Jump to content

Big 10 Basketball 2022-23


IUFLA

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Artesian_86 said:

The Northwestern loss to Michigan moved us up one spot in the BIGTEN standings to 4th. We are one game out of 2nd place.

Purdue 11-1 .917 22-1 .957 1703-1387 11-1 7-0 4-0 W9
Illinois 7-4 .636 16-6 .727 1650-1393 11-2 3-2 2-2 W3
Rutgers 7-4 .636 15-7 .682 1571-1288 13-2 2-4 0-1 W1
Indiana 6-5 .545 15-7 .682 1706-1481 11-1 3-5 1-1 L1
Maryland 6-5 .545 15-7 .682 1556-1392 12-1 1-5 2-1 W3
Northwestern 6-5 .545 15-7 .682 1519-1374 10-4 4-2 1-1 L2
Iowa 6-5 .545 14-8 .636 1793-1612 11-2 2-4 1-2 W2
Michigan State 6-5 .545 14-8 .636 1517-1455 9-2 2-4 3-2 L1
Michigan 6-5 .545 12-10 .545 1610-1530 8-3 2-4 2-3 W1
Penn State 5-6 .455 14-8 .636 1605-1479 11-2 1-5 2-1 L1
Wisconsin 5-6 .455 13-8 .619 1366-1326 7-3 3-4 3-1 W1
Ohio State 3-8 .273 11-11 .500 1669-1487 8-3 1-6 2-2 L3
Nebraska 3-9 .250 10-13 .435 1505-1577 7-3 2-7 1-3 L4
Minnesota 1-10 .091 7-14 .333 1298-1443 5-7 1-6 1-1 L6

Not that it matters much at this point but given head to head results IU should be on the 7 line in that graphic behind Maryland, Northwestern and Iowa.

Edited by eddy4iu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, eddy4iu said:

Not that it matters much at this point but given head to head results IU should be on the 7 line in that graphic behind Maryland, Northwestern and Iowa.

I'm not sure the tiebreakers are as clear cut as that when so many teams are tied. There are other teams we've beaten or haven't played with the same record besides the three who beat us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KoB2011 said:

I'm not sure the tiebreakers are as clear cut as that when so many teams are tied. There are other teams we've beaten or haven't played with the same record besides the three who beat us. 

Big Ten basketball tiebreaker procedures

Tiebreaker Procedures for Tournament Seeding

1) There is no minimum-game threshold for tournament seeding purposes, but the Conference Champion or Co-Champions shall occupy the top seed(s) of the tournament.

2) Seeding among Co-Champions (if applicable) will be done in accordance with the tiebreaking procedures set forth below.
3) After the Champion has (or Co-Champions have) been seeded, the remaining seeds for the tournament (down through No. 14) shall be determined exclusively by winning percentage, with the tiebreaking procedures set forth below used as needed.

4) Procedures used to determine seeding among Co-Champions or to break ties among the remaining seeds are as follows:

A. Ties Involving Two Teams:

1) Results of head-to-head competition during the regular season.

2) Each team’s record vs. the team occupying the highest position in the final regular-season standings (or in the case of a tie for the championship, the next highest position in the regularseason standings), continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.

a. When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team’s record against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tiebreaking procedures), rather than the performance against the individual tied teams.
b. When comparing records against a single team or a group of teams, the higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or groupare unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0 or 0-0).
3) Won-loss percentage of all Division I opponents.

4) Coin toss conducted by the Commissioner or designee.

B. Ties Involving more than Two Teams:

1) Results of head-to-head competition during the regular season.

a. When comparing records against the tied teams, teams will be seeded based on winning percentage among the group, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0 or 0-0). If all teams among the group are separated based on winning percentage, all ties are broken. If winning percentage among the group for any tied teams is equal, move to step b with those specific tied teams only (e.g. if there is a four-team tie, one team is 4-0, another is 3-1 and the last two are 2-2 among the group, the two teams that are 2-2 move to step b and the teams that are 4-0 and 3-1 assume the next two available highest seeds).
Note: Teams can be separated from the top, middle or bottom.
b. If a team or teams are separated from the group based on step a, seeding for remaining teams among the group is not determined by head-to-head record vs. the remaining teams, but rather by taking all remaining teams to next tiebreaker.
2) If the remaining teams are still tied, then each tied team’s record shall be compared to the team occupying the highest position in the final regular-season standings, continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.

a. When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team’s record against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tiebreaking procedures), rather than the performance against the individual tied teams.
b. When comparing records against a single team or group of teams, the higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0 or 0-0).
3) Won-loss percentage of Division I opponents.

