73.4% chance at a Top 4 Seed per Torvik with the next being Rutgers at 42%. If we win vs MSU I'd expect that gap to grow. If we lose this game vs MSU I'd expect the Rutgers / Illinois percent to be approximately equal. Need to get a W against MSU and make progress on securing at Top 4 finish.
Important distinction.I'm just noticing that his top-4 forecast includes ties, so that 73% chance is reflective of chances of a top-4 finish, not a top-4 seed. A decent fraction of that 73% is situations where we tie for 4th (or 3rd) and are seeded 5th or worse. As evidence, if you check out the sum of the top-4 column, you get something like 500%. That means on average, 5 teams are going to end up tied for the top 4 spots.
The latest from model runs overnight:
Perceived Clarity — 51% (up from 49%)
True Clarity — 43% (up from 39%)
View attachment 5676
I'm going to stick with Mean Seed as the sort order this season just for consistency's sake. Illinois/MSU is really showing how odd that can be. We have a lower shot at the #1 seed, but quite a bit higher chance for a 2–4 seed and end up with a higher overall shot at a top-4 slot (60% to 55%). Illinois still maintains our sub-1% chance at a no-bye catastrophe despite Friday's loss.
The other big change is Indiana, who has played themselves into a more-likely-than-not 12th seed after their home loss. Elsewhere in the B1G, this is an incredible race where four teams (Iowa, Wisconsin, Purdue, and Rutgers) have a 1-3% chance of both a 1 seed or a 12 seed. I can't imagine we've seen that too often with 8 conference games left too often.
View attachment 5677
If we look at the equal-strength scenario, it's apparent how much of IU's fall is due to the drop in their ratings. Based purely on record and the alignment of remaining games, they'd be expected to finish roughly on par with OSU and Michigan.
I've changed the rightmost column here to highlight the difference in mean seeding versus the normal case. Rutgers finds themselves in much the same boat as IU — they're expected to finish almost 2 whole seeds worse than what we see with all teams equal. In their case it's not so much how good they are as how hard their last 7 games are: @OSU, IL, Mich, @Wisc, @PSU, MD, @Purdue.
Lastly, I'll just note without the whole chart that running the "regular" scenario with random tiebreakers nets us a 10% chance at the 1 seed instead of 6%. It's hard (but not impossible) to imagine us winning any tiebreaker involving Maryland, so let's say 3/4 of that bump is due to our two losses to them. That tells us something interesting:
- 6% chance if we always lose the tiebreaker to Maryland
- 10% chance if we have a 50/50 chance in all tiebreakers
- at least 3/4 of that change attributable to tiebreakers — i.e., a 3% bump if our tiebreaker chance goes from none to half
- = something like 6% (roughly 1 in 15) scenarios involve Illinois and Maryland tied for the Big Ten crown.
what does your model have against Rutgers? Others have them selected to finish better
For now, all I've been able to incorporate is KenPom projections. So, I'd guess his system thinks a bit less of Rutgers than others' (or maybe just thinks more of other mid-pack B1G teams, like Iowa). I should probably hesitate before calling my setup a "model" per se — basically just simulating the rest of the season many times under a few different conditions.
With 2 losses to Maryland and 1 loss (hopefully only 1) to MSU our tiebreaker scenarios for the title are not good at all. We would need to win outright and that would probably require a 14-6 record. Which means going 6-2 the rest of the way. Not impossible but a real challenge.
Isn't it shared title if teams are tied at the top? I know there are tiebreaker scenarios needed for BTT seeding, but the conference title would still be shared.With 2 losses to Maryland and 1 loss (hopefully only 1) to MSU our tiebreaker scenarios for the title are not good at all. We would need to win outright and that would probably require a 14-6 record. Which means going 6-2 the rest of the way. Not impossible but a real challenge.
It's probably about the remaining schedule. Per Pomeroy, here are the in-conference SoS rankings to date for the top half of the league:what does your model have against Rutgers? Others have them selected to finish better