That's how I voted. Lose to non-division foes. Lose a close thriller to OSU get them in the CC game and then beat them. Those other losses don't really trip my trigger. But cant stand the idea of losing to Iowa,Wisc, again.
Last edited:
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
Nebraska predicted to finish 9-3; you get to pick the 3 losses, who would you WANT those losses to be? This is NOT who is most LIKELY to beat us.
- Thread starter Middle-aged_Ball_Coach
- Start date
Colorado, tOSU and Iowa
With those losses we win the west and play in the B1G Title game.
CU and tOSU are fairly obvious as to why.
To me picking Iowa is that its perceived as a "good" loss theoretically. I can't stand Wisconsin and would never pick them as a possible loss. Understand the arguments for Maryland.
With those losses we win the west and play in the B1G Title game.
CU and tOSU are fairly obvious as to why.
To me picking Iowa is that its perceived as a "good" loss theoretically. I can't stand Wisconsin and would never pick them as a possible loss. Understand the arguments for Maryland.
A difficult exercise, as there are no games I would feel good about losing. I would prioritize winning the West, and it is about damn time that we start handling Iowa and Wisky. To win the West, that probably means no more than two conference losses. So I guess my picks would be Ohio State, @ Maryland, and @ Colorado... that last one hurts. If we could go 6-3 in conference and still win the West, then I'll trade another conference loss for a win over CU.
I'm right with you on most of that. I can't stand the thought of another home loss to Iowa though. I would rather have the third loss be @Maryland, @Minnesota, or @Purdue.
This is a key point to remember. The Big Ten treats all conference losses the same. Which, in theory, means the divisions serve as nothing more than a random method of generating two lists from which to pull teams. It also means you could theoretically re-jigger the divisions and it wouldn't have much effect on the teams themselves, short of which opponents are guaranteed annual games and which are semi-regular.
If memory serves, the Big XII used to rank in-division losses more highly than cross-division losses. So dropping a game to Kansas State hurt us more than a loss to Oklahoma or Texas.
We need to win all of our home games, restore the notion that it is hard for any opponent to win in Lincoln. We can absorb losing to the weaker teams on the road if we win our 'big' games, ie. OSU, Wisconsin, Iowa, CU.
Good point on protecting our house. Might make me change my Indiana vote to Minnesota (I was thinking IU was away). But still, PJ Fleck.
Actually, I'm guessing PJ would be gracious if they were to beat us. Hopefully we won't ever know.
Last edited:
I understand I hate even playing Penn State.
None of above picks. Think 12-0. Gravy ..... 15-0. 
Losing to a west team does matter more than losing to the east because if you beat the west team, it has a loss and you are more likely to finish ahead of them. If you lose to a west team, it has a win and it is more likely it will win the west. So you are better off if all your conference losses are to the east. (That said, if one of your three losses was to Illinois, it likely wouldn't matter.)
Here's the (edited) Big Ten tiebreaker rules, in case anyone wants to know:
bigten.org
If two teams are tied, the divisional winner is the winner of the head-to-head game.
If three or more teams are tied, follow Steps 1 through 8 (in order) until only two teams remain. Then, the head-to-head winner between those two is divisional champ.
#5 and #6 are funky. It means that they look at your cross-over games (Big Ten East opponents, for Nebraska) and calculate their collective win/loss records (in conference). So basically, if you're in a deadlock with your own division, it's better to have played against Ohio State, Michigan, etc., than to have played against Maryland or Rutgers. Again, it's worth remembering that this really only goes that far in a 3-way tie. If you're in a 2-way tie, the head-to-head game solves this immediately.
Here's where this gets extremely odd - and even more rare.
Let's say there's 3-way tie between NU, Iowa, and Wisconsin. Each team 5-1 within the division (NU beats WI, WI beats IA, IA beats NU). Steps 1 and 2 don't break the tie, and Step 3 doesn't either since all three teams are perfect against Minny, Illinois, N'western and Purdue.
