šŸ€ The B1G and their rules. This one is a little strange when it comes to the regular season conference champion.

TerryP

Successfully wasting your time since...
Staff
The title was awarded to Michigan this season. They are the #1 seed going into the tournament. Michigan holds a 14-3 conference record.

In November, the conference agreed that winning percentage would be used to determine the regular-season champion in basketball. At the time, we stared into an uncertain future, not knowing how many games teams would be able to play. The winning percentage metric was meant to "level the playing field" for those teams that might suffer more significant disruption than others. For Michigan, which played three fewer games than its allotted 20, it accomplished that purpose. What we did not anticipate, and what we now realize, is that this same metric would actually penalize a team – in this case, Illinois – that was fortunate enough to play its entire schedule of 20 games. With the benefit of now seeing the entire season, winning percentage was an overly simplistic, misplaced choice, and it deserved to be changed.


Jump back to football's season and remember this is the same conference that changed their rules for Ohio State. That quote is from Josh Whitman, Illinois Athletic Director.

The Illini have a 16-4 record; three more games played than UM. It's their (UI's) wish/opinion/hope the conference title is shared. Do they have a legitimate point?

Before you reply, consider one last thing.

They beat Michigan by 23.

 
I would imagine you go by number of losses, then the tie breaker being head to head. 14 to 16 isn't as big of a deal to me in basketball when there was no minimum, plus Michigan isn't say 7-3. I can't really defend my stance, but it just feels different than what happened with Ohio State in football.
 
Back
Top Bottom