Close Games. 1992

[selmaborntidefan]

I remember coach stallings saying that if we can put 17 on the board we expect to win, he knew his defense was pretty good. The miss st game was probably the toughest game of the season, I knew then that team was going to be special.

Exactly.

We lost five games on the field when we scored 17 or more (and tied the Vols in 1993).

1990 USM
1994 Florida
1995 Arkansas
1995 Auburn
1996 Florida

Two of those games (the ones in 1995) we were largely screwed by the officials. At least one of those two we'd win today on review (the Iron Bowl).

 

[TideEngineer08]

Our rushing offense was 23rd that year (208.9).
Our passing offense was 80th (153.9).
Our scoring offense was 26th (27.7).
Our TOTAL offense was 53rd out of 107 teams, so we were almost precisely an AVERAGE offense. That's funny to me because it always felt we were BELOW average.

But there's ALWAYS a second side to any statistic in sports.

We faced the following defenses:
Auburn - #11 rush defense, #7 pass defense, #5 total
Ole Miss - #3 rush, #6 pass, #6 total, #16 scoring
Miami - #8 rush, #5 pass, #8 total, #3 scoring
Florida - #25 rush
Tennessee - #26 total, #15 scoring
Southern Miss - #8 pass defense, #27 scoring defense (17.7 ppg)
La Tech - #10 scoring defense
Miss St - #17 scoring defense

Everyone looks at Auburn's 5-5-1 record and says, "They were lousy," but the fact is their defense was REALLY good. They gave up a lot of their points because their offense kept turning the ball over in their own side of the field. The "worst" scoring defense was faced was Tulane (98).

SCORING DEFENSE STATS 1992 (WHAT WE GOT)
Miami - 11.5 (34, granted, we had a Pick Six but we also got robbed 4 points on a dumb penalty)
La Tech - 15.2 (13)
Tennessee - 15.7 (17)
Ole Miss - 15.8 (31)
Miss St - 16.0 (30)
USM - 17.7 (17)
Auburn - 18.6 (17)
Arkansas - 19.0 (38)
S Carolina - 21.8 (48)
Florida - 22.8 (28)
LSU - 23.7 (31)
Vandy - 25.2 (25)
Tulane - 31.7 (37)

So.....three times we were held BELOW a team's average point surrendered (I don't count Vandy since you can't score .2 points, round down). But we were not held MUCH BELOW it, so those are essentially average performances. On the other hand, we doubled (or nearly doubled) the average surrender four times and TRIPLED it in a national championship game where the other team knew we were running it and still couldn't stop it.

What I'm saying is this: viewed in the context of the schedule, the 1992 offense wasn't nearly as bad as everyone remembers/thinks it was. It wasn't exactly the 1999 Rams, but it wasn't the 2000 Ravens, either.

Well, on offense it wasn't.

That offense did what it was designed to do, and it did it very well. Jay Barker was a sophomore. David Palmer was as well. We had 3 good RBs - Lassic, Sherman (another soph), and Chris Anderson. We had 2 great fullbacks - Martin Houston, and Tarrant Lynch. The offensive line was undersized (Roosevelt Patterson was the biggest at 277) but they were athletic. I'll never forget one of the Miami defensive players mouthing off about Patterson being fat, and then we ran all over them.

It was no accident that team went 13-0. Yes the defense was elite, once in a generation great. But the offense was not a weakness at all. That's why I described it as conservative. Stallings didn't want Mal Moore taking chances, and so they didn't very often.

 

[tusks_n_raider]

That offense did what it was designed to do, and it did it very well. Jay Barker was a sophomore. David Palmer was as well. We had 3 good RBs - Lassic, Sherman (another soph), and Chris Anderson. We had 2 great fullbacks - Martin Houston, and Tarrant Lynch. The offensive line was undersized (Roosevelt Patterson was the biggest at 277) but they were athletic. I'll never forget one of the Miami defensive players mouthing off about Patterson being fat, and then we ran all over them.

It was no accident that team went 13-0. Yes the defense was elite, once in a generation great. But the offense was not a weakness at all. That's why I described it as conservative. Stallings didn't want Mal Moore taking chances, and so they didn't very often.

I’ve always thought if Palmer had come back in ‘94 we go undefeated that year.

Probably still finish 3rd but undefeated nonetheless.

Barker could sling it in ‘94. He had the 4th best QBR (higher than Wuerffel).

We could open it up that year when needed (see Bama vs UGA).

If you could pair the ‘94 Offense with the ‘92 Defense then it’s probably one of our Best Complete teams ever.

 

[TideEngineer08]

I’ve always thought if Palmer had come back in ‘94 we go undefeated that year.

Probably still finish 3rd but undefeated nonetheless.

Barker could sling it in ‘94. He had the 4th best QBR (higher than Wuerffel).

We could open it up that year when needed (see Bama vs UGA).

If you could pair the ‘94 Offense with the ‘92 Defense then it’s probably one of our Best Complete teams ever.

Absolutely. We should have beaten Florida as it was. Surely Palmer would have been worth 2 points in that game.