Let's say for argument's sake that in Step 4 each team played two unique Big Ten East foes (UM/MSU, OSU/PSU, MD/RU), and then we all smashed Indiana.
At Step 5, we'll say that Nebraska played (and beat) Ohio State and Penn State. Iowa beat the Two Michigans. Normally, you'd expect that one of these tiebreakers would eliminate a team (in this case, Wisconsin) and then the two prevailing teams would go back to their head-to-head record (Iowa beats Nebraska).
But in this case, assuming OSU and PSU had the best records in the East, Nebraska could essentially eliminate BOTH Wisconsin and Iowa on the same step, meaning that Nebraska emerges as the victor, even though technically we both "beat" Wisconsin and then we'd normally lose to Iowa based on the head-to-head loss.
Again, that's a super improbable (impossible) circumstance, but it's kind of funny to think about. And it also means that yes, the Big Ten actually does weight divisional losses more heavily than cross-divisional losses, since Steps 2 and 3 are directly about how you stack up to your division, Step 4 looks at the whole conference, and then Steps 5 and 6 focus on cross-divisional ratings.
Big Ten Conference Football Divisional Tiebreaker
The Big Ten football championship will be decided by a game played between the two division champions. A team or teams that are not eligible to participate in a postseason football bowl game as a result of NCAA and/or Big Ten sanctions shall not be eligible to participate in the Big Ten...
bigten.org
If two teams are tied, the divisional winner is the winner of the head-to-head game.
If three or more teams are tied, follow Steps 1 through 8 (in order) until only two teams remain. Then, the head-to-head winner between those two is divisional champ.
- Records compared based on winning percentage against the other tied teams.
- Records compared based on winning percentage within their division.
- Records compared against the next highest placed teams in their division in order of finish (#4, 5, 6, and 7).
- Records compared based on winning percentage against all common conference opponents.
- Records compared based on the best cumulative conference winning percentage of their non-divisional opponents.
- Records compared against the highest placed non-divisional teams in their division order of finish (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7).
- The team with the best overall winning percentage [excluding exempted games] shall be the representative.
- The representative will be chosen by random draw.
#5 and #6 are funky. It means that they look at your cross-over games (Big Ten East opponents, for Nebraska) and calculate their collective win/loss records (in conference). So basically, if you're in a deadlock with your own division, it's better to have played against Ohio State, Michigan, etc., than to have played against Maryland or Rutgers. Again, it's worth remembering that this really only goes that far in a 3-way tie. If you're in a 2-way tie, the head-to-head game solves this immediately.
Here's where this gets extremely odd - and even more rare.
Let's say there's 3-way tie between NU, Iowa, and Wisconsin. Each team 5-1 within the division (NU beats WI, WI beats IA, IA beats NU). Steps 1 and 2 don't break the tie, and Step 3 doesn't either since all three teams are perfect against Minny, Illinois, N'western and Purdue.
Let's say for argument's sake that in Step 4 each team played two unique Big Ten East foes (UM/MSU, OSU/PSU, MD/RU), and then we all smashed Indiana.
At Step 5, we'll say that Nebraska played (and beat) Ohio State and Penn State. Iowa beat the Two Michigans. Normally, you'd expect that one of these tiebreakers would eliminate a team (in this case, Wisconsin) and then the two prevailing teams would go back to their head-to-head record (Iowa beats Nebraska).
But in this case, assuming OSU and PSU had the best records in the East, Nebraska could essentially eliminate BOTH Wisconsin and Iowa on the same step, meaning that Nebraska emerges as the victor, even though technically we both "beat" Wisconsin and then we'd normally lose to Iowa based on the head-to-head loss.
Again, that's a super improbable (impossible) circumstance, but it's kind of funny to think about. And it also means that yes, the Big Ten actually does weight divisional losses more heavily than cross-divisional losses, since Steps 2 and 3 are directly about how you stack up to your division, Step 4 looks at the whole conference, and then Steps 5 and 6 focus on cross-divisional ratings.
I'd choose to lose all 3 non-conference games and win the big 10 plus a bowl game.
This would be a dream come-back year. I like it!
