I don't think you know what reasonable means...
With that said, I have no idea what shoukd means.
Nebraska VS Penn St -- 1994
- Thread starter zrob
- Start date
I don't think you know what reasonable means...
With that said, I have no idea what shoukd means.
Didn't Fulmer deny that it was him?
I actually hear it was heard it was Coach Carr that voted his own team 4th because he knew that is where they belonged.
AP voters had a huge bias towards the B1G and the Rose Bowl. The B1G avoided playing legit competition at the end of the season for years by having the rose bowl “commitment”. Remember the PAC was pretty weak for most of the 90s.
I agree to an extent, actually NU should have won 1982 outright. I do think Penn St probably deserved a share of the 1994 title though, they were extremely good and it was very unfortunate things could not have been settled on the field.
Last edited:
Not sure how this thread became 50% 1997 Michigan discussion, it was supposed to be for 1994. I think we would have destroyed Michigan in 1997 and in my opinion that hypothetical game is not even worth discussing.
I think if NU had played PSU in 1994 an a #1 vs #2 match up it would have went down in history as one of the greatest games of all time. PSU was a lot better that year than some of you are giving them credit for. I would LOVE to have seen that game... I'm very glad we finally beat #3 Miami in a great game that year, but part of me really wishes there had been a BCS or Playoff system that year that would have made Neb-PSU possible!
It is too bad that Michigan and Nebraska couldn’t have decided things on the field. Nebraska’s affiliation didn’t keep this from happening - michigan’s did.
The program that participated in the system that was attempting to match the 2 top teams in the national championship game should have been given the benefit of the doubt.
The big ten was in a system where their champion played the best in the PAC 10 rather than the best in the nation.
The program that participated in the system that was attempting to match the 2 top teams in the national championship game should have been given the benefit of the doubt.
The big ten was in a system where their champion played the best in the PAC 10 rather than the best in the nation.
Both the Big 10 and PAC 10 didn’t want to be in the Bowl coalition and have their champion play for the National title if they were rated #1 or #2. They preferred to play in the Rose Bowl.
By 1997 I think they called it the Bowl alliance.
Either way both avoided Nebraska because of it. Nebraska didn’t avoid them.
Believe Miami and Tennessse were ranked #3 in 94 and 97.
I posted a somewhat similar thread over on the PSU forums. Though the title wasn't just about 1994, their fans sure do not have a lot of respect for the 94 Husker team! Which sucks because I respect the hell out of the 94 Nitany Lions....
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/undefeated-joe-paterno-teams.198244/#post-3249852
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/undefeated-joe-paterno-teams.198244/#post-3249852
Or maybe Fulmer was on the receiving end of an ass whoopin that Michigan wasn't capable of handing out in a bowl game..
Ummm.... I guess I included him because he led the team in tackles for loss with 4.5, plus he also had 6.5 sacks, 36 tackles and 11 QB hurries. His stats were far better than Tomich in all of these categories.
Ummm.... I guess I included him because he led the team in tackles for loss with 4.5, plus he also had 6.5 sacks, 36 tackles and 11 QB hurries. His stats were far better than Tomich in all of these categories.
Seriously though, Donte Jones and Dewayne Harris were the starters. And, as far as I'm concerned they are two of the most underrated Husker defenders from that era. Both played at a level well above Wistrom that year.
Perhaps and there may be some truth to this. However, Michigan was a damn good football team that year. I would have loved to have played them. And... a Michigan fan could just as easily say (and they have) that the only reason Nebraska got a split of the title from the coaches is that they wanted to reward Tom as he retired. So those kinds of arguments can cut both ways.
It would have been worse than what we did to tennesee.
Michigan failed to score 40 points the entire season. Nebraska scored 40+ 8 times that season, yet Michigan is going to shut down and stop the #1 rush offense and #1 scoring offense and somehow score points on Nebraska's top 5 defense?? Michigan defense was great, but it was best at stopping the pass, #1 in fact, too bad you weren't going to go up against a passing team if you faced Nebraska.
Lets also not forget the fact, Michigan needed the ref's to literally run off the field while Washington State was driving, to preserve the win for Michigan.
I also don't care about common opponents because the transitive property doesn't apply in football. Colorado literally basing its entire season around Nebraska, makes a little bit of a difference compared to Colorado facing Michigan. Just like Michigan playing against Ohio State mattered more to them than their closest game of the year, Iowa.
Nebraska:
#1 offense
#1 rush offense
#1 scoring offense
#5 defense
#3 rush defense
#12 scoring defense
#28 pass defense
Nebraska also had better net punting, better punt return and better kick return stats than Michigan.
