Our MNC Wednesday miniseries drifts one more season back in time this weekend with another look at a far-distant year in the history of college football. We have an interesting campaign to assess this time around, with a split mythical national championship in the experts’ estimation. Again, this is why we do what we do: not only for our own edification but also for the benefit of the not-so-casual reader. One of the 1912 chosen champs was dethroned by our analysis last year, so … let’s see here.

The 1912 MNC: Harvard (Helms, NCF-tie) & Penn State (NCF-tie); Wisconsin (DMP)

The Harvard Crimson (9-0, No. 8 SRS, No. 29 SOS) and the Penn State Nittany Lions (8-0, No. 4 SRS, No. 68 SOS) were the jointly anointed duo for the season, but with only 76 major-college teams on the scene for this campaign, it’s clear the latter’s schedule was not up to snuff. Penn State played just five real schools, and in the three “cupcake” games? The Nittany Lions outscored their overmatched opponents by a silly 103-0 margin. That highly inflated the sabermetric ranking, of course.

Yet the other so-called co-champion also played four small schools, outdoing them by a combined 98-3 score. Plus, Harvard played just a single road game. Now we know travel was a bit harder in these days, but still, that’s quite problematic. For comparison’s sake, Penn State left home for half its total schedule of opponents. So, we do know that traveling was possible for schools that needed or wanted to do it. We have to rank the Crimson over the Nittany Lions based on SOS, but we need more.

So, here are the other teams, prescreened, we’d like to include in this analysis:

  • Wisconsin (7-0): No. 1 SRS, No. 9 SOS (out of 76)
  • Auburn (6-1-1): No. 2 SRS, No. 1 SOS
  • Vanderbilt (8-1-1): No. 3 SRS, No. 14 SOS
  • Texas A&M (8-1): No. 5 SRS, No. 49 SOS
  • Georgia (6-1-1): No. 7 SRS, No. 5 SOS
  • Georgetown (8-1): No. 9 SRS, No. 39 SOS

A few things first to streamline this comparison include eliminating the Aggies and the Hoyas, due to considerably weaker schedules. TAMU outscored its three weaklings by a 166-0 margin, while Georgetown took care of its business against a weaker trio by a aggregate 150-0 score. Those lopsided results killed the SOS numbers while artificially boosting the sabermetric ranking(s). We just can’t abide by that when a team like the Tigers played no small schools; even Wisconsin played only one.

The future SEC teams on this list played kind of a round-robin tourney among themselves, too: Auburn lost to Georgia on the road in the final game of the season; Vanderbilt tied the Tigers on the road; and the Bulldogs lost to the Commodores at home by a 46-0 score. That last tidbit basically eliminates Georgia from this evaluation, whether fair or not. A close loss would not have eliminated the Bulldogs, although getting torched on your home turf like that by another team under consideration is egregious.

Auburn’s profile is excellent, obvious, but transitive correlation here is weird: how did the Tigers manage to lose to Georgia while tying Vandy? If Auburn was the equal of the Commodores, how did it drop that game against the Bulldogs, even if on the road? Admittedly, that final game was played just five days after the Tigers’ tie against Vanderbilt, so poor foresight/scheduling may have done Auburn in here. If Auburn wins that last game against Georgia, this is a different conversation, to be sure. Alas …

Vanderbilt’s loss, by the way, was to the Crimson on the road. This means the Commodores played three road games against Top 10 teams, and even if they had some cupcakes, that’s impressive scheduling, whether intended or not. We have to rank Vandy ahead of Auburn at this point, as the tie “edge” goes to the Commodores, even if the overall SOS is favor of Auburn. Individual results matter, and the Tigers’ loss to Georgia is “worse” than Vandy’s loss to Harvard, really. Argue with us if you want, though.

This leaves us with Vanderbilt or the Badgers, who went undefeated like Harvard and Penn State did—and rates out as the top sabermetric team this season by almost a four-point margin over the No. 2 team. That’s significant, and Wisconsin played just a single small school, while running the table against six major-college teams by a 233-29 margin. Admittedly, the Badgers played just two road games, but the overall SOS mark is in the Top 10, and without a loss or a tie, it’s plenty enough to survive here.

In the end, this MNC goes to Wisconsin, and we’re confident with this choice. They went undefeated; they topped the SRS; and they had a Top 10 SOS rating, too. No other team can match that combination profile. Thus, this becomes the Badgers’ first-ever title in our analyses, and we congratulate them on this achievement, so late in the game. Certainly, it’s a matter of better “early” than never in this case. Yes, we won’t quit our day job(s); never worry there. We will be back next week, too, for an encore.