4) Coin toss conducted by Commissioner or designee.

Edited by IUFLA
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Artesian_86 said:

The Northwestern loss to Michigan moved us up one spot in the BIGTEN standings to 4th. We are one game out of 2nd place.

Purdue 11-1 .917 22-1 .957 1703-1387 11-1 7-0 4-0 W9
Illinois 7-4 .636 16-6 .727 1650-1393 11-2 3-2 2-2 W3
Rutgers 7-4 .636 15-7 .682 1571-1288 13-2 2-4 0-1 W1
Indiana 6-5 .545 15-7 .682 1706-1481 11-1 3-5 1-1 L1
Maryland 6-5 .545 15-7 .682 1556-1392 12-1 1-5 2-1 W3
Northwestern 6-5 .545 15-7 .682 1519-1374 10-4 4-2 1-1 L2
Iowa 6-5 .545 14-8 .636 1793-1612 11-2 2-4 1-2 W2
Michigan State 6-5 .545 14-8 .636 1517-1455 9-2 2-4 3-2 L1
Michigan 6-5 .545 12-10 .545 1610-1530 8-3 2-4 2-3 W1
Penn State 5-6 .455 14-8 .636 1605-1479 11-2 1-5 2-1 L1
Wisconsin 5-6 .455 13-8 .619 1366-1326 7-3 3-4 3-1 W1
Ohio State 3-8 .273 11-11 .500 1669-1487 8-3 1-6 2-2 L3
Nebraska 3-9 .250 10-13 .435 1505-1577 7-3 2-7 1-3 L4
Minnesota 1-10 .091 7-14 .333 1298-1443 5-7 1-6 1-1 L6

So as of right now looking at the composite overall head to head records of the group that is 6-5

Iowa 4-1

Maryland 3-3

Northwestern 3-3

Michigan 3-3

Michigan St 2-2

Indiana 1-3

So if I'm calculating this right, we'd currently be the 9 seed...

  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mrflynn03 said:

sooooo

I pull for Illinois in this one?

Well, I kinda look at it this way...

Pulling for Illinois under any circumstances is distasteful, but Iowa is tied with us as of now. 

They lose, we're basically on the 7 line for the BTT for now.

We can worry about Rutgers Tuesday and Illinois later... 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other news an Illinois fan group admits misleading Iowa to get discounted basketball tix. They purchased 200 tickets at a discount based on the lie they were purchasing them for Boys and Girls Club kids. Such a great fan base.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/35585311/illinois-fan-group-admits-misleading-iowa-get-discounted-basketball-tix

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad to see Tony Perkins getting his share of the limelight at Iowa. 32 points for the Lawrence North kid. Always thought he was one of those hidden gem type players. Honestly I didn't see any of Iowa/Illinois 2nd half. Doubt most of us did. Seemed like a really good game with some miscues by Illini towards the end being the only difference.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Seeking6 said:

Glad to see Tony Perkins getting his share of the limelight at Iowa. 32 points for the Lawrence North kid. Always thought he was one of those hidden gem type players. Honestly I didn't see any of Iowa/Illinois 2nd half. Doubt most of us did. Seemed like a really good game with some miscues by Illini towards the end being the only difference.

 

Yeah, career day for Perkins, made a bunch of tough 2 point shots and lived at the FT line. Couple bad plays by Illinois and the officiating completely changed in the second half. First half the 2 teams shot a combined 9 FTs, second half a combined 44 FTs! The calls weren't really one sided but it was still a completely different approach and ultimately favored Iowa IMO. Good game that was fun to watch except for the ending.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming OSU doesn’t have a miraculous turnaround and misses the tournament, how hot does Holtmann’s seat get? Obviously basketball will always be a distant second place there but when do folks start getting antsy? Especially with the talent he’s brought in:

2018: 27th (247 composite rankings)

2019: 14th

2020: 48th

2021: 49th

2022: 8th

2023: 6th

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Stlboiler23 said:

Assuming OSU doesn’t have a miraculous turnaround and misses the tournament, how hot does Holtmann’s seat get? Obviously basketball will always be a distant second place there but when do folks start getting antsy? Especially with the talent he’s brought in:

2018: 27th (247 composite rankings)

2019: 14th

2020: 48th

2021: 49th

2022: 8th

2023: 6th

 

Has he won an NCAA tournament game yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...