Vote - What if? 1992 CFP

[SFBadger96]

Their schedule was almost as bad as UCF's this year.  Here are their opponents sorted by final record along with how aTm did against them:

• 10-3 Stanford:  won by a FG at a neutral site
• 7-5 Baylor:  won by 6 at home
• 6-5 Texas:  won by 21 on the road
• 6-5 Rice:  won by 26 at home
• 5-6 Louisville:  won by 22 at home
• 5-6 SMU:  won by 34 at a neutral site
• 5-6 TxTech:  won by 2 at home
• 4-7 Houston:  won by 8 on the road
• 4-7 Tulsa:  won by 10 at home
• 3-8 Mizzou:  won by 13 on the road
• 2-8-1 TCU:  won by 27 at home
• 2-9 LSU:  won by 9 on the road

Of their opponents only Stanford and Baylor went to bowl games.  There just isn't much here.  

Lost to #5 ND in the Cotton Bowl by 25. Kicked a field goal in the 4th quarter, when down 21-0. Lost 28-3.
I get OAM's point that the outcome of a single game doesn't determine what would happen if they played again, but an outcome like this one--or the Sugar Bowl--does indicate that some of these teams were probably substantially better than others. Not necessarily, but probably.

Incidentally, many people believed Notre Dame didn't deserve the invite to play aTm; they felt aTm should have played FSU. #5 over #3 for ratings purposes (especially since aTm played FSU in the prior Cotton Bowl) was probably not egregious. But coming off the Sugar Bowl the year before (in which #18 ND upset #3 Florida--ND fans call it the "Cheerios Bowl"--speaking of a game result that probably wouldn't repeat every time), it's easy to see why people thought ND was getting favors.

[FearlessF]

no chance vs the Canes in round one

[OrangeAfroMan]

no chance vs the Canes in round one

That's what many said about Alabama before the Sugar Bowl....

[SFBadger96]

Not exactly ironic, but I just realized that the reason ND is #5 and not in the top four for 1992 was its loss to Stanford earlier in the year (the Irish were 9-1-1, with a tie to Michigan and a loss at home to Stanford). Why does this matter? Well, as one of the resident ND supporters around here...

This was my freshman year at UW and my parents were in Madison for Parents' Day. My dad graduated from and worked (still works) at Stanford, and as a teenager my mom and I had season tickets to Stanford games. My mom grew up something of a Penn State fan, and that, combined with Stanford's then relatively new series with ND meant she didn't like ND--so I didn't like ND, either. Ok, and Lou Holtz ND was easy to not like, particularly with the NBC contract and all that. 

So anyway, on this day in history, October 3, 1992, my parents and I sat in the upper deck at Camp Randall and watched Wisconsin upset #12 Ohio State, quarterbacked by Kirk Herbstreit. This was the program's biggest win since Barry Alvarez came to town. We left Camp Randall and walked to my parents' friend's house where her tailgate had never quit (she lived a couple blocks off of Breese Terrace--very close to the stadium), and watched Stanford knock off the mighty Notre Dame in South Bend.

It was a good football day for the family.

It wasn't until SFIrish came along several years later that I began to shift my allegiances from Stanford to the Irish.

All these playoff what ifs also remind me just how good Miami and ND were in the late 80s and early 90s.  88-93 the Irish were beasts; with their worst finish the year ND upset #3 Florida by 11 in the Sugar Bowl (1991 season). Miami even more so (81-94); FSU (87-2000); Nebraska (93-01). I guess there's always someone at the top that everyone else wants to knock down.

[FearlessF]

That's what many said about Alabama before the Sugar Bowl....

As you know...... I'm certainly not one of the many

[SFBadger96]

Yeah, see I think determining who the four teams would be is something done without the benefit of bowl results. But when trying to figure out who wins those games, bowl results are worthy data points. Sure, people thought Alabama was the heavy favorite, but now? We know that if we were handicapping the 2018 CFP, Clemson would be the favorite. Not that Clemson would necessarily win, but it would be the favorite. 

So in '92, aTm got in--and deserved to--but they weren't likely to win it.

[FearlessF]

Do most of us think that if Clemson and Bama played again this Saturday that Clemson would win?

I don't

[SFBadger96]

Not with all the junk Clemson's team just ate...

[medinabuckeye1]

Yeah, see I think determining who the four teams would be is something done without the benefit of bowl results. But when trying to figure out who wins those games, bowl results are worthy data points. 

I agree with this.  It isn't fair to use bowl results to determine who should have been in the hypothetical 1992 CFP because people at that time wouldn't have had that information.  However, when we are discussing who would have won it is highly relevant that in the actual event:

• #1 Miami lost to #2 Alabama by 21 points in the Sugar Bowl
• #2 Alabama beat #1 Miami by 21 points in the Sugar Bowl
• #3 Florida State beat #11 Nebraska by 13 in the Orange Bowl
• #4 aTm lost to #5 Notre Dame by 25 in the Cotton Bowl

In retrospect it is clear that aTm didn't belong in with the other three and realistically should have been replaced by Notre Dame.  That is one of the reasons that all of us excluded them almost automatically.  

Note to @ELA :  In 1992 9-4 Florida finished #10.  Their losses were to (final rank):

• #1 Alabama by 7
• #2 Florida State by 21
• #12 Tennessee by 17
• #23 Mississippi State by 24

They had wins over (final rank):

• #8 Georgia by 2
• #17 NCST by 17
• #31 (orv) Southern Mississippi by 4

[SFBadger96]

So Alabama finished the season unbeaten. One other major conference team also finished unbeaten and had a margin of victory of 29 points in its wins, played only major conference teams, and wasn't on probation. Michigan. Truth. Undefeated, and left out of the top 5...

Michigan tied three times: to Notre Dame, Illinois, and Ohio State. Started the season with the tie at ND (between teams ranked 3 and 5), was ranked #3 when Michigan needed a late field goal to tie Illinois in the penultimate week of the season, then dropped to #8 and tied #16 Ohio State the next week (Cooper didn't go for two when the Buckeyes scored with about 4 minutes to play thinking OSU would have another shot--they did, and went 3 and out). Finished with a quality win over #11 Washington in the Rose Bowl, to finish at #7--and still unbeaten.

[OrangeAfroMan]

I looked and saw that exact thing (9-0-3 Michigan) last night and the comparison that came to mind was "yeah, Michigan was undefeated kind of how the FL seminole tribe is 'unconquered'".......as in having 3 ties is like being pinned into a tiny strip of swampland and clinging on to something no one else wants.  Meh.


A 9-1-1 ND team wouldn't have gotten in over a 12-0 A&M, especially with their Stanford connection.

[SFBadger96]

Agree on both points. Mostly I was surprised to see an unbeaten team with three ties. I had forgotten that about 1992 Michigan.

[FearlessF]

 Finished with a quality win over #11 Washington in the Rose Bowl, to finish at #7--and still unbeaten.

lack of respect - #7?

[OrangeAfroMan]

9-0-3 isn't like kissing your sister...it's like making out with her.