Big Ten Elite: 1997 Michigan Wolverines

[HuskerNationNick]

I watched the Big Ten Icons the other day, and they had one on Woodson. Tonight, they played Big Ten Elite, and they had the 1997 Michigan team. This brings back the old subject or who was better, Nebraska or Michigan?!

 

I for one, wish they never ducked us, and played us in the National Championship Game.

 

Again, there isn't much going on here during the off season, so... fan bias aside, do you think we would have beaten the heralded Woodson's Wolverines? Thought this could be a good conversation piece, and a reason to live in the past a little.

[Eric the Red]

*Michigan had the better defense. Tough to go against.

 

*Vegas would have had NU a 7 point favorite. They are somehow usually right.

[Savage Husker]

Woodson would have no impact in that game on defense. Unless tackling our rusher 7-10 yards downfield is considered a good thing.

[True2tRA]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/227560-1997-the-great-debate

 

 

As good a breakdown as I've seen about it.

 

I just can't see anybody stopping Mackovicka and Ahman Green, especially with a title on the line.

 

As great as Michigans defense was, Nebraska's defense was pretty stout as well.

 

Both teams played quite a few tough games throughout the season but in the end, Nebraska rose to the occasion when they truly needed to by beating Manning and Tennessee. Michigan had the chance to lock their position as the best team in the country and disappointed.

 

Nebraska had been there and done it in the years previous, they'd been battle tested on the big stage, they'd have rose to the occasion again.

[Redux]

Nebraska by a lot

[knapplc]

This is what they have for 1997:

 

 

This is what we have for 1997:

 

It's the one in the middle. We have so many, the picture gets cluttered sometimes.

 

 

 

 

Michigan could have been known as the undisputed National Champ that year. All they had to do was take the field against the other contender and settle things. But they chose to run and hide to the Rose Bowl instead of joining the Bowl Alliance like the SEC, Big 8, SWC, ACC and Notre Dame (and eventually the Big XII), so they get their ugly AP trophy as the "other national champion" and Nebraska gets the big crystal football for the real National Championship. We played by far a tougher opponent and demolished them.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZJ9ZPLAssc?t=6215

 

Manning's head shake at this point says so much. That 1997 Nebraska team wasn't a Ferrari like 1995 - they were a Steamroller. By the end of the game every opponent was beat up and beat down. At best, Michigan could have hoped for a Missouri-like showing. But by the time this mythical Nebraska/Michigan game would have been played, Osborne would still have already announced his retirement, and that 1997 Nebraska team was out for blood.

 

You gotta give Tennessee a ton of respect for that game. Nebraska was there to rip out hearts and curb-stomp fools, and the Vols hung in there for half the game. The floodgates opened in the third quarter and they crumbled, but they were a worthy opponent.

 

I'm not sure Michigan would have fared any better than Tennessee. A very good argument could be made that they would have fared much worse.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

We were the better team, simple as that, nothing Michigan can show me as proof matters. I would've loved for us to curb stomp them to prove it though.

[Landlord]

In the "national championship" sense, it's good that the AP poll went with Michigan at #1, because otherwise Michigan would have gone unbeaten and uncrowned in most people's eyes, a bitter pill for a great program that had not won a mythical national championship since 1948. But that's the bitter pill Penn State had to swallow in 1994 and Auburn in 2004, and I think that both of those teams have as much of an argument for sharing a title as Michigan did in '97 (and probably better arguments). For myself, I consider Michigan and Nebraska co-champions regardless of where they are ranked (and I extend the same view to Penn State '94 and Auburn 2004 too), but the question here is, who should be ranked #1? And there is simply no real argument for Michigan.

As you can see, I have written an enormous amount on this issue by now (and have spent many hours on it). That is because I don't like to reverse an AP poll decision at the top. So I looked at Michigan's case from every angle, trying to find some solid reason to keep them #1. But the fact is, no such reason exists. As far as I can tell, Michigan was voted #1 not by merit, but because that was the result AP voters wanted. So, being writers, they picked up their pens, and wrote their own ending. Eyes closed.

In the end, all I've done is spent a lot of time corroborating what was already blatantly obvious from the beginning. Nebraska went 13-0 while playing 5 rated opponents, won by an average of 30 points a game, gained 515 yards per game offense, gave up 262 on defense, and won their bowl over the then-#3 team by 25 points. Very few teams in the AP poll era (1936 to present) have put up those kinds of numbers. And the few that have never finished #2.

I worked my brain overtime on this first fix, but really it's a no-brainer: Nebraska moves to #1, and Michigan drops to #2.

http://www.tiptop25.com/fixing1997.html

[Redux]

I would like to hear why Titanic thinks Michigan was better.

[True2tRA]

I would like to hear why Titanic thinks Michigan was better.

I think his argument may resemble something like this:

 

 

[huKSer]

The answer is clear: Which team challenged the opponent to a one game play off, and which team ran away with their tail between their legs?

[huKSer]

 

I would like to hear why Titanic thinks Michigan was better.

I think his argument may resemble something like this:

 

 

 

Did Knapp take that picture?

[broganreynik]

Michigan's D was good, sure. So was Nebraska's. So, Michigan would have needed to field a great offense to beat DONU in a championship game. Michigan only scored more than 30 three times that year, and never more than 40. On the flip side, Nebraska only scored less than 30 three times, and more than 40 eight times.

 

Couple that with the fact that when playing for a National Championship, Nebraska clobbered the #3 team, while Michigan struggled to beat a #8 Washington State with a controversial finish. I'm not sure there's any way a logical person could claim Michigan would have won.

[HuskerNationNick]

For the person who gave Michigan one vote...

[NebraskaShellback]

For the person who gave Michigan one vote...

 

I wonder the same thing who had given the one vote.

Edited May 18, 2015 by NebraskaShellback