CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: OrangeAfroMan on November 15, 2018, 12:03:16 AM
-
#3 Florida was on probation, so wouldn't have been ranked by the playoff committe (a la OSU in 2012).
#1 BYU - WAC
Only undefeated team. Opened season with close win @ #3 Pitt. Faced no other ranked opponents.
Great offense with a truly great passing game. Elite punt returner - Vai Sikahema.
#2 - Oklahoma - Big 8
Tied #1 Texas and lost to 5-6 Kansas. Early season blowout win vs #17 Pitt. Ended the season with two elite wins (@ #1 Nebraska and vs #3 Oklahoma State). Option offense was pedestrian by OU standards, this team was led by its defense. Only allowed over 17 points once.
#3 - Washington - Pac-10
Another great defensive team, giving up over 16 points only once. Win @ #3 Michigan was only vicotry over ranked team. Lost only other game vs ranked team (#16 USC). Did not win Pac-10 conference. Reached #1 ranking midseason befoe losing to USC. Poor QB play offset by good RB. Defense had incredible 27 INTs.
#4 - Nebraska - Big 8
Number one scoring defense in country. Offense failed them in only two losses (@ unranked Syracuse, vs OU). Wins over #8 UCLA and #9 Oklahoma State. Rose to #1 ranking before regular-season finale vs OU loss. Strong running game (obviously) with 2-QB system. Poor FG kicking (5 made FG in 12 ATT).
All-Americans involved:
OL Mark Traynowicz - Nebraska
DL Tony Casillas - Oklahoma
DL Ron Holmes - Washington
*OL Lomas Brown - Florida
-
Well we did get to see OU play Wash, and saw OU get an unsportsmanlike penalty on the Sooner Schooner. Such a dubious flag.
-
This year is an interesting dynamic. No one believes in the #1 team. 2 already beat 4. Florida, Washington, and Oklahoma are thought to probably have been the best team, depending on which you believe in, but in this exercise, Nebraska gets a shot.
-
The Big 8 gets TWO in, in only the second year of the playoff???? Selection committee is obviously rigged! :)
I'm going with U-Dub.
Edit: Oh, and ANOTHER rematch. Nobody will ever watch this thing on TV.
-
Are we confident BYU would even make the playoff?
-
Are we confident BYU would even make the playoff?
Yeah, that part would be interesting, I think he's just using the straight up polls, but I did the exercise a couple years ago, going in reverse order, of picking what you thought the playoff field SHOULD be. I don't think we made it back to 1984.
-
After a pair of "upsets" in the semis, Nebraska beats Washington for the title.
They were ineligible, but Florida may have been the "best" team by the end of that season. Started 0-1-1, Pell got fired, Hall took over, and the won 9 in a row. Closed by beating #11 Auburn (24-3), #8 Georgia (27-0) and #12 Florida State (27-17). It was Florida's first SEC title, and easily their best team ever, and the title was subsequently vacated.
-
May I make a gentle suggestion?
I think I see where this series is going. Similar to the jersey numbers threads of the summer. I encourage the series but wonder if maybe, until the end of the postseason, it is best if we only have ~1 such thread per week and then go nuts with infinites thereafter.
This is just peak "This is everything we've waited for" time. And if a quarter of the front page were to soon become this series that may be a drag.
Having said that: Sorry for being a drag.
-
May I make a gentle suggestion?
I think I see where this series is going. Similar to the jersey numbers threads of the summer. I encourage the series but wonder if maybe, until the end of the postseason, it is best if we only have ~1 such thread per week and then go nuts with infinites thereafter.
This is just peak "This is everything we've waited for" time. And if a quarter of the front page were to soon become this series that may be a drag.
Having said that: Sorry for being a drag.
I was actually going to say the same, save it for when we don't have a lot going on.
-
#1 BYU - WAC
Opened season with close win @ #3 Pitt.
#2 - Oklahoma - Big 8
Early season blowout win vs #17 Pitt.
That Pitt team was a big part of the reason for this screwy season:
- As you noted, Pitt opened #3. The then lost 20-14 at home to unranked BYU. (NOTE: Only 20 teams were ranked back then)
- That moved BYU from unranked to #13 and Pitt from #3 to #17.
- After a bye in week two, in week three #17 Pitt lost 42-10 at home to #15 Oklahoma.
- That dropped Pitt out of the rankings for good and propelled Oklahoma up to #11.
After losing to BYU and Oklahoma the Panthers lost to Temple and WVU to drop to 0-4 before beating a woeful ECU. Then they lost two more (USCe, Miami, FL) before tying a bad Navy team and losing to Syracuse to drop to 1-7-1 before beating a bad Tulane team and a mediocre Penn State team to finish the season 3-7-1.
