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

I think "back in the day", the Rose Bowl was a big deal, it had history, pageantry, and often two top teams from difference conferences competing on Jan. 1.  That is considerably diluted today, but the history remains.

I've always thought a conference championship was a Big Deal, the Goal for most programs.  The NC was "mythical" back then (and winning your conference could be shared of course).  It's a bit sad today that winning the NC is now the goal for 15-20 odd progams each season.

I'm just dumbfounded that two HCs so obsessed with winning seemed to let up in the RB. 

I'm just dumbfounded that two HCs so obsessed with winning seemed to let up in the RB.

• The intensity for THE GAME was so strong that it simply couldn't be maintained into the next game.
• I think, particularly earlier that Bowl games were still seen as a reward/vacation, not part of the chase. As noted above, the AP only switched to a post-bowl final poll for the 1968 season so that was new when the Ten Year War started in 1969. Also, in 1968 the final regular season #1 (Ohio State) beat #2 (USC) in their bowl so there was no change. Same in 1969 when #1 Texas beat #9 Notre Dame. The first time #1 actually changed as a result of the bowls was 1970 when #1 Texas and #2 Ohio State both lost their bowls (to #6 ND in the Cotton Bowl and #12 Stanford in the Rose Bowl). #3 Nebraska beat #5 LSU in the Orange Bowl and jumped up to #1.
• I think that the general weakness of the "little eight" hindered the Buckeyes and Wolverines in that the conference slate didn't really expose any weaknesses that needed work.
• Changing times: Woody and to a lesser extent Bo stuck with their outdated offenses in part because they were good enough to win nearly all of their games. In that era of the Big Ten you *MIGHT* occasionally see a team that could pass effectively but those teams generally couldn't run or play D so Woody and Bo just ground them into dust. Then when they got to Pasadena they ran into (usually) USC teams that could run, pass, and play D.
• Dumb luck:  Over the course of the 10 years of the Ten Year War the Buckeyes and Wolverines went 1-9 in Rose Bowls. The one win was a 42-21 blowout. The losses were by:

• 1 M to Stanford in 71
• 1 tOSU to USC in 74
• 7 M to USC in 69
• 7 M to Washington in 77
• 7 M to USC in 78
• 8 M to USC in 76
• 10 tOSU to Stanford in 70
• 13 tOSU to UCLA in 75 (beat them earlier in the season)
• 25 tOSU to USC in 72

I don't know that they let up. I think it was a combination of factors including:

• The intensity for THE GAME was so strong that it simply couldn't be maintained into the next game.
• I think, particularly earlier that Bowl games were still seen as a reward/vacation, not part of the chase. As noted above, the AP only switched to a post-bowl final poll for the 1968 season so that was new when the Ten Year War started in 1969. Also, in 1968 the final regular season #1 (Ohio State) beat #2 (USC) in their bowl so there was no change. Same in 1969 when #1 Texas beat #9 Notre Dame. The first time #1 actually changed as a result of the bowls was 1970 when #1 Texas and #2 Ohio State both lost their bowls (to #6 ND in the Cotton Bowl and #12 Stanford in the Rose Bowl). #3 Nebraska beat #5 LSU in the Orange Bowl and jumped up to #1.
• I think that the general weakness of the "little eight" hindered the Buckeyes and Wolverines in that the conference slate didn't really expose any weaknesses that needed work.
• Changing times: Woody and to a lesser extent Bo stuck with their outdated offenses in part because they were good enough to win nearly all of their games. In that era of the Big Ten you *MIGHT* occasionally see a team that could pass effectively but those teams generally couldn't run or play D so Woody and Bo just ground them into dust. Then when they got to Pasadena they ran into (usually) USC teams that could run, pass, and play D.
• Dumb luck:  Over the course of the 10 years of the Ten Year War the Buckeyes and Wolverines went 1-9 in Rose Bowls. The one win was a 42-21 blowout. The losses were by:

• 1 M to Stanford in 71
• 1 tOSU to USC in 74
• 7 M to USC in 69
• 7 M to Washington in 77
• 7 M to USC in 78
• 8 M to USC in 76
• 10 tOSU to Stanford in 70
• 13 tOSU to UCLA in 75 (beat them earlier in the season)
• 25 tOSU to USC in 72

The Buckeyes and Wolverines were competitive, it isn't like the Pac Champ just romped every year.

#1 above:  many here have insisted to me that isn't a thing
#2:  idk, they're keeping score, aren't they?  The one good thing about Mullen (which he threw out the window in the Cotton Bowl vs OU) was if they're keeping score, we might as well win.
#3:  I can totally buy that
#4:  I think that aligns with #3
#5:  Ehh...I'd buy that if it was 4-6 or 3-7, but 1-9?  1-9 is too severe for me to buy that.  What's more likely is simply that USC was a program above, aka the SEC has been in our modern era.