Thursday, April 10, 2008

1961 McMNC: Alabama Crimson Tide

AP Top 10: Final Record -- Key Bowl Results

1. Alabama: 11-0-0 -- W, Sugar, 10-3
2. Ohio State: 8-0-1 -- NONE
3. Texas: 10-1-0 -- W, Cotton, 12-7
4. LSU: 10-1-0 -- W, Orange, 25-7
5. Mississippi: 10-2-0 -- L, Cotton, 7-12
6. Minnesota: 8-2-0 -- W, Rose, 21-3
7. Colorado: 9-2-0 -- L, Orange, 7-25
8. Michigan State: 7-2-0 -- NONE
9. Arkansas: 8-3-0 -- L, Sugar, 3-10
10. Utah State: 9-1-1 -- NONE

Side note: Rutgers went 9-0 in 1961 with a 45% SOS rating. Their schedule was mostly full of Ivy League schools. Also, Utah State lost its last regular season game to 6-5 Baylor by 15 points at home.

Second note: This was the year that Ohio State's faculty declined the bid to the Rose Bowl, perhaps costing Woody a McMNC. [Damn teachers: who the hell do they think they are?!]

This comes down to 'Bama, Texas and LSU -- a good, ol' fashioned South brawl for the McMNC. Sweet ... although Ohio State still has a shot, too. Alabama and LSU didn't play each other in SEC play, and the Tide are the champions of record, simply because they went 7-0 in league play while LSU "only" went 6-0 in conference games. Seriously, the uneven schedules crap is ridiculous. So for the time being, I will still consider LSU.

Let's start with the Tide and see if there are any cracks: their SOS was only 48%, so yes, there is daylight there perhaps. They beat 6-4 Tennessee by 31 points at home, they beat 5-4-1 Houston on the road in a 17-0 shutout, they beat #13 Georgia Tech (7-4) at home 10-0, they beat 6-4 Auburn on the road 34-0, and they beat #9 Arkansas in the Sugar Bowl. So, they only beat two ranked teams all year, and their SOS is not overtly strong. No wonder they only gave up 25 points all season.

Can anyone beat that?

Ohio State: Poor SOS rating (45%) and no bowl game hurts the Buckeyes. Their tie (7-7) was to 3-5-2 TCU at home in the first game of the year. That hurts, too. They did beat #16 UCLA (7-4) at home by ten points, they beat UPI #18 Wisconsin (6-3) on the road by nine points, they beat 5-4 Iowa by 16 points at home, and they beat 6-3 Michigan by 30 points in Ann Arbor (ouch). Overall, it's not impressive enough to dethrone Alabama, and combining the BAD tie with the lack of a bowl win, Ohio State just doesn't cut it this year. Sorry, Woody.

If the TCU tie was enough to kill Ohio State, then Texas is out because they friggin' lost to TCU at HOME, 6-0. Sure, they beat #5 Mississippi in the Cotton Bowl, a better win than any Alabama posted, but the Tide didn't lose to a 3-5-2 team at home, either. Combined with the same SOS rating (48%) as Alabama, the Longhorns just don't cut it.

That leaves us with LSU as the last opponent for the Tide. A 54% SOS rating starts the Tigers out strong, and their bowl win is more impressive than Alabama's, for sure. So who did LSU lose to? Is it excusable? They lost to a ranked team on the road in their first game of the season. But it was a 13-point loss to 7-5 Rice (AP #17) ... Alabama beat #9 and #13, so can LSU out-do that by enough to compensate? LSU beat #13 Georgia Tech by the same 10-0 score, also at home. LSU also beat #5 Mississippi by three points at home, giving them two wins (including their bowl win over #7 Colorado) that are better than any Alabama win. That's strong.

But in the end, a loss to #17 is too much to overcome, considering Alabama won all its games and beat almost as many ranked teams as LSU (and did so convincingly).

Roll Tide, roll!

McMNC Revisions
1. Alabama
2. LSU
3. Ohio State
4. Texas
5. Minnesota

RUNNING SCORECARD:
Tennessee: +1938, +1942, +1950, -1951
Washington: +1960
Iowa: +1956
Georgia Tech: +1952
Illinois: +1951
Michigan: +1947, =1948
Georgia: +1946
Alabama: +1945, =1961
Purdue: +1943
Stanford: +1940
California: +1937
Pittsburgh: +1936, -1937
Syracuse: =1959
LSU: =1958
Texas A&M: =1939
Michigan State: -1952, +1953
Ohio State: -1942, +1944, =1954
Oklahoma: +1949, -1950, =1955, -1956, +1957
TCU: -1938
Maryland: -1953
Auburn: -1957
Army: -1944, -1945
Minnesota: -1936, -1940, =1941, -1960
Notre Dame: -1943, -1946, -1947, -1949

No comments: