Talk:2012 Big Ten men's basketball tournament

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject College basketball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of college basketball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.College basketballWikipedia:WikiProject College basketballTemplate:WikiProject College basketballcollege basketball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I'm not sure if this has all of a sudden changed recently, but directly from source [2] as of 2/8/12:

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 regular-season standings), continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.

Which means that the tiebreakers proceed as they have in previous years. Although this I believe might be different:

b. After the top team among the tied teams is determined, the second team is ranked by its record among the original tied teams, not the head-to-head record vs. the remaining team(s).

Andzroid64 (talk) 03:50, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Due to tiebreakers Michigan State clinched the #1 seed even before losing to Indiana. They would be ahead of Ohio state thanks to record vs Wisconsin and they would be ahead of Michigan in a 3-way tiebreaker because Ohio state would be eliminated for the same reason and Michigan State swept Purdue while Michigan did not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.172.73 (talk) 03:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. 1 seed

Just to be clear, MSU did not clinch the No. 1 seed until Wisconsin won last night.

Any tie that Ohio State is involved in (whether a 2-way or a 3-way) they lose because of their split with Wisconsin. In the event of a 2-way tie with MSU and OSU, the tied teams would split 1-1 against each other. In 3rd place, the only possible options are Michigan alone at 12-6, Michigan and Wisconsin tied at 11-7, Michigan-Wisconsin-Indiana at 11-7, or Michigan-Wisconsin-Purdue at 11-7. If it's Mich-Wis, MSU wins against OSU (3-1 to 2-2). If it's Mich-Wis-Ind, MSU wins (4-2 to 3-3). If it's Mich-Wis-Pur, MSU wins (5-1 to 3-2). The only way it moves on is if it's Mich alone, where MSU and OSU tie (again) at 1-1. Then the only possible options for 4th place are either Wisconsin alone at 11-7, Wisconsin-Indiana at 11-7, or Wisconsin-Purdue at 11-7. MSU wins Wisconsin alone (2-0 to 1-1), Wisconsin-Indiana (3-1 to 2-2) and Wisconsin-Purdue (4-0 to 2-1). All possible scenarios for a 2-way tie with OSU are losers for OSU.

In the event of a 3-way tie, the 3 teams are all 1-1 against each other (2-2 against the group). The only options for the next team after the champions are Wisconsin alone (whether at 12-6 or 11-7), or Wisconsin tied with either Purdue or Indiana but not both. In the case of Wisconsin alone, OSU is eliminated whether or not Michigan is involed in the 3-way tie (MSU is 2-0, UM is 1-0, OSU is 1-1). If it's Wisconsin tied with Indiana, MSU wins without needing a further step, because MSU would be 3-1, Michigan 2-1, OSU 2-2. If it's Wisconsin tied with Purdue, again MSU wins without a further step; MSU would be 4-0, and OSU and Michigan would both be 2-1. All possible scenarios for a 3-way tie leave OSU a loser. OSU, therefore, cannot get the No. 1 seed, and the Wisconsin win last night didn't matter; even if Wisconsin had lost, the split was going to doom OSU.

Let's continue with a 3-way tie for a moment, and take that scenario where Wisconsin finishes alone in 4th (which would have to be at 12-6 to make room). Michigan as noted above can get past Wisconsin in the tiebreaker if Wisconsin finishes alone in their position in the standings, since 1-0 matches 2-0. The next possible options for the team after Wisconsin are either Indiana alone at 11-7, Purdue alone at 11-7, or Indiana tied with Purdue at 10-8. In the event of Purdue alone, MSU wins (2-0 to Michigan's 1-1). In the event of a Purdue/Indiana tie, MSU wins (3-1 to Michigan's 2-2). So the only way it moves on is if Indiana finishes alone in 5th at 11-7. The only possible options for 6th are then Purdue alone or Iowa tied with Purdue. THIS IS CRITICAL. Because we're assuming a 3-way tie, that means Ohio State has defeated Northwestern and Northwestern can't tie Purdue. Vis-a-vis Michigan, MSU wins both of those. Purdue alone, MSU wins (2-0 to Michigan's 1-1), and Purdue/Iowa MSU wins (3-0 to Michigan's 1-2). Michigan cannot finish ahead of MSU in a 3-way tie, either.

In a 2-way tie with Michigan, mostly the same thing happens. For Michigan to tie MSU, OSU must beat MSU, which gives OSU 12 wins. Thus, OSU can either finish alone in 3rd or tied with Wisconsin. If it's a tie, MSU wins (3-1 to Michigan's 2-1). If it's separate, Wisconsin is either alone in 4th or tied with Indiana or tied with Purdue. If Wisconsin is tied with either Indiana or Purdue, MSU wins. If Wisconsin is alone in 4th, MSU's 2-0 to Michigan's 1-0 advances to the next step. The only possible option here, however, is now a 2-way tie between Purdue and Indiana, which MSU wins against Michigan. All possible options leave MSU with the No. 1 seed.

The Wisconsin win last night kills Michigan's chances for the top seed. Michigan needed Indiana to beat Purdue so that Purdue could finish tied with Northwestern, and they needed Northwestern to beat Ohio State or the same reason (to get up into a tie with Purdue). But Michigan also needed Wisconsin to finish alone in their position in the standings. Before Wisconsin's win last night, that was possible if OSU was alone in 3rd at 12-6, Indiana was alone in 4th at 11-7, and Wisconsin was alone in 5th at 10-8. Now, if Indiana picks up that extra win to push Purdue back into the necessary tie with Northwestern, either Indiana is tied with Wisconsin or Wisconsin is tied with Ohio State. Either one favors MSU. MrArticleOne (talk) 22:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Table

This table needs to be edited down. First, there is no need for all 4 columns of tiebreakers since there is no reason to think we'll go out that far. Second, it's mis-labeled. The first tiebreaker has nothing to do with the No. 1 seed. The teams are compared in descending order against the PLACEMENT finishers, so for example, any two tied teams that go 1-1 against each other will not be compared solely against Michigan State (the No. 1 seed), but instead by any teams which finish tied for 1st place. A tie for first place will have nothing to do with how anybody does against the No. 1 seed (the tiebreaker would be to establish who the number 1 seed is), but will instead go in descending order against the next-best finishers.

The table is overly verbose and inaccurate. MrArticleOne (talk) 19:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Big Ten Conference Men's Basketball Tournament which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]