Help me settle this debate (and no, I don’t use the full corporate sponsor names).
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No way we get crushed. Ten points is the biggest margin in 3 years. I expect a close game w 40% chance of winning.The Domers are going to crush the Cyclones.
Iowa/USC is the more compelling match up to me.
Not that it makes a huge difference but Texas beat ISU by 14 last year.No way we get crushed. Ten points is the biggest margin in 3 years. I expect a close game w 40% chance of winning.
Forgot about that game. You’re right and it really wasn’t really that close.Not that it makes a huge difference but Texas beat ISU by 14 last year.
Both interesting but I went with ISU/ND since it’s the first matchup between the two.
I was surprised to see this is the 10th game between the hawks and Trojans. And appears that none were in the rose bowl but that they played alternating home and home series in the 60’s and 70’s with USC taking the last 6 games by a wide margin, including the 2003 orange bowl victory.
Not to go off on a tangent, but I don’t recall anything changing in terms of the selection process as a result of that matchup. The sequence of events that led to it started in 1997, when Michigan and Nebraska both finished undefeated but couldn’t play each other because Nebraska was part of the Bowl Coalition and Michigan was contractually obligated to play in the Rose Bowl.That 2003 Orange Bowl SHOULD have been in the Rose Bowl. “Rose Bowl East” it was dubbed. But the old BCS system allowed the Orange to take the 3 and 4 ranked teams and nabbed them. The Rose Bowl was so pissed that they changed the system after that year to try and ensure a B1G-PAC match up if possible. The Gazette published a preview of the bowl with orange roses on the cover.
Not to go off on a tangent, but I don’t recall anything changing in terms of the selection process as a result of that matchup. The sequence of events that led to it started in 1997, when Michigan and Nebraska both finished undefeated but couldn’t play each other because Nebraska was part of the Bowl Coalition and Michigan was contractually obligated to play in the Rose Bowl.
The Rose Bowl, the Big Ten, and the Pac-10 all were worried they would become irrelevant on the national scene by isolating themselves from the Bowl Coalition. So they joined together with the other conferences and bowls and formed the BCS.
The Rose Bowl got the National Championship game at the end of the 2001 season featuring Miami and Nebraska. I don’t think they were too upset about that.
The reason Iowa and USC ended up in the Orange Bowl is that the BCS bowls that weren’t hosting the National Championship game and lost one of their partner teams to the title game got to pick an at-large replacement.
The Orange Bowl lost #1 Miami to the Fiesta Bowl and the Rose Bowl lost #2 Ohio State. So the Orange Bowl got to pick first and chose Iowa. The Rose Bowl got second pick. They were contractually obligated to take Pac-10 co-champion Washington State. The top available options for the other team were USC and Oklahoma. Obviously they didn’t want a conference matchup between USC and Wazzu, so they picked Oklahoma.
The Rose Bowl decided to ditch the traditional Big 10/Pac-10 arrangement after 1997, so they really had no one but themselves to blame.
Iowa got screwed in the bowl matchups. How the heck does Indiana get the Gator Bowl?
I don’t think that actually was the case. The Orange got first pick over the Rose to take Iowa because Miami (ACC) was ranked #1 and Ohio State (Big Ten) was ranked #2.The part that changed was that the Rose Bowl and Orange Bowl made an agreement after that game that no longer would the Orange “steal” a B1G vs PAC match-up from the Rose. They were only allowed to take USC to play Iowa from the Rose that year because of a rule that stated that the bowl with a larger payout got to take a team they both wanted. That’s what changed.