Huskers93-97
All-American
I figured 95 makes a great story since ESPN was going to do a 30 for 30. 97 has the conflict with Michigan I just figured both were no brainers
BTN Big Ten Elite to Showcase 1997 Nebraska
- Thread starter Mavric
- Start date
VectorVictor
Heisman Trophy Winner
Lots of (non-Michigan) B1G alums I've talked to down here have a problem with it because they felt it was robbing their conference of a title via (their perception) of a publicity stunt with Dr. Tom retiring. Some of the local Penn State fans also have a problem with it, mainly as a way to redirect their angst towards the 1994 NC being given to us over them. Many of them are in their late 30s or older, so it may be a case of them being around to remember the B1G teeth gnashing about it.
Granted, I do agree that time has tempered a lot of the angst towards the NC, but that still doesn't mean it's been fully accepted as legit. Hell, look at Teddy Greenstein's (Northwestern alum IIRC) article about Frost--first thing he led with was Shevin Wiggins' foot. Not the dismantling of Tennessee (or conversely, how Michigan was manhandled by an overrated Wazzu team) to clinch the title--Shevin Wiggins' foot.
I mean, sure, Shevin Wiggins' foot is a magical foot that deserves its own statue in front of Memorial Stadium...but when you lead with that when talking about the 1997 NC team, you do it as a means to discredit their subsequent accomplishments, not to reinforce their worth as a title holder.
Last edited by a moderator:
Huskers93-97
All-American
I just find it funny that so many people point to the 97 wiggins play and say they didnt deserve a national title because we played a tough game. Who cares. If you look back at ALOT of past national champions they had a game or numerous games they struggled to get past. Not everyone can be like the 95 huskers and bring their A+ game every week. I could probably go back and look at alot of years and come up with something similiar. But here is just a few off the top of my head and I am not trying very hard to think.
01 miami struggled numerous games throughout the season
02 ohio state required double overtime and some fake pass interference call to get their title
04 or 05 USC cant remember which. Didnt they have some illegal bush push to beat notre dame.
05 texas one could say if bush wouldnt have made that bone head play in the first half on his own like 20 yard line trying to pitch to some guy that game might have gotten out of hand.
09 or10 if colt mccoy wouldnt have gotten hurt one could say alabama probably wouldnt have won a title that year
93 florida state- how many fake calls did it take to beat nebraska
Point being you could put an asterisk by alot of national titles. But the point is- they all got past those games of struggle and won it all.
Last edited by a moderator:
VectorVictor
Heisman Trophy Winner
I agree. I think it was just because of how unusual it was that it's stuck in people's craws. That, and Nebraska was one of the top TV draws and ESPN was at their zenith, so the airtime given to this one fluke that saved our season has been a spotlight others may not have received prior.
Huskers93-97
All-American
I agree. Its just frustrating. Because if you take away that game like it didnt exist. Then look at the rest of the season. Heck that 97 team is probably the 2nd best husker team we ever had behind 95.
VectorVictor
Heisman Trophy Winner
Ulty
All-Conference
Don't forget 1990 Colorado. They sucked.
A lot of national championship teams need a little bit of serendipity along the way at some point, but are otherwise dominant the rest of the year.
Last edited by a moderator:
whateveritis1224
All-Conference
I would say if you want to use examples of tough games, you might want to use something other than the NC game against the number 1 or 2 team in the country. Miami needed something like an 80 yard int return to close out Boston College and 05 USC needed a 70 yard pass play in the last minute and the Bush push to get by Notre Dame are really the only equivalents to '97 NU-MU.
Now this isn't to say that NU would not have killed Michigan (can't see Michigan's offense doing anything if Tennessee's offense could barely get started).
California Husker
Starter
This thread seems to have turned into a "what if....?" about the 1997 Huskers vs the 1997 Wolverines. And many people have noted that Michigan had the best scoring defense that season while NU had the best offense (both true statements), therefore setting up the "who wins? best defense or best offense?" argument.
