Jump to content
Mavric

Nebraska vs. Michigan ..... in 1997

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

I've always loved the "Michigan was #1 and didn't lose so they should have stayed #1" argument.

 

Exactly how did Michigan take over the #1 spot from Nebraska in the first place?

 

Excellent point.  From memory, we dropped after the Missouri game.  Now I have to go look it up and verify.

Share this post


Link to post

1 minute ago, admo said:

Excellent point.  From memory, we dropped after the Missouri game.  Now I have to go look it up and verify.

 

You remember correctly

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks.  I remember being so shocked and excited in that win, but upset and confused, why the heck they would drop us in the polls.  So yeah we went from #1 in the country to #3.  Got up to #2 and creamed A&M in the Big12 Championship but stayed there.  It was a joke and that's why many people felt it was unfair.

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

 

 

Others have already covered this more or less, but to reiterate:

 

The only bits of argument that Michigan has are the Missouri game (the kick should have been illegal, but it wasn't, and we won), and the Colorado game (week 1 home non-rivalry opponent vs week 12 away rivalry opponent playing for bowl eligibility who made the score closer than it seemed late). 

 

 

The kick is only illegal if it is deemed intentional. It is a judgement call for the officials and they ruled it was not intentional kicking. Completely legal.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

 

The kick is only illegal if it is deemed intentional. It is a judgement call for the officials and they ruled it was not intentional kicking. Completely legal.

Wondering when this would come up. Intentional kicking, as I understand it, different than keeping a ball alive. Intention kicking would be kicking the ball out of a ball carrier's hands, kicking a loose ball like a fumble or onside kick. You are allowed to use any part of your body, including your feet, to keep a pass alive.

 

Or do I have it wrong?

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
51 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

 

The kick is only illegal if it is deemed intentional. It is a judgement call for the officials and they ruled it was not intentional kicking. Completely legal.

 

 

Right, I agree. But they missed the call, imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, TGHusker said:

The Eye Test also needs to be stated:  Watch the Big 12 championship game -  We looked like the 95 Huskers in that game. Texas A&M looked like a HS and not a 20th ranked college team in comparison to NU.

 

This should play from the correct starting point. Watch the block that Frost throws on a reverse to Newcombe:
 

 

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, Gage County said:

Wondering when this would come up. Intentional kicking, as I understand it, different than keeping a ball alive. Intention kicking would be kicking the ball out of a ball carrier's hands, kicking a loose ball like a fumble or onside kick. You are allowed to use any part of your body, including your feet, to keep a pass alive.

 

Or do I have it wrong?

I believe that is (or was at the time) the rule, you could use your feet to keep a pass alive. I think possibly only to keep it alive for yourself and not to kick it to another person. Seems pretty convoluted.

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

Right, I agree. But they missed the call, imo. 

 

I never thought it looked very intentional but Shevin stated later that he did kick it on purpose and then after that he changed it to he kicked it on purpose but to keep it alive for him to catch. I always thought he was making up both of those stories so he could sort of take credit for the play.

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

I'm not sure your "facts" are as factual as you'd like to believe.

 

Michigan maybe played a slightly tougher but by a pretty thin margin.  Florida looks to have played the toughest schedule.

 

Michigan beat 3 teams that finished the year ranked (#16 Penn State - 9-3; #12 Ohio State - 10-3; #9 Washington State - 10-2)

 

Nebraska beat 5 teams that finished the year ranked (#18 Washington - 8-4; #8 Kansas State - 11-1; #23 Missouri - 7-5; #20 Texas A&M - 9-4; #7 Tennessee - 11-2)

 

Your claim about Michigan beating six Top 25 teams is deceptive.  Michigan played Colorado, Notre Dame, Iowa, Michigan State and Wisconsin who were ranked earlier in the year.  They finished 5-6, 7-6, 7-5, 7-5 and 8-5 respectively so they weren't nearly as good as those initial rankings suggest and all finished the year unranked.

 

Michigan beat Colorado at home the first game of the year.  The Huskers played at Colorado the last game of the year.  On the road.  What had become a rivalry game.  And Nebraska was up 27-10 until Colorado scored two late TDs to get closer.  Also, Michigan beat Colorado by 24 which I believe is a three-score game.

 

Also, every computer ranking that I could find - Sagarin, SRS, Congrove, Howell - has Nebraska as the better team.

 

That would be my rebuttal if a Michigan fan were to bring up those points, which I think you just did.

Damn, Mav I think you could write the closing arguments for Perry Mason.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post

"Also, Michigan beat Colorado by 24 which I believe is a three-score game." Did they have the 2-point conversion back then? Its been too long, I dont remember.  

 

By the way, I read both MIchigan and NU forums. I don't see this discussion on UofM boards like I do on NU boards. Not sure why. Maybe I am just not on the correct UoFM board.

I also have many freinds that are NU fans and they always bring this up when the two teams play. I don't hear Michigan fans bring it up. It seems like NU fans feel more slighted by the split polls. Or maybe Michigan fans were just happy to get a NC after a 50 year drought. :-)

 

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, nic said:

"Also, Michigan beat Colorado by 24 which I believe is a three-score game." Did they have the 2-point conversion back then? Its been too long, I dont remember.  

 

By the way, I read both MIchigan and NU forums. I don't see this discussion on UofM boards like I do on NU boards. Not sure why. Maybe I am just not on the correct UoFM board.

I also have many freinds that are NU fans and they always bring this up when the two teams play. I don't hear Michigan fans bring it up. It seems like NU fans feel more slighted by the split polls. Or maybe Michigan fans were just happy to get a NC after a 50 year drought. :-)

 

I think its because for whatever reason national public media always have something to publicly say about how it should have been 100% Michigan. Probably most of the Michigan faithful were just happy to get a share and we actually know we were the better team and shouldnt have had to split it. 

 

Think about it- if you dont have a very good argument about why your better you probably wont try to argue.

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

I think its because for whatever reason national public media always have something to publicly say about how it should have been 100% Michigan. Probably most of the Michigan faithful were just happy to get a share and we actually know we were the better team and shouldnt have had to split it. 

 

Think about it- if you dont have a very good argument about why your better you probably wont try to argue.

 

Maybe Michigan fans have moved on from the 1997 season? :dunno

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/19/2018 at 5:22 PM, huskerfan333157 said:

I think Nebraska would have won but Nebraska fans ignore these facts:

 

Michigan played the toughest schedule and played 6 top 25 teams.

 

Michigan beat Colorado 30 to 3 that year, we beat them 27 to 24 

 

We all talk about how we played a far superior team in the bowl game (which we did) yet we ignore that we had a common opponent in which Michigan beat them by 4 scores while we only beat them by 1.  

 

If a Michigan fan were to bring up these points then what would your rebuttal be besides the one bowl game?  

I believe this idea that Michigan played so many more ranked teams is propaganda spread by Michigan. Those teams were ranked when they played, but many of them were over ranked. I am pretty sure when you do a composite of the two poles that most people used back then (AP and Coaches), at the end of the season, when it counts, Nebraska had actually beaten more ranked teams than Michigan. 

As far as the Colorado game goes; Michigan got them at home at the beginning of the season. Nebraska was playing a division rival and had to play in colorado where there is no air. That's a whole different ball game. 

The fact is, Nebraska was a #1 offense and a top 10 defense and in Michigan, they would have been playing a #1 defense and an offense that couldn't even crack the top 25. 

You have to score to win and as I've said elsewhere, the Nebraska defense shut down Payton-Effing-Manning (who should have won the Heisman that year), who on earth thinks the Blackshirts wouldn't have been able to shut down Brian Griese? Seriously? 

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...