Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Didn't get a ton of traction on Indiana, so here's #3

1936 - obviously nobody here can speak to it, and can't find much info.  Went 7-1 overall, 6-0 in the Big Ten, winning the title, and finished #7 in the initial AP Poll, which is tied for their all-time highest finish.

1948 - again, nothing, but went 8-2 overall, 5-1 in the Big Ten, 2nd to Michigan.  Because of the no repeat rule back then, UM couldn't go back, so Northwestern went, and beat Cal 20-14 for the lone Rose Bowl win in program history.

1995 - obviously the sentimental favorite.  Went 10-2, including 8-0 in the Big Ten, to win their first conference title in 60 years, and make their 2nd Rose Bowl trip, where they lost to USC.  An early season upset loss to Miami(Ohio) was the other loss.  LB Pat Fitzgerald cleaned up on national defensive awards, and RB Darnell Autry finished 4th in the Heisman, but was overshadowed within the conference by Eddie George.  Finished #7 in the AP Poll, tying 1936 for a program best.

2012 and last season were pretty darn good teams.

I agree it's hard. With NU, I think their first bowl win was just a few years ago. The recent Big Ten champion (shared) teams lost bowls, and two of them got absolutely pounded. 2000 finished 8-4 after UNL hung 66 on them. 1996 lost to Wake (bad) and squeaked by almost any team it played with a pulse. 1995 lost to a fairly decent Miami (OH) team.

Not to be a bad guy, but kind of hard to evaluate the 2000 NW team comparitively w/o addressing getting blasted by 50 in the Alamo Bowl, by a very angry (non-conf champion) Nebraska team.  "Conference Champs" aside, I'm not so sure I hold that team as high as some of their peers from either side of 2000.

They lost to Purdue, didn't play OSU, and needed a pair of terrible calls in their favor to beat Michigan.  They also got blasted OOC by TCU by 27, and lost to a 3-9 Iowa team.  They beat MSU in EL, who was ranked at the time, but wound up going 5-6.  Really the best thing they did was beat a 9-4 Wisconsin team.

Honestly this past year's team could have been in the discussion based on how it finished, but they were so much worse the first half of the year, it's hard to overlook.  Plus 3-0 in OT games (in back-to-back-to-back weeks) is probably not a replicatable outcome.

I addressed that in my post above yours.

And, as ELA said, the best team they beat was 9-4 Wisconsin, which was decent but not great, and it needed OT to win by 3 points.

such is life when one posts w/o checking for new posts. 
At any rate, we have a consensus.  2000 team is not up for discussion. 

As I'm reading these posts, I'm missing nuwildcat's input.  

Halfway through the initial post I realized we weren't going to get his input, and it almost made me pull the plug on doing it.