CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: OrangeAfroMan on June 06, 2020, 03:00:19 AM
-
What's the best team you can remember that didn't win anything of consequence. No division or conference title, no NC, none of that. But they were good - damn good.
For Florida, it's either the '84 team that started the year with a loss and tie before finishing 9-1-1 and SEC champs, only for that to be voted away a month later. An on probation so not even a bowl win. Was likely the best team in the country that year.
The other is the 2001 team. Lost twice - missing the starting RB in both games, Grossman at QB (who probably should have won the Heisman). Best Spurrier offense since Wuerffel (and perhaps better).
Didn't win the division, but probably would have posed the greatest challenge to the '01 Miami juggernaut.
-
I'm no student of history - I bet some of those Woody teams were great, but 2005 hits it for me. Lost an awesome game at home to eventual national champ Texas, a game where Justin Zwick started after Troy Smith was coming off a suspension for getting a credit card or something. Then lost to eventual B1G champ at Penn State in a smothering defensive battle. They had eventual Heisman winner Troy Smith, and a fleet of first round draft picks and guys who were in the league for years, including Nick Mangold, AJ Hawk, Santonio Holmes, and Ted Ginn. Hawk>Pos
-
2006 for Michigan. 2016 and 2018 to a lesser extent, too.
-
1983 Texas, awesome dominating defense and pretty good offense, in line to win the NC that year, and somehow managed to lose a bowl game to a middlin' team that caught a late lucky break or two.
-
1983 Texas, awesome dominating defense and pretty good offense, in line to win the NC that year, and somehow managed to lose a bowl game to a middlin' team that caught a late lucky break or two.
The late, great Hooky Hornstein/Charley Horse often lamented that loss to Georgia in the Cotton Bowl.
But, still, Texas did win the SWC that year. That was reasonably important.
-
2014 MSU might have been the best of that awesome 2013-2015 run. 2013 won the Big Ten and the Rose Bowl, 2015 won the Big Ten and reached the CFP.
But 2014 went 11-2, beat Baylor in the Cotton Bowl, but eh? No division or conference title, no CFP.
Their two losses were to OSU and Oregon, who played each other for the national championship.
-
I'll go with a weird one.
2002 Penn State.
They lost to Iowa in OT in a poorly officiated game. A complete pass in OT was called incomplete by an official. Iowa would go undefeated in the B1G that year.
They lost to Michigan away in OT in another poorly officiated game. Late in the fourth, Penn State completed a pass to Tony Johnson in which he got both feet in bounds, but the officials called it incomplete. This play would have put Penn State in FG range for the game winning score. Michigan would finish the season ranked #9 in the country.
They lost to Ohio State away by a score of 7-13. Ohio State completed a LONG 3rd down pass in which the ball hit the turf nearly 3 yards in front of the receiver, and bounced into his hands. Called complete by the official. This allowed OSU to run more time and hit a field goal, not to mention the flip in field position. On the preceding series, a long pass to Bryant Johnson was foiled by blatant pass interference. Chris Gamble (OSU), the interfering player making his first start on defense, said afterwards, "I tapped him a little early and was relieved when there was no flag." Ohio State would go undefeated in the B1G and win the national championship.
This season changed Paterno's view on instant replay and it was implemented by the B1G two years later.
They also lost to Auburn in their bowl game by a score of 9-13. Auburn scored a TD with 2:13 left in the game to take the lead for good.
A season in which Penn State caught every bad break there was.
-
I'm no student of history - I bet some of those Woody teams were great, but 2005 hits it for me. Lost an awesome game at home to eventual national champ Texas, a game where Justin Zwick started after Troy Smith was coming off a suspension for getting a credit card or something. Then lost to eventual B1G champ at Penn State in a smothering defensive battle. They had eventual Heisman winner Troy Smith, and a fleet of first round draft picks and guys who were in the league for years, including Nick Mangold, AJ Hawk, Santonio Holmes, and Ted Ginn. Hawk>Pos
Who is Hawk?
-
2015 Ohio State
-
I'm no student of history - I bet some of those Woody teams were great, but 2005 hits it for me. Lost an awesome game at home to eventual national champ Texas, a game where Justin Zwick started after Troy Smith was coming off a suspension for getting a credit card or something. Then lost to eventual B1G champ at Penn State in a smothering defensive battle. They had eventual Heisman winner Troy Smith, and a fleet of first round draft picks and guys who were in the league for years, including Nick Mangold, AJ Hawk, Santonio Holmes, and Ted Ginn. Hawk>Pos
2005 won a share of the Big Ten Title, which renders them ineligible for this exercise.
-
2015 Ohio State
2015 won a share of the B1G East Title, which renders them ineligible for this exercise.
-
2015 Ohio State
This is my vote as well. That team was so loaded and should’ve won national titles back to back. A weird fluky game where they lost by only 3 to a very good MSU team cost them the title. They pretty much wrecked everyone else they played.
-
For Michigan it’s probably 2016. That defense was a good as I’ve seen at Michigan in some time.
Wilton Speight breaking his shoulder at Iowa and losing by 1 point on a last second FG really changed the trajectory of that team. They were just beating the snot out of everyone up until that point. Speight was never the same since that injury either, he continually got worse year after year.
They could’ve made up for it in Columbus but they shit the bed up double digits and fell apart and lost by 3 in OT.
