TideMan 09,
Tend to agree with you but not here. Miami was not they were cracked up to be. Talented, sure. But simply look at their teams CLOSELY and a different picture emerges.
1983 - their first national title was a freak of nature. Basically, they were rated number five and all four teams above them were contractually obligated to go to certain bowls. They get Nebraska in a home game and win, jump an Auburn team with the same record that played a schedule three or four times more difficult than Miami, oh - and they lost to Florida, 28-3, so they weren't even the best team in Florida, much less the USA.
1985 - they shamelessly run up the score on Notre Dame. Now I'll admit I laughed because it was the Irish. But this year is sort of a microcosm. They lose to Florida in the opener AGAIN and then get smoked by Tennessee in the Sugar Bowl after spending a month whining about why they should be number one. Two SEC teams, two Miami losses.
1986 - go unbeaten until the end and then Vinny T throws five picks to Penn State and the Canes lose.
1987 - I'll admit I'd be hard-pressed to argue this particular year. This is their one undisputed title from that time frame. Since they beat the other unbeaten, Oklahoma, can't say much (yes Syracuse was unbeaten and didn't play anyone).
1988 - whine, whine. They lose to Notre Dame and then spend the entire month of the West Virginia-Notre Dame build-up saying that if West Virginia beats the Irish then MIAMI should be number one despite a lesser record and a loss to the Irish. What a bunch of whiners they were.
1989 - lose to Florida State, play a soft-touch schedule but since they beat Notre Dame and Auburn beat us, Miami is in line for the championship. When Notre Dame beats Colorado in the Orange Bowl, Miami jumps to number one. While I can see the reasoning again - they were not even the best team in FLORIDA, much less the entire USA. Yes, they beat a Notre Dame team that played a killer schedule while Miami was tip-toeing through the tulips (btw - I hate the Irish, too, so it's not like I'm for them). But this one was questionable.
1990 - they mess up and schedule some decent opponents early. Oops!! Two losses!! I contend that had Miami played two months EVERY year like their schedule this particular year, they would not have a single championship. Their early schedule was BYU (Heisman winner Ty Detmer), Cal (7-4-1), Iowa (who went to the Rose Bowl that year), Florida State (a top five team), and then after a breather with Kansas, they played Notre Dame. Yes - they finally played a DECENT schedule and lost TWICE in six games.
And you find this with them, which is why I don't respect them at all. They were 8-4 against the SEC during their "great" run, and one of those wins was against a terrible MSU team.
1991 - a good team, yes, but if you saw the Washington Huskies that year, they remind you of the 2011 Alabama team. I'm serious - they were THAT good on both sides of the ball and built similarly. Washington had only one game against a tough schedule that was closer than double digits, a narrow victory over Cal on the road. Miami played some decent teams this year - but then they ducked out on playing Florida in the Sugar Bowl and took the pansy game with Nebraska at home.
Their ducking tough foes and carefully crafting schedules will never get my respect. They were a freak that benefited from a lazy East Coast media. And btw - they were invited into the SEC when Arky and S Carolina came and they dodged - because they knew their reign would be over in a heartbeat.
And it was.
