As I recall both polls had about the same number of voters switch their votes. It just so happened that the coaches already had NU closer than the media voters. There was no gift from the coaches, only a closing of the gap in both polls since Nebraska was impressive in the bowl and Michigan struggled. NU closed the gap by 17.5 first place votes out of 70 in the AP poll. Can’t find the coaches poll from 1997, maybe someone else can find the number of votes NU gained in the coaches poll after the bowl game…

Its a joke that Michigan had to share the title with you guys. They were clearly the number one team in the country. You guys needed one of the flukiest plays in college football history to be undefeated that year. You beat a Tennessee team without a healthy Manning. Michigan beat more ranked opponents and was the better team. Michigan’s defense that year ranks as one of the best defenses in college football history.

I guarantee you Michigan would have beaten you guys. Nobody could run on that Michigan defense and they had a more balanced offense than you did. Michigan would have put 10 in the box and let Woodson cover whatever “receiver” you guys had and won the game. It would have been a close game but they would have beaten you guys. Everybody outside of Nebraska knows that Michigan was the best team in America that year. It was a parting gift and everybody knows it. The media, for once, was right on that. That Washington State was better than people thought they were.

Its like saying that ’77 Nebraska team and the ’95 Nebraska team were the two greatest in college football history back when ESPN did that greatest teams of all time. ’95 yes ’77 no. It was just the people of Nebraska stuffing the ballots.

With one more win, Nebraska deserves national title

© 1998 Copyright Nando.net

1998 Scripps Howard

MIAMI (Jan 2, 1998 – 05:12 EST) — If Nebraska beats Tennessee in the Orange Bowl by the margin the odds makers say it should, then the Cornhuskers should win the national championship. They wont, but they should.

Too many voters are too reluctant to drop a winning team. And that’s unfortunate for Nebraska.

In voting unbeaten Michigan over unbeaten Nebraska for the last third of the season, I based that first-place vote, in part, on Michigan’s tougher schedule. The bowl games have changed my perspective.

The Big Ten was overrated. That became more evident with every bowl game: Michigan State lost to Washington 51-23. Iowa lost to Arizona State 17-7. Wisconsin lost to Georgia 33-6. Penn State lost to Florida 21-6. Ohio State lost to Florida State 31-14. Purdue, which Michigan didn’t play, was the only other Big Ten winner (33-20 over Oklahoma State in the Alamo Bowl).

Michigan’s opponents, five Big Ten teams and Notre Dame, went 0-6 in the bowls.

Nebraska’s opponents went 2-2 in the bowls. Washington and Kansas State won; Missouri and Texas A&M lost.

Here’s what I jotted down on a notepad after Michigan’s 21-16 Rose Bowl victory over Washington State: Records: If Nebraska beats UT in the Orange Bowl, it will be 13-0. Michigan is 12-0.

Opponents: If Nebraska beats UT, its opponents record will be 76-74; Michigan’s opponents are 74-67.

Dominance: Nebraska outscored its opponents by 30.7 points per game; Michigan outscored its opponents by 17 points per game.

More dominance: Nebraska outscored its opponents with winning records by 23.6. Michigan outscored its opponents with winning records by 10.8 points.

It’s too easy to say Michigan was No. 1 and won its game, so it should stay No. 1. That’s not the way the system is supposed to work. Our archaic method of choosing a college football champion is based on style points. Nebraska lost style points because it beat Missouri in overtime and beat Colorado by three after leading by 17 late in the game.

However, against good teams, Nebraska, not Michigan, has been more stylish. The Cornhuskers beat 11-1 Kansas State by 30 points. They beat Washington by 13. They beat Texas A&M by 39 points just three weeks ago.

In Thursday’s Cotton Bowl, those same Aggies almost upset a UCLA team that had won nine consecutive games. Don’t forget that Michigan only beat Notre Dame by seven points, Iowa by four and Wisconsin by 10. Its most-convincing victory was against Penn State, which for much of the year was the most-overrated team in the country.

Michigan deserves tremendous credit for an unbeaten season. But if Nebraska plays well in beating Tennessee, it deserves the national championship.

By JOHN ADAMS, Scripps Howard News Service

                                            Sympathy Vote??

Yeah, I agree there was a sympathy vote in the 1997 National Championship. Michigan
had not won a NC since 1948 and a Big 10 team had not won one since 1968, so yes I think there was a sympathy vote for Michigan. Not for the coach who had just won 2 National Championships in the last 3 years, or a football program who had won 4 since the last time Michigan or a Big 10 team had won any. (AP & Coaches Polls).

                          Few points on Wiggins catch vs MIzzu that year

1. NCAA rules say -player may use any part of his body to try and bring the ball under his control

2. Shevin Wiggins admits kicking the ball – trying to bring it up to HIS hands to catch it.

3. Being pulled over backwards by the defender added extra effort to the kick and it went over his head.

4. Wiggins had no idea a NU reciever would be behind him – Matt Davisons pass route on the play took him to the other side of the field. He just ran to the play when he saw the ball going away from him.

5. In order for the play/kick to be illegal, the official would have to be certain that the player was intentionally kicking the ball to a teammate. Any doubt and it is a legal play.

6. Both the Big 8 head of officals and the NCAA head of officials stated that the play had been called correctly

7. If Wiggins arms had not been pinned at his side by the Missouri DB, he probably would have caught the ball in the first place.

I wish I had saved it, but shortly after the final polls for the 1997 football NC. There was an article showing that sports writers in Big 10 country voted by a higher % for Michigan than areas in other parts of the country. So, yes there was a bias in favor of Michigan and the Big 10.