header pic

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

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff

 (Read 6211 times)

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18835
  • Liked:
VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« on: May 02, 2019, 01:32:41 AM »
It's December 9th, 2002.  The playoff is set, who wins?
1 Miami vs 4 USC
2 Ohio St vs 3 Georgia
-
-
-
The teams:
#1 Miami, 12-0, Big East Champions
4th in scoring offense
22nd in scoring defense
37th strength of schedule
-
The defending national champs went through the 2002 season undefeated and have won 34 straight games.  The Canes faced four ranked foes this year, with a blowout win @ #6 Florida, and 1-point victory over #9 FSU, and two close wins vs #17 Pitt and #18 VT.  They beat the hell out of everyone else they played.
The offense was prolific, with a 3,000 yard passer (QB Dorsey), 1700 yard rusher (RB McGahee), and 1000 yard receiver (WR Johnson).  Dorsey was efficient, McGahee averaged 6.2 ypc, and Johnson had TE Winslow to take attention away from him. 
The defense was great, allowing just 285 yds per game.  The pass D was incredible again, allowing just 120 yards through the air @ a 46% completion rate.  The run D was the weakness, with teams gut-punching Miami for 165 yds per game.  While the Canes created far fewer turnovers than the year before, they still simply shut down opponents' passing games (1st, nationally).
The special teams were ordinary, although PR Parrish's 14.5 yds per punt return were strong.  K Sievers hit just 59% of FGs. 
-
#2 Ohio St, 13-0, Big Ten Co-Champions
41st in scoring offense
2nd in scoring defense
21st strength of schedule
-
OSU began the year ranked 13th, but gradually worked its way up to 2nd.  They easily beat #10 Washington St early before close calls vs unranked Cincinnati and Wisconsin.  #18 Penn St was a 6-point win, but #23 Minnesota was a blowout.  Closing out the year, the Buckeyes defeated #12 UM by 5. 
OSU's offense was run-heavy.  Freshman RB Clarett led the team in carries, yards (1,237), ypc (5.6), and TD (16).  Backup RB Ross averaged just 3.7 ypc.  The passing game was efficient, but unremarkable.  It did yield a 1,000 yard receiver (WR Jenkins).  CB Gamble was used in lieu of other playmakers, contributing 500 yds himself to the offense.  QB Krenzel did little to win games for OSU, but he also did little to lose any.
The defense shut down enemy running games, allowing just 78 yards per game on the ground (3rd, nationally).  OSU was susceptible through the air, allowing 243 yds per game.  They did pick off 18 passes, bringing 3 back for TDs, though.
The Buckeyes' return game was average, but the kicking game was good, with K Nugent hitting 89% of FG attempts and P Groom booming 45 yard punts, on average.
-
#3 Georgia, 12-1, SEC Champions
22nd in scoring offense
4th in scoring defense
24th strength of schedule
-
Georgia spent the season ranked in the top 10 and made it into the playoff by winning the SEC.  Along the way, UGA had close wins at #22 Alabama and vs #10 Tennessee, as well as at #24 Auburn.  All of those one-score wins were punctuated by a blowout win in the SECCG vs #22 Arkansas.  Georgia's lone blemish was a 7-point loss to Florida in Jacksonville.
The Dawgs' offense was pass-heavy, with reliable QB Greene at the helm.  He kept the chains moving, thanks to WRs Edwards (1000 yds) and Gibson (750 yds).  Running the ball was RB Musa Smith (1300 yds) at 5.1 ypc.  The offense overall didn't gain 400 yds per game, but it got the points when it had to.
Defensively, UGA held teams under 200 yds passing and 115 rushing.  Four of the team's 16 INTs went back for TDs.  DE Pollack had a big year as the anchor.
KR Gibson and PR Gary proved able, as both ran back a kick for a TD, with good averages for the season.  K Bennett made 26 FGs (79%) and P Kilgo had a decent average (42 yds). 
-
#4 USC, 10-2, Pac-10 Co-Champions
9th in scoring offense
17th in scoring defense
1st strength of schedule
These Men of Troy aren't the Leinart/Bush crew of a few years prior, but they definitely earned their way into the playoff by facing 8 ranked teams.
Beginning 20th in the preseason poll, USC used its #1 toughest schedule to work its way up, despite a couple of hiccups along the way.  In its first four ranked tests, USC went 2-2, with wins at #18 CU and vs #23 Oregon St and losses at #25 KSU and #17 WSU.  A close win vs unranked Cal followed, but then the Trojans got going, closing out 2002 with six big wins, including over #22 Washington, at #14 Oregon, at #25 UCLA, and #7 ND, all blowouts. 
Heisman-winner QB Palmer led the charge, at 300+ yards per game passing for USC.  He had two targets go over 1,000 yards on the season in WRs Colbert and M.Williams.  Running the ball were RBs McCullough and Fargas, both averaging about 4.5 ypc.  The offense was the strength of the team.
Defensively, the Trojans were stout against the run (83 yds allowed).  Versus the pass, however, despite allowing just under a 50% completion rate, opponents gained 200 yds per game.  The DBs were able to snag 17 INTs, though.
Oddly, the USC return game was very poor.  The kicking game was better, though.
-
-
-
The major players:
C  Brett Romberg, Miami - Rimington, All-American
QB Carson Palmer, USC - Heisman, Unitas, AA
HC Jim Tressel, OSU - AFCA, Robinson, Bryant Coach of the Year
RB Willis McGahee, Miami - AA
K  Mike Nugent, OSU - AA
DE David Pollack, Georgia - AA
LB Matt Wilhelm, OSU - AA
S  Mike Doss, OSU - AA
S  Troy Polamalu, USC - AA
-
-
-
Who wins it all?
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 20294
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #1 on: May 02, 2019, 07:59:39 AM »
Trojans.  Lost two tough road games early, then rolled.  Won 8 in a row, 5 of which were top 30 teams, by an average of 22 points.

