RebKell's Junkie Boards

[undersized_post]

Does anyone have concrete knowledge about how the B1G (or other conferences) actually 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.

In the B1G, some 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, and Michigan and Maryland were upset they didn't get to play Illinois. Indiana did not like having their makeup games so close together, or having to play Iowa twice instead of Iowa once and Rutgers once. Yet I've read elsewhere that the teams involved in each postponement were responsible for working 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"? If so, does that refer to a conference policy or a specific administrative official/person in charge of overseeing/enforcing this? Or is it 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 effusively praised Iowa's Assistant AD Barbara Burke for successfully getting all 18 conference games on the books for Iowa. Had sure been unsuccessful, Iowa wouldn't have a share of the title. I'm curious how much of that is purely about Burke's diligence versus her lobbying power in being able to influence 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.

_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆

[mzonefan]

Illinois had what looks like 6 cancellations in total, and the Iowa and Nebraska games were made up through a series of rescheduling/date swaps.

Iowa was originally to play the Illini on 1/3. Illinois was out for protocols. They were rescheduled to 2/12 but rescheduled again to 1/23 due to Nebraska dropping off Illinois’ schedule. Then Nebraska was able to rebook with Illinois on 2/12.

My take is it’s easier to find a spot and shift games for rescheduling the earlier in the season the original game was missed. There are essentially two open dates in the B1G 18-game season (two games per week), and some were lucky enough to have the right alignment with opponents to get rescheduled games in. The two games in 48 hours with travel like the Iowa/Indiana series seem like too big of a risk with injuries and fatigue.

[undersized_post]

[purduefanatic]

I feel for both Michigan and Maryland. I mean, sure, upsets happen, but does anyone think Illinois was going to beat either of those 2 teams? The Big Ten didn't do enough to get those games rescheduled. The Illinois games that were canceled (can't say postponed because they didn't get played):

Dec 30th vs Maryland
Jan 27th @ Indiana
Jan 30th @ Northwestern
Feb 3rd vs Michigan

Illinois did not play a game from Dec 23rd through Jan 5th. They had a full week off from Jan 9th - Jan 16th, which coincidentally, Maryland also had that same week off. No clue why that game didn't get plugged in there. The Illinois men were on the road the 11th and home on the 14th. The women's game could have easily been plugged in there. Ridiculous.

In my opinion, both Maryland and Michigan got hosed out of a co-champion title.

* Just FYI for anyone that doesn't follow B1G WBB, Illinois was 1-13 in conference games, 6-19 overall.

[undersized_post]

[PG4ever]

[ArtBest23]

The ACC had two or three weeks when they played a bunch of makeup games on Tuesdays, in addition to their usual Sunday-Thursday schedule.

I think they cleaned up all the games, for conference standing/seeding purposes anyhow, either by rescheduling them this way or by forfeits. UVA forfeited at least the Louisville and ND games, that I know of, so UVA got losses and those two teams wins for conference purposes Overall, I think most of the missed games were rescheduled and played. Don't think there are any leftover games that weren't resolved one way or the other, and for conference purposes, everyone's full conference schedule is resolved, I believe.

[Queenie]

Several games in the Big East appear to have been declared no-contests by default. The only one that might have had an impact on the final standings is UConn at Villanova, and on the one hand, Villanova might have appreciated the SOS boost, but on the other hand...they probably weren't sweeping UConn and a 5th loss would have dropped them into a tie with Creighton. I don't know how things would have gone from there.

Games *not* being declared no-contests and instead left as straight forfeits ultimately did in St. Francis Brooklyn in the NEC; they were forced to take two bad losses to teams they probably would have beaten, which would have left them tied with FDU going into the final game of the regular season on 3/3. FDU does have the head-to-head sweep, so would take the #1 seed on tiebreakers, though.

_________________
Ardent believer in the separation of church and stadium.

[Marquette Fan]

[mzonefan]

PAC12 coaches weigh in: https://www.oregonlive.com/collegebasketball/2022/03/several-pac-12-womens-basketball-coaches-want-conference-to-address-gamesmanship-of-peers-who-elect-not-to-play-games-support-greater-penalties-than-forfeits.html

[ucbart]