If Speight doesn’t suffer that injury they might not have lost to Iowa or Ohio State.
-
So aside from OSU fans, everyone else's reason is "...but for OSU"
-
MSU spoiling OSU's 1996? 1998? Both? season(s) must have been maddening.
On '06 Michigan....I realize OSU was IN and the debate to play them was UM again or Florida, and then what happened happened, but I like to wonder about that '06 Michigan team vs Florida.
How would they have fared vs the Gators? Obviously, no one saw it coming, what UF did to OSU, but you did see the best of that Florida team - crazy pass-rushing DEs, great DB play, diverse running game with Tebow and Harvin, efficient passing game...
All I remember from that UM team was the lockdown defense, which OSU exploited in their game. What would have been different if it was UM facing Florida?
-
'98 and '15.
Both times in Columbus. I think we've won like 5 times road/neutral against OSU since that '98 upset, but haven't won at home in over two decades
-
I'm still amazed that of MSU's recent success, their best season came with one of their worst defenses.
-
Who is Hawk?
Just the best B1G linebacker in history. No biggie.
-
Just the best B1G linebacker in history. No biggie.
Was he though?
LaVarr Arrington was pretty spectacular. I think would go with him.
I wouldn’t even put Hawk as the best OSU Lb. For my money that’s Chris Spielman.
-
Just the best B1G linebacker in history. No biggie.
Oh, you spelled it wrong.
-
'98 and '15.
Both times in Columbus. I think we've won like 5 times road/neutral against OSU since that '98 upset, but haven't won at home in over two decades
I was going to add that 15 Buckeye team to this list. I feel they were the best team by far that year.
-
I'm still amazed that of MSU's recent success, their best season came with one of their worst defenses.
SP+ has them #12 offense, #14 defense, #7 overall (behind an elite offense, but 8-5 Auburn team)
Thats a tick down defensively, but that has to be their highest offensive ranking.
EDIT: Unless you mean 2015? In which case I'd argue that team wasn't all that good, just won every close game aside from a bad call at Nebraska. Of the Dantonio teams, I'd put that one for sure behind 2014 (the best), 2013, 2010 and 2011. It's closer to 2008 or 2017.
-
MSU spoiling OSU's 1996? 1998? Both? season(s) must have been maddening.
Both of those OSU teams won a share of the Big Ten title, rendering them ineligible in accordance to the criteria that YOU authored.
-
So OSU in accordance to the rules set forth in the OP (no division/conference/national title) by decade:
2010s: 2011 by default, because it is the only eligible team.
20ots: 2003 was the top team that meets the criteria, with an 11-2 record and Top 5 finish.
1990s: 1995 they were 11-2, finishing in the top ten.
1980s: The 1983 team somehow finished in the Top Ten at 9-3. There were a few other 9-3 teams that didn't win a conference title, but they weren't ranked nearly as high at seasons end.
1970s: The only two eligible teams are 1971 and 1978. Both lost four games and finished unranked, so flip a coin.
1960s: The 1960 and the 1964 team each finished in the Top Ten at 7-2, finishing 2nd in the Conference. So flip a coin.
1950s: The 1958 team finished in the top ten at 6-1-2.
1940s: The 1941 team was 6-1-1, ranked #13.
1930s: The 1934 team was 7-1, with a Michigan win. Finished 2nd in the Big Ten.
1920s: 1921 was 5-2, with a 2nd place Big Ten finish.
1910s: The Chic Harley lead 1919 team ran the table, beat Michigan for the first time ever, but then dropped the turtle game at seasons end for a 6-1, 2nd place Big Ten finish.
-
I'm calling shenanigans on the 1984 Gators. They won the SEC. I get that someone said "but the cheating" but they were atop the standings and beat the other team atop the standings. Take your title.
They feel like 2015 OSU in the sense that they got kind of a consolation prize, even if one believes strongly they were that awesome of a team. (In this context, the 2016 Buckeyes are wild. They won a division title without a trip to the title game, got awarded a trip to the playoff, which meant the woodshed. It was pretty successful and didn't totally feel like it)
For UW, it probably has to be 2006. They went 12-1, but missed OSU (undefeated until the title game) and lost fairly comfortably to Michigan (No. 2 heading into the OSU game). They couldn't go to the BCS at 11-1 because there was a two-teams per conference limit. UW went to the Cap One Bowl and beat an Arkansas team that collected losses to good teams (Opened with beat down to 11-2 USC, won 10 in a row, lost to 11-2 LSU, 13-1 Florida and 12-1 UW).
The Badgers schedule was bad and they started slow, but they did win nine in a row. Wins of note were 9-4 PSU and 10-4 Arkansas.
UW had the No. 2 scoring D and top-5 in yards per play. The group was junior and sophomore heavy and just smothered folks. The offense had a senior QB with a totally new set of skill guys. A first-year TE blossomed for 900 yards and both receivers were second-tier quality in program history. The RB was very system, but he did have 1,569 yards and 15 TDs.
For UW, they didn't have a lot of modern era teams that were good by squeezed out before the CCG, and with the west, you almost can't be very good and not go. The 2013 team is interesting, having lost that controversial one to ASU (with an advantage of 2 yards per play), put up a nice YPP edge but couldn't get No. 4 OSU and then had the passing game and defense fizzle down the stretch. South Carolina beat them after their WRs played out of their minds and Stave exploded his shoulder on a defender. That Badgers team had Melvin Gordon, James White, Jared Abbedaris, Jacob Pederson (with the best Joel Stave) with top-13 groups in points per drive on both sides of the ball.
