 | | 
11-04-2010, 12:12 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
| | VN GURU
| 1990 National Championship
I know this is a random question, but I recently saw that Georgia Tech and Colorado each won a share of the national title in 1990. I knew Colorado had won a share, but I didn't know who the other team was. Colorado finished 11-1-1 while Tech finished 11-0-1, and Colorado also had the game where they got 5 downs at the end.
So my question is, how the hell did Colorado receive a share? I'm not trying to stir up a debate or anything, I'm just looking for a straight answer if anyone knows. (ie. one played a much tougher schedule, GT had lucky wins, etc.) Thanks for the help.
__________________
| 
|   | |
11-04-2010, 12:15 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
| | THE #1 COLLEGE DIFFENCE
Join Date: Sep 2008  Location: A place somewhere
Posts: 13,445
Likes: 588
| Colorado started out rated pretty high, and GT didn't, I think.
All I know is that Colorado was lucky as hell to win that thing, between the 5th down, and the Rocket Ismail punt return being called back.....
Yep, I was right. Colorado started out the year 5th in the nation, Georgia Tech didn't appear in the AP poll until October 2nd.
Last edited by KingNick865; 11-04-2010 at 12:19 PM..
| |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:20 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
| | smh
| GA Tech played a significantly tougher schedule that year. They tied Tennessee, beat Texas, Washington, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Notre Dame who were all 8/9/10 win teams, and Texas and Washington won their respective conferences. | |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:21 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
| | THE #1 COLLEGE DIFFENCE
Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: A place somewhere
Posts: 13,445
Likes: 588
| Quote:
Originally Posted by milohimself  Colorado played a significantly tougher schedule that year. They tied Tennessee, beat Texas, Washington, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Notre Dame who were all 8/9/10 win teams, and Texas and Washington won their respective conferences. |  | |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:22 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
| | VN GURU
| All right, so was this championship generally accepted at the time, or was there a lot of criticism?
__________________
| |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:23 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
| | THE #1 COLLEGE DIFFENCE
Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: A place somewhere
Posts: 13,445
Likes: 588
| Georgia Tech was aided that year as well. They shot up 9 spots after beating #1 Virginia. | |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:24 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
| | smh
| Quote:
Originally Posted by nickknx865 | My bad.
Clemson and Nebraska were the only teams GA Tech played that were worth a damn IIRC. | |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:25 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
| | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 21,924
Likes: 0
| another year like this year when all the top programs were down. | |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:25 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
| | THE #1 COLLEGE DIFFENCE
Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: A place somewhere
Posts: 13,445
Likes: 588
| Quote:
Originally Posted by tvolsfan All right, so was this championship generally accepted at the time, or was there a lot of criticism? | Generally, it was a pretty quiet year in terms of controversy. At least as quiet as a split national title could be.
I mean to say, there wasn't as much debate with that as there was with Michigan and Nebraska in '97, or LSU and USC in '03. | |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:25 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
| | smh
| Quote:
Originally Posted by nickknx865 Georgia Tech was aided that year as well. They shot up 9 spots after beating #1 Virginia. | Virginia was a fraud at that point... They were undefeated prior to that game, but against Kansas, Clemson, Navy, Duke, W&M, NC State and Wake Forest. | |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:27 PM
|
#11 (permalink)
| | THE #1 COLLEGE DIFFENCE
Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: A place somewhere
Posts: 13,445
Likes: 588
| Quote:
Originally Posted by milohimself My bad.
Clemson and Nebraska were the only teams GA Tech played that were worth a damn IIRC. | South Carolina was in the top #25 at the time, and GT beat #1 Virginia on the road as well. Not arguing that Colorado's schedule wasn't tougher, but just saying. | |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:32 PM
|
#12 (permalink)
| | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Maryville, TN
Posts: 10,402
Likes: 2
| When the initial BCS idea came out in 98 then went back to see how it would have affected prior seasons and Ga Tech would not have even played for the title that year. They probably didn't even deserve their share of it truthfully. | |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:39 PM
|
#13 (permalink)
| | VN GURU
| Quote:
Originally Posted by tigervol9802 When the initial BCS idea came out in 98 then went back to see how it would have affected prior seasons and Ga Tech would not have even played for the title that year. They probably didn't even deserve their share of it truthfully. | Seriously? This year, it definitely doesn't seem like a a tougher schedule will trump an unbeaten mid major, let a lone an unbeaten major conference team.
Although the system has changed since 1998.
__________________
| |
| | |
11-04-2010, 12:50 PM
|
#14 (permalink)
| | 09 Tennessee Alum
Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Nashvillish
Posts: 2,661
Likes: 819
| Until fairly recently there was a significant bias against southern teams not named Alabama in national polls. Even though it is not the case anymore, I think its after effect is the "Team SEC" thing that annoys the rest of the country. | |
| | |
11-04-2010, 01:25 PM
|
#15 (permalink)
| | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,368
Likes: 33
| I lived in Atlanta at the time. The fans were just ecstatic to get a share. At the time people did not get really angry about "shared" the way some other fan bases did.
Alabama fans do not mind sharing championships as long as they get called champion by someone, somewhere, they will add it to the total number. | |
| | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
| | | |
 | |
Forums |
