(Re)Scheduling Controversies, B1G and Otherwise

[undersized]

Does anyone have concrete knowledge about how the Big Ten (or other conferences) went about rescheduling postponed games? I'm asking about the B1G specifically because the race was so close at the top and it's the conference I follow the most closely. However, I'm interested in other conferences, too, if anyone cares to share.

Context: Some B1G coaches (Teri Moren, Kim Barnes Arico, maybe Brenda Frese also?) expressed frustration with "the conference" for not getting in all of their makeup games and/or not rescheduling them to their liking. For example, Indiana did not like having their makeup games so close together, and Michigan was upset they didn't get to play Illinois. Yet I've read elsewhere that the Big Ten let the teams involved in each postponement work out a date amongst themselves -- which, if true, sort of seems like the conference shirking responsibility?

So who exactly is to blame for Michigan not getting in their game against Illinois, for example? The "conference"? Does that refer to conference policy or a specific administrative official/person in charge of overseeing this? The Illinois coach for not wanting to play? The Illinois AD? The Michigan AD (for not pushing enough to get the game back on the books)?

On the other side of the coin, Lisa Bluder has effusively praised Iowa's Assistant AD Barbara Burke for successfully getting all 18 conference games on the books for Iowa. I'm curious how much of that is purely about Burke's diligence versus her influence in being able to lobby the B1G to prioritize Iowa's games over others.

Disclaimer: I am not starting this thread out of insecurity that Iowa's (and OSU's) titles are less meaningful because there were discrepancies in number of games played among the top teams. I fully recognize that there would be a >99% chance of Maryland and Michigan also being co-champs had they had a chance to play their missed games, or even Indiana, who had to play Iowa twice instead of Iowa once and Rutgers once. I'm simply curious about the "behind the scenes" of it all.

 

[TC22]

Doesn't seem very fair. That's why Dawn cancelled UConn game so we could get all of ours in. She didn't want that same thing to happen to SC. At the time we were a game behind Tennessee and had a make-up game with Ole Miss to reschedule.

 

[cancontent]

Does anyone have concrete knowledge about how the Big Ten (or other conferences) went about rescheduling postponed games? I'm asking about the B1G specifically because the race was so close at the top and it's the conference I follow the most closely. However, I'm interested in other conferences, too, if anyone cares to share.

Context: Some B1G coaches (Teri Moren, Kim Barnes Arico, maybe Brenda Frese also?) expressed frustration with "the conference" for not getting in all of their makeup games and/or not rescheduling them to their liking. For example, Indiana did not like having their makeup games so close together, and Michigan was upset they didn't get to play Illinois. Yet I've read elsewhere that the Big Ten let the teams involved in each postponement work out a date amongst themselves -- which, if true, sort of seems like the conference shirking responsibility?

So who exactly is to blame for Michigan not getting in their game against Illinois, for example? The "conference"? Does that refer to conference policy or a specific administrative official/person in charge of overseeing this? The Illinois coach for not wanting to play? The Illinois AD? The Michigan AD (for not pushing enough to get the game back on the books)?

On the other side of the coin, Lisa Bluder has effusively praised Iowa's Assistant AD Barbara Burke for successfully getting all 18 conference games on the books for Iowa. I'm curious how much of that is purely about Burke's diligence versus her influence in being able to lobby the B1G to prioritize Iowa's games over others.

Disclaimer: I am not starting this thread out of insecurity that Iowa's (and OSU's) titles are less meaningful because there were discrepancies in number of games played among the top teams. I fully recognize that there would be a >99% chance of Maryland and Michigan also being co-champs had they had a chance to play their missed games, or even Indiana, who had to play Iowa twice instead of Iowa once and Rutgers once. I'm simply curious about the "behind the scenes" of it all.

I appreciate the disclaimer, but I wouldn't have taken it that way personally. I've been scratching my head about it as well as I'm just as confused. If Virginia can be hit with forfeits, why couldn't Illinois? It's a fair question.

 

[dws3665]

The SEC, imo, screwed Arkansas in terms of RS'ing their game with Ole Miss, which OM canceled early in the season. Hogs ended up having to play 5 games in 10 days, which seems ridiculous to me.

But I think the policy was RS, no matter what.

 

[TerpWomenFan]

Mentioned in the Maryland websites. This will have to be addressed in the next Big 10 AD meetings.

 

[cancontent]

Mentioned in the Maryland websites. This will have to be addressed in the next Big 10 AD meetings.

Agreed. The ESPN article about this highlights how the win-loss records for several teams are out of whack because of it. I would think this would also affect the overall seeding for the BIG10 tournament, not just the #1 position.

Quoted from the article: "The Big Ten tried to reschedule both games against Illinois but was unable to, and they were counted as no-contests. In all, seven of the league's 14 teams got in all 18 of their conference games. Four got in 17, two 16 and one 14."

Michigan laments missing shot at Big Ten title

Kim Barnes Arico lamented that a game against Illinois was postponed and not rescheduled, which helped cost the Wolverines a shot at sharing the program's first Big Ten title.

www.espn.com

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Answering a few questions.

The SEC, ACC and Big 12 played all their games (well, except for Virginia opting for a forfeit). I don't know how they worked it out, but they did succeed in doing it.

The Big East largely made up their games. Of the 4 games not made up, 3 involved UConn, I'm sure if Geno wanted to make them up it would have been handled.

The B1G, as noted, had a few games not made up. The problem for them, largely, was that 4 of them involved Illinois. Illinois won only 1 conference game - I doubt they were motivated to make up games against Maryland, Indiana, Michigan or Northwestern.

Only 2 other games were not played - Rutgers against Indiana and Northwestern / Michigan State. No, I don't know why this one and not that one.

The PAC also had a bunch not made up. 16 games in all. Cal was involved in 6 of them and ASU in 5 of them. Adia mentioned (she was asked) that she didn't think the conference was concerned with Arizona making up their games with Cal and Washington. OTH, Oregon made up a lot of their missed games, I think 3 of them. Oregon State was pressured into making up a game they didn't want to, and ASU took a forfeit supposedly for transportation problems to a makeup game they didn't want to.

Just a reminder that the few forfeits charged affected only conference standings. The NCAA did not recognize them.