The 1984 Pitt team should NEVER be viewed as an elite opponent for BYU, Oklahoma, or any of the other five teams that beat them that year.
To put it in perspective BYU's six point win over the Panthers was not as good as:
- OU's 32 point win over Pitt
- USCe's 24 point win over Pitt
- Maimi, FL's 20 point win over Pitt
- WVU's 18 point win over Pitt
That win matched Syracuse's six point win over Pitt and was barely better than Temple's one point win over Pitt.
BYU was not even close to an elite team that year. Their wins:
- Over 8-4 Air Force by five points
- Over 7-4 Hawaii by five points
- Over 6-6 Michigan by seven points
- Over 6-6 Wyoming by three points
- Over 6-5-1 Utah by 10 points
- Over 6-5 Tulsa by 23 points
- Over 5-6 Baylor by 34 points
- Over 4-8 New Mexico by 48 points
- Over 4-7-1 SDSU by 31 points
- Over 3-7-1 Pitt by six points
- Over 3-8 Colorado State by 43 points
- Over 2-9 UTEP by 33 points
- Over 1-10 Utah State by 25 points
Nothing in that resume looks NC worthy or even CFP worthy.
-
They'd have the H-H tiebreaker over Harbaugh's Wolverines.
-
OU would be my vote
-
Yes I’ll keep it at one per week. I had the same thought.
I’m just going by AP poll, because it was gospel back then.
-
If this playoff happened, I think Nebraska would mercy-rule BYU in the first round.
I also think Florida was objectively the best team in 1984.
-
If this playoff happened, I think Nebraska would mercy-rule BYU in the first round.
I also think Florida was objectively the best team in 1984.
As for Florida, I said the same above.
As for BYU, no they were not the best team, but I think how "bad" they were gets oversold because they were so clearly not the best. I think they were still a top 5-6 team. But yes, Nebraska would beat them, but I think BYU would have probably hung closer than many expect, simply because we tend to overrate how bad they really were, simply because they so clearly were not the best.
-
And so the voters in '84 were sort of slaves to the W/L columns....how far have we evolved since then? Have we at all? Have they (the actual voters of whatever group you want to specify)?
-
I don't really think this Nebraska team would have much chance here, as the QB position was weak. I would actually point to this squad as evidence that the previous years' team was the best in the country however, as this elite defense was the same group of guys that played in 1983, albeit a year more expereinced. The difference in 1984 was they played alot more after halftime than the year before.
-
How many other times were mid-majors undefeated, and how did they fare? Was there a reason BYU was given that benefit of the doubt at the time?
-
How many other times were mid-majors undefeated, and how did they fare? Was there a reason BYU was given that benefit of the doubt at the time?
I think it was two things and in both of them BYU was just VERY lucky:
- They got a HUGE boost from playing a highly ranked "Power Conference" type opponent early in the season. As it turned out, they were even luckier because that highly ranked opponent wasn't any good so they basically got a freebie. As I noted above, that win over "#3" moved them up to #13.
- There was just plain Armageddon down the stretch. As late as November 6 BYU was ranked #4 (even that was way too high, IMHO)*. Then #1 Washington lost to USC which moved them up to #3. Then #1 Nebraska lost to OU and #2 USCe lost to Navy in the same week which moved them up to #1. Then #3 OkSU lost to OU. Then in the bowls #2 OU lost to Washington, #3 UF was ineligible.
I strongly disagree with your assessment that they were a top 5-6 type team:
They had two wins over teams that finished above .500 and those were by five points each. Those two teams (Hawaii and Air Force) lost worse to Fullerton State, Colorado State, Iowa, Wyoming, Utah, and Army.
They had another two wins over teams that finished exactly .500 and those wins were by three and seven points. Those two teams (Wyoming and Michigan) lost worse to Nebraska, Oregon State, SDSU, UTEP, Washington, Michigan State, Iowa, and Ohio State.
The most direct comparisons to other teams that finished ranked are these:
BYU beat Pitt by six, 20-14. Against other teams that finished ranked Pitt:
- Lost to #6 Oklahoma by 32
- Lost to #11 USCe by 24
- Lost to #18 Miami, FL by 20
BYU beat Hawaii by five, 18-13. Against other teams that finished ranked Hawaii:
BYU beat Air Force by five, 30-25. Against other teams that finished ranked Air Force:
- n/a, they didn't play any
BYU beat Wyoming by three, 41-38. Against other teams that finished ranked Wyoming:
- Lost to #4 Nebraska by 35
BYU beat Michigan by seven, 24-17. Against other teams that finished ranked Michigan:
- Lost to #2 Washington by nine but note that this was before Michigan's QB (Harbaugh) was lost for the season.