-
Here's a good one from the first team I liked.
2004 Cal.
Top 10 in scoring offense and defense. Second in the country in yards per play. Had a 2,000-yard back, and the backup was MarShawn Lynch, who averaged 8.8 a carry. At QB, Aaron Rodgers, who was fire the first half of the year, but tailed off (his receivers were college good). Defense was excellent until the bowl.
The schedule was more balanced than good at the top. Still, No. 15 by college football reference. They held national champion USC to 4.1 yards per play, but three fumbles led to a 23-17 loss, the only one of the regular season.
They were competing with Texas for the last BCS bowl spot (Rose Bowl), but Mack Brown politics the 'Horns in (their schedule was slightly worse). Cal was No. 4 in both the final two polls, but the computers hurt Cal and the votes are just close enough Bears sleepwalk into the bowl. They go up 14-7, allow 24 points in a row and can never get back in it. Sonny Cumbie threw for 520 yards in that game, which contributes to dropping Cal's yards per play defense from what would've been fourth nationally to 42nd.
So they miss a conference title and a BCS slot and slip from No. 4 in the final polls with the bowl loss.
(Two years later, Cal goes 9-3, gets Jeff Tedford's only conference title, one it shares with USC when the Trojans blow a national title game spot on the last game of the season. Cal is not all that good and lost 23-9 to USC, a game that was 9-9 at the end of the third quarter and probably still not all that competitive).
-
Oh, you spelled it wrong.
Yeah Musberger did like to really emphasize the A.J. in "A.J. Hawk"
-
I’m guessing a lot of teams that were independent would qualify. 86 Miami, 87 FSU, 89 ND, etc.
For WVU outside of the 88 team it is probably the 06 team. 11-2 and top 10 but no conference hardware. Lost to Louisville who won the conference and finished 4th in the country and had a weird, unexpected loss to USF late in the year that knocked them out of a potential BCS bid.
-
Both of those OSU teams won a share of the Big Ten title, rendering them ineligible in accordance to the criteria that YOU authored.
Yeah, I was just sharing, not nominating. For shame!
-
Here's a good one from the first team I liked.
2004 Cal.
Top 10 in scoring offense and defense. Second in the country in yards per play. Had a 2,000-yard back, and the backup was MarShawn Lynch, who averaged 8.8 a carry. At QB, Aaron Rodgers, who was fire the first half of the year, but tailed off (his receivers were college good). Defense was excellent until the bowl.
The schedule was more balanced than good at the top. Still, No. 15 by college football reference. They held national champion USC to 4.1 yards per play, but three fumbles led to a 23-17 loss, the only one of the regular season.
They were competing with Texas for the last BCS bowl spot (Rose Bowl), but Mack Brown politics the 'Horns in (their schedule was slightly worse). Cal was No. 4 in both the final two polls, but the computers hurt Cal and the votes are just close enough Bears sleepwalk into the bowl. They go up 14-7, allow 24 points in a row and can never get back in it. Sonny Cumbie threw for 520 yards in that game, which contributes to dropping Cal's yards per play defense from what would've been fourth nationally to 42nd.
So they miss a conference title and a BCS slot and slip from No. 4 in the final polls with the bowl loss.
(Two years later, Cal goes 9-3, gets Jeff Tedford's only conference title, one it shares with USC when the Trojans blow a national title game spot on the last game of the season. Cal is not all that good and lost 23-9 to USC, a game that was 9-9 at the end of the third quarter and probably still not all that competitive).
We did an NCAA 05 dynasty in my college house, and rolled a dice to determine which conference. We rolled Pac 10, and agreed nobody could be USC. I got Cal and DESTROYED everyone. I think JJ Arrington was the backup RB. I barely used Aaron.
-
Arrington was the starter, Lynch was the backup.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned 2012 OSU here.
-
Arrington was the starter, Lynch was the backup.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned 2012 OSU here.
They are ineligible by virtue of winning their division that year.
-
Arrington was the starter, Lynch was the backup.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned 2012 OSU here.
I felt like a lot of folks didn't like that team so much?
The defense was a mess in the middle of the year. They were weirdly close with Cal, MSU, IU, kinda UCF. Went to OT with Purdue and a Wisconsin team that was bad at offense.
It did have the awesome Hyde-Miller backfield and a sorta so-so passing game. (I might be wrong, but Miller felt like a guy whose passing numbers got better while people's feeling about his passing potential got worse. It was a while ago)
-
Yeah Musberger did like to really emphasize the A.J. in "A.J. Hawk"
You mean the same guy that said POS was the best linebacker in the big ten? I remember Musburger. :)
-
The Musberger drinking game lives on!
Not sure what you could do with current announcers. Drink every time they go off script? You'd never drink
-
We did an NCAA 05 dynasty in my college house, and rolled a dice to determine which conference. We rolled Pac 10, and agreed nobody could be USC. I got Cal and DESTROYED everyone. I think JJ Arrington was the backup RB. I barely used Aaron.
He backed up Adimchinobi Echemandu the year prior. Echemandu was an objectively good college back. Not like really good, but good. A little limited, but powerful.
