Did you watch BYU vs. Michigan in 1984 live on TV?

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I know you fifty-something overpaid attorney types have a little trouble keeping up when the conversation turns to football, so to help you out here, we're talking about the 94 copper bowl.

But if you want to start playing transitive property of defeating the Huskies, one team defeated the Huskies 55-14 this year. The other team needed a bad call at the two second mark to escape an embarrassing upset. Or, as they say around here, "scoreboard."

This post makes no sense at all.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by YOhio

This post makes no sense at all.

I was replying to a post that made no sense at all.

[yankeecoug]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

This is roughly the equivalent of a Ute trying to brag about defeating Southern Cal in a year when USC went 6-6 and lost to Kansas State and Stanford.

Finally someone with a clue...

I hate to sound like a hater of my own team but...

I was always very proud of BYU's 1984 national champion ship and its awesome to think they have a slim chance at doing it again in 2008!!

But I was not so proud when I saw what took place in the 1984 season...I saw a documentary on LaVell Edwards - Comcast On Demand a couple years ago and found out the following which makes me think thank goodness for the BCS even as lame as it is.

1. BYU wins national championship beating 5th place in the Big Ten - Michigan Wolverines.

2. Michigan ended the season WITHOUT a winning record - just 6-6 which by today's standards barely qualifies a team for a bowl game.

3. The first win of the season was against #3 Pitt, not a bad win! Then I found out Pitt finished 3-7 and obviously not ranked. We beat them 20-14.

4. Nothing you can say to going undefeated but we played the wrong team in the bowl game.

5. We barely beat 6-6 Wyoming (41-38), We had a close one with 6-5 Utah (24-14) but most of them are anyway.

6. Unrelated but I found out LaVell graduated from USU and played on their football team

7. Not sure how I can justify that we were a legit champion other than its not our fault we beat anyone we ever played that year. Just thought I'd mention that info I never knew about. Maybe this year we will avenge that championship with a legit opponent?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I know you fifty-something overpaid attorney types have a little trouble keeping up when the conversation turns to football, so to help you out here, we're talking about the 94 copper bowl.

But if you want to start playing the transitive property of defeating the Huskies game, one team defeated the Huskies 55-14 this year. The other team needed a bad call at the two second mark to escape an embarrassing upset.

Or, as they say around here, "scoreboard."

No problem. I'm glad we softened them up for you, so that they came in demoralized. Maybe you can return the favor by softening up TCU for us.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Originally Posted by yankeecoug

Finally someone with a clue...

I hate to sound like a hater of my own team but...

I was always very proud of BYU's 1984 national champion ship and its awesome to think they have a slim chance at doing it again in 2008!!

But I was not so proud when I saw what took place in the 1984 season...I saw a documentary on LaVell Edwards - Comcast On Demand a couple years ago and found out the following which makes me think thank goodness for the BCS even as lame as it is.

1. BYU wins national championship beating 5th place in the Big Ten - Michigan Wolverines.

2. Michigan ended the season WITHOUT a winning record - just 6-6 which by today's standards barely qualifies a team for a bowl game.

3. The first win of the season was against #3 Pitt, not a bad win! Then I found out Pitt finished 3-7 and obviously not ranked. We beat them 20-14.

4. Nothing you can say to going undefeated but we played the wrong team in the bowl game.

5. We barely beat 6-6 Wyoming (41-3, We had a close one with 6-5 Utah (24-14) but most of them are anyway.

6. Unrelated but I found out LaVell graduated from USU and played on their football team

7. Not sure how I can justify that we were a legit champion other than its not our fault we beat anyone we ever played that year. Just thought I'd mention that info I never knew about. Maybe this year we will avenge that championship with a legit opponent?

I never tire of addressing those who dare denigrate the '84 Title. I concede BYU was far from being the strongest national champion, but thanks to the proper alignment of stars, great timing, and a little luck, BYU deserved the title, a point with which a majority of the nation's sportswriters and Div. I coaches agreed.

Consider the only three logical alternatives at season's end in 1984: Oklahoma, Washington and Florida. Thanks in part to that goofy covered wagon and some overzealous cheerleaders, Oklahoma lost its bowl game, so hard cheese. Plus, it was coached by Barry Switzer, a fact that should deny consideration in any event.

Washington? Nice team, but should a team which can't win its own conference be considered for a national championship? Survey says....fuhgeddaboudit. Plus, Washington was invited to play BYU and had it done so, could have won a title and ended the discussion. But it chose the Orange Bowl's filthy lucre, shunning all that is good and right about college sports, gambling (a UW favorite) the Wolverines could do the heavy lifting for them. Screw 'em. And need I remind the viewers about the carnage that ensued a few months later when Don James brought his wannabes to Provo? I believe the Huskies scored a field goal, which was nice.

