What is the worst college football team to win/share a national title?

I agree with that. But if the two champions played, I think CU would have demolished Tech.

 

If would take another year like 1990 for Boise or TCU to have a chance

 

Nebraska was ranked No. 1 and Penn State No. 2 in the AP poll before the Indiana game. So the outcome changed nothing, except that six voters changed the No. 1 vote from Penn State to Nebraska and Nebraska's lead went from six points to 18 points.

Penn State did drop from No. 1 to No. 2 in the coach's poll after the Indiana game, as 10 voters changed their No. 1 vote from Penn State to Nebraska and a two-point PSU lead became a 27-point Nebraska lead.

So blame the coaches. The media didn't really hurt Penn State at all as it was No. 2 before the Indiana game, and No. 2 after it.

 

Gee, it is a shock to me that someone called SEC Guy is actually going to make the case that LSU - with two losses and defense that seemed to specialize in giving up 40+ points in games - was a deserving national title and one of the great teams of all times...... :

Give me a freaking break.

Throw that horse shit Michigan team from 1997 on this list while we are at it. They beat up a very bad Big Ten, beat nobody of distinction in their non-conference schedule and then squeaked a win over Ryan Leaf.

 

The Holiday Bowl wasn't going to let them out of their commitment so that wasn't an option.

 

The thing with that 2007 LSU team was they had a case to jump every team that they jumped in the final BCS standings:
Missouri and West Virginia: Either didn't win their conference title (Missouri) or lost to a shitty Pittsburgh team (West Virginia) with a chance to clinch it.
USC: Also had two losses, including a bad one at home to a god-awful Stanford team.
Georgia: Also had two losses, didn't even win the SEC East.
Virginia Tech: Had three losses and was annihilated by LSU during the regular season.
Oklahoma: Its two losses (Colorado and Texas Tech) were at least on the level of LSU's losses, if not worse.

LSU wasn't a terrible team. They were a very lucky team, yes, but they were not terrible by any means.

 

Didn't say they were a terrible team, they just weren't a great team.

 

I don't know what you consider a non-conference schedule "of distinction", but Michigan's 97 non-conference schedule consisted of Notre Dame, Colorado and Baylor. That's more distinguished than the vast majority of power programs will dare schedule these days. By comparison, 97 Nebraska's consisted of Akron, Central Florida and Washington. You really think Nebraska wins on the non-conference scheduling issue?

Also interesting about Michigan's non-conference schedule is that two of em were Big 12 teams that Nebraska also played. As noted on the other thread, here's how the two team fared against their two common opponents:

Against Colorado: Michigan wins 27-3, Nebraska wins 27-24
Against Baylor: Michigan wins 38-3, Nebraska wins 49-21

And the Big 10 was certainly better than the Big 12 that year (Oklahoma and Texas were both horrific 4 win teams in 97).

97 Michigan might not have been one of the best champions. But it's just silly to suggest it as a possible worst. It's nowhere even close to the bottom rung of that ladder.

 

2005 Texas Longhorns.

They only had to beat a winless USC team in the national title game.

 

While I would have voted for Nebraska in 1997, I agree that Michigan team is nowhere close to being the worst champion ever.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Michigan_Wolverines_football_team

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Nebraska_Cornhuskers_football_team

 

Harvard, 2 - 1 - 1, 1874

Yale, 3 - 0 - 2, 1877

Pitt, 4 - 1, 1918