Michigan Coach Still Upset Over Split 1997 National Championship

[Foppa]

 

Btw- discussions like this are one of the main reasons I like(d) the uniqueness of cfb not having a playoff to an indisputable champion. It's fun.

Playing Michigan on the field to determine the champion would've been a lot more fun.

 

Only for Nebraska

 

If it wasn't for that damn Missouri game a split title wouldn't have been an issue at all IMO. IIRC, Nebraska dropped to 3rd after that win. I've never understood the whole 'dropping in polls' after you win, especially in the middle of the season. I can see it in the first game or two, when maybe your pre-season rank was maybe perceived to be too high, but if you're winning game after game, no matter how tough the game is, it shouldn't happen.

[knapplc]

Nebraska suffered two wins in 1997 (as in, won, but dropped in the poll).

 

We dropped from 6th to 7th after beating Central Florida in Week 2.

 

We dropped from 1st to 3rd after beating Missouri in Week 9.

[VectorVictor]

Pretty sure Nebraska at some point, in some regard was offering to set up an end all, say all game for all the marbles. Pretty sure Michigan and/or the Big 10 denied it.

 

Actually, Fox was.

 

Before Michigan pulled it from their website some time ago, an internet sleuth on Huskerpedia back in the early 00s (read: when it was free) found minutes from a committee dealing with their Athletic Department and funding/expenditures. In it, it was explained that Fox approached both Nebraska and Michigan after the game to offer a one-shot, winner-take-all match on their network. Each school would get something like $2 million each. Michigan rejected it, citing worries about reprisal from the NCAA and the toll it would take on their student athletes.

 

 

It was also noted in their minutes that Nebraska had already accepted the offer.

I'd love to read that if that's true.

 

I think all of the old Huskerpedia posts got pruned during the HuskerMax/HuskerPedia pissing match from long ago. The minutes were from a meeting in 1999, IIRC.

 

I always wanted to go and find those minutes again as well, but I don't think they're online any longer. It would probably take a FoIA request to get them now...and I wouldn't have the foggiest where to look other than the year and the type of meeting it was.

 

If anyone else's Google-Fu is strong, they may want to have a crack at it?

[Mavric]

My Google-Fu turned up this gem:

 

What if Nebraska had joined the Big Ten 15 years ago? What if the Leaders and Legends Divisions were established in 1996? Who would have won the most Big Ten championship games? Would Nebraska or Michigan have won the 1997 national title (hint: the simulation says “maybe Ohio State”)?

 

BTN is teaming up with WhatIfSports.com for the simulation project, “Big Ten Legends & Leaders: 1996-2010,” to find out the answers to those questions and more.

 

WhatIfSports.com split the 12 current Big Ten teams into their respective divisions and used the actual team rosters and statistics to simulate the Big Ten regular-season schedules from the 1996-2010 seasons.

 

Every day through August 26, a simulated season in Big Ten history will be highlighted on www.BTN.com, including box scores and play-by-plays for every hypothetical Big Ten Championship Game.

 

For example, in real life, Michigan and Nebraska shared the 1997 National Championship. In the 1997 WhatIfSports.com simulation, however, Nebraska was out of the picture with three conference losses and Michigan represented the Legends Division in the Big Ten Championship Game against Leaders Division champion Ohio State. In the simulation of the championship game, the Buckeyes avenged their only regular-season loss and used a 29-yard field goal by Dan Stultz on the game’s final play to defeat Michigan, 37-34. That left the Buckeyes and the Wolverines with one conference loss, to each other, heading into bowl season. In reality, Ohio State lost to Florida State in the Sugar Bowl. Through this simulation, however, the Buckeyes would have presumably gone to the Rose Bowl to play Washington State, while Michigan could have played Florida State in the Sugar Bowl. If both Big Ten teams had won, Ohio State and Michigan might have shared the national championship that season.

 

The link doesn't work anymore but WhatIfSports is still around. And you can simulate games on your own if you like. I ran 1997 Nebraska vs. 1997 Michigan on a neutral field 10 times and came up with Huskers 7-3, although the scores are so all over the board I'm not sure how they are coming up with some of that stuff.

[knapplc]

Nebraska was out of the picture with three conference losses

 

[74Hunter]

 

Btw- discussions like this are one of the main reasons I like(d) the uniqueness of cfb not having a playoff to an indisputable champion. It's fun.

Playing Michigan on the field to determine the champion would've been a lot more fun.

 

Only for Nebraska

 

If it wasn't for that damn Missouri game a split title wouldn't have been an issue at all IMO. IIRC, Nebraska dropped to 3rd after that win. I've never understood the whole 'dropping in polls' after you win, especially in the middle of the season. I can see it in the first game or two, when maybe your pre-season rank was maybe perceived to be too high, but if you're winning game after game, no matter how tough the game is, it shouldn't happen.

I'm the opposite, I think you vote for who you think is best. Just because a team was thought of as good, such as PSU in 97, it doesn't make it so.

 

What pissed me off was that the pollsters found it okay to jump us after the Mizzou game, but they went all hypocritical after the bowls and preached that garbage about not jumping a team that wins their game. Even when it was obvious that we had the much better team that year after the bowls were played.

[VectorVictor]

What pissed me off was that the pollsters found it okay to jump us after the Mizzou game, but they went all hypocritical after the bowls and preached that garbage about not jumping a team that wins their game. Even when it was obvious that we had the much better team that year after the bowls were played.

 

I dunno. That quarterback for Tennessee was garbage--maybe that's why people say Michigan would beat Nebraska?

[StPaulHusker]

Here is the most important thing said in this article.

 

Lloyd Carr was upset the coaches poll didn't GIVE them the title.

 

Never said he wanted a shot at Nebraska to make it unanimous.

[Nobody]

"I was extremely bothered by it and I still am.”

 

[The Snork]

I always thought this poster summed the situation up nicely.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

I expect him to stand up for his team, but this has been beaten to death over the years. We were willing to play, they didn't want to, you had your chance Carr..................you guys wussed out. No way that Husker team allows Michigan to beat them. They had the attitude and swag that you want in your team and never mind the athletic ability to boot. We have the trophy, you don't, deal with it.

[VectorVictor]

I expect him to stand up for his team, but this has been beaten to death over the years. We were willing to play, they didn't want to, you had your chance Carr..................you guys wussed out. No way that Husker team allows Michigan to beat them. They had the attitude and swag that you want in your team and never mind the athletic ability to boot. We have the trophy, you don't, deal with it.

 

I always thought if we got a rivalry going with Michigan on the field, that a mock 1997 NC award would make for a good rivalry trophy.

[huskerhandy35]

As we ALL know, T.O. has way too much class to ever complain about sharing the National Title with Michigan. It is what it is and there's nothing he or Carr can do about

it! But, as we also all know, being on the same level of class and integrity as T.O. is close to impossible and Carr illustrates this perfectly!

[Nobody]

that poster is where its at

[Notre Dame Joe]

That's why a cross over rivalry with PSU or UM would make sense, and therefore did not happen.