In terms of S&P+, USC had the #1 offense and #4 defense.

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13078
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2019, 09:33:40 AM »
Remind me - what are the standards for picking these teams?  Final AP?  After the fact the Trojans are a strong contender, but I don't know if at the time they would have been a favorite to make the playoffs.  Wazzu and Iowa also had strong arguments.

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #3 on: May 02, 2019, 10:46:33 AM »
Remind me - what are the standards for picking these teams?  Final AP?  After the fact the Trojans are a strong contender, but I don't know if at the time they would have been a favorite to make the playoffs.  Wazzu and Iowa also had strong arguments.

I was wondering the same thing.  I agree with @ELA 's point.  IF USC got into the playoff, they were probably the best team at the end of the season, but that is a BIG "if". 

Undefeated BigEast and Big11Ten Champions Miami and Ohio State would obviously get in along with 1-loss SEC Champion UGA.  The fourth spot, who knows.  The contenders:
#3 AP, Big11Ten co-Champion Iowa:  The Hawkeyes lost early at home to a .500 ISU team in a rivalry game.  They also had an early close-call against a middling MAC team but after the loss they reeled off nine straight wins including a road win at Penn State (#10 in the Dec 8 AP) and a 34-9 win at Michigan (#12 in the Dec 8 AP). 

#5 AP, PAC co-Champion USC:  As discussed above, USC certainly has the SoS to get in, but they have three major problems.  Problem #1 is that they lost H2H to Washington State.  Thus, they are NOT the PAC Champions.  Problem #2 is that Iowa has less losses and IS a major conference Champion.  Either Iowa or WSU would be likely to be picked ahead of the Trojans.  Additionally, USC can't really blame their extra loss on SoS because WSU's OOC loss (@tOSU) was "better" than USC's (@ #6 KSU). 

#6 AP, Kansas State:  They didn't win the B12-N because they lost H2H to Colorado but both of their losses were close and to good teams (by 3 to final #9 Texas and by 4 to final #14 Colorado). 

