• 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 .

Projecting a 3-6-6 Schedule for Nebraska

wcbsas said:
I cannot see how super conferences, with teams numbering greater than 12, how you can determine the two best teams.

For example, tOSU goes 9-0 with a win over Nebraska, Michigan goes 8-1 with loss to tOSU but doesn’t play Nebraska, NU loses to tOSU and loses a tie-breaker because they played a tougher non-conference schedule and lost a game there.

I am sure there are many scenarios where determining the first and second place teams cannot be easily determined … especially when you include protected rivalries … is it fair tOSU has to/gets to play Michigan while Purdue gets Indiana?

Strength of schedule will never be balanced, divisions at least allowed conferences to have a round robin schedule where everyone played everyone else within the division.
Click to expand...

I'm certain a tiebreaker format can be devised to work in creating the top 2 teams -- but it likely will be more complex than current tiebreakers. Head-to-head, like opponents (if like opponents even exist), heck, maybe the last straw applied is something like point differential. Or Sagarin ratings. Whatever.

Will everyone be happy? Nope. Some aren't now, some won't be with the change, some never will be. Fair? Probably not -- as some teams will clearly have more difficult schedules than others.

Anyhow, that's just to determine the conference champ. The playoff wouldn't necessarily have to go with the two teams in the conference championship game (though the winner should be automatic).

It's also possible that if conferences grow to say 20 teams -- maybe the conference itself will have a 4-team playoff to determine their champion. Nothing to say they can't with 16 teams. It's really up to each conference to determine what's best for them -- which is a change from the NCAA determining what's best for all.

I'll just roll with whatever is decided -- since my input has zero value.
 

When it comes to tiebreakers, the only truly concerning issue is a potential tie between 2nd and 3rd place, or a three-way (four-way, etc) tie between more than two teams.

Why? Because if you have a tie between just the 1st and 2nd place teams, who really cares about the ranking? Just have them play. It's only when you've got a potential #3 trying to bust the bracket that you really need to examine your tiebreaker procedures.

For the sake of argument, I'll scrap East/West or Legends/Leaders and just list the Top 3 (or 4) Big Ten teams from each season going back to 2000. In that time, there have been 11 seasons with potential tiebreaker scenarios. That's exactly 50% of the time. And there have been just three seasons with multi-way ties, which get even more hairy.


Year1st2nd3rd4th
2000Purdue (6-2)Northwestern (6-2)Michigan (6-2)
2003Michigan (7-1)Ohio State (6-2)Purdue (6-2)
2006Ohio State (8-0)Wisconsin (7-1)Michigan (7-1)
2007Ohio State (7-1)Michigan (6-2)Illinois (6-2)
2009Ohio State (7-1)Iowa (6-2)Penn State (6-2)
2010Ohio State (7-1)Michigan State (7-1)Wisconsin (7-1)
2011Michigan State (7-1)Wisconsin (6-2)Michigan (6-2)Penn State (6-2)
2014Ohio State (8-0)Michigan State (7-1)Wisconsin (7-1)
2015Iowa (8-0)Michigan State (7-1)Ohio State (7-1)
2018Ohio State (8-1)Michigan (8-1)Northwestern (8-1)
2019Ohio State (9-0)Penn State (7-2)Minnesota (7-2)Wisconsin (7-2)


That sounds like a LOT of tiebreaking, but guess what? Only TWO seasons could not be figured out with immediate head-to-head games to support a decision. That means in 9 out of 11 seasons, all we needed to do was just look at the tied teams and see which team won the head-to-head game. That's it.

As far as the two Tie-Tackular seasons, one involved a three-way tie and the other was a simple two-way tie without a direct head-to-head game for reference. Ironically, both years involved the same three teams: Bucks, Sparty, and Badgers.
  • In 2010, Ohio State, Michigan State, and Wisconsin all tied for #1. Ohio State lost to Wisconsin. Wisconsin lost to Michigan State. And there was no game between Ohio State and Michigan State.
  • In 2014, Ohio State was the clear #1, beating both Michigan State and Wisconsin. The Badgers and Spartans did not play each other, however.

Long story short - tiebreakers happen somewhat often, but the evidence would suggest they are typically resolved at the first tier (head-to-heads). Only rarely do tiebreakers get convoluted enough that they require progressing to further tiers of supporting evidence to decide which team prevails.
 
Last edited:
HuskerWeatherman said:
College hoops, baseball, volleyball, etc ... no divisions. They do just fine developing a playoff bracket.

I believe only one FCS conference (SWAC) has divisions. There's two other conferences with 12 teams that don't.

It'll work out just fine. It'll be different -- and maybe that's the hesitancy -- but it'll work.

I'm guessing the automatic bids will be determined by conference champs -- and every other bid will be an at-large -- whether there's divisions or not, I doubt the playoff committee would choose those at-large teams any differently.
Click to expand...
You have no guarantee it will work, none. You hope it will work and its like buying a stock it may go up, but it can go down too. As far as hoops go, there are 65 teams....whoa thats right 65 teams, its not the same game. You are gambling with football and it worked for years before ESPN decided that they would monopolize the sport.
 



If B1G wants to teams to play all teams in conference, just extend season to 15 (current) conference games and 2 out of conference games so 17 game schedule, just like NFL. If pros can do it, so can College players

NFL plays until January so NCAA can do the same. More money for TV too.
 




Lings video is a good watch. Local rivalry's and most trophy games are probably locked in stone.
USC is contracted to play ND every year for the foreseeable future. They will not be getting OSU UM PSU every year.

UM: OSU, MSU
OSU: UM
Indiana purdue
Ill Nw
Iowa: Minn Wisc
UCLA USC


NU: Iowa, UCLA, Minn
 
Last edited:
BGRed said:
I still vote for keeping divisions; but, rotating them every two years based on the records over the prior two years. Play all teams in your own division and the teams close to you in record for cross-overs.

Based on Last Two Seasons:
View attachment 94441
Click to expand...

I think for long-term competitive balance, the protected rivalry concept may need to go by the wayside. You can play for those trophies when they show up on the schedule. And a game like OSU/Michigan could be for a conference championship instead of a regular season game. The conferences wanted to expand to make $$$, trying to cobble together a fair schedule while protecting the rivalry games are conflicting goals. So, if you want a logical super-conference approach that goes beyond the historic geographic rivalries, there needs to be a consistent and fair scheduling practice.
 
David3464 said:
If B1G wants to teams to play all teams in conference, just extend season to 15 (current) conference games and 2 out of conference games so 17 game schedule, just like NFL. If pros can do it, so can College players

NFL plays until January so NCAA can do the same. More money for TV too.
Click to expand...
Great idea. Seriously.
Hey NCAA gods, need to change from 12 to 15 regular schedule. August 15 opening season:Popcorn:.

I like two non-conference foes instead of 3. Thus added 13 B1G opponents.

Anyway, I prefer 40+ games per one season. Year-round !!! ;)
 
Last edited:



DuckTownHusker said:
When it comes to tiebreakers, the only truly concerning issue is a potential tie between 2nd and 3rd place, or a three-way (four-way, etc) tie between more than two teams.

Why? Because if you have a tie between just the 1st and 2nd place teams, who really cares about the ranking? Just have them play. It's only when you've got a potential #3 trying to bust the bracket that you really need to examine your tiebreaker procedures.

For the sake of argument, I'll scrap East/West or Legends/Leaders and just list the Top 3 (or 4) Big Ten teams from each season going back to 2000. In that time, there have been 11 seasons with potential tiebreaker scenarios. That's exactly 50% of the time. And there have been just three seasons with multi-way ties, which get even more hairy.


Year1st2nd3rd4th
2000Purdue (6-2)Northwestern (6-2)Michigan (6-2)
2003Michigan (7-1)Ohio State (6-2)Purdue (6-2)
2006Ohio State (8-0)Wisconsin (7-1)Michigan (7-1)
2007Ohio State (7-1)Michigan (6-2)Illinois (6-2)
2009Ohio State (7-1)Iowa (6-2)Penn State (6-2)
2010Ohio State (7-1)Michigan State (7-1)Wisconsin (7-1)
2011Michigan State (7-1)Wisconsin (6-2)Michigan (6-2)Penn State (6-2)
2014Ohio State (8-0)Michigan State (7-1)Wisconsin (7-1)
2015Iowa (8-0)Michigan State (7-1)Ohio State (7-1)
2018Ohio State (8-1)Michigan (8-1)Northwestern (8-1)
2019Ohio State (9-0)Penn State (7-2)Minnesota (7-2)Wisconsin (7-2)


That sounds like a LOT of tiebreaking, but guess what? Only TWO seasons could not be figured out with immediate head-to-head games to support a decision. That means in 9 out of 11 seasons, all we needed to do was just look at the tied teams and see which team won the head-to-head game. That's it.

As far as the two Tie-Tackular seasons, one involved a three-way tie and the other was a simple two-way tie without a direct head-to-head game for reference. Ironically, both years involved the same three teams: Bucks, Sparty, and Badgers.
  • In 2010, Ohio State, Michigan State, and Wisconsin all tied for #1. Ohio State lost to Wisconsin. Wisconsin lost to Michigan State. And there was no game between Ohio State and Michigan State.
  • In 2014, Ohio State was the clear #1, beating both Michigan State and Wisconsin. The Badgers and Spartans did not play each other, however.

Long story short - tiebreakers happen somewhat often, but the evidence would suggest they are typically resolved at the first tier (head-to-heads). Only rarely do tiebreakers get convoluted enough that they require progressing to further tiers of supporting evidence to decide which team prevails.
Click to expand...
As long as you have unbalanced scheduling there is no way you can determine the two best teams. The 2019 Minnesota Gophers lost to Iowa and Wisconsin. The 2019 PSU lost to tOSU and Michigan. Who do you think was better? The 2019 Wisconsin lost to tOSU and Illinois. Who do you think was better?

Sure there are academic mathematical methods to break ties but unless you match everyone up you cannot guarantee that the two best teams are meeting. And if team #1 beat team #2 … is it fair they have to pay team #2 again?
 

Betwixt the two & based on playing history, UCLA would make more sense. NU has played USC 5 times & Bruins ~ 14 times.

Iowa & Minnesota ought to be the rest of our 3 from a historical perspective,, 53 & 63 games played respectively.

Regarding past rivals, would love to see our non conference schedule include games against KU (117 game history) & Mizzou (104).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top