That year, Rodgers beat out a junior named Reggie Robertson, who was actually pretty good. He closed out the upset of USC and threw two passes the rest of the year. These days, he woulda been a nice grad transfer.
(This now has me down a rabbit hole when Kyle Boller and Joe Igbar helped put up 46 in EL during the last Bobby Williams year. MSU lost five turnovers to a not great Cal defense. Cal turned around and gave up nearly 300 rushing yards to Air Force. Bears were on bowl probation for some reason that year)
-
For Oklahoma, 2009.
Most of the 2008 team that lost the BCC championship to Florida 24-14 was back. Heisman Trophy-winner Sam Bradford was back.
Bradford got knocked out of the 1st game, a neutral-site game at JerryWorld, with a separated shoulder, and OU lost 14-13. Missed a makeable FG at the end that would have won it.
With Landry Jones at QB, the Sooners blew out Idaho State and Tulsa 64-0 and 45-0.
Lost to Miami 21-20. I can't remember exactly how, but lack of a good place kicker was again part of the problem.
So, 2-2.
Beat Baylor 33-7.
Sam Bradford was back for the RRS, but he got knocked out again, and this time it was for the season. Sooners lost to Texas 16-13. Semi-late, they got a pick that should have been for six, but incredibly the DB let QB Colt McCoy come out of nowhere and tackle him.
Beat the two Kansas teams, then played Nebraska in Lincoln. OU dominated all the stats except rushing yards, but lost 10-3. It seems like we were inside the 20 about 15 times (it was probably about 3), but had to go for it (and fail) on 4th down because Bob Stoops didn't trust our kicker for anything but a chip-shot. Oh, 5 INTs didn't help.
So, 5-4.
Beat Texas A&M 65-10.
Then had a total letdown and lost to Texas Tech in Lubbock (where Bob Stoops often had problems) 41-13.
So, 6-5.
Beat Oklahoma State 27-0 to close out the regular season, then beat Stanford in the Sun Bowl 31-27.
8-5, and four of the losses were hugely affected by the lack of a decent FG kicker. Woulda/shoulda/coulda been a lot better. That was Bob's last really good defense.
-
2010 Alabama. Injuries and complacency did this team in. But that’s arguably one of the most talented overall rosters I’ve ever seen at bama, maybe anywhere in cfb.
On defense, you had:
Dee milliner
Mark baron
Hightower
Dre Kirkpatrick
Nico Johnson
Marcel dareus
Josh Chapman
Upshaw
CJ Mosley
On offense you had:
Julio
Ingram
Trent Richardson
Eddie lacy
Chance warmack
Barrett Jones
Vlachos
Carpenter
Fluker
The amount of talent on this team is insane for them to not have won anything. When finally healthy they showed what they could do vs MSU in the bowl game.
2013 bama could also make list. Still say that team competes with FSU in title game.
-
Arrington was the starter, Lynch was the backup.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned 2012 OSU here.
For a team that could have won a national championship if Gene Smith hadn't stupidly wanted to go to a bowl game the year before, they weren't actually all that good.
-
The Musberger drinking game lives on!
Not sure what you could do with current announcers. Drink every time they go off script? You'd never drink
I don't know what lab they find these robots in but I wish they'd find a new one. Man I miss Musburger.
-
Ever since he started jerkin' it to A.J. McCarron's girlfriend on air, it's been downhill for him.
-
For a team that could have won a national championship if Gene Smith hadn't stupidly wanted to go to a bowl game the year before, they weren't actually all that good.
The saddest part is they could've won a title, but it would've been because there were two undefeated teams that no one thought were all that good. OSU-ND with a so-so OSU defense and so-so ND offense.
I'm actually kinda thankful to Gene, lord help me.
-
1998 Kansas State!
Started 10-0, was upset by A&M in the BXIICG, and lost to Purdue @ the Alamo.
They held 8 of their first 9 opponents to single-digits.
QB Bishop was a Heisman contender.
Bubkus.
-
1998 Kansas State!
Started 10-0, was upset by A&M in the BXIICG, and lost to Purdue @ the Alamo.
They held 8 of their first 9 opponents to single-digits.
QB Bishop was a Heisman contender.
Bubkus.
That team might be the poster child for this topic.
-
1998 Kansas State!
Started 10-0, was upset by A&M in the BXIICG, and lost to Purdue @ the Alamo.
They held 8 of their first 9 opponents to single-digits.
QB Bishop was a Heisman contender.
Bubkus.
Won a division though? Are we counting that?
And it was a program that had not finished first in a conference or division since 1934. (I went back and rewatched chunks of that CCG. Just an insane game)
-
Speaking of...2003 Oklahoma. Was the dominant #1 team until they got waxed by K. State in the championship game then lost in the title game to LSU. Ended up with only a divisional crown.
-
1994 Colorado
Insanely loaded offense: Heisman winner Rashaan Salaam, Kordell Stewart, Michael Westbrook, Murderous Rae Carruth, Christian Fauria.
11-1, losing only to National Champion Nebraska. Then smashed an unranked Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl.
