drop those short-game shots in lets other teams just defend the 3 and defend against the under-the-bucket layups.
That's the biggest gap in Iowa's game, IMO, and if they worked on guys hitting those at a 70% clip (which is very do-able), they would be very tough to stop with the 3 pt shooters we have, and guys like Perkins, Murray and Rebraca who can finish at the rim. Learn to use the backboard on those short runners - practice the hell out of them.
And it's not just because of Kris Murray - Kris Murray did Kris Murray things all year, and played to his expectations.
They did it because guys like Tony Perkins and Filip Rebraca and Peyton Sandfort and Connor McCaffrey (and others) stepped up and put in some big big games.
I really wish Iowa guards/forwards would work more on those short/midrange jumpers, because they regularly are able to penetrate into the paint, but then just dribble back out because they cannot identify a cutter to pass to, and don't drop that short-2 runner in because they don't have confidence in the shot. Only Perkins has done this regularly - having the rest of the team perfect that shot means defenses have to collapse faster to defend it, which means more opps for layup-assists and kick-outs for open threes. The unwillingness to drop those short-game shots in lets other teams just defend the 3 and defend against the under-the-bucket layups.
That's the biggest gap in Iowa's game, IMO, and if they worked on guys hitting those at a 70% clip (which is very do-able), they would be very tough to stop with the 3 pt shooters we have, and guys like Perkins, Murray and Rebraca who can finish at the rim. Learn to use the backboard on those short runners - practice the hell out of them.
I remember predicting Iowa going on a 4 game win streak and got laughed off the board for a moment. But I'll also predict just about anything Iowa related that has to do with winning. I don't make specific game predictions because i jinxed them 3 times earlier in the season.
Good link
Only shortcoming on his charts is that MSU gets the W vs the Minn game canceled, so they are also 12-8.
That forfeit I believe counts in the seeding standings
That's a really good analysis because we see the gaurds beat their man into the paint but when the defense collapses on them they seem a little lost except for Tony. I think you are absolutely correct in your analysis.
I have only heard that MSU misses out on a likely home W by not being able to make up the Minny game, and that will probably cost them in the seeding for the BTT.
I thought I'd read that the MN forfeit ends up counting officially as a W for MSU, not a "no game".
Have not seen that reflected in standings, however.
Here is the BT 2021-2 policy, which I have not seen has changed:
Competition Involving Two Teams. If a team is unable to participate in a scheduled Conference competition due to COVID-19 and as a result the competition is unable to occur on the calendar day on which it is scheduled, the competition shall be considered a forfeit by the team unable to participate and shall not be rescheduled. In such case, the team unable to participate shall be assessed a “loss,” its opponent a “win,” and Conference standings shall be adjusted accordingly.
Still has not been updated in the standings this way
Last edited:
It wouldn't be a MN forfeit because Michigan State postponed the game because of the campus shooting. Michigan State was unable to find a time to play the game.
Oh...forgot that was the shooting one, not MN's Covid issues.
So, does that count as an MSU forfeit and loss, then? Or they must just be making it a no contest. That does knock MSU down in the standings.
I think they just made it a no contest.
Probably the best decision; MSU is miffed they did not work to reschedule, and could have this last week I think. Not like MN was going to move up from the basement spot, in any case.
247 Sports lays out in an easy to read/understand foremat:
- Michigan loses at least one of its final regular season games (at Illinois, at Indiana)
- Michigan wins at Indiana and Illinois
- Iowa would have the round-robin record in its favor if Rutgers wins its final two games (at Minnesota, Northwestern) and Maryland beats Penn State
- Michigan wins at Indiana and Illinois
- Ohio State beats Michigan State
- Purdue beats Illinois and Wisconsin
- Northwestern beats Rutgers
- Penn State beats Maryland
- Rutgers loses to Minnesota, beats Northwestern
- Michigan State beats Ohio State
- Michigan wins at Illinois and Indiana
- Maryland beats Penn State
- Rutgers beats Minnesota, loses to Northwestern
- Michigan State beats Ohio State
- Michigan wins at Indiana and at Illinois
- Maryland beats Penn State
- Illinois wins at Purdue
OR
- Iowa loses to Nebraska
- Michigan loses at Indiana and at Illinois
