- Joined
- Nov 3, 2011
- Messages
- 14,608
Plenty of that was pure make believe. UCLA and particularly USC have received tons of grief for playing the Rose Bowl so close to home. It was a perpetual topic in the '60s and '70s when so many national titles were at stake in those games. The month between the end of the regular season and the New Year's Day bowls was flooded with that theme. And before we start chirping that results that old don't matter, it's wise to be careful because many of our early titles will be similarly dated not too long down the road.
USC went to 5 Rose Bowls under Pete Carroll, and the media hardly ever brought up the proximity of the Rose Bowl to USC's campus during that run. When it was, it was simply mentioned as an advantage, but never the crippling obstacle used as a crutch for the 4 teams they beat. That's not make believe. And nobody gave UCLA **** in the run up to their matchup with Wisconsin in '99. That's not make believe either. If anything it was brought up after the fact to point and laugh at them because they lost in their own building.
I had to belly laugh at the suggestion that the Orange Bowl wasn't a massive factor in our championships. We had the greatest home field advantage in the country, playing in the stadium that still holds the record for longest pro home winning streak (31) and longest college home winning streak (58)...
Well aware of all this. Once you're done belly laughing, feel free to point out where I said the O.B. wasn't an advantage. I said it's not our fault. What are we supposed to do other than move the Orange Bowl game to Tampa whenever we get invited? Nebraska people have ALWAYS been babies about this fact and I'm hardly the first (or only) person to pick up on this. It was one of their main talking points in the run up to the Rose Bowl. They were all, "Derpy-Derp, now we get you guys in a 'real neutral site'...Sea of Red....you don't have the O.B. to fall back on this time...Derp." It was pathetic.
...Plenty of evidence. The only bowl game we lost at home was the late collapse against Nebraska when they wore us out in the 4th quarter and Frank Costa missed one cheap 80 yard touchdown opportunity that could have restored a fluke margin. Meanwhile, we were exposed on the road countless times -- against UCLA, Tennessee, Arizona and obviously the devastating national title failures against Penn State, Alabama and Ohio State. We basically were hit or miss away from home and dominant in our own building. The rest of the nation properly views it that way and it's pathetic if we prefer to deny it. Away from home we needed the perfect matchup. We got it in 2001 against flawed Nebraska after their hapless effort against Colorado. A year later we drew the worst opponent imaginable, blue collar Ohio State, the team I desperately rooted against all season because they shared so many similarities to those 1986 and 1992 Penn State and Alabama teams. I wouldn't have worried at all in the Orange Bowl, where we would have shaken them off by maybe 10 points. Away from home I considered it a toss up and posted that on numerous sites. That Ohio State team was loaded with pro talent, had a great Yards Per Pass Attempt Differential, and matched up great against our offensive line.
Well aware of all of this. There's a difference between something being an advantage, and sour grapes. The media has always brought this point up with us because we've lost the Fiesta Bowl four times and the Sugar twice during our 2 runs. As if the only reason we ever won a title was the O.B. They always seem to forget we beat Alabama in the Sugar in '89, and Nebraska in the Rose in '01. They forget that when we beat OU in '87 it was the 3rd time in as many years. And that Nebraska team we beat in '91 sucked. They weren't even in the top 10. They beat up on the Big 2 - little 6 and had insane offensive stats. We didn't need the Orange Bowl for the '87 and 91 titles.
Well aware of all of this. We've played them 10 times. 6 of them were in bowl games. Those bowl games over the past 30 years are what everyone thinks of when you say "Miami vs. Nebraska". We haven't played them in the regular season since the Ford administration. So when I say, "basically we've only played these guys in bowl games...", it's hardly some gross mischaracterization on my part.Also, I should point out it's hardly true we've played Nebraska exclusively in bowl games. I remember the back to back 1975 and 1976 games in Nebraska. Miami battled like heck in those games, both times as huge underdogs. We actually led at halftime in 1975 despite conventional wisdom that we'd be deflated after nearly defeating defending national champion Oklahoma the previous week as 35.5 point home underdogs. That's the type of schedule we faced in those days, back to back against Oklahoma and Nebraska. As a teenager I loved it. The '70s weren't as bad as younger fans prefer to believe. Nebraska rallied behind Vince Ferragamo and we lost by maybe two touchdowns.
A year later in 1976 the game wasn't as close physically but the score was even tighter since we kept the ball on the ground with Ottis Anderson and benefited from some key fumbles. I believe we led at halftime again. Ferragamo finally put together a drive and we lost 17-9. I was annoyed that Nebraska hadn't given us a home and home like Oklahoma and Alabama had recently. Both games were at Lincoln. I suspect the series had something to do with the Carl Selmer connection but so many decades later that could be wrong. More than anything I remember watching those games with my dad in our living room, knowing we were outmatched but hoping for some type of miracle, one that wouldn't arrive until Jim Kelly at Penn State a few years later. Nebraska also had the hardest and most faded astroturf imaginable. I remember the Canes players complaining when they got back, nursing scrapes and similar arm injuries. The Orange Bowl had finally gotten rid of the pathetic Poly Turf.