From: "al sorhaindo" <al.sorhaindo@execnet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: running up scores+ties
Date: 22 Nov 92 15:05:35 EST
Reply-To: "al sorhaindo" <al.sorhaindo@execnet.com>
Distribution: rec
Organization: Executive Networks Information

Not long ago, Miami played Oklahoma in three consecutive seasons.
*Oklahoma* was favored in all three games, even though two were
played in the Orange Bowl.




If you don't think running up the score versus bad teams will get
you high rankings, read on.

Twenty games and fourteen losses ago Houston coach John Jenkins
proclaimed his Cougar offense "unstoppable". The public bit,
making his fraud of a team only a seven point underdog *at* Miami.

Research has shown that only Oklahoma, Florida State, and Notre Dame
have been accorded more respect when playing at Miami during the
last five years. Furthermore, most of those teams could not even come
within seven points of the Hurricanes in Miami. (OU lost by 12 and
9, ND by 17, and 24, and FSU by 16 in 1986, 31 in 1988, 13 in 1990,
before finally losing by 3 in 1992).

Schools with better programs than Houston were mega-underdogs at Miami.
(In 1990 Iowa won the Big-10, yet were 24 point dogs, and 28 point
losers at Miami. Syracuse won the 1990 Peach bowl, but were 24
point underdogs, and 20+ point losers at Miami the same season.

What got Houston the respect of a powerhouse?

Not beating good teams. Even during 1988-1990 when Houston had winning
records they were horrible against top 20 opposition. 2-7 to be
exact. The two wins were against #20 Wyoming in 1988, and versus
Texas A&M in 1990 when A&M racked up over *300* yards rushing, but
were edged due to seven fumbles, 3 inside the ten yard line.
Wins like the 95-21 victory over SMU are what got Houston noticed.

It doesn't seem like long ago this year that Wolverine fans were
claiming their favorite team was better than Miami and almost everyone else.

The "evidence" : Michigan's routing of the losing schools Houston,
Oklahoma State, Iowa, Michigan State, Indiana, and Minnesota.

The facts : Michigan is winless in three tries versus winning teams
this year.



Since both John Cooper and Gary Moeller were happy with a tie
Saturday, why didn't they just agree to a draw before the game and
let the players go out and scrimmage? At least some of the players
could have gone home happy after the outcome of an unofficial contest.


National Championships decided by teams going, or not going for ties

1990-1991 Colorado? The Buffaloes were 10-1-1. What were the circumstances
of their tie? 10-2 would obviously have dropped them out of their share
of the title with Ga. Tech. 11-1 would have gotten them both the AP, and
UPI #1 slots.  (11-0-1 Ga. Tech's tie did not come down to a late TD,
+ decision to accept a tie)

1988-1989 Miami(11-1) went for two against Notre Dame(12-0) and failed.
Had Miami tied Notre Dame they likely would have routed W. Virginia
New Year's day instead of Notre Dame, and won the MNC.

1987-1988 Florida St. 11-1 failed on a late 2 pt conversion attempt vs
Miami(12-0). Possibly FSU could have had a piece of the MNC with a tie.

1983-1984 Nebraska(11-1) went for two versus Miami(11-1), failing.
          A tie would have given Nebraska and Osborne the MNC, but
          would have been a disappointment for the Cornhuskers.
          Nebraska was a big (14 point) favorite in that Ornage Bowl
          encounter and the Hurricanes were considered upstarts!!!

1982-1983 SMU(11-0-1) did not go for two in their tie. Penn St won the
          MNC with an 11-1 record. A 12-0 record by SMU would have made
          it more difficult to deny them.

1966-1967 Notre Dame played for a tie versus Michigan State and won
          the MNC.
---
  DeLuxe 1.21 #11688  al.sorhaindo@execnet.com
--
Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
International ILink Host