-
Being at that 1998 N at Kstate game was pretty cool even if I wasn't pleased with the outcome or the missed face mask call which I could see from the last row of the end zone on the other end of the field. Anyways, the atmosphere was as tense as any game I've ever attended, including multiple 1 v 2 games or similar huge games. KSU hadn't beaten Nebraska in 30 years, they had the better team, easily, and it was a very entertaining football game. Back and forth, wild plays. Turnovers, etc. It took the fans a long time getting the goalposts down but there was such euphoria in Manhattan that day. I was really pulling for them in that equally crazy Bigxii game.
-
Won a division though? Are we counting that?
And it was a program that had not finished first in a conference or division since 1934. (I went back and rewatched chunks of that CCG. Just an insane game)
I don't think winning your division matters. All it means is that you lost your CG. It's like winning your heat in the 100m dash and finishing 4th in the final. Who cares?
-
11-1, losing only to National Champion Nebraska. Then smashed an unranked Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl.
One of the two Fiesta Bowls ND didn't deserve to be in during that era. Getting waxed by Oregon State was the other.
That Beavers team makes this thread list, too. They were in a 3-way tie as Pac-10 champs, but didn't go to the RB.
Their best season in at least 50 years (and probably EVER) ended in a Fiesta Bowl win over that undeserving ND team. They beat a top-10 USC team and top-5 Oregon rival, but fell 3 points short vs Washington (RB rep that year).
-
B1G and PAC fans can help me with this - pre-CG era, if your team was technically conference co-champs, but didn't go to the Rose Bowl, did you consider yourselves champs?
I wouldn't.
-
Hmm, I recall being told repeatedly that the Co-Big Ten Champs were going to knock off Nebraska in that Alamo Bowl some time ago. I dont know if this was my chippy NW friend trying to measure an appendage or what. I bet the answer is, it depends who you ask.
-
B1G and PAC fans can help me with this - pre-CG era, if your team was technically conference co-champs, but didn't go to the Rose Bowl, did you consider yourselves champs?
I wouldn't.
I can't speak for everyone else, but when the rules stipulated that if 2 teams tied for the Big 10 Championship, the team that most recently went to the Rose Bowl was ineligible, sure I would consider that a conference title. The fact that they were not going to the Rose Bowl had nothing to do with the results on the field, but simply a rule that they had not power to change.
-
I think co-championships are a real thing. The bowl aspect is akin to a participation trophy IMHO, not something won on the field.
-
B1G and PAC fans can help me with this - pre-CG era, if your team was technically conference co-champs, but didn't go to the Rose Bowl, did you consider yourselves champs?
I wouldn't.
Yes. Although we were only co-champs once during the time I followed Purdue and we *did* go to the Rose Bowl that year, split championships were common enough in the pre-CCG era that I think all teams' fans considered themselves champs if they tied for it.
We see it as well in basketball, where regular season conference championships matter as much, if not more, to Big Ten fans than BTT championships. And there are split championships in basketball regularly, but we count those.
-
Huskers and Sooners were co champs a few times back in the old Big 8
but, neither team considered the co championship worthy because the head to head winner grabbed the glory
-
That 1998 K-State team is the poster child for losing a bowl game out of disinterest.
They were expected to win their conference and be in the #1 bowl, and the bowl committees just assumed they'd win it and had already invited other teams to the #2 and #3 most prominent bowls in the B12. So K-State went from the presumptive conference champion to playing in the #4 bowl for their conference against "lowly" Purdue.
Purdue had a chip on their shoulder; K-State didn't. I find it hard to believe that didn't affect the outcome of the game.
-
2007 uga could be on the list. early season inexplicable loss to usce, then mid season loss to #12 tennessee. kept them out of the seccg and thus bcs picture. finished #2.
07 usc (pac version) could also be on list, but they were co-conf champs.
-
I don't think winning your division matters. All it means is that you lost your CG. It's like winning your heat in the 100m dash and finishing 4th in the final. Who cares?
So here's where it gets reductive to a degree. We've said at different points it sometimes does or doesn't, and we've said that winning a prestigious bowl game doesn't matter.
I wouldn't strongly push back, but perhaps gently. If we're arguing about best teams that didn't outright win a conference title or make the playoff, it's a much smaller circle and kind of a different beast.
(It's also not really like winning a heat. Because there are multiple heats and multiple qualifiers come from each heat. Plus heats are treated with only moderate seriousness, whereas 2/3rds of the regular season are not)
-
also 08 texas. 3 way tie with tt and ou, ou gets bigxiicg bid.
-
B1G and PAC fans can help me with this - pre-CG era, if your team was technically conference co-champs, but didn't go to the Rose Bowl, did you consider yourselves champs?
I wouldn't.
I think yes, but the level of mention was sometimes up for debate.
The last year of the Big 10 pre-CG, three teams split the title. All were 11-1. OSU probably had the strongest team, but the worst case in the tiebreaker. MSU had the best tiebreaker (1-0), but didn't even make the NY6. I think in that case, everyone claiming it is fine.
The head-to-head ones are more tricky. I know Cal has a technical Pac-12 title in 2007, but they lost head-to-head to USC, lost two conference games and got mushed in their opener. In an unscientific way, I'd say if you're 7-1 or 8-1 in conference, lost the one game to a team you tied with, could go either way. IF you've got two losses and the head-to-head, ehhhh.
-
The head-to-head ones are more tricky. I know Cal has a technical Pac-12 title in 2007, but they lost head-to-head to USC, lost two conference games and got mushed in their opener. In an unscientific way, I'd say if you're 7-1 or 8-1 in conference, lost the one game to a team you tied with, could go either way. IF you've got two losses and the head-to-head, ehhhh.