#7 AP, PAC Champion Washington State:  The Cougars lost in Columbus by 18 early and lost the Apple Cup late by a FG to a mediocre Washington team but they do have that H2H trump card over USC. 

#8 AP, B12 Champion Oklahoma:  The Sooners had two head scratching losses.  They lost on the road to a .500 aTm squad then lost the Bedlam game on the road by 10 points.  OTOH, they beat a solid Bama team, beat Texas, and beat Colorado twice. 

I think that is all of the plausibly realistic contenders.  I honestly don't think the committee would put USC in the mix.  I think that either:
WSU with their H2H win over USC and PAC Championship, or
Iowa with their better record, or
Oklahoma with their better record and conference title
would get in instead. 

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 20294
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #4 on: May 02, 2019, 11:26:57 AM »
It's the final BCS rankings

SFBadger96

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1243
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #5 on: May 02, 2019, 11:43:24 AM »
USC. For the reasons stated above. And it would have been picked. At the end of that regular season, everyone knew that USC was on a tear. USC would get the nod for the 4th spot.

bayareabadger

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 7849
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2019, 11:44:00 AM »
Ahh, the olden days, when you didn’t treat the spots below the top 2 as totally counting

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13078
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #7 on: May 02, 2019, 12:40:12 PM »
Maybe - Iowa also finished on a tear, had a better record, and also had the added bonus of being in the 2/3 game with OSU.  They were ranked higher than USC and I think it rather unlikely that USC would have jumped them for the playoff.

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18835
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #8 on: May 02, 2019, 01:38:36 PM »
These seedings are going by the model used at the time - so for years up to 1997, it was the AP poll.  Frim 1998 until it ended, I use the final regular season BCS rankings.  
The BCS had USC over Iowa.  There would be some outcry to give Big Ten Co-Champ Iowa a shot vs OSU, but the USC helmet trumps that, in all likelihood. 

“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18835
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #9 on: May 02, 2019, 01:51:21 PM »
I keep thinking that was the Iowa team with Tavian Banks.  

Anyway, I don't give a damn who is on a roll or not, I treat the season as a whole.  I'd have USC in because of their SOS.  I don't think their RBs could take advantage of Miami's relative weakness defending the run.  It would be fun to see Carson Palmer and his pair of 1,00 yard WRs vs Miami's secondary.  
OSU vs UGA would be a relative snoozer.  
Miami beats whichever one wins that.  Pretty ho-hum playoff, imo.
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18835
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #10 on: May 02, 2019, 01:56:41 PM »
I see after 8 votes, I'm the first to pick Miami.  Are we mentally unable to ignore what happened in the bowls or what?  I give up hope of that.  And it's not about me approving of your picks or there being a right or wrong pick.
OSU was 12 point underdogs in that title game and 4 of you have decided to take them straight up.  It's dishonest at best.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2019, 06:13:38 PM by OrangeAfroMan »
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

SFBadger96

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1243
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #11 on: May 02, 2019, 02:01:40 PM »
I took USC. But if I were to pick a different team it would be Miami.

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13078
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #12 on: May 02, 2019, 04:01:01 PM »
I keep thinking that was the Iowa team with Tavian Banks. 

Anyway, I don't give a damn who is on a roll or not, I treat the season as a whole.  I'd have USC in because of their SOS.  I don't think their RBs could take advantage of Miami's relative weakness defending the run.  It would be fun to see Carson Palmer and his pair of 1,00 yard WRs vs Miami's secondary. 
OSU vs UGA would be a relative snoozer. 
Miami beats whichever one wins that.  Pretty ho-hum playoff, imo.
Though Miami and USC play each other first, so it's tough to pick either one with any confidence. 

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37482
  • Liked:
Re: VOTE! 2002 College Football Playoff
« Reply #13 on: May 02, 2019, 04:28:24 PM »

OSU was 12 underdogs in that title game and 4 of you have decided to take them straight up.  It's dishonest at best.
it's a big ten board

and, no one liked the CoCanes
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.