Take both of your hands, firmly grasp the spoon, and stir the pot.
It's better to be lucky than good!
Luck? Heck, magic happened in 1984. I knew George Orwell personally. Anyway, moving on 30 years into the here and now, this headline had me
thinking Coach Anae would be talking about current title hopes and chances along
those lines. It could happen again. The formula is there. Here is
what needs to happen; keep playing the exposure games against a couple of big
name schools a year and win those games. Take the rest of the schedule by storm
and beat Idaho State 8 times a year (done deal). And then use an undefeated
record and BYU brand name to lobby for a National Title Game. If all works out
up to this point then BYU will need to use their bowl prep for actual practices
and bust out their magic spin wheel and cross their fingers.Sarcasm?
Yes. Possibility of goal to be attainable? Actually, that is a yes as well. I took my shot and gave hope in return. That is the balance Daniel son.
I'm pretty sure Lavell Edwards said that going undefeated in CFB always
takes a measure if luck. Obviously it follows that winning a NC takes a measure
of luck as well. If you go back & look at the national champions from the
last 5 or even 10 years you see at least one or two games that they very easily
could have lost & more than a few against opponents that shouldn't have
been close. Kind of a non issue Rock, moving on...
That was my last year at BYU. It was a great year and unbelievable #1 ranking
starting off with the big win at Pitt. Now, all of us look like we at the Pitt.
But we still love our BYU football. Go Cougs.
Lucky is the most honest answer I have heard any BYU player/fan use ever. They
played the 3rd best team in the Big 10 who finished the year 6-6. Miami and
Nebraska were far superior teams that BYU should have played. They were awarded
the national title rather than earning it, which coincides with the honest
answer of luck provided by Anae.Go UTES!!
I was at that game covering it for the Football news (Detroit). I remember
thinking what a sore looser Bo Schembechler was. BYU was fortunate to win. Had
Bosco's knee and ankle been any worse, he never would have come back on the
field. Blaine Fowler had actually done fine when he took over, but the reality
is, BYU needed luck just to win that game. They had also lost many Holiday
Bowls on the basis of bad bounces and odd poor luck prior thereto. Luck however
is best defined as the point at crossroads of preparation and opportunity.
Auburn was incredibly lucky this past year. You can make your own luck if you
are ready! BYU held Michigan to 200 yards under their season average in that
game. They actually won it with defense of all things. Yes! BYU was lucky.
Every National Champion always is!
BYU was very lucky in 1984. Every team above them in the polls (including
no-names Navy and South Carolina)had their shot...and lost it. They eeked out a
win at Hawaii with a gem of a goaline stand at their own 1 inch line. The
Holiday Bowl committee tried hard do get the Cougs' biggest detractor (cry
babies) Oklahoma to put their money where their mouth was, man up and play the
Cougs in the Holiday bowl for the title...which they declined. (If Oklahoma had
won the Orange Bowl they probably would have jumped BYU in the polls and won the
championship anyway...but they LOST!!) The Holiday Bowl settled for Michigan and
BYU won despite 5 turnovers in a game with immense national pressure to win.
Bottom line, they won the national championship fair and square under the system
of the time...which caused the eventual birth of the elitist BCS. Yes, BYU was
very good that year and very lucky...but who really cares. The trophy is in
their trophy case and that says all that needs to be said. Nobody can ever take
it away. Football Champions Forever! Eat your heart out Utes!
Well, Wookie, they did do one thing no other team ever did that year and that
was go undefeated. They were rankled 33 and then #1 and #2 lost. What's
supposed to happen when you are undefeated and those above you lose a game?Frank Kush went undefeated at ASU one year, but finished #2 in the
country. Utah went undefeated, along with Auburn, but the luck part didn't
work out for the Utes because there was another team that also was
undefeated.No one that wins a national title as being the only
undefeated team is awarded a championship they didn't earn, especially when
every other teams had losses. Luck had to do with the other teams, not BYU.
They had a great defense that year, giving up at least 5 turn-overs to Michigan,
but they still won the game, even with a QB that was injured.I know
it's been a bitter pill for Utes all these years, but BYU did win a
national championship. (And had a Heisman Trophy Winner, and numerous
conference crowns at the time they were in the same conference as Utah.)Maybe never again....but in 1984---YES!!Go Cougars!!
Well, at least then we had an offense. Now we have one of the worst offenses
in the country. Mr. Anae remains the weak link in the chain...but at least
he's better than Doman. We have a weaker schedule than last year, but I
see only 7, maybe 8 wins. If this happens, perhaps we'll hire a real
offensive coordinator with a proven track record of success.
Re: Wookie & othersYou make it sound so easy. As though it
shouldn't be recognized as an accomplishment at all. And yet with all the
hot air you use you fail to mention that the Utes have never accomplished it
before or after. Was luck involved? Most likely. And the Utes have
never been so lucky themselves. Nor was any other team as lucky in 1984.
It's something we Cougars will remember and cherish. It must be pure
jealousy that makes you cut it down and belittle the accomplishment.
toosmartforyou:"Utah went undefeated, along with Auburn, but the
luck part didn't work out for the Utes because there was another team that
also was undefeated."Utah was the only undefeated team in 2008.
So there goes your argument.The "lucky" part Anae was likely
referring to, was that back in 1984, SOS wasn't taken into much
consideration. Unlike the case in 2008. And that's why a 13-0 cougar
team* -- who narrowly edges an unranked 6-6, Michigan team in the Holiday Bowl
-- could be "awarded" ("awarded"; because you certainly
didn't "win" it) a national title, whereas a 13-0 Ute team** -- who
routed a Top-10, 12-2 Alabama team -- had not. I know it's a
bitter pill for cougar fans, but nobody reveres your '84 squad as anything
more than a "zeitgeist" team under "fortuitous" circumstances.
Not an actual "best team in the country" kind of squad, which is to whom
the Nat'l Championship was intended to be awarded.
BigCougFan:"You make it sound so easy. As though it
shouldn't be recognized as an accomplishment at all. And yet with all the
hot air you use you fail to mention that the Utes have never accomplished it
before or after."Not so. All that the cougars
"accomplished", back in 1984, was "go undefeated". And
it's been the cougars who had never accomplished it before or after. Utah
had done it 5 times prior to 1984, and twice thereafter.And while it
isn't "easy" to go undefeated, it's a whole lot easy-ER when
you play a schedule like the one you did back in 1984. I doubt a single other
team who finished ranked in the Top-10 that year wouldn't have likewise
finished "undefeated" with your ultra weak SOS schedule.
@Naval Vet - so, who did "win" the national title in 1984? Perhaps
Washington, who finished second and, along with the Oklahoma team and coaches,
whined all bowl season that whoever won their bowl game should be national
champion? I suppose it's BYU's fault that neither Oklahoma or
Washington had the guts to accept an invitation to the Holiday Bowl.BYU thoroughly trounced Washington in the very next game the following season,