I think what gets lost in the 1997 NU vs Mich argument is this:
Mich #1 scoring defense
NU #8 scoring defense
That's right...whenever the `97 Huskers vs the `97 Wolverines argument comes up, we don't hear much about NU's defense...a really good defense. Ask Peyton Manning.
NU #1 scoring offense
Mich #29 scoring offense
Yes, that's right....NUMBER TWENTY-NINE....not good.
So, yes Michigan had a great defense, but so did Nebraska...a top 10 defense. I think I might make the argument that since Nebraska played far fewer close games, NU's points allowed might even be slightly inflated by the fact that starters are out early in a lot of NU games, while Michigan HAD to keep their first team in due to close games. Michigan only managed to put up scores in the 20s in 9 of their 12 games, while Nebraska scored in the 30s or more 11 of 13 games (in the 40s three times, in the 50s three times, 69 once and 77 once). Michigan's three highest scoring games were against unranked Baylor (38 points), unranked Indiana (37 points) and a little more impressive Penn State who finished ranked #17 (34 points).
Nebraska, on the other hand, scored 49 against that same Baylor team, 56 against a K-State team that was 11-1 and finished #8, and 42 against Tennessee who finished ranked #7.
Even if Michigan could have held Nebraska under their scoring average (and that's a big if), how the hell would they ever beat Nebraska if THEY couldn't score? Look, if Peyton...effing...Manning couldn't score on Nebraska's defense, how the hell was Griese going to score on them?
I think what gets lost in the 1997 NU vs Mich argument is this:
Mich #1 scoring defense
NU #8 scoring defense
That's right...whenever the `97 Huskers vs the `97 Wolverines argument comes up, we don't hear much about NU's defense...a really good defense. Ask Peyton Manning.
NU #1 scoring offense
Mich #29 scoring offense
Yes, that's right....NUMBER TWENTY-NINE....not good.
So, yes Michigan had a great defense, but so did Nebraska...a top 10 defense. I think I might make the argument that since Nebraska played far fewer close games, NU's points allowed might even be slightly inflated by the fact that starters are out early in a lot of NU games, while Michigan HAD to keep their first team in due to close games. Michigan only managed to put up scores in the 20s in 9 of their 12 games, while Nebraska scored in the 30s or more 11 of 13 games (in the 40s three times, in the 50s three times, 69 once and 77 once). Michigan's three highest scoring games were against unranked Baylor (38 points), unranked Indiana (37 points) and a little more impressive Penn State who finished ranked #17 (34 points).
Nebraska, on the other hand, scored 49 against that same Baylor team, 56 against a K-State team that was 11-1 and finished #8, and 42 against Tennessee who finished ranked #7.
Even if Michigan could have held Nebraska under their scoring average (and that's a big if), how the hell would they ever beat Nebraska if THEY couldn't score? Look, if Peyton...effing...Manning couldn't score on Nebraska's defense, how the hell was Griese going to score on them?
Ulty
All-Conference
HuskerNBigD
Starter
I love how every thread about a documentary from BTN turns into, "they hate us cause '97", similar to every thread about ESPN turns into, "show that to Herbstreit cause he can't stand Nebraska and is a whinny baby." People need to learn to let stuff go.
And, yes, I was broadly generalizing about every documentary and article, because that seems to be the trend - just like saying every B1G fan disputes our 1997 national championship.
To be honest, I haven't run into any B1G fans that bring up the 97 season and there probably aren't a lot that honestly care too much. Half these threads turn into pity parties, or "I can't believe xyz fanbase is a bunch of meany-heads" or "this state sucks".
BTW, I can't wait to watch the show.
And, yes, I was broadly generalizing about every documentary and article, because that seems to be the trend - just like saying every B1G fan disputes our 1997 national championship.
To be honest, I haven't run into any B1G fans that bring up the 97 season and there probably aren't a lot that honestly care too much. Half these threads turn into pity parties, or "I can't believe xyz fanbase is a bunch of meany-heads" or "this state sucks".
BTW, I can't wait to watch the show.
Last edited by a moderator: