Tiebreaker.

[Spence]

I just watched the show tiebreaker on the B10 network about the 10-10 tie that ultimately led to the Big Ten sending more than one team to a bowl game. What lots of people don't know is that between 1904 and 1974 the Big ten played in 31 bowl games. With the Big Ten champ being the only school aloud to play in any post season game when they allowed it at all. In 1974 the AD's had to vote to break the 10-10 tie on the field between the Buckeyes and Michigan. They voted Ohio State in because the Michigan QB Dennis Franklin hut his arm and the AD's thought that Ohio State had the best chance to beat USC in the Rose bowl. After that year they decided to let more than one team play in bowl games.

Bo Schembechler was asked after the voter whether he thought that AD's voted against them because they didn't like or was jealous of him. He responding telling them "Anytime you have had the success we've had, I'm sure their are some people that might have reservations. But I don't think that I am any more disliked than the coach they are sending to the Rose Bowl". I thought that was great.

From 1972-1974 Michigan's record was 30-2-1. Those teams never played in a bowl game. The 2 losses and the tie were to Ohio State. They are the reason that the B-10 decided to let more than one team go bowling.

[Eric]

From one end of the spectrum to 39 bowl games

[Spence]

Yeah, we were one of the few who one sent one representative to a bowl even back then. They said that years later when playing Illinois that Bo was ranting to the players about them voting against Michigan for motivation. They player said he had no clue what the old man was talking about but if it pissed him off that much it must be worth playing hard for.

[RazorHawk]

What many do not remember is in the 60's, I believe, the winner of the Big Ten could not go to the Rose Bowl in back to back years. The Pac8 or Pac10 was not that competitive in the Rose Bowl, so If a Big Ten team won the conference for a second straight year, the Big Ten sent the runner-up to the Rose Bowl, while the Big Ten winner did not go to a bowl game.

[Spence]

What many do not remember is in the 60's, I believe, the winner of the Big Ten could not go to the Rose Bowl in back to back years. The Pac8 or Pac10 was not that competitive in the Rose Bowl, so If a Big Ten team won the conference for a second straight year, the Big Ten sent the runner-up to the Rose Bowl, while the Big Ten winner did not go to a bowl game.

I remember that too. That cost us a Rose bowl too.

[donovan]

What many do not remember is in the 60's, I believe, the winner of the Big Ten could not go to the Rose Bowl in back to back years. The Pac8 or Pac10 was not that competitive in the Rose Bowl, so If a Big Ten team won the conference for a second straight year, the Big Ten sent the runner-up to the Rose Bowl, while the Big Ten winner did not go to a bowl game.

I think that is correct for both conferences. Neither conference, as I remember, could send the same team back to back. Not sure I am willing to buy into the not competitive reason, but as I remember the Pac 8 got beat up on a regular basis...and at our age...regularity is not a bad condition.

[Spence]

The B10 dominated the Rose Bowl in the 50's 9-1, the 60's were even 5-5, and the 70's were dominated by the PAC 9-1. So in those three decades the games were 50-50.

[RazorHawk]

What many do not remember is in the 60's, I believe, the winner of the Big Ten could not go to the Rose Bowl in back to back years. The Pac8 or Pac10 was not that competitive in the Rose Bowl, so If a Big Ten team won the conference for a second straight year, the Big Ten sent the runner-up to the Rose Bowl, while the Big Ten winner did not go to a bowl game.

I think that is correct for both conferences. Neither conference, as I remember, could send the same team back to back. Not sure I am willing to buy into the not competitive reason, but as I remember the Pac 8 got beat up on a regular basis...and at our age...regularity is not a bad condition.

I don't believe the Pac 8 had that same rule. Cal went 3 straight years 1949-1951, Washington went back to back in 1960-1961. It looks like that Big Ten rule was changed in the early 70's or late 60's, with Ohio St going 4 straight years from 1973-1976.

[donovan]

What many do not remember is in the 60's, I believe, the winner of the Big Ten could not go to the Rose Bowl in back to back years. The Pac8 or Pac10 was not that competitive in the Rose Bowl, so If a Big Ten team won the conference for a second straight year, the Big Ten sent the runner-up to the Rose Bowl, while the Big Ten winner did not go to a bowl game.

I think that is correct for both conferences. Neither conference, as I remember, could send the same team back to back. Not sure I am willing to buy into the not competitive reason, but as I remember the Pac 8 got beat up on a regular basis...and at our age...regularity is not a bad condition.

I don't believe the Pac 8 had that same rule. Cal went 3 straight years 1949-1951, Washington went back to back in 1960-1961. It looks like that Big Ten rule was changed in the early 70's or late 60's, with Ohio St going 4 straight years from 1973-1976.

Everyone is correct...because agreements in college football mean nothing.....this is from the Rose Bowl History.

"Both conferences had a "no repeat" rule in force for a number of years. Under this rule, any team that had appeared in the Rose Bowl game the previous season could not go again, even if they were the conference champion. The notable exceptions to this rule were Washington playing in the 1960 and 1961 games and Minnesota playing in the 1961 and 1962 games during the period when the conference agreements were in a state of flux. The Big Ten abolished this rule in 1972. The AAWU/Pac-8 had abandoned its no-repeat rule by the time Southern California played in four consecutive Rose Bowl games from 1967-1970.

Both conferences also had "exclusive agreements" with the Rose Bowl game, in the sense that member schools were not allowed to play in any other bowl game. Both conferences abolished this rule before the 1975 college football season. As a result, Michigan and USC were allowed to play in the 1976 Orange Bowl and the 1975 Liberty Bowl, respectively."