My opinion has evolved over the years. I would love to win a regular season title again, but I think winning the tournament is much more fun. Of course, making the Sweet 16 once in a while would be great.
Regular Season or Tournament title?
- Thread starter Mohawkeye
- Start date
Regular season title is so much harder to do. Winning a tournament just takes getting hot at the right time, although I can't think of a team besides Iowa that has won the BTT and really had no business even being there. Didn't Illinois make a run one year when they weren't super good?
But yeah, winning the BTT is a lot of fun to watch.
But yeah, winning the BTT is a lot of fun to watch.
BTT gives you the autobid to the NCAA's so have to go with that.
If your team sucks bad enough to need to win to get in they aren't going to win it anyway.
I've heard other people give that specifically as the reason that its more important, but thats really a silly non starter answer. I mean if you win the conference regular season, (which is certainly harder), your already IN the NCAA tournament, so the "autobid" for a power conference like the B1G holds no weight in that discussion...
This wikipedia page for the tournament shows the seed for the winner and the runnerup.
The biggest surprises:
Winners:
#8 Michigan in 2017
#6 Iowa in 2001
#5 Iowa in 2022
#5 Michigan in 2018
Runnersup:
#11 Illinois in 1999
#10 Illinois in 2010
#10 PSU in 2023
#9 Iowa in 2002
Big Ten men's basketball tournament - Wikipedia
Regular season by far. Much harder to do.
I'm not a fan of automatic bids. Too many good mid major teams in one bid leagues get left out of the tournament because they had one bad game, allowing some undeserving team with possibly a losing record into the tournament.
I'm not a fan of automatic bids. Too many good mid major teams in one bid leagues get left out of the tournament because they had one bad game, allowing some undeserving team with possibly a losing record into the tournament.
I didn't mention "regular season title" because like most of the posters here, when is the last time anyone actually saw one? It's basically not doable at Iowa, which is why 41 out of 42 years the BTT is way more important.
Yes, I understand the BTT has only been going X amount of years, the point remains. This year Iowa is firmly on the bubble, and it may be possible the only way they get to the NCAA tourney is by winning the BTT.
Regular season. Primarily because it means you are more likely playing well enough and will be put on a good pathway to get to the Final Four.
NCAA tourney is the most important event of the season. Whatever gets them ready for that and puts them in the best position to make a run is what I want.
NCAA tourney is the most important event of the season. Whatever gets them ready for that and puts them in the best position to make a run is what I want.
That's honestly one of the biggest detractions against keeping conference tournaments for these major conferences.
I mean yeah it isn't gonna help all the bubble teams if you take away the ACC, B10, B12, SEC conference tournaments, but other than that and helping to kind of iron out some seeding debates for the NCAA Tournament, the positives are few and far between outside of..........."revenue".
But if you were to ask any major conf. coaching staff at the end of a regular season if they honestly give a single sh*t about the revenue from the conference tournaments, they'd probably just laugh at the question.
Making money for the conference isn't even on the radar of coaches, or players (who are only interested in money for themselves).
So again, then I ask, what purpose does a conference tournament serve for a major conference other than to be more games/risk to their teams?....................
To answer the question, then, I should also preface that I'm more of an old school head. I grew up in a time where half my childhood the Big Ten didn't even have a conference tournament yet. But I remember everyone mocking the B10 and Pac 10 for not playing one.
Well, the other elephant in the room is the fact that conferences are about to get bloated as f***, and there really becomes absolutely no need to play a conference tournament in an 18 team league (or more if they idiotically continue to expand with only football in mind and forcing every other sport to just deal with it.......)
The f*** do you need a conference tournament for in a 24-team league? At that point, you either will have to blow up the NCAA model in its current format, break off and do your own fake "national tournament", or actually use logic and make changes and go back to a more balanced and regionally structure to keep what isn't broken from becoming unnecessarily broken...................
Suffice it to say, the grind of a regular season title, to me, is more important than the fun of winning a tournament title, even though I've enjoyed every tournament title Iowa has had and wouldn't trade them for anything.....................other than a regular season title or a national championship. 😉
Yep, even next year the B1G will not "invite" the bottom three teams to play in the conference tourney. Too big a mess, and too many added games for no reason.
Well the women won it just two years ago, SO its certainly been in your lifetime, and its certainly doable...
Regular season for sure, 1979 is way too long.
Although it is fun when we go on a run in the BTT. March and early September are my favorite times of the year.
Although it is fun when we go on a run in the BTT. March and early September are my favorite times of the year.
I had honestly forgotten that we won the regular season title two years ago. Probably had something to do with how that season ended.....Well the women won it just two years ago, SO its certainly been in your lifetime, and its certainly doable...
The regular season title is and will always be viewed as more important than winning just 4 games in a row. If you think otherwise, then you must be a crazy Hawkeye fan.
I believe the only 2 Iowa teams in my lifetime that won an outright title in the Big Ten were the 1955 and 1970 teams, and we know that the 1979 team finished tied with Michigan St. and Purdue. That's only 3 times in 69 years if my math is correct.
I believe the only 2 Iowa teams in my lifetime that won an outright title in the Big Ten were the 1955 and 1970 teams, and we know that the 1979 team finished tied with Michigan St. and Purdue. That's only 3 times in 69 years if my math is correct.
Last edited:
These are all the teams seeded 5th or worse to play for the BTT championship since it began in 1998 (winners are bolded):
1999- 1 Michigan State 67, 11 Illinois 50
2001- 6 Iowa 63, 4 Indiana 61
2002- 2 Ohio State 81, 9 Iowa 64
2003- 2 Illinois 72, 8 Ohio State 59
2008- 1 Wisconsin 61, 10 Illinois 48
2009- 3 Purdue 65, 5 Ohio State 61
2010- 1 Ohio State 90, 6 Minnesota 61
2011- 1 Ohio State 71, 6 Penn State 60
2017- 8 Michigan 71, 2 Wisconsin 56
2018- 5 Michigan 75, 3 Purdue 66
2021- 2 Illinois 91, 5 Ohio State 88 OT
2022- 5 Iowa 75, 3 Purdue 66
2023- 1 Purdue 67, 10 Penn State 65
- teams seeded 5th or lower are 4-9 in BTT Finals appearances
- obviously, Iowa and Michigan are the only two teams to have pulled off this feat. In fact, 1998 Michigan is the only other team outside the top 3 seeds to have won the BTT. They were a very strong 4 seed that year.
- here is how each winner ended up in the NCAA Tournament:
2001 Iowa (9 seed)- L 2nd Rd, 2 Kentucky, 92-79
2017 Michigan (7 seed)- L Sweet 16, 3 Oregon, 69-68
2018 Michigan (3 seed)- L NCG, 1 Villanova, 79-62
2022 Iowa (5 seed)- L 1st Rd, 12 Richmond, 67-63
1999- 1 Michigan State 67, 11 Illinois 50
2001- 6 Iowa 63, 4 Indiana 61
2002- 2 Ohio State 81, 9 Iowa 64
2003- 2 Illinois 72, 8 Ohio State 59
2008- 1 Wisconsin 61, 10 Illinois 48
2009- 3 Purdue 65, 5 Ohio State 61
2010- 1 Ohio State 90, 6 Minnesota 61
2011- 1 Ohio State 71, 6 Penn State 60
2017- 8 Michigan 71, 2 Wisconsin 56
2018- 5 Michigan 75, 3 Purdue 66
2021- 2 Illinois 91, 5 Ohio State 88 OT
2022- 5 Iowa 75, 3 Purdue 66
2023- 1 Purdue 67, 10 Penn State 65
- teams seeded 5th or lower are 4-9 in BTT Finals appearances
- obviously, Iowa and Michigan are the only two teams to have pulled off this feat. In fact, 1998 Michigan is the only other team outside the top 3 seeds to have won the BTT. They were a very strong 4 seed that year.
- here is how each winner ended up in the NCAA Tournament:
2001 Iowa (9 seed)- L 2nd Rd, 2 Kentucky, 92-79
2017 Michigan (7 seed)- L Sweet 16, 3 Oregon, 69-68
2018 Michigan (3 seed)- L NCG, 1 Villanova, 79-62
2022 Iowa (5 seed)- L 1st Rd, 12 Richmond, 67-63
Regular season is a grind and a true testament to the strongest and best teams at the top. That winner is usually the best team while the tourney winner can be a 5 or 7 seed once in a whiel
Could you say the same thing about the NCAA Tournament?
Since they don't play a balanced schedule, I say the tourny champion is the only way to decide the champ. That being said, Purdue certainly earned the reg season championship this year. No other team was close but when they are close and the teams played different schedules, it doesn't mean anything outside of having an easier schedule.
Refer to my post about teams seeded 5th or lower in the BTT.
4 teams have won the tournament seeded 5th or lower out of 13 appearances.
I would venture to guess the NCAA Tournament figures are lower than that. In fact, since they've seeded the tournament, 1 seeds have won 26 of those 43 championships. The only teams seeded worse than 6th to win a title were 1985 Villanova (8 seed) and 2014 UConn (7 seed).
you do recall Alford won 2 BTT titles in 8 years at Iowa and you wanted him fired/gone back in the day
I would say Regular Season Title, simply because it defines the culture of the program, which can encompass a team's strengths and overcoming of weaknesses, while playing the right way. Competitiveness and consistency is huge, especially in the conference itself.
Regular season title. ALWAYS regular season title. Can't believe it's even a question.
BTT titles are fun, but I put a lot more value in what you do over the course of 18-20 games in the grind of the season than in some weekend tournament that's sandwiched in between the regular season and NCAA tournaments.
Now, if the question is regular season title or NCAA tournament title.. I'll take the natty all day.
BTT titles are fun, but I put a lot more value in what you do over the course of 18-20 games in the grind of the season than in some weekend tournament that's sandwiched in between the regular season and NCAA tournaments.
Now, if the question is regular season title or NCAA tournament title.. I'll take the natty all day.
It's going to be interesting next year and beyond to see how the Big Ten shapes their 20 game scheduling to try and even out the bad teams with the good and home and away games.
I mean how are they going to give each team, 3 teams that they play home and away and fill out the remaining schedule with 17 one play home or away games,
The computer they use, is going to blow a circuit trying to figure it out. A number of teams are going to get royally screwed.
One possibility is spit the 18 teams into 2 divisions of East/West.
Washington, Oregon, USC, UCLA, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois in one group, and Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Maryland, Penn St. and Rutgers in the other group. Then figure out how many in each group plays home and away and how many from the other group a team plays one game home or away. However the BT does it, it's going to be a imbalanced schedule for sure.
Last edited:
I know change is coming whether I like it or not, but am not a fan of all these conference changes. Seeing some new opponents will be nice, though.
But, I recall the old days where the Big Ten actually had TEN teams. True round Robin, each of 9 opponents twice. Perfect balance.
Some great responses, I don’t think there’s a wrong or right. Very subjective.
I’m not sure how you would define “important”, but I think winning the tournament is more entertaining. When we won a share of the title in 1979, it was actually anticlimactic as we had tailed off at the end of the season IIRC.
I’ve gotten immense joy at winning the 3 BTT, I think there’s something special about a tournament run.
They’re both awesome, and I have no tolerance for BTT haters … it’s such a fun event. With that said, “Big Ten champions” has always and will always refer to the regular season champ 90% of the time. It’s much more meaningful and impressive.
I think they both have their merits. One may be more indicative of playing your best when it’s most important. I would rather Caitlin be known for success in tournaments than her teams performances overall in regular season.
But that doesn’t mean I don’t think it’s disappointing she never won a regular season title. Or rather Lisa wasn’t able to get a team around an amazing talent that played consistent enough to not give up double digit leads in 2nd halves.
I agree that I’d prefer a regular season title. But with the Big Ten currently at 14 teams and moving to 18, unbalanced schedules really don’t make for a fair regular season. The Women’s season this year was a prime example. OSU won the regular season but didn’t have to play Indiana twice which basically gave them the 1 game lead over Iowa in the standings. The top three teams lost a random game to one of Illinois, Michigan, and Nebraska. Then they beat each other at home. But Indiana didn’t get OSU at home.
That’s my exact point. We took them to OT and lost at their place, then closed the season by clobbering them at our place. But they won the title because they didn’t have to play in Bloomington like we did. With 18 teams next year this is only going to get worse. Meaning the tournament title becomes more important.
If it were still that way the Iowa women may have won the regular season title this year and last year.
Entertainment and revenue. And I'll bet the coaches and players like the tournament as well.
What more do you need?
But, I'd like to see the men win the regular season again in my lifetime.
The Big 10 was one of the last conferences to add a conference tournament. One of the reasons for adding it was because Big 10 teams were having issues with losing early round games and schools from conferences with a tournament were having far more success. At the time it was thought that the conference tournament help get teams in the right "mode" so if they had a first game bomb it would be in the conference tournament game and not the NCAA's. After the Big 10 started the conference tournament their NCAA tournament performance did seem to improve (although I don't have any statistical information available on that). Lately though, it's clear that the conference tournament is not having any impact on tournament performance. Whatever current factors affecting performance seem to be having a much greater impact than having a conference tournament is doing.
AGree, and all the games were on Thursday and Saturday so after each of those two days every team had played the same number of games to see the standings very easily.
That scheduling was also for the students and their travel.
When the 1970 team won the regular season title there were 10 teams in the Big Ten, but each team only played 14 conference games. The Hawkeyes averaged over 100 points in conference games and there was no three point shot.
Regular season and it's not even close! We've won three BTTs since we last won the regular season title. We are so overdue that you would think maybe some disenchanted player or fan put a curse on us after Lute left.
Regular season and it’s not even remotely close. Just common sense all the way around.
Win the reg season = at very least, a good seed in the NCAA tournament.
B1G tournament = rehearsal for NCAA tournament. Lose one? Learn and move on.
Win the reg season = at very least, a good seed in the NCAA tournament.
B1G tournament = rehearsal for NCAA tournament. Lose one? Learn and move on.
Last edited:
