Big Ten 2024 - Oh My!

[ay2013]

Dec 22, 2023 22:16:04 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Dec 22, 2023 22:10:27 GMT -5 JT said:

Adding a conference tournament as the last week, after a single-round-robin, might be the least bad option (imho), and I hate it. You could conceivably do it with the top four, six (two byes), or eight teams (play Wed if needed, and then Fri/Sat).

I plan on complaining uselessly once the schedules start coming out.

In a true round-robin, a team can't be too upset about being excluded from a conference tournament or sending them to a lower tournament if they are in the bottom half.

If it had to be one week for the tournament, for example, you could send #1-#8 or #1-10 as the 'top' tournament and #9-#18 or #11-#18 to the 'consolation' tournament. This would definitely protect RPI. But I could see teams being upset about having to play three matches in the final week of the season (though plenty of mid-majors do this anyways). 

There's creative options, but a 20-game regular conference season schedule is just not the option the Big Ten should commit to. 

THERE'S NO REASON THE SUN BELT SHOULD BE SCHOOLING THE BIG TEN IN RPI SCHEDULING

Sure the Big 10 can do a better job of conference scheduling to maximize RPI, but I would proffer whether or not they need to? I think some of the convos around the number of bids the Big 10 got this year is a bit overblown. Looking at the nitty gritty, at the margins, the Big 10 did themselves in because the teams in the middle simply did not collectively win enough in the non-conference to offset how much they beat up on each other. Nebraska and Wisconsin were appropriately awarded a 1 seed and Purdue a 3 seed. On the seed line, other than getting Penn State a seed (going from a 5 seed to a 4 seed), I don't see how Big 10 RPI manipulation/scheduling for the better would have changed what they were actually given this year in regards to seeds. Minnesota just lost too much to be considered for a 4 seed (but they were still given a bid).

On the question of at larges - the only Big 10 team that could have been up for consideration was Indiana, and even while they had a couple of top 50 wins, they also had losses to multiple teams who also weren't given bids (Washington, UCLA, LBSU).

I think nationally, mediocre teams who are among the best in their mid-major conferences NEED to schedule extremely well to maximize RPI, but I don't think that same argument applies to the Big 10. The conference has superior recruiting, resources, and tons of fans and media mouth pieces (insert Michella Chester) that like to shout from the rooftops that the conference is the best. The Big 10 shouldn't need to manipulate RPI - they just need to win. I think it gets a bit trickier with the P5 conferences trying to maximize RPI - what the ACC/SEC has done with their conference schedule in the past (and the upcoming proposed SEC schedule) is borderline criminal. The Big 12 (prior to this year) has long benefited in RPI, not from schedule manipulation, but just because of how RPI is computed and the fact that it benefits an individual team to have as much diversity of opponents-opponents as possible, and fewer conference matches helps with that. I'm still not convinced the Big 10 needs to do something drastic in schedule to account for other conferences maximizing RPI scheduling - you and I both know the committee loves the Big 10 and it frequently gets over exposed in tournament selection (based on the criteria) and I have no reason not to believe that will change in the near future. The best thing to ensure number of bids and good placement in the tournament is for the best Big 10 teams to continue to schedule, and win, against the best teams in the other power 5 (now 4) conferences, and for the mid conference Big 10 teams to schedule very good mid-major programs, as well as the mid conference teams in the SEC, ACC, and Big 12, and WIN.

[bluepenquin]

I don't get the resistance to a conference tournament at the end of the season. I think it would help the sport grow - and a certain way it could make the B1G stronger.

[rogero1]

Dec 26, 2023 8:43:58 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

I don't get the resistance to a conference tournament at the end of the season. I think it would help the sport grow - and a certain way it could make the B1G stronger.

The B1G has tried running a conference tournament twice in the past. First time around (1978 & 1979) all 10 schools were involved in 2 pools of 5 teams with the top two advancing to semifinals. The next time (1982-1984), there were two divisions (East & West) with the top two advancing to the semifinals again.

Since then, the coaches have been against a conference tournament. They have disagreed on the format. Some want to include every team. Others want only the top half or top 4, 6, or 8. Hence, no tournament format has garnered enough support to push for it.

Since the coaches opted to play a round robin type schedule next year, I don’t see any support for a tournament in the near future.

[Deleted]

Dec 26, 2023 8:43:58 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

I don't get the resistance to a conference tournament at the end of the season. I think it would help the sport grow - and a certain way it could make the B1G stronger.

I believe this is very true. I also Know that most of the coaches want it. But the top dogs do not.

[B1Gminnesotafan]

Dec 26, 2023 9:50:28 GMT -5 @decadesofvb said:

Dec 26, 2023 8:43:58 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

I don't get the resistance to a conference tournament at the end of the season. I think it would help the sport grow - and a certain way it could make the B1G stronger.

I believe this is very true. I also Know that most of the coaches want it. But the top dogs do not.

Some coaches think it is extra wear and tear on the athletes just before the NCAA tournament.  I don't know how it would help the sport grow.  There is already a lot of hype around the NCAA tournament.  Now that it is 16, they may have to have something like it in the future to determine a champ but it hasn't been needed for that so far.

[tomclen]

Conference tournaments (IMO) cheapen the regular conference season.

You beat some team twice, finish 4 or 5 games ahead of them in the final conference standings, and then, because of some fluke/hot streak/injury the team you beat twice wins the conference tournament. They get an auto-bid. You get pushed off the bubble. Even though, over the course of the season you were clearly the superior team.

Plus, all the teams have to travel to one location for multiple days of hotels/meals/transportation/etc.?

[Deleted]

A tourney to get into a tourney. lol. Yeah I don’t like the fact that a team could have had horrible season and get a fluke win in tourney and get in. Sports in general have been cheapening seasons for awhile now by allowing half many sports leagues into the playoffs. I get why they do it to keep more fan bases interested longer but it takes away from reg season accomplishments. Im college football a 500 record can reward you with bowl game. I find that utter nonsense , always have

[HappyVolley]

Dec 26, 2023 8:43:58 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

I don't get the resistance to a conference tournament at the end of the season. I think it would help the sport grow - and a certain way it could make the B1G stronger.

Conference tournaments can be detrimental to one-bid conferences and unfair to the teams that win those conferences during the regular season.

Conference tournaments give regular season non-champion teams a second bite at the apple and makes the regular season conference champions the apple being bitten.

One-bid conferences send their best team to the NCAA tournament when they send the regular season champion.  That is the team that proved itself over months, not just one weekend.  So often we have seen a dominant regular season champion have one bad match in the conference tournament and end its season, while a team that has a much less impressive record goes to the NCAA tournament.  

[Friday]

Dec 25, 2023 10:13:42 GMT -5 Kearney Kingston said:

Dec 25, 2023 9:57:54 GMT -5 hawkfan said:

And Malu Garcia is one big reason why I don't believe the Hawks will finish dead last again!  Excited to watch our future Hawk!

Exactly who selects this group for thus match?

I don't know who, but at least it isn't the Red Hat lady this year.

[mr. samwich]

Personally if say in an 8 team conference tourney the 8 seed Indiana/Washington with a meh season and 70ish RPI somehow sweeps through an entire B1G conference playoff undefeated to win the thing and that so happens to steal an NCAA tourney bid from the conference 6 seed UCLA/MN in the 40ish RPI range, that seems like a pretty earned swap, especially given the likely change of RPI thereafter. Swap the numbers and teams all you want (for instance I'm sure top 8 B1G teams will be within bubble range anyway). Weren't people irate that K State was left out of NCAAs when they very well could have lit up a Big 12 tourney to earn the auto bid?

Obviously the teams most worrying about a post season tourney are the ones most likely to win the regular season. I'm not super high on a conference tourney, but I don't think the best argument against is because of potential for upsets.

[tomclen]

Here's an idea for a cool conference tournament: Have each team in the conference play all the other teams at least one time. And after all those games are played, check the standings. The team at the top wins the tournament! Yay!!

You could start this tournament in September and wrap it up Thanksgiving week.

[trojansc]

Dec 26, 2023 11:46:14 GMT -5 tomclen said:

Conference tournaments (IMO) cheapen the regular conference season.

You beat some team twice, finish 4 or 5 games ahead of them in the final conference standings, and then, because of some fluke/hot streak/injury the team you beat twice wins the conference tournament. They get an auto-bid. You get pushed off the bubble. Even though, over the course of the season you were clearly the superior team.

Plus, all the teams have to travel to one location for multiple days of hotels/meals/transportation/etc.?

Pushed off the bubble doesn’t make sense to me. Conference tournaments generally help RPI and if you lose that match in the last week of the season, why does it matter if its in conference or out? Either way you’d get left out, but It’s less likely in a conference tournament.

And I don’t even know how plausible the scenario you described happens in the Big Ten. If some non-tournament team gets hot and wins the AQ, they should go to the tournament. There’s 18 teams in the conference now, with a conference tournament, your scenario likely never happens.

Could UCLA have won a PAC 12 tournament the past two years and gotten in the tournament instead of being left out on the bubble? They easily could have gotten in either year though.

[trojansc]

Dec 26, 2023 2:28:28 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

The best thing to ensure number of bids and good placement in the tournament is for the best Big 10 teams to continue to schedule, and win, against the best teams in the other power 5 (now 4) conferences, and for the mid conference Big 10 teams to schedule very good mid-major programs, as well as the mid conference teams in the SEC, ACC, and Big 12, and WIN.

They could also just try to become paper tigers, inflating RPI by avoiding P5 competition mostly altogether and just hope they get enough in conference wins as everyones RPI would be inflated and they just beat each other up and all get in. The ACC, SEC, and Big 12 have done this all in recent years

[trojansc]

Dec 26, 2023 12:48:07 GMT -5 mr. samwich said:

Personally if say in an 8 team conference tourney the 8 seed Indiana/Washington with a meh season and 70ish RPI somehow sweeps through an entire B1G conference playoff undefeated to win the thing and that so happens to steal an NCAA tourney bid from the conference 6 seed UCLA/MN in the 40ish RPI range, that seems like a pretty earned swap, especially given the likely change of RPI thereafter. Swap the numbers and teams all you want (for instance I'm sure top 8 B1G teams will be within bubble range anyway). Weren't people irate that K State was left out of NCAAs when they very well could have lit up a Big 12 tourney to earn the auto bid?

Obviously the teams most worrying about a post season tourney are the ones most likely to win the regular season. I'm not super high on a conference tourney, but I don't think the best argument against is because of potential for upsets.

K State wouldn’t have even needed to win it, just a couple wins may have possibly been good enough depending on who it’s against

[trojansc]

Reminder that one co-ACC Champion *and* AQ was eliminated in Round 1 and the other went to the Final Four. With unbalanced conference schedules, meh.