Michigan:
44th offense
28th rush offense
44th scoring offense
63rd passing offense
(that mediocre offense would have literally been lucking to score 10 points, if that)
#1 defense
#1 scoring defense
#1 pass defense
#7 rush defense
Defense is what Michigan survived on, but they also only faced 1 top 20 offense, while Nebraska faced 4 top 20 offenses.
I'd argue Kansas State was a better team than Michigan in 97' the problem for them was that they had to go up against Nebraska and their only loss on the season was Nebraska, 56-26. K-state had a a top 5 defense and top 15 offense, but that didn't help them one bit against Nebraska, just like with weeks to prepare and for Osborne's last game, Michigan would have gotten pounded even worse than a Peyton Manning led 3rd ranked Tennessee.
Funny how ell-dope-o hasn’t showed up since his original asinine comments. 
Hell yeah!
Michigan failed to score 40 points the entire season. Nebraska scored 40+ 8 times that season, yet Michigan is going to shut down and stop the #1 rush offense and #1 scoring offense and somehow score points on Nebraska's top 5 defense?? Michigan defense was great, but it was best at stopping the pass, #1 in fact, too bad you weren't going to go up against a passing team if you faced Nebraska.
Lets also not forget the fact, Michigan needed the ref's to literally run off the field while Washington State was driving, to preserve the win for Michigan.
I also don't care about common opponents because the transitive property doesn't apply in football. Colorado literally basing its entire season around Nebraska, makes a little bit of a difference compared to Colorado facing Michigan. Just like Michigan playing against Ohio State mattered more to them than their closest game of the year, Iowa.
Nebraska:
#1 offense
#1 rush offense
#1 scoring offense
#5 defense
#3 rush defense
#12 scoring defense
#28 pass defense
Nebraska also had better net punting, better punt return and better kick return stats than Michigan.
Michigan:
44th offense
28th rush offense
44th scoring offense
63rd passing offense
(that mediocre offense would have literally been lucking to score 10 points, if that)
#1 defense
#1 scoring defense
#1 pass defense
#7 rush defense
Defense is what Michigan survived on, but they also only faced 1 top 20 offense, while Nebraska faced 4 top 20 offenses.
I'd argue Kansas State was a better team than Michigan in 97' the problem for them was that they had to go up against Nebraska and their only loss on the season was Nebraska, 56-26. K-state had a a top 5 defense and top 15 offense, but that didn't help them one bit against Nebraska, just like with weeks to prepare and for Osborne's last game, Michigan would have gotten pounded even worse than a Peyton Manning led 3rd ranked Tennessee.
Lived it, enjoyed it.... just don't care anymore. I cherish the memories of watching games in those years with my grandpa and my mom, both gone now. Don't really care about arguing about the trophies, not like you'll ever (EVER) convince someone that you're right and they're wrong. I'm just glad that for the most part the whole argument over mythical national champions is over. Win or lose, I wish we had played PSU in '94 and Michigan in '97.
As Husker fans we get this asked all the time.I'd like to ask who was better and who would win the game between 94 Penn St against 97 Michigan...
Love to hear some responses too this question not only our fan base but Penn St and Michigan..
Love to hear some responses too this question not only our fan base but Penn St and Michigan..
Well I started a very respectful thread in the Penn State forums... Every one of them thinks the Huskers would have been slaughtered! Some of the posters were pretty hostile too. Here's a link to the thread if you want to see what the PSU fan base has to say:
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/undefeated-joe-paterno-teams.198244/page-3#post-3253663
They just don't get that they were not as complete of team as Nebraska was. They were an offensive power, defense pushover. Nebraska produced at a high level on both sides of the ball...
I agree, definitely about the defensive side of the ball. But many of them posting are quite bitter... I think it would have been amazing game.
,
I agree, Michigan was nothing spectacular in '97 and in my opinion they were one of the worst teams ever to be crowned s National Champs.
They never responded about Nebraska had to play 3 different QB during the season ( Frazier blood clot,Berringer collapsed Lung ) if they could have won with their 2nd or 3rd string QB like Nebraska did of course it is irrelevant but TF doesn’t have that blood clot and Nebraska offense doesn’t miss a beat.
They base a lot on that Orange Bowl when we played Frazier and Berringer... TF had’t played in 3 months, I don’t know if they were a aware of that.
They still made plays and against the nations top defense if I’m not mistaking..
They believe our defense couldn’t stop them enough and we couldn’t keep up offensively with them I imagine.
They did have an explosive offense but there D in 94 was similar to ours in 1983.
Obviously a bunch of idiots. Nebraska would have had a field day scoring at will on that pathetic D and then Collins slow ass would have been a sitting duck having to throw virtually every down.