- Beat #18 Miami, FL by eight but note that this was before Michigan's QB was lost for the season.
- Lost to #13 Ohio State by 15.
- Lost to #16 Iowa by 26.
That BYU team was obviously not as good as #2 Washington and #4 Nebraska but they were also not as good as #11 USCe, nor #13 Ohio State, nor #16 Iowa. They were arguably as good as #18 Mimia, FL. A reasonable ranking for them would be somewhere around #17-20 if ranked at all.
-
Cougs probably could've fought and clawed and scraped their way to an ugly win over any of those teams once.
Two in a row? Probably not.
-
I also think BYU had pseudo Helmet qualities to them at that point. They were the perennial Holiday Bowl rep. (when the Holiday Bowl was amongst the best non NYD bowl games), and they had 'star QBs' prior to Bosco and they were in some respects, Boise State circa Chris Peterson era. Very lovable, did have some notable wins in prior years. Given the train wreck around them in the top 10 (as we've discussed about 21 times on this and the old board) they had the stars align. There was no shortage of controversy. If you can find and watch the entire pregame, game and postgame of the Orange Bowl, this is discussed to death during the UW v OU game.
-
I don't really think this Nebraska team would have much chance here, as the QB position was weak. I would actually point to this squad as evidence that the previous years' team was the best in the country however, as this elite defense was the same group of guys that played in 1983, albeit a year more expereinced. The difference in 1984 was they played alot more after halftime than the year before.
I'm not saying the Huskers would have won this playoff, but I wouldn't count them out. You're right, Sundberg wasn't great, but the defense was and the offense could run the ball.
yup, home loss to the Sooners thanks to their "magic" I was there. Huskers were the better team.
Official recap
Oklahoma scored 10 unanswered points in the fourth quarter, while the Sooner defense twice stopped Nebraska inside the OU 10 in the second half (the second time just inches away with 5:32 left in the game), and came away with a 17-7 win over the Huskers.
The loss ended Nebraska's 27-game conference win string and the Huskers' 21-game homefield win string and kept NU from clinching a fourth-straight outright Big Eight title. The Huskers won the stats handily — 19 first downs to nine, 373 total yards to 201 — but four key turnovers gave the Sooners the breaks they needed.
and an impressive win over LSU in the Sugar Bowl 28-10
-
If I remember 1984 was similar to 2007 as teams were just falling out left and right. BYU was yes the Boise st/UCF of their day going 11-1 in 1983 (arguably a better BYU team than 84) and finishing in the top 10 the season before.
I got no problems w/ them winning the NC that year. There was a ton of outraeg about their schedule and yes while they were locked into the Holiday bowl, there were a ton of good teams that passed on playing them. So that argument kind of rings hollow. Oklahoma lost in the orange bowl, if NU played BYU and beat them they could have been national champs and/or split the title w/ Washington.
-
In researching for this thread, I found that Washington directly avoided playing BYU for the NC on the field (as they did not win the Pac-10 and were not beholden to the Rose Bowl). They passed.
Could you imagine that today???
-
If this playoff happened, I think Nebraska would mercy-rule BYU in the first round.
I also think Florida was objectively the best team in 1984.
Agree on both counts.
-
In researching for this thread, I found that Washington directly avoided playing BYU for the NC on the field (as they did not win the Pac-10 and were not beholden to the Rose Bowl). They passed.
Could you imagine that today???
I kind of remember Penn State lobbying hard to get the Holiday Bowl bid, only problem was they were 6-5 and drubbed by that 3-7-1 Pitt team.
-
I highly doubt it. Playing BYU would have been a lose/lose proposition for any of the top teams. Nebraska or any other real top-10 team would have been favored by at least two TD's. It is lose/lose because:
- If you win the game it is a cream-puff opponent and doesn't help.
- If you lose the game, you lost.
Nebraska would NOT have won a NC by beating the Cougars, they'd have simply given it to Washington. The Cornhuskers had two losses (Syracuse and Oklahoma) and went into the bowls ranked ranked #5 (behind #1 BYU, #2 OU, #3 UF, and #4 UW).
Rankings going into the bowls and what happened:
- BYU: Beat the worst Michigan team of Bo Schembechler's tenure 24-17 in the Holiday Bowl, finished #1.
- Oklahoma: Lost 28-17 to #4 Washington
- Florida: ineligible
- Washington: Beat #2 OU 28-17
- Nebraska: Beat #11 LSU
- Ohio State: Lost to #18 USC
- USCe: Lost to #9 OkSU
- Boston College: Beat nr Houston
- Oklahoma State: Beat #7 USCe
- SMU: Beat #17 Notre Dame
-
Given those bowl pairings, which were fairly typical back then, we can perhaps see that the System today is better in terms of ensuring the top teams play other top teams.
