1973 Michigan vs ohio highlights- The infamous 10-10 tie
I know I said my next video would be Michigan vs san diego state 2004, but I couldn't wait to get this one up. This is the infamous 10-10 tie from 1973. Michigan was screwed over by the big ten athletic directors who voted for ohio to the Rose Bowl.
ohio only attempted ONE pass the entire game, in the 4th quarter, which was intercepted by Michigan.
I personally am a huge advocate for Michigan recognizing and claiming 1973 as national championship. They have been recognized as national champions by the National Championship Foundation, but the university doesn't claim the title. Hopefully Dave Brandon does the right thing, and claims it.
I guess you didn't see my reply to your last video. You can embed in the OP if you check "use old embed code" on YouTube.
No I did not see that. Thank you.
Classy self-upvote.
Guilty as charged....
You better stop that or I'm not going to be your internet friend anymore.
Unlike 'bama, who claim random years for no apparent reason...
When they heard that we were not going to claim 1973, and they saw that it was just lying there and available, they said "You gonna' claim that?"
I wasn't alive to see this game but one could make an argument that the hype leading up to this game was probably bigger than the 97 game.
You have both teams undefeated, Michigan at 10-0, OSU at 9-0. They're ranked #1, we're ranked #4. Winner goes to the Rose Bowl, loser gets no bowl. Win this game, and either team gets the national title by beating a very weak USC team in Pasadena. Yeah, even though we're ranked 4th, there's no doubt we get at least a share of the title, especially with a win over the #1 ranked team in our last regular season game.
Mike Lantry missing those field goals...just enough to end the game with a tie so Sparty's vote can send Ohio to the Rose Bowl. Bastards.
Mike Lantry's missed field goals were the soul dong punches of my youth (before I even knew what that was). Not sure I want to relive it.
Considering the huge trouble that Bo had in beating anybody from the Pac-8/Pac-10 in the Rose Bowl—especially USC—a victory on Jan. 1 was far from likely.
Aside from that, your characterization of the 1973 USC team as "very weak" is without factual basis. They were returning a good part of the squad that went undefeated en route to an uncontested NC in 1972, including such players as Lynn Swann, Pat Haden, Marvin Cobb, Anthony Davis, Gary Jeter, and Richard Wood. USC went 9-1-1 in the regular season, going undefeated in the conference, tying then-#8 Oklahoma at home, and losing to then-#8 Notre Dame in South Bend.
Oklahoma finished the 1973 season ranked #2, going 10-0-1. The only reason they didn't figure into the NC picture was because they were on probation that season for using ineligible players the previous season. '73 was Barry Switzer's first season, and was the first of eight straight Big 8 championships.
As for the USC loss to ND? The Irish ended up as national champions for the '73 season after beating an undefeated and #1-ranked Crimson Tide in the Sugar Bowl.
So no, that 1973 USC team was far from being "very weak."
I was at the 1973 game, and it was probably the most painful game I ever attended in person for all the obvious reasons.
My dad almost got booted out of the student section at this game for completely flipping out on the asshole Ohio-student boyfriend of one of my mom's sorority sisters. The girl never talked to my mom again.
Ad: Bando Parents
I raise my glass to your dad for proper defense of honor!
Sorry, but how much could a title possibly mean to you when the school hasn't bothered claiming anything with it for 40 years and it's from an organization that doesn't even have a wikipedia page?
The selective claiming, revisionist history and incessant debating that goes on over college football paper championships has to be by far the silliest thing in all of American sport and totally cheapens what the word "championship" is supposed to mean. It's ludicrous.
alabama CLAIMS 14, but one of the years they claim, they lost 2 games and finished ranked #20.
Bo deserves a national championship added to his legacy. This team did not lose one game, they allowed only a total of 68 points scored on them all season.
If my dad called his elementary school classmates to inform them he was declaring himself "Ultimate Third Grade Recess Badass," I'm not sure how much due respect that would earn him. These manufactured NCs aren't as far away from the absurdity of such a thing as you seem to think.
They are mythical of course. Which is why I am puzzled as to how any adult would care so much about something so superficial. I'm not speaking of the media poll/coaches poll titles - although those are sketchy enough in some cases - but the secondary ones. Ones awarded by something called "The Dunkel System." (yes, that actually existed and provided an option for schools to lay these empty claims).
Even though the AP didn't exist when Yost began coaching at Michigan, how does anyone deny the Point-A-Minute teams as the best in the nation? They obliterated teams. Certain systems like the Dickinson and Houlgate systems were the essential systems at the time. I'm sure in 50 years people are going to look at Michigan's 1997 national championship and scoff at it since there wasn't a playoff. The playoff makes the AP/Coaches polls irrelevant now in terms of selecting national champions.
You are suggesting an irrelevant, secondary system should get run from a season well into the media poll/coaches poll era (1973) and that it be done 40 years after the fact. THAT is the topic, not Yost's teams or what was relevant at the time.
If Michigan recognizing 1973 means a lot to you, you really need to grow up.
Michigan claims National Championships in 1903 & 1904 by that same irrelevant selector.
USC recognized a National Championship 65 years after the fact in 2004.
http://www.usctrojans.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/072604aaa.html
I was at that game. Seem to remember snow flurries at one point but wouldn't swear to it. Dennis Franklin's shoulder injury was supposedly the key factor in the vote.
Go Blue!
We should have gone for 2.
I actually had not seen the end of this game before, but I knew the result - the missed field goals, when viewed, add another dimension to the dong punch feeling.
However, despite the tie and the lack of bowl assignment, it is comforting to know that, if nothing else, we were the reason the Buckeyes were denied the NC that year, with Notre Dame and Alabama playing in the Sugar Bowl that year. I think Ohio was #2 in both surveys.
If I am not mistaken, one significant change that was inspired by this game was the removal of the so-called "Rose Bowl or no bowl" rule from the Big Ten books, and I believe also that Michigan was the first beneficiary of the change when they went to the 1975 Orange Bowl.
The "inspiration" to remove the Rose-Bowl-or-no-Bowl rule was Bo, violently and relentlessly jumping down the throats of every AD and Big Ten official he could find until they finally changed the rule.
Thanks so much for posting this. It was the first game I attended. I was 13 and sitting with hippie older cousins who were smoking the first weed I ever smelled. We were in the end zone where Lantry missed the FG's. On one of them – must've been the first – it looked so good to us and everybody was going wild. We couldn't believe the ref! Even at that age, I felt how awful it was when it ended.
I didn't know that smelling weed was a big first. But it was the 70s so what do I know.
We might as well claim it since ohio claims the one in 1970 when they lost the rose bowl
was looking for a copy of Michigan/eastern michigan HD game from 2009? one of denards coming out party as a freshman.