Out of curiosity, how would you handle 2000?
Purdue, Michigan, and Northwestern all finished 6-2. Purdue had H2H over both teams, so although we talk about "last team in Rose Bowl" as a tiebreaker at that time, it never came down to it.
I think you can make the argument that Purdue has a legitimate claim to call themselves Big Ten champs, because not only did they tie for the championship, they won H2H tiebreakers.
But what do you do with those years for Michigan and Northwestern? Do you consider their claims to also call themselves Big Ten Champs legit?
Northwestern had H2H over Michigan, but an additional loss to Iowa. Michigan, finishing 6-2, obviously their only losses were Purdue and Northwestern.
-
Out of curiosity, how would you handle 2000?
Purdue, Michigan, and Northwestern all finished 6-2. Purdue had H2H over both teams, so although we talk about "last team in Rose Bowl" as a tiebreaker at that time, it never came down to it.
I think you can make the argument that Purdue has a legitimate claim to call themselves Big Ten champs, because not only did they tie for the championship, they won H2H tiebreakers.
But what do you do with those years for Michigan and Northwestern? Do you consider their claims to also call themselves Big Ten Champs legit?
Northwestern had H2H over Michigan, but an additional loss to Iowa. Michigan, finishing 6-2, obviously their only losses were Purdue and Northwestern.
The official Big Ten record book lists them all, so that's that. Page 107.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/bigten.org/documents/2019/7/30/2019_BIG_TEN_FOOTBALL_MEDIA_GUIDE.pdf
(https://s3.amazonaws.com/bigten.org/documents/2019/7/30/2019_BIG_TEN_FOOTBALL_MEDIA_GUIDE.pdf)
-
Yeah, I guess I was imagining 2 teams tied, with one having beaten the other. All of the other possibilities are so messy.
If I tie for the conference championship and lost to the other team I'm tied with, I don't consider myself champion of anything.
The Big Ten's rule of no repeats was really dumb.
-
The official Big Ten record book lists them all, so that's that. Page 107.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/bigten.org/documents/2019/7/30/2019_BIG_TEN_FOOTBALL_MEDIA_GUIDE.pdf
(https://s3.amazonaws.com/bigten.org/documents/2019/7/30/2019_BIG_TEN_FOOTBALL_MEDIA_GUIDE.pdf)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority)
-
The Big Ten's rule of no repeats was really dumb.
The SEC had the same rule, but the repeat team would still go to the Orange or Cotton Bowl, so it wasn't a big deal.
-
Yeah, I guess I was imagining 2 teams tied, with one having beaten the other. All of the other possibilities are so messy.
If I tie for the conference championship and lost to the other team I'm tied with, I don't consider myself champion of anything.
The Big Ten's rule of no repeats was really dumb.
It was in place because for many years, the only bowl game the Big Ten was tied to was the Rose. None of the other teams went to bowl games.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority)
I'll stick with the official records. Everything else is subjective.
-
I'll stick with the official records. Everything else is subjective.
Exactly. The question about how fans subjectively felt about shared titles.
Unless your argument is that the fans should feel exactly how the Big Ten tells them to feel, the record book is irrelevant.
-
I will stick with the record book. For me as a fan, it doesn't much matter, as UW went to the Rose Bowl after each co-championship.
-
2002 USC (west), also. Technically co-champs with Washington State, but Wazzu had the head-to-head and went to the Rose Bowl. That Trojan team felt like it was getting better and better, and could have taken anyone on (including Ohio State and Miami).
-
How could Miami/tOSU not be getting better and better when they both went in undefeated?And USC lost twice :017:
-
How could Miami/tOSU not be getting better and better when they both went in undefeated?And USC lost twice :017:
If you stink at first, it's easy to "get hot" as the season progresses. It's a garbage argument for teams that don't belong.
-
It was in place because for many years, the only bowl game the Big Ten was tied to was the Rose. None of the other teams went to bowl games.
Another dumb rule.
-
the rule wasn't dumb when the big ten only played in one bowl
it was dumb later when there were more bowl games
-
1998 Kansas State!
Started 10-0, was upset by A&M in the BXIICG, and lost to Purdue @ the Alamo.
They held 8 of their first 9 opponents to single-digits.
QB Bishop was a Heisman contender.
Bubkus.
I don't know if this affected the Big 12 CCG, but DC Bob Stoops and ass't coaches Mike Stoops and Brent Venables left K-State to come to OU before the bowl game.
-
many wildcat fans think this was a huge factor
many Cat fans hate the Stoops family and all of their ancestors for this
-
many wildcat fans think this was a huge factor
many Cat fans hate the Stoops family and all of their ancestors for this
I think that Bob may have mended fences a bit when he took out a full-page "celebrate his great career" ad in the local paper upon Wild Bill's first retirement.
-
dern little bit
-
I don't know if this affected the Big 12 CCG, but DC Bob Stoops and ass't coaches Mike Stoops and Brent Venables left K-State to come to OU before the bowl game.
Small thing, it was just Mike and Brent. Bob went to OU from UF.
-
Right you are. Don't know how I forgot that!