-
Washington absolutely should have played BYU. Back in those days, it was common for a team ranked 3-5th to jump up to #1 after beating #1 in the bowl game.
-
If you take away off of BYU's TDs on Offense, Defense and Special Teams, then they never would have won that National Championship!
:098:
-
I highly doubt it. Playing BYU would have been a lose/lose proposition for any of the top teams. Nebraska or any other real top-10 team would have been favored by at least two TD's. It is lose/lose because:
I'd say lose/lose/lose
the Big 8 conference would not have enjoyed sharing the payout for the Holiday vs what the Huskers were paid to play LSU in the Sugar
-
Would a program back then have opted for a lesser bowl payout just to win a "mythical"?
I don't think so, money talks.
-
Washington absolutely should have played BYU. Back in those days, it was common for a team ranked 3-5th to jump up to #1 after beating #1 in the bowl game.
But the catch-22 for #4 Washington was that BYU's #1 ranking was tenuous and controversial. Washington obviously would have manhandled BYU if they had played them but most voters would simply have seen that as proof that BYU wasn't any good and moved up #2 Oklahoma and #3 Florida. Washington was at least as well off playing #2 Oklahoma because that win proved that Washington was really good. It moved them up to #2 which is the best they could have gotten.
The only way Washington would have gotten to #1 is if Oklahoma AND BYU lost and Washington couldn't beat both of them so they needed help. Given their situation it made sense to leave the lighter job to somebody else. They did the heavy lifting and beat Oklahoma. They just needed somebody to beat BYU. Too bad the team that played BYU didn't get that done. So, what we have learned is that it is all Michigan's fault. That is pretty constant. No matter what the problem is, bottom line, it is all Michigan's fault.
-
Would a program back then have opted for a lesser bowl payout just to win a "mythical"?
I don't think so, money talks.
I think a program very well may have to gain some glory, but they would have to answer to their conference mates
-
They just needed somebody to beat BYU. Too bad the team that played BYU didn't get that done. So, what we have learned is that it is all Michigan's fault. That is pretty constant. No matter what the problem is, bottom line, it is all Michigan's fault.
I can't remember if I actually rooted for Michigan in the Holiday bowl or not. Can't imagine that I did. But, I certainly blamed Michigan for allowing the Mormans to claim that mythical title
-
Or, the Orange Bowl payout was substantially more than the Holiday bowl.
-
1984:
not only did a small named and small statured school with the mythical title, a little runt named Flutie playing at a school of small stature won the hypesman
-
But the catch-22 for #4 Washington was that BYU's #1 ranking was tenuous and controversial. Washington obviously would have manhandled BYU if they had played them but most voters would simply have seen that as proof that BYU wasn't any good and moved up #2 Oklahoma and #3 Florida. Washington was at least as well off playing #2 Oklahoma because that win proved that Washington was really good. It moved them up to #2 which is the best they could have gotten.
The only way Washington would have gotten to #1 is if Oklahoma AND BYU lost and Washington couldn't beat both of them so they needed help. Given their situation it made sense to leave the lighter job to somebody else. They did the heavy lifting and beat Oklahoma. They just needed somebody to beat BYU. Too bad the team that played BYU didn't get that done. So, what we have learned is that it is all Michigan's fault. That is pretty constant. No matter what the problem is, bottom line, it is all Michigan's fault.
1 - If you're likely to blowout #1, then you should do that
2 - We don't know if that's the best they could have gotten
3 - As I stated previously, it was common back then for the team to beat #1 in a bowl to leapfrog other bowl winners above them
UW should have played #1 instead of #2, period.
-
3 - As I stated previously, it was common back then for the team to beat #1 in a bowl to leapfrog other bowl winners above them
true, but those instances were against a #1 that was highly respected. BYU was not
-
Ehhh they were respected enough to be #1...
-
they weren't respected then and they still aren't respected
-
I think Fearless and Fro ought to dook it out.
-
What ELA and Fearless have said makes some sense considering the context, but fails logically.
Was BYU thought 'less than' your usual #1 team? Yes.
Was #2 OU a better team? Sure.
BUT - say you're UW. You're at #3. You're able to play either BYU or OU in your bowl game. Despite the above factual opinions, the voters put BYU at #1. You'd like to wind up #1 yourself. Who do you choose to play to end up #1? You play the #1 team, period. You have to. If the above two ideas really mattered all that much, OU would've been voted #1 already. But they're 2nd, so you go and play the team above them.
It's logic.
-
What ELA and Fearless have said makes some sense considering the context, but fails logically.
Was BYU thought 'less than' your usual #1 team? Yes.
why ya gotta include me in the failed logic?
ya just agreed