Who wins? 97 Nebraska vs 97 Michigan

[Original Rookie]

What's relevant is that every single pollster thought Michigan was the best team riiiiight up to the point Osborne announced his retirement. What's relevant is that I don't think the coaches up and decided that Nebraska was in fact better, I think they decided to send out Osborne with a bang. I'm not Michigan fan, wasn't then, not now, and that's how I've always felt.

 

For those who argue that the Nebraska/Tennesee game compared to the Michigan/Washington State game proves that Nebraska was the better team, what do they have to say about their fluke win over Missouri (and make no mistake, it was a fluke)? What do they have to say about their three point win over 5-6 Colorado?

 

:thumb:

 

Isn't the deal with College Football that you have to be the best for the whole year and not just the last game?

[madduxace]

It was an absolute joke Michigan even had to split that national championship. Nebraska had not see a defense with the talent UM had that year and the Big 10 was a better Conference at that point in time. Not to get off the subject but the 94 Penn St. team got hosed. They were hands down the best team that year.

[Hatz]

It was an absolute joke Michigan even had to split that national championship. Nebraska had not see a defense with the talent UM had that year and the Big 10 was a better Conference at that point in time. Not to get off the subject but the 94 Penn St. team got hosed. They were hands down the best team that year.

 

 

Truth be known PSU always has received the short end of the poll stick.

 

1968 undefeated

1969 undefeated

1973 undefeated

1994 undefeated

 

All unbeaten and no titles that year, split or otherwise. I don't even like Penn State but they are the ones who have largest gripe historically to complain.

[NHS BIG DADDY]

It was an absolute joke Michigan even had to split that national championship. Nebraska had not see a defense with the talent UM had that year and the Big 10 was a better Conference at that point in time. Not to get off the subject but the 94 Penn St. team got hosed. They were hands down the best team that year.

 

Did you eat some sour grapes or something?

[madduxace]

Did you eat some sour grapes or something?

No just stating the facts that Michigan was the best team that year. Nebraska was an absolute awesome program in the 90's and had one of the best teams of all time in 95. Just not the best team in 97. The Big Ten in the 90's was almost impossible to go undefeated in due to the physicality of it. Just like the Penn St. 94 it was an impressive feat. (Not a Penn St. fan but that team was phenominal also)

[NHS BIG DADDY]

No just stating the facts that Michigan was the best team that year. Nebraska was an absolute awesome program in the 90's and had one of the best teams of all time in 95. Just not the best team in 97. The Big Ten in the 90's was almost impossible to go undefeated in due to the physicality of it. Just like the Penn St. 94 it was an impressive feat. (Not a Penn St. fan but that team was phenominal also)

 

Both years NU went undefeated and had very impressive bowl victories. Not much else they could have done to show they deserved to be champions. I think they deserved to split the title in 97 since they couldnt play each other. I wouldnt have minded it in 94 either, PSU did all they could also.

[madduxace]

Michigan beat 7 top 25 teams that year. How many top 25 teams did Nebraka beat? ( I really do not know. I am asking a question, not trying make a statement or anything like that)

[Original Rookie]

Michigan beat 7 top 25 teams that year. How many top 25 teams did Nebraka beat? ( I really do not know. I am asking a question, not trying make a statement or anything like that)

 

Wow, that I did not know. There is your reason for the difference in average margain of victory.

[Under the Lights]

Wow, that I did not know. There is your reason for the difference in average margain of victory.

 

That, combined with the fact that the Big 12 itself was a joke of a conference at this point.

 

I refuse to believe that Nebraska would have gotten that vote if Osborne didn't retire.

 

As far as an actual Neb/Mich game, no doubt it would have been a good one. I for one, think both teams would struggle to score in that game. Nebraska had a pretty darn good defense that year, as was the case most years with the "black shirt" defense. Call me crazy, but the Big 10 was pretty good at stopping the run/running the ball and I'm pretty sure Woodson could take one passing option out of the equation.

 

Common Opponents

 

Baylor - Michigan (38-3) Nebraska (42-21)

Colorado - Michigan (27-3) Nebraska (27-24)

 

Strictly based off this, I'd say both offenses were pretty close(+4 Neb), with Michigan holding a distinct edge on D(Mich +39).