- Illinois beats Michigan and Purdue
- Maryland beats Penn State
- Rutgers beats Northwestern, loses to Minnesota
- Michigan wins both of its final two regular season games (at Illinois, at Indiana)
- Rutgers beats Minnesota (away) and Northwestern (home)
- Maryland wins at Penn State
- Michigan State wins at Ohio State
- Illinois wins its final two games (vs. Michigan, at Purdue)
- Rutgers beats Minnesota (away) and Northwestern (home)
- Michigan State wins at Ohio State
- Maryland beats Penn State
No. 2 seed
- Iowa beats Nebraska on Sunday (3/6)- Michigan loses at least one of its final regular season games (at Illinois, at Indiana)
No. 3 seed
- Iowa beats Nebraska- Michigan wins at Indiana and Illinois
- Iowa would have the round-robin record in its favor if Rutgers wins its final two games (at Minnesota, Northwestern) and Maryland beats Penn State
No. 4 seed
- Iowa beats Nebraska- Michigan wins at Indiana and Illinois
- Ohio State beats Michigan State
- Purdue beats Illinois and Wisconsin
- Northwestern beats Rutgers
- Penn State beats Maryland
No. 5 seed
- Iowa loses to Nebraska- Rutgers loses to Minnesota, beats Northwestern
- Michigan State beats Ohio State
- Michigan wins at Illinois and Indiana
- Maryland beats Penn State
No. 6 seed
- Iowa loses to Nebraska- Rutgers beats Minnesota, loses to Northwestern
- Michigan State beats Ohio State
- Michigan wins at Indiana and at Illinois
- Maryland beats Penn State
- Illinois wins at Purdue
OR
- Iowa loses to Nebraska
- Michigan loses at Indiana and at Illinois
- Illinois beats Michigan and Purdue
- Maryland beats Penn State
- Rutgers beats Northwestern, loses to Minnesota
No. 7 seed
- Iowa loses to Nebraska- Michigan wins both of its final two regular season games (at Illinois, at Indiana)
- Rutgers beats Minnesota (away) and Northwestern (home)
- Maryland wins at Penn State
- Michigan State wins at Ohio State
No. 8 seed
- Iowa loses to Nebraska- Illinois wins its final two games (vs. Michigan, at Purdue)
- Rutgers beats Minnesota (away) and Northwestern (home)
- Michigan State wins at Ohio State
- Maryland beats Penn State
Disagree, midrange shots are for suckers. No way they ever hit 79%. Very few (Perkins being an exception) are ever good enough to justify what is a low percentage 2 point shot. You’re almost always better off shooting a 3 or driving all the way to the bucket.
I Iowa beats Debby, and M GO BLOW loses one of its last two, Iowa has the Best overall record of the Tied teams, and wins the 2nd seed. Tie broken.
IL beats Mich 91 / 87......2 O/T
All that we need for a 2 seed is BEAT NEBBY!!
All that we need for a 2 seed is BEAT NEBBY!!
Assuming a Hawkeye win on Sunday.....
The WORST seed Iowa can do in the BTT is the 3 seed. But the 2 is more likely.
The WORST seed Iowa can do in the BTT is the 3 seed. But the 2 is more likely.
This is wrong, Northwestern needs to lose at Rutgers or at least 1 of the following Maryland needs to win at PSU or Michigan beats Indiana. If Northwestern, Iowa, and Indiana all finish 12-8 then Northwestern is the 2 seed because they own the tiebreaker.
Rutgers didn’t want to reschedule the MN game to help get the MN/MSU game rescheduled, so it was a no contest.
It’s as much luck as anything once you get into the tournament. The best 16 teams NEVER all make it to the sweet sixteen or even the Elite Eight. Just making the tournament is a reward for a good season.
It has nothing to do with this thread but I hate Wisconsin.
That’s it. This Purdue game is just a typical Wisconsin cluster.
That’s it. This Purdue game is just a typical Wisconsin cluster.
Man, so close to winning the big this year. Didn't realize that until just now. What a rough season for my heart.
Head to head is applicable if only 2 teams are tied; if more than 2 are tied, the best winning % of the tied teams wins. It's like what is the round robin records of the tied teams.
(I know "what ifs" bring nothing but heartbreak, but ....)
EIU
Wisconsin [lost by 3, in OT]
@ PSU [lost by 4]
@ MSU [lost by 2]
@ Wisconsin
Away from both taking the regular season B1G crown and being on the 3-line - maybe even a borderline 2 - in NCAA seeding right now.
Actually if we beat Neb a 3 seed is still possible. If NW wins and Maryland loses the NW is the 2 seed. Frankly the 2 and 3 seed are a bit interchangeable. All about match ups and hitting shots. Just beat Nebraska at this point.
For the #2 seed:
Iowa needs to win — 81%
And
Any ONE of these other things:
Illinois win ( @ PU) — 26% ILL
Michigan win ( @ IU) — 33% Mich
Rutgers (home) win (vs NW) — 67% Rut
Maryland win ( @ PSU) — 52% Maryland
If Iowa wins and all four of these games go against the Hawks, there will be a three way tie with IU, Iowa, and NW. Iowa and NW would be still tied at 3-1 with the round robin, but the next tie breaker goes to NW who would be 1-0 vs Purdue.