-
How could Miami/tOSU not be getting better and better when they both went in undefeated?And USC lost twice :017:
first, that's not what he said. usc getting better and better doesn't preclude osu and miami from doing the same.
second, he said it "felt" like usc was getting better as season went along, and they did. they were white hot at seasons end and looked like they could beat anyone, including the 2 that played for the title. doesn't mean usc deserved a shot at the title, but not deserving a shot doesn't mean they couldn't also play competitively with them either.
finally, looking at records and going from memory, i feel the same as @SFBadger96 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=51) . usc started pretty weak, having close games and losing a couple of them. then finished on a tear, beating 5 top 25 teams by double digits. including 2 top 10 teams by an average of 26 points.
conversely, both osu and miami started out very strong, and mostly stayed strong but "struggled" a bit with their top 25 teams faced later in the season.
usc started as a mediocre team and finished as a great team. osu and miami started as a great team and finished as a great team. both can be (and imo, are) true; that usc could have contended with and maybe beaten osu and miami at seasons end, and that usc didn't deserve that chance because they didn't play the whole season as such. it is not disparaging osu and/or miami to say the usc got better throughout the season to the point they could compete with them.
-
first, that's not what he said. usc getting better and better doesn't preclude osu and miami from doing the same.
second, he said it "felt" like usc was getting better as season went along, and they did. they were white hot at seasons end and looked like they could beat anyone, including the 2 that played for the title. doesn't mean usc deserved a shot at the title, but not deserving a shot doesn't mean they couldn't also play competitively with them either.
finally, looking at records and going from memory, i feel the same as @SFBadger96 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=51) . usc started pretty weak, having close games and losing a couple of them. then finished on a tear, beating 5 top 25 teams by double digits. including 2 top 10 teams by an average of 26 points.
conversely, both osu and miami started out very strong, and mostly stayed strong but "struggled" a bit with their top 25 teams faced later in the season.
usc started as a mediocre team and finished as a great team. osu and miami started as a great team and finished as a great team. both can be (and imo, are) true; that usc could have contended with and maybe beaten osu and miami at seasons end, and that usc didn't deserve that chance because they didn't play the whole season as such. it is not disparaging osu and/or miami to say the usc got better throughout the season to the point they could compete with them.
Also worth noting USC’s schedule was beastly.
Here's the slate
9-4 Auburn
9-5 Colorado
11-2 K-State
8-5 Oregon State
10-3 Washington State
7-5 Cal
7-6 Washington
7-6 Oregon
2-9 Stanford
8-6 Arizona State
8-5 UCLA
10-3 ND
11-2 Iowa
They ended up eighth in MOV
It would've also been odd were there a four-team playoff. You would've had two undefeateds, 12-1 UGA and probably 12-1 Iowa since they had a true split Big Ten. So then USC, which as we've said was very good, and the WSU team that beat USC for a conference title would've been out. Maybe not so odd.
-
Was that the year USC played Illinois and UGA played Hawaii? UGA was 11-2 that year, two rather bizarre losses, sort of. 2007. Matt Stafford at QB.
-
Was that the year USC played Illinois and UGA played Hawaii? UGA was 11-2 that year, two rather bizarre losses, sort of. 2007. Matt Stafford at QB.
No, it was the year UGA played FSU and won the Sugar Bowl. Richt's best chance at the natty.
Got popped by Zook and UF once.
-
If you stink at first, it's easy to "get hot" as the season progresses. It's a garbage argument for teams that don't belong.
Tennessee got really hot later in the season last year. They finished 6-0, unbeaten and on a ROLL, man.
-
well, if the Vols can keep that streak going to start this season, they will belong
-
Schedule was garbage.
-
Impossible
-
South Carolina - garbage
UAB - garbage
Kentucky - garbage
Missouri - garbage
Vanderbilt - garbage
Indiana * - The Hoosiers were pretty good
-
Kentucky was decent, but missing any kind of actual QB.
Well, I just looked at their schedule, their best "win" was a 29-20 loss to Florida, which was close really.
They lost to USCe. Beat VT in a bowl game, yay, nearly beat Tenn.
8-5, but the 8 were unimpressive, 3 solid pastries.
-
Kentucky was decent, but missing any kind of actual QB.
basketball school
-
If we reverse the question, would we go with BYU?
-
Kentucky was decent, but missing any kind of actual QB.
Well, I just looked at their schedule, their best "win" was a 29-20 loss to Florida, which was close really.
They lost to USCe. Beat VT in a bowl game, yay, nearly beat Tenn.
8-5, but the 8 were unimpressive, 3 solid pastries.
I posit if my QB can average just shy of 8 yards a carry and get 171 yards a game, I say pish to your need for a QB.
SP+ rankings of UT's opponents in the streak:
47
67
35
39
106
23
-
If you stink at first, it's easy to "get hot" as the season progresses. It's a garbage argument for teams that don't belong.
USC sidestepped this by not stinking.
-
Schedule was garbage.
Tennessee always closes the year strong because of their traditional schedule. It's a known thing in SEC circles.
-
I don't think the Vols can avoid playing Mizzou/UK/USCe/UK each year, and they just happen to catch UGA/UF/Bama early(ish). And they play their OOC P5 game early. But in some recent years they have not even won the back half, so there is that.
-
They've just played Florida early, Georgia and Bama in the middle, then the SEC Sisters of the Poor in November every year.