[DragonFire]

Michigan beat 7 top 25 teams that year. How many top 25 teams did Nebraka beat? ( I really do not know. I am asking a question, not trying make a statement or anything like that)

Nebraska only played 6 teams with a winning record, let alone a ranking.

 

Nebraska played 4 teams that were ranked at the time they played them. Only 3 teams (Washington, Kansas State, Tennessee) finished in the top 25.

[DragonFire]

Going into the final poll 58 of the 62 coaches thought Michigan was the better team. Two days following this poll, Tom Osborne's retirement was announced. Following the bowl games, Michigan lost 28 first place votes to Nebraska. Furthermore, when looking at that final Coaches Poll is that Nebraska received 32 FPV and 1520 points, Michigan received 30 FPV and 1516 points. If you do the math (one first place vote equals 25 points, one second place vote equals 24, etc.), Nebraska's point total breaks to 32 * 25 = 800, 30 * 24 = 720, which means every voter that voted Michigan first voted Nebraska second. If you break down Michigan's total it's 30 * 25 = 750, 32 * = 768 which combined would be 1518. That means not only did the aforementioned 28 coaches stray, either two coaches voted them third, or one voted them fourth, which is just blatant.

[NHS BIG DADDY]

NU did beat the #2 team in the nation Washington in Seattle by 13 points and and the #3 Vols by 25 points in the Orange Bowl, #14 Texas A&M by 39 points in the Big 12 championship and #17 Kansas St by 30 points.

 

Maybe they played down to there competition in some of those other games but that right there is impressive. Not only did they beat they ranked teams but they spanked them except for Washington but they won that won by 2 tds.

 

As far as the sympathy vote, They were previously ranked #1 for a few weeks that season, they dropped back to #3 after they narrowly beat Mizzou in overtime. The week after that they were back to #2. So its not hard to believe after the bowl games when NU spanked the #3 Vols and UM had a not to impressive win over Wazu that voters believed that NU was the best team.

 

I really would have loved to have seen these two play, instead we get to argue forever over who would have won.

[Hatz]

Michigan beat 7 top 25 teams that year. How many top 25 teams did Nebraka beat? ( I really do not know. I am asking a question, not trying make a statement or anything like that)

 

If I'm looking at the AP poll from 1997 right, I only see the following games vs. the Top 25:

 

Ohio State #12

Penn State #16

Washington State #9

 

 

In looking at Nebraska's record they played

 

Washington #18

Missouri #23

Tennessee #7

Texas A & M #20

Kansas State #8

 

So I think a little exaggeration on who played whom happens to all of us. Nebraska looks as if they might have played a little tougher schedule based on the poll results but it was pretty tight.

[madduxace]

Ranked at the time they played them Michigan beat: #8 Colorado, #15 Iowa,

#15 MSU, #3 PSU,#23 Wisconson,#4 OSU,#8 Washington.

[5wide]

If I'm looking at the AP poll from 1997 right, I only see the following games vs. the Top 25:

 

Ohio State #12

Penn State #16

Washington State #9

 

 

In looking at Nebraska's record they played

 

Washington #18

Missouri #23

Tennessee #7

Texas A & M #20

Kansas State #8

 

So I think a little exaggeration on who played whom happens to all of us. Nebraska looks as if they might have played a little tougher schedule based on the poll results but it was pretty tight.

 

Exactly, what do you base it on? What the opponents were ranked at the time of the game...or what their opponents ended up being ranked? One way favors Michigan, one way favors Nebraska.

 

Seriously, I have no problem with the split title...with no system in place that allows them to play, both teams did all they could do. All I'm giving you is my opinion from watching both teams play...I thought Nebraska was better at the time and nothing has changed that opinion.

 

Personally, I prefer to look at where the teams ended up...example...did UK beat the 9th ranked team in the nation or a .500 team when they beat U of L? Obviously, there are circumstances, like injuries that could alter this in certain instances, but for the most part, looking at the finished product gives you a better idea of what kind of teams they played. Just my two cents...