Iowa needs to win — 81%
And
Any ONE of these other things:
Illinois win ( @ PU) — 26% ILL
Michigan win ( @ IU) — 33% Mich
Rutgers (home) win (vs NW) — 67% Rut
Maryland win ( @ PSU) — 52% Maryland
If Iowa wins and all four of these games go against the Hawks, there will be a three way tie with IU, Iowa, and NW. Iowa and NW would be still tied at 3-1 with the round robin, but the next tie breaker goes to NW who would be 1-0 vs Purdue.
Iowa would not own that advantage if they wind up tied with Indiana and Northwestern because NW swept Indiana as well. So the tiebreaker goes to best record against the #1 team and NW is 1-0 against Purdue.
For Iowa to get the 2 seed one of these scenarios has to happen assuming they beat Nebraska: NW loses to Rutgers, Michigan beats Indiana, or Maryland beats PSU. If Michigan or Maryland also ends up in the tie THEN Iowas round robin record makes them the 2 seed.
Edit, I missed Illinois beating Purdue. Again Iowa needs another team in the mix to win the tiebreaker for the 2 seed.
Just messing with the big ten predictor. If NW wins at Rutgers and Penn St beats Maryland at home (which I expect both to happen) and the other games go as expected, Hawks are the 3 seed?
And if I’m reading this right, the silver lining is Wisconsin would be pushed to playing Wednesday😂
And if I’m reading this right, the silver lining is Wisconsin would be pushed to playing Wednesday😂
Last edited:
IMO, the 2 seed would be cool and all, but with the B1G being the way it is, I care more about matchups. I'd gladly take a 3 seed against a weaker opponent over a 2 seed against a team we don't matchup well against. It's going to be a fun weekend, love me some March Madness!
Yes...I believe this is correct.
Iowa needs one of MD, Mich or Ill in the tied teams mix for NW to get knocked out in the first tiebreakers, or else NW will get the #2.
#2 or #3 seed is the best place to sit in the BTT, so you aren't facing Purdue by the quarters. Iowa has played well against all of the top teams, aside from Purdue.
You can hit >50% of them, if you practice them; and I think 60-70% is very makeable with practice. And that will make your team very very difficult to guard.
Teach your guards/fwds to use the glass on those.
I don't think the Illinois win with others against us helps.
Isn't that a 4 way tie with Ill, Iowa, NW, Indiana?
In that scenario,
NW = 4-2
Indiana = 2-4
Illinois = 1-4
Iowa = 4-1
As I understand it, that drops Illinois to the lowest seed, and the process is rerun with Iowa, Indiana, NW
Then,
NW = 3-1
Indiana = 0-4
Iowa = 3-1
That drops Indiana to the next lowest seed, and the comparison is now Iowa/NW both 1-1, then the tiebreaker goes to the vs Purdue records, and NW gets the #2.
The round-robin is just used to knock the lowest team out, not to decide the entire seeding, as I understand it.
If Illinois is involved in the 12-8 tiebreaker then Iowa is the 2 seed. Iowa need any team outside of Indiana to be tied along with Northwestern to use that round robin tiebreaker and be the 2 seed.
The process does not get "rerun" to determine the other seeds.
Got it. This is correct.
We need another team to add one L to NW's record here.
Actually, if we and NW win, we can be 2nd seed if Maryland, Michigan, or Illinois win.
Here's the rule for tied seedings when more than 2 teams (have to read multiple times to really determine). BTW, 247 is now predicting a 3 seed:
B. Ties Involving more than Two Teams:
1) Results of head-to-head competition during the regular season.
4) Coin toss conducted by Commissioner or designee.
B. Ties Involving more than Two Teams:
1) Results of head-to-head competition during the regular season.
- a. When comparing records against the tied teams, teams will be seeded based on winning percentage among the group, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0 or 0-0). If all teams among the group are separated based on winning percentage, all ties are broken. If winning percentage among the group for any tied teams is equal, move to step b with those specific tied teams only (e.g. if there is a four-team tie, one team is 4-0, another is 3-1 and the last two are 2-2 among the group, the two teams that are 2-2 move to step b and the teams that are 4-0 and 3-1 assume the next two available highest seeds).
Note: Teams can be separated from the top, middle or bottom. - b. If a team or teams are separated from the group based on step a, seeding for remaining teams among the group is not determined by head-to-head record vs. the remaining teams, but rather by taking all remaining teams to next tiebreaker.
- a. When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team's record against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tiebreaking procedures), rather than the performance against the individual tied teams.
- b. When comparing records against a single team or group of teams, the higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0 or 0-0).
4) Coin toss conducted by Commissioner or designee.
5) Fran has a stare down with Collins. First one who blinks is seeded lower.
5) Fran has stare down with Collins. First one who blinks is seeded lower.