I went back to their bad downturn under Dooley and found this nugget:
Tennessee beat a ranked South Carolina on Halloween in 2009.
The Vols went on to lose their next 17 SEC games played before November (3.5 seasons-worth).
Nationally, I don't think people realize how bad Tennessee fell, as they'd always wind up 6-7 or something similar, often on an upswing to close out the year. False hope. But for one 4-year stretch, against anyone with a pulse, the Vols were a joke.
Even in 2013, when they finally won a pre-November SEC game, it was against South Carolina again....and drunk off of that win, proceeded to lose their next 4 SEC games.
And none of that includes their 0-8 conference record in 2017.
-
They were 4-0 in OOC games though ....
-
They've just played Florida early, Georgia and Bama in the middle, then the SEC Sisters of the Poor in November every year.
I went back to their bad downturn under Dooley and found this nugget:
Tennessee beat a ranked South Carolina on Halloween in 2009.
The Vols went on to lose their next 17 SEC games played before November (3.5 seasons-worth).
Nationally, I don't think people realize how bad Tennessee fell, as they'd always wind up 6-7 or something similar, often on an upswing to close out the year. False hope. But for one 4-year stretch, against anyone with a pulse, the Vols were a joke.
Even in 2013, when they finally won a pre-November SEC game, it was against South Carolina again....and drunk off of that win, proceeded to lose their next 4 SEC games.
And none of that includes their 0-8 conference record in 2017.
so the Vols sold their soul for the 1998 MNC and the curse is still strong?
-
I have at times thought the Dawgs sold their soul to beat Florida in 1980 and have been falling short ever since.
-
Quote from: MrNubbz on June 15, 2020, 03:45:36 PM (https://www.cfb51.com/big-ten/best-team-that-didn't-win-anything-important/msg226789/#msg226789)
How could Miami/tOSU not be getting better and better when they both went in undefeated?And USC lost twice (https://www.cfb51.com/Smileys/fantasticsmileys/017.gif)
If you stink at first, it's easy to "get hot" as the season progresses. It's a garbage argument for teams that don't belong.
Maybe my reading comprehension sucks, but I thought the topic here evokes good teams that didn't win anything. I didn't say USC belonged in the title game--it didn't. I said it was a really good team that didn't win anything--and that at the end of the season, the way it looked, a lot of people--me included--would have expected it to do well in an NFL-like playoff format. It wouldn't have looked out of place playing against Miami or OSU--it didn't belong there the way CFB works, but in a different format it wouldn't have been dismissed, either. (Even under the current format, it probably wouldn't get it, as the playoff probably would have been Miami, OSU, Georgia, Oklahoma.)
As BAB pointed out, it was a team that played a tough schedule, with two early, close losses to very good teams (on the road, by one score each, one in OT; the teams finished 7 and 10 in the AP poll--they were 6 and 7 going into the bowl games). After going 3-2, the Trojans finished on a tear behind its Heisman trophy winning quarterback. This was--as I think the topic looks for--a very good team that didn't win anything of note.
But it did torch 12-1 Iowa in the Orange Bowl game (dropping the Hawkeyes from #3 to #8 in the AP). But don't take my word for it; take the voters in the AP Poll, who put USC 4th. Of note, in the Orange Bowl, after Iowa returned the opening kickoff for a touchdown, USC outscored Iowa 38-3, until Iowa scored a consolation touchdown with 50 seconds to play to make the final score--38-17--look respectable.
So yeah, a garbage argument for a team that stunk. Exactly.
-
For what it's worth, I agree that 1998 KSU feels like the poster child for this topic. That said, I never thought 1998 KSU was really that good--it was more like the 2002 Iowa, 2006 Wisconsin, or 2012 Notre Dame--teams that were perfectly competent, and took advantage of weak schedules. I don't even know if that's true (and I'm not going to look it up), but I remember thinking at the time that it shouldn't ever have been a real contender.
And head to head I would pick 2002 USC over 1998 KSU every day of the week and twice on Saturday (perhaps ironically, as one of USC's two losses was in Manhattan to KSU).
:)
-
So yeah, a garbage argument for a team that stunk. Exactly.
I wasn't pooping on your post, it's just that 2002 USC is the poster child for those who want to discount September losses. Obviously, I don't agree with it.
That USC team was co-champ of the Pac-10 (albeit losing to the 'other' team, who went to the RB).
-
I wasn't pooping on your post, it's just that 2002 USC is the poster child for those who want to discount September losses. Obviously, I don't agree with it.
That USC team was co-champ of the Pac-10 (albeit losing to the 'other' team, who went to the RB).
To a degree, I tend to buy that the discounting of early losses in CFB is kind of a silly thing. We don't have enough data to discount much of anything. That said, we spend a lot of time in the sport finding all manner of ways to discount all sorts of things (bad/soft schedule being a key thing there)
Anyway, on balance, the USC team was strong has hell. Based on a lot of metrics, it was the strongest team that year. It's case would've been in some ways similar to 2011 Alabama. Just look at that team, it looks and plays like one of the two best teams (Bama's other chip was that it's best win was a good loss).
I don't know that anyone was arguing, they should've been in the title game, save for contrarians who were trying out dumb narratives because we have two many talking heads. Even if we had today's system they wouldn't have made it.
-
A team that lost twice early and then looked impressive the rest of the way would seem to be a good candidate for this topic, to me.