As to the polls. They wanted to give Osborne the NC so he was getting it regardless after they beat Miami in the Orange Bowl. We would have played FSU in the Sugar.

But look if they didn’t give Paterno and Penn State a share, they were never giving us one. And that Penn State team was fantastic. Seems like they had one close game all year. Illinois, maybe? Otherwise they were dominant against everyone they played.

Our only chance was to actually face Nebraska in the bowl, and that wasn’t possible. They were obligated to the Orange, Alabama would have been obligated to the Sugar, and Penn State was obligated to the Rose. Had Penn State not just joined the Big Ten a couple of seasons earlier, they would have been able to be placed in the Orange or Sugar. That would have been an interesting dilemma.

 

[dabamafan]

3 first downs
54 yards
Only TD for USM was a Pick Six
They got a FG - IIRC - recovering a fumble near our red zone and didn't gain a yard.
We fumbled six times, lost two
Our early TD was a fake punt





That was La Tech.
But yeah, he bailed us out.
I think he sat out USM suspended.




We had a horrid sequence of possessions and they caught a damn miracle for a TD.

But it also showed we could handle adversity so in that sense it was important, too.

Thank you for fixing my memory lapses, it's a good thing I don't teach history. My heart was in the right place though.

 

[bravo6]

The S Miss game was close, scorewise, but they couldn't move the ball much,period. David Palmer punt return if memory serves me.
The MissSt game was the worst imo. Alabama was playing awful and got a couple fortunate breaks and calls. ( is this blasphemy )

I was at the MSU game. It was not fun.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Absolutely. We should have beaten Florida as it was. Surely Palmer would have been worth 2 points in that game.

As to the polls. They wanted to give Osborne the NC so he was getting it regardless after they beat Miami in the Orange Bowl. We would have played FSU in the Sugar.

But look if they didn’t give Paterno and Penn State a share, they were never giving us one. And that Penn State team was fantastic. Seems like they had one close game all year. Illinois, maybe? Otherwise they were dominant against everyone they played.

This is all good, and I agree with every bit of it. One odd piece of trivia:

Penn State was ranked #1 in the nation in BOTH polls. The last week of October, they sandblasted #21 Ohio State, 63-14. They dropped in the AP poll. Yes, they did. They remained #1 in the coaches poll, and the next week they beat Indiana, 35-29. Looks bad, right? Well, Penn State was leading, 35-15, with maybe 3 minutes or so left. They put in their FOURTH-STRING players to get reps. Indiana scored two TDs, one on the last play of the game to make it LOOK close, but it was never close.

The next poll, the coaches dropped Penn State to #2 as well. This after the COACHES were whining about teams running up scores. Penn State let off the gas - and in all honesty, it probably cost them the national championship.

Our only chance was to actually face Nebraska in the bowl, and that wasn’t possible.

This is not - at least not technically - correct. In 1992-93-94, the non-B1G teams operated under the Bowl Alliance, which was designed to match up #1 vs #2 so long as they weren't in ROSE BOWL conferences. The "obligated bowls" had contracts designed to allow this by this point in time. So if then #3 Alabama had boat raced #5 Florida, Alabama COULD have played Nebraska in the Orange Bowl IF Alabama wound up ranked #2 after that game.

Well, except for one key thing that happened between the Iron Bowl and the SECCG: the bowls suddenly announced publicly "okay, these are the matchups." Lee Corso was on our side, though. He was blowing the trumpet for Alabama, basically saying, "If they beat #16 Miss State on the road, knock off an Auburn who hasn't lost in two years, beat Florida in the SECCG by any margin and then knock off Florida State in the Sugar Bowl, HOW CAN YOU VOTE FOR ANY OTHER TEAM for the top spot?"

In other words, IN THEORY and BY RULE, we could have played #1 Nebraska. It wasn't like 1978, "Hey you go here, you go here, you go here, no exceptions."

I've always been glad we lost that one to Florida, though. Or to someone. It would still hurt to this day to have been robbed that year when the cheerleading for Tom Osborne was so damned obvious.

They were obligated to the Orange, Alabama would have been obligated to the Sugar, and Penn State was obligated to the Rose. Had Penn State not just joined the Big Ten a couple of seasons earlier, they would have been able to be placed in the Orange or Sugar. That would have been an interesting dilemma.

You just reminded me of something.

Back in the 1980s for many years, the rumor of Penn State going to the B1G was out there. There was even this whole, "We wanna play in the Rose Bowl!" So that particular year they FINALLY get to go. And because they do, they kinda get screwed over. I enjoyed mocking some of their fans. "Hey - YOU WANTED to go to the Rose Bowl, you're there, what's the problem?"

Penn State was also hurt - let's face it - by playing Oregon back when that was more like playing Cal would be today in a big bowl game. Oregon wasn't USC or UCLA or even Washington, so obviously they weren't any good, right?

 

[dabamafan]

I was at the MSU game. It was not fun.

My bar tab that night was rather high.But it did have a happy ending..

 

[TideEngineer08]

This is not - at least not technically - correct. In 1992-93-94, the non-B1G teams operated under the Bowl Alliance, which was designed to match up #1 vs #2 so long as they weren't in ROSE BOWL conferences. The "obligated bowls" had contracts designed to allow this by this point in time. So if then #3 Alabama had boat raced #5 Florida, Alabama COULD have played Nebraska in the Orange Bowl IF Alabama wound up ranked #2 after that game.

I could not remember the details, and whether it was the Bowl Alliance, or the Boal Coalition (don't really remember differences in those two). I knew, of course, it was not the BCS which began in 1998.

So basically, the chance to face Nebraska was there but we would have been locked out by Penn State who occupied the #2 slot even though they were going to the Rose Bowl? That would have sucked, indeed.

I mean, I'm not convinced we would have beaten Florida State in the Sugar Bowl. If I'm not mistaken, that was a Danny Kannell team, the one which famously came back from a 31-3 deficit against Florida to tie that game 31-31? And then they got a rematch against Florida in the Sugar Bowl and beat them prettily handily if I'm not mistaken. And I'm not sure we'd have beaten Penn State or Nebraska either, for that matter, had we gotten the chance to face either team.

But I have forgotten; in our hypothetical, David Palmer has returned for his senior season in 1994. In that case, I'd certainly give us a great chance to win against any of those teams, but IMO, Penn State was on a different level that year. I may be wrong, but I think they'd have beaten Nebraska if they could have played them.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

They were obligated to the Orange, Alabama would have been obligated to the Sugar, and Penn State was obligated to the Rose.

Btw, I want to add two things right here:

1) what you say here is exactly why I have NO PROBLEM with BYU winning the 1984 national championship. The bowls OFFERED to let Oklahoma out of their contract or let Washington play BYU in the Holiday Bowl, where they were obligated to be by contract. Neither team took it because the Holiday Bowl payout was 1/3 of the Orange Bowl. Fine - they chose the money - but you don't then get to complain about BYU's schedule, either.

2) I don't know if you read my 1978 writeup, but the Penn State Pedophile Protector and Coach Bryant were trying to work a deal because it looked like Alabama was not going to get the 1979 Sugar Bowl (back then it was "if there's a tie, the team who hasn't been most recently"), so they concocted a scheme to match up #1 Penn State if it was #2 Alabama in the GATOR Bowl, not on New Year's Day.

What broke it up is that just as they agreed, NEBRASKA (yes, the same one we had routed, 20-3) jumped us to #2 in the poll - and Penn State suddenly saw the chance for both dollar signs and a national championship. Seriously - we owe Missouri for that 1978 national title as they beat Nebraska and put us at #2.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

So basically, the chance to face Nebraska was there but we would have been locked out by Penn State who occupied the #2 slot even though they were going to the Rose Bowl? That would have sucked, indeed.

Yep.

The bowls gambled that even if we beat Florida, it wouldn't be a 35-7 job that might make us #2 so they went ahead and announced their selections.

I mean, I'm not convinced we would have beaten Florida State in the Sugar Bowl. If I'm not mistaken, that was a Danny Kannell team, the one which famously came back from a 31-3 deficit against Florida to tie that game 31-31? And then they got a rematch against Florida in the Sugar Bowl and beat them prettily handily if I'm not mistaken. And I'm not sure we'd have beaten Penn State or Nebraska either, for that matter, had we gotten the chance to face either team.

I actually agree with all of this.

Corso himself said he didn't think we could run the table but if we did, we deserved to be sole champions.

 

[rtr90]

I’ve always thought if Palmer had come back in ‘94 we go undefeated that year.

Probably still finish 3rd but undefeated nonetheless.

Barker could sling it in ‘94. He had the 4th best QBR (higher than Wuerffel).

We could open it up that year when needed (see Bama vs UGA).

If you could pair the ‘94 Offense with the ‘92 Defense then it’s probably one of our Best Complete teams ever.

Homer was off coord in 94

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I could not remember the details, and whether it was the Bowl Alliance, or the Boal Coalition (don't really remember differences in those two). I knew, of course, it was not the BCS which began in 1998.

So basically, the chance to face Nebraska was there but we would have been locked out by Penn State who occupied the #2 slot even though they were going to the Rose Bowl? That would have sucked, indeed.

I mean, I'm not convinced we would have beaten Florida State in the Sugar Bowl. If I'm not mistaken, that was a Danny Kannell team, the one which famously came back from a 31-3 deficit against Florida to tie that game 31-31? And then they got a rematch against Florida in the Sugar Bowl and beat them prettily handily if I'm not mistaken. And I'm not sure we'd have beaten Penn State or Nebraska either, for that matter, had we gotten the chance to face either team.

But I have forgotten; in our hypothetical, David Palmer has returned for his senior season in 1994. In that case, I'd certainly give us a great chance to win against any of those teams, but IMO, Penn State was on a different level that year. I may be wrong, but I think they'd have beaten Nebraska if they could have played them.

From Great To Legend: A Look Back At The 1978 Alabama Crimson Tide | TideFans.com