Finally, Florida. Probably the most talent-laden team of the bunch. Also the most scandal-plagued, getting cited a few months later for over 100 NCAA violations. Think how much better the Cougs would have been had they been similarly cavalier about compliance. I believe The Sporting News picked them No. 1, but unlike the AP, UPI, and other polls, TSN cared little about things like eligibility and felonies.

BYU played by the rules, defeated every team brave enough to play them, and did so despite some tough injuries (the image of a limping Bosco, throwing the winning TD pass to Smith, will cure even the most severe case of flaccidity). BYU was far from the strongest national champion, but considering the competition, was very deserving, as hundreds of voters agreed. And you're "not so proud"?

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by yankeecoug

Finally someone with a clue...

I hate to sound like a hater of my own team but...

I was always very proud of BYU's 1984 national champion ship and its awesome to think they have a slim chance at doing it again in 2008!!

But I was not so proud when I saw what took place in the 1984 season...I saw a documentary on LaVell Edwards - Comcast On Demand a couple years ago and found out the following which makes me think thank goodness for the BCS even as lame as it is.

1. BYU wins national championship beating 5th place in the Big Ten - Michigan Wolverines.

2. Michigan ended the season WITHOUT a winning record - just 6-6 which by today's standards barely qualifies a team for a bowl game.

3. The first win of the season was against #3 Pitt, not a bad win! Then I found out Pitt finished 3-7 and obviously not ranked. We beat them 20-14.

4. Nothing you can say to going undefeated but we played the wrong team in the bowl game.

5. We barely beat 6-6 Wyoming (41-3, We had a close one with 6-5 Utah (24-14) but most of them are anyway.

6. Unrelated but I found out LaVell graduated from USU and played on their football team

7. Not sure how I can justify that we were a legit champion other than its not our fault we beat anyone we ever played that year. Just thought I'd mention that info I never knew about. Maybe this year we will avenge that championship with a legit opponent?

um, wow. I was just trying to slam BYU and Utah simultaneously. I didn't mean to suggest the title wasn't legit (although honestly I've never heard of anybody else getting a penalty on a mascot).

You realize that all national titles are like that, right? They always involve close calls and luck, and up til the end of the 90s #1 never played #2 because of the bowl tie-ins. And it's nearly impossible to go undefeated no matter the caliber of competition, so if you guys had a perfect season and the AP gave you the title there's no reason to denigrate that accomplishment.

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by yankeecoug

I hate to sound like a hater of my own team but...

Boooooooooo!!!!
Boooooooooo!!!!
Boooooooooo!!!!
Boooooooooo!!!!
Boooooooooo!!!!
Boooooooooo!!!!
Boooooooooo!!!!
Boooooooooo!!!!

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by cougjunkie

Suck your mother, Queer.

he got mixed up...I think he ment pinche

[Surfah]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

he got mixed up...I think he ment pinche

Yeah that cracked me up.

[Venkman]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

I never tire of addressing those who dare denigrate the '84 Title. I concede BYU was far from being the strongest national champion, but thanks to the proper alignment of stars, great timing, and a little luck, BYU deserved the title, a point with which a majority of the nation's sportswriters and Div. I coaches agreed.

Consider the only three logical alternatives at season's end in 1984: Oklahoma, Washington and Florida. Thanks in part to that goofy covered wagon and some overzealous cheerleaders, Oklahoma lost its bowl game, so hard cheese. Plus, it was coached by Barry Switzer, a fact that should deny consideration in any event.

Washington? Nice team, but should a team which can't win its own conference be considered for a national championship? Survey says....fuhgeddaboudit. Plus, Washington was invited to play BYU and had it done so, could have won a title and ended the discussion. But it chose the Orange Bowl's filthy lucre, shunning all that is good and right about college sports, gambling (a UW favorite) the Wolverines could do the heavy lifting for them. Screw 'em. And need I remind the viewers about the carnage that ensued a few months later when Don James brought his wannabes to Provo? I believe the Huskies scored a field goal, which was nice.

Finally, Florida. Probably the most talent-laden team of the bunch. Also the most scandal-plagued, getting cited a few months later for over 100 NCAA violations. Think how much better the Cougs would have been had they been similarly cavalier about compliance. I believe The Sporting News picked them No. 1, but unlike the AP, UPI, and other polls, TSN cared little about things like eligibility and felonies.

BYU played by the rules, defeated every team brave enough to play them, and did so despite some tough injuries (the image of a limping Bosco, throwing the winning TD pass to Smith, will cure even the most severe case of flaccidity). BYU was far from the strongest national champion, but considering the competition, was very deserving, as hundreds of voters agreed. And you're "not so proud"?

Amen, brother. And to continue with the apologia, Michigan was better than their 6-6 record indicated. They were pretty decimated by injuries during the year, but many of their starters were back to health by the Holiday Bowl.

At least that's what Dick Harmon (or was it Paul James?) have said. I can't think of any more credible sources than either of those two.