If you researched their offense they wouldn't have been throwing every down...
They were very prolific offense much better than Miami and Colorado..
But Colorado and Miami had better defenses. It would have been a helluva game in Miami.
Biggest factor was Nebraska playing 2 QB...
Doesn't matter now, it's all a pipe dream but I think Penn St in 94 would have been the tougher game than the 97 game against Michigan.
When Nebraska hangs a TD on them damn near every possession you have no choice but to pass. Again, Nebraska's offense would have had a field day running all over Penn State. 50 points would have been a possibility against that horrendous defense.
The site linked lists some facts, but leaves out others. It lists opponents overall records and shows NU with opponents performing better at 0.523 vs. 0.518. But, the site does not include the fact NU’s opponents played more non Div 1-A teams. Taking into account only 1-A games (Iowa State lost to a lower level team), the records ibecome:
NU opp. 0.510 (73-70-3)
PSU 0opp. .514 (69-65-4)
The site does not mention the opponents’ opponents records for each team:
NU’s opp. Opp. 0.537 (892-767-39)
PSU’s opp. Opp. 0.557 (863-681-52)
So, PSU’s opponents had slightly more success against better competition.
With the bowl stats, while NU had more bowl opponents:
NU’s opponents in bowls went 1-4 with bad losses by KSU and OU.
PSU ‘s opponents went 3-1, with tOSU losing to 1-loss Bama being the L.
It lists close games and insinuates PSU had 3 while NU had 1. It fails to mention that in the 4th quarter NU led ISU 14-12 and OU 6-3. PSU no doubt had close games with Michigan and Illinois (actually trailed 21-0), but in no way was the Indiana game ever in doub.
Btw, to try and give a response to many other posts in this thread, PSU’s defense had many injuries throughout the year (a few season ending). Unllike NU’s QB woes, those didn’t get publicized, and obviously are remembered by few.
FYI, the average halftime score of a PSU game was 28-9. There were quite a few games where the games were essentially over, and garbage time yards were accumulated. Finishing 30th in scoring defense considering the competitiveness and injuries isn’t bad at all.
As for the Rose Bowl, It was competitive for awhile, the outcome wasn’t in doubt at the end of the 3rd quarter, and Oregon scored last to lose by 18. If one chooses to describe that as close, so be it.
That said, none of it is proof PSU or NU was better than the other, and I won’t try and convince anyone about a theoretical outcome of a never was match-up. Just trying to provide information to those that may not know otherwise.
Being you brought this subject up a few times in the thread you started on the PSU site, I will ask this here as my mis-displayed response may have gone unnoticed.
Do you know all that happened in that 1982 game, or are you being selective in choosing which singular officials' ruling you would like to have corrected?
How many teams have won a NT with a scoring D of 30?
Miami had a legit defense, championship caliber. Don't let the score fool you into thinking PSU was going to replicate what Miami did, not with Warren Sapp and Lewis back there. #1 in total and #1 in scoring defense in fact and Nebraska still hung 24 on them with a quarter back that hadn't played for several games...like most of them. Ray Lewis was quoted as saying Lawrence Philips was the toughest..."guy"... he ever saw in college or PRO! That PSU D would have had to experience that at some point...
Would have been a great game and no one will convince the other teams fans their team would have lost hands down. So it will always be what it is.
However let me ask you this: If someone asked you to pick a team to represent you in a bid to save a bunch of children from a teetering school bus on a cliff edge that could be saved as long as the team you pick wins... would you go with the team that had a top offense and a 70th rated defense 30 scoring, or a team that had a top rated offense and a top rated defense 3 in scoring if I remember right?
Remember those kids now...
They are actually awarded, although the winning part is a lot closer now than it was back in time, especially way back when polls sometimes were finished before the regular season was.
The defense was fine, but the offense left something to be desired. They weren’t the Hurricanes of ’86 to pre Bama ’92. Even their homefield mystique was shattered earlier that year by Washington. I wouldn’t say there’s anything wrong with NU beating Miami.
I wouldn’t make a decision based on yards. I’d prefer to choose the team whose worst offensive points scored in a game wasn’t worse than their worst defensive points given up in a game. It is an odd statistic, but take a look back through years and see how few teams actually accomplished this. You’ll probably like the result of the one of the teams that exceeded that.
I hope this isn't meant as a joke about a certain subject. It really wouldn't be a morally superior thing to do.
Gotcha.I'm talking about the kids in the hypothetical schoolbus....
Good luck next season, you guys got the coach I wanted for Nebraska when we hired Riley. He's proven to be a great hire so far for Penn State.
GO BIG RED!!!
Last edited:
