Why We Hate Scott Frost

Submitted by BursleyHall82 on

[MOD EDIT - Bumped to Diary Section for nice breakdown. Also because sometimes getting excited to face a team that was worse than Hawaii last year needs help sometimes.]

This has been mentioned numerous times in other posts, so it's probably worthy of its own thread. Many of you might be too young to know the story, and others may have forgotten it, so you're wondering: Why is there so much animosity among the Michigan fan base toward UCF head coach Scott Frost?

Here's the short version: Because he cost us a unanimous national championship in 1997, and he did it by denigrating Michigan.

Here's the longer story, and exactly what Frost said. The 1997 season was the last one before the BCS came in, so national champions were determined solely by the AP (media) and USA Today (coaches) polls. Michigan finished the season on Jan. 1, 1998, by beating Washington State in the Rose Bowl, 21-16, to finish 12-0.

Nebraska finished the season on Jan. 2, 1998, by beating Tennessee and Peyton Manning in the Orange Bowl, 42-17, to finish 13-0.

In both the AP and USA Today polls, Michigan was a clear No. 1 heading into the bowl games. This was primarily because Nebraska had to cheat to beat a very mediocre Missouri team late in the season. A Nebraska player admittedly kicked the ball in the end zone to keep it alive for a TD, and the refs didn't call him for it. (That's illegal.) The play became known as the "Flea Kicker," and it's very famous. Look it up.

In any case, Michigan's season-long body of work was better, which is why following the Missouri game, pollsters vaulted Michigan ahead of Nebraska. It should have stayed that way following the bowl games, but then Nebraska quarterback Scott Frost stepped in.

He knew that the AP was never going to sway from Michigan, but following the Orange Bowl, he made an impassioned plea to the coaches to give Tom Osborne (who was retiring) a national championship as a going-away present.

And this is the important part - and why we hate Scott Frost: He did it by denigrating Michigan. This is exactly what he said on the night of Jan. 2, 1998 (emphasis mine):

"So, it's up to the coaches. I'm so proud of this team and Coach Osborne, I don't want to see him go out without a championship. I basically have two points for the coaches:

"One, if you can look yourself in the mirror and say if your job depended on playing either Michigan or Nebraska to keep your job, who would you rather play? You watched the Rose Bowl and the Orange Bowl. Michigan won with a controversial play at the end. We took apart the third-ranked team in the country.

"The second point I have is: I can't see how any coach outside the Big Ten or the Pac-10 would vote for Michigan. Because if somebody from North Carolina, Florida State, West Virginia, Notre Dame--wherever it might--if they were undefeated and won the Alliance bowl game, they would expect to share the national title.

"I don't know who would win the game if we played Michigan. I think I know. I think all you guys know. The thing I'd like to say is: Who would be favored?

"I'd like to see the line on that game, because I think it would be seven, 10, 14 points (in Nebraska's favor). Any time that it's that way and you vote the other way, you've got to be crazy."

So, that's why we don't like Scott Frost, and that's why we want to see Harbaugh hang 70 on him on Saturday. Scott Frost whizzed a fastball at our head 19 years ago, and now he's finally coming up to the plate. It's time for payback.

Elephants and Wolverines never forget.

 

Comments

Don

September 5th, 2016 at 12:37 PM ^

#2 Nebraska played #3 Tennessee (who had an outside chance at the NC) led by Heisman runner-up Peyton Manning and kicked their asses up and down the field. It was a dominant performance, and the game was never in doubt.

#1 Michigan played #8 WSU (who had no chance at the NC) and squeaked out a 21-16 victory that came down to the last play of the game. To say it was not dominant is an understatement.

In the era of polls and bowls, this disparity in performance cost you. We think it stinks, but if we'd put a thrashing on WSU like we did Penn St. that year, that would have clinched it for us in both polls. It was a typical Carr-era bowl victory—exciting but far from a convincing win.

If your football fate is decided by people casting votes, then never give them a justification for voting against you. You do that by kicking the crap out of your opponent. Harbaugh understands that.

Ronnie Kaye

September 6th, 2016 at 1:39 AM ^

*ding ding ding* The offense was terrible in the Rose Bowl. We only had one sustained drive (the other two TDs were bombs to Streets, a rarity that season). Wazzu's D was very weak and it wasn't taken advantage of. Lloyd Carr and Mike DeBord were their normal, bad selves that season. They just had a historical defense to cover it up led by the best player in program history along with about eight other starters on that team who had good long NFL careers.

Blue Bayou

September 5th, 2016 at 11:44 AM ^

Please tell me she's on Twitter. I remember how obnoxious Scott Frost was in '97, when Woodson was capping of his historical season. After that iconic shot of Charles celebrating after the OSU game, Frost remarked "I don't have a rose in my mouth but..." The rotten apple doesn't fall far from the diseased tree. I'm not sure what's worse, mama Frost's bitter recollections or the way she keeps referring to him as "My Scotty!"

GreatLakes4

September 5th, 2016 at 12:46 PM ^

If you actually watched the game (Rose Bowl) Mr. Frost you'd realize we didn't win on a controversy at all. There were alot of blown calls for Wazzu that day. If anyone was getting screwed around it was Michigan. Furthermore that Michigan team would've destroyed the gimmick option offense.

160 IQ

September 5th, 2016 at 12:47 PM ^

The controversial play was when Nebraka kicked a pass to beat Missouri.  100% illegal.

Did Nebraska have 35 pros from that team like Michigan did?  Highly doubtful.

WolverineHistorian

September 5th, 2016 at 3:38 PM ^

How bad must Missouri feel? That was the exact same end zone where 7 years earlier, Colorado spiked the ball on 4th & goal and then scored the game winning touchdown on 5th down. As incredibly stupid as that was, there was somewhat of an excuse since that was the first year you could spike the ball in college football to stop the clock and not everybody understood the rules quite yet. You know you can't f*cking kick the ball up in an attempt to keep the play alive. It is illegal. Throw the damn flag. Nebraska fans are probably still sending muffin baskets to that officiating crew. The only reason they have any share of that national title is because of the refs incompetance.

grumbler

September 5th, 2016 at 2:29 PM ^

If the Quarterback of the football team can't be a homer, who can?  

I've got no problem with what Frost said, and the idea that it changed anyone's mind is absurd.

nogit

September 7th, 2016 at 10:47 PM ^

yea..... this just doesnt move the needle for me.  It's a QB arguing that you should vote for his team because 

a) he thinks they'd win the head to head

b) if you're from his bowl group, you should support the idea that if you go undefeated in that group you deserve at least a share of the national championship, full stop.

I guess that somehow is "denigrating michigan" and we should now hate him.

shoes

September 5th, 2016 at 3:31 PM ^

Nebraska would have struggled to move the ball and score against our 1997 defense. Football is a game of match-ups and that would have been a bad match-up for them. Peyton's Tennessee teams always choked in their biggest games, no shock they did it against Neb that year. 

uminks

September 6th, 2016 at 3:46 AM ^

that NE some how wins the west, so that Harbaugh can beat NE to a pulp and that Frost will be color for that game!  Let him be impressed when Michigan beats down his NE team 70-3 in the B1G championship game!

rschreiber91

September 6th, 2016 at 7:20 AM ^

An interesting fact not mentioned by the OP is that the Nebraska-Missouri game happened on November 8, which was referred to as "Judgment Day" by the media.  On that day, 4 of the 5 remaining undefeated teams played head-to-head -- #4 Michigan at  #2/3 Penn State and #3/2 Florida State at #5 North Carolina -- while #1 Nebraska played at Missouri, who was rather good at home at the time.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/11/08/sports/college-football-battles-of-un…

Michigan's win that day was so dominant and Nebraska's so shaky that Michigan jumped to #1 in both polls, despite the fact that two undefeated teams ahead of Michigan both won that week.  As we know, Michigan remained #1 in both polls until the final poll.

That said, I have no qualms with Scott Frost advocating for his team -- that's what you're supposed to do if you're him.  The issues are (1) the coaches who chose to vote an undefeated Michigan team third or fourth in their ballot out of spite, when there's no conceivable way they should have been anything lower than second and (2) the system that allowed them to do that.

At the end of the day, we got to print t-shirts that said National Champions on them, and we got a trophy to prove it.  No sour grapes for me.

Everyone Murders

September 6th, 2016 at 10:18 AM ^

If the takeaway here is that the QB of an undefeated team made what he thought was his best argument as to why Nebraska should win the national title, what the hell did we expect him to do?  He was a leader on the team, and probably believed what he said.  And Nebraska did look great against a (vastly overrated) UT.

Now I CAN muster up some hate for Fulmer.  I recall someone showed that the only way that the coaches' poll could have turned out the way it did is if someone voted Michigan 4th.  That someone is largely-recognized to be Fulmer, who was petulant because Woodson got the Heisman that season even though Manning came back to UT largely to collect what he and Fulmer thought was Manning's birthright.

So Phil Fulmer strikes me as a sack of shit.  Scott Frost I find hard to care much about.  It will be fun to watch Michigan pants his UCF team. 

Drbogue

September 6th, 2016 at 11:31 AM ^

Phil Fulmer's grad assist (or whoever they had place his vote) ranked Michigan #5 in their ballot which ended up giving Nebraska the USA Today #1. It was supposedly over Peyton losing the Heisman to Woodson. I stuck around in 1997 for a fifth year and so glad I did. The previous 4 years of 8-4 were misery (other than always beating OSU!).

GoBlueGladstone

September 6th, 2016 at 1:41 PM ^

I met him at the White House while they were waiting for Michigan to leave the podium with POTUS in 1998. He was not particularly friendly, which didn't bother me as much as he carried himself like that dude that wears the shirt tuxedo to prom thinking he's too clever by the half. 

SFBlue

September 6th, 2016 at 3:45 PM ^

Let's put this in perspective. In no way, shape, or form is the UCF game going to resemble a grudge match, or a rivalry, even if they dig up Woody, put a whistle around his neck, and send him to Orlando.

That having been said, to Hell with Scott Frost. 

 

 

Mgodiscgolfer

September 8th, 2016 at 2:55 AM ^

clocks last 1 1/3 seconds running off the clock on a spiked ball. Even though the referee new he missed a obvious pass interference call on a 60 yard pass because it was a OMG hurry up frantic situation in the first place. He went as far as put his hand on the flag to throw it then for reasons I will never believe doesn't pull the flag because he needed both hands to catch the ball thrown to him.

Talk about bad arguments, How do you go into a game as big as the Rose Bowl ranked #1 in every poll then win it by shutting down the highest scoring offense in the country to the tune of 16 points and some one leap frogs you. We all know if a team is favored in Vegas it is to get people to put money on them who would otherwise pick the other team to win. He said NOTHING that comes anywhere near a good point to make me think they would have got jobbed if Michigan wins it outright. Awe gee Tom Osborne is retiring lets just give them the national title because of things he has done in the past.