Do we really need the B1G Tournament?

[HawkNorth]

You play 20 B1G games. It’s a rough, physical league. You play most of the other teams two times. Your team is beat up. At the end of the season there are usually at least a half dozen B1G teams ranked with a lock to play in the NCAA Tournament. What does it serve to then go and play some of these teams all over again, potentially four or five games in a short week?

The answer is of course money. But if the B1G is married to the TV networks and the big payday, why not cut back the B1G schedule? How many times do you have to play somebody to determine a champion? I equate it to MLB. Is it really necessary for the Twins to play the Royals 17 times in a season to determine the Central Division Champion?

 

[Kurt Warner]

Never used to have it and got along fine. It's really unnecessary but like you said it's all about the green backs

 

[hawktrooper1]

Between 1970 and and 1997, 8 Big Ten teams played in the National Championship Game. That’s back when the Power 5 schools dominated the tourney.

From 1998 (first year of Big Ten tournament) to 2019, 8 teams have played in the National Championship Game. This has been a roundly more competitive era with legit teams from non Power 5 schools.

The last two B1G teams to play in the NCG game (Michigan ‘18 and Wisconsin ‘15) both won the B1G tourney. Showing the extra games didn’t hurt but perhaps helped them entering the tourney.

There is no substantive correlation between conference tourney and NCAA tourney success, but it does shade in favor of the conference tourney helping prepare B1G teams for the NCAA tourney as opposed to hurting them.

Under the old model, B1G teams didn’t play games for two weeks between end of season and the first round. That would be deemed a disadvantage now.

Ultimately, as noted before, it’s about money. But if everyone else is having conference tourneys, the B1G should too.

 

[HeRKeYHoPeFuL]

Conference tournaments are good for big conferences and bad for little conferences. The major conferences add Q1/2 opportunities to strengthen resumes. The little conferences have to hope their best team wins so they get their best representative in the tournament.

 

[13thman]

Under the old model, B1G teams didn’t play games for two weeks between end of season and the first round. That would be deemed a disadvantage now.

/QUOTE]
That's not the case at all. THE BIG was playing the last week of their regular schedule while other conferences were playing their tournaments.

 

[Rudolph]

I go back and forth. Watching Wisconsin celebrate the regular season championship a week or so ago reminded me that the players still get that the regular season championship is still the bigger accomplishment. My main beef against the conference tournaments is it rewards a weekend of work more than it does for two-plus months of work, and this has always been my beef. For most conferences all a team has to do is get hot for a few days and, boom, they're the rep for the dance. Bradley in the Valley, a four seed, by virtue of upsets never had to play a higher seed on its way to the MVC Conference Tournament Championship this year. Now, I took some classes at Bradley, dad taught at Bradley, but if their winning three games vs a 5, and 8, and then a 7, bumped UNI out of the dance, that, to me, is messed up.

 

[HeRKeYHoPeFuL]

I go back and forth. Watching Wisconsin celebrate the regular season championship a week or so ago reminded me that the players still get that the regular season championship is still the bigger accomplishment. My main beef against the conference tournaments is it rewards a weekend of work more than it does for two-plus months of work, and this has always been my beef. For most conferences all a team has to do is get hot for a few days and, boom, they're the rep for the dance. Bradley in the Valley, a four seed, by virtue of upsets never had to play a higher seed on its way to the MVC Conference Tournament Championship this year. Now, I took some classes at Bradley, dad taught at Bradley, but if their winning three games vs a 5, and 8, and then a 7, bumped UNI out of the dance, that, to me, is messed up.

You mean, "if losing to Drake by 20 bumped UNI out of the dance"

 

[Rudolph]

You mean, "if losing to Drake by 20 bumped UNI out of the dance"

Well, yeah. Play well for two months, then have one bad outing vs a non-tourney team, you're out.

 

[L. Wade Childress]

Conference tourneys are absurdly stupid.

 

[IamHawkeye]

Conference tourneys are absurdly stupid.

The first one I remember hearing about was the SEC one, many years ago. It was the only one I knew of, unless some lesser southern leagues had them. Then the idea starting catching on. Not a good trend, IMHO.

 

[VodkaSam]

“Do we really need the BIG Tournament?”

This weekend I sure would have appreciated it.

 

[Ronman]

I suspect if we were actually routinely making some noise in the BTT, attitudes toward it might be totally different. The two we won I remember as being a lot of fun, especially 2001 when we were a 6 seed and Reggie Evans was wreaking havoc.

 

[NI hawk]

I go back and forth. Watching Wisconsin celebrate the regular season championship a week or so ago reminded me that the players still get that the regular season championship is still the bigger accomplishment. My main beef against the conference tournaments is it rewards a weekend of work more than it does for two-plus months of work, and this has always been my beef. For most conferences all a team has to do is get hot for a few days and, boom, they're the rep for the dance. Bradley in the Valley, a four seed, by virtue of upsets never had to play a higher seed on its way to the MVC Conference Tournament Championship this year. Now, I took some classes at Bradley, dad taught at Bradley, but if their winning three games vs a 5, and 8, and then a 7, bumped UNI out of the dance, that, to me, is messed up.

Agree. One good weekend should not be rewarded more than 3 good months.

 

[IllQChawk]

With the conference going to 20 games, I'm not in favor of the conference tournament period!
The Big Ten is a meat grinder as it is, with great players and great teams from top to bottom and just playing 1 or 2 games a week for 5 months has to wear on the coaches and players, let alone having to play 2, 3, or 4 games on consecutive days.
Yea, maybe a team like Purdue, winning the whole thing would have added another team to the tournament, but it might have removed a team like Indiana too. You never know.
Honestly, the bottom line is the body of work from the entire season should be the ultimate test that determines who makes the tournament from the Big Ten and not a team that becomes hot at the end of the year. Sorry, just not a fan of that even though the Hawks pulled that trick out of the hat in 2001.