So if a West Div winner with 6-3 record beats a 12-0, 9-0 East winner in the Big Champ Game...

[uihawk82]

Then by some poster's logic on this board the now 12-1, 9-1 Champ Game loser can declare themselves the overall Big Ten Regular Season champion. That is where the logic leads if you say Iowa should not have a share of the West Div title because of a tie-breaker that does not really show up in the standings list.

I would think all hawk fans would want to be even tied for the West Div Title.

We will all check back on this at about 6:30 tonight.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

Then by some poster's logic on this board the now 12-1, 9-1 Champ Game loser can declare themselves the overall Big Ten Regular Season champion. That is where the logic leads if you say Iowa should not have a share of the West Div title because of a tie-breaker that does not really show up in the standings list.

I would think all hawk fans would want to be even tied for the West Div Title.

We will all check back on this at about 6:30 tonight.

The winner of the BTT game is the champion period. I would say it would be alright to have Co-Divisional Champions though....of course with the understanding that who wins the tie-breakers gets the honor of defending the division in said title game.

 

[uihawk82]

The winner of the BTT game is the champion period. I would say it would be alright to have Co-Divisional Champions though....of course with the understanding that who wins the tie-breakers gets the honor of defending the division in said title game.

Correct but some people only want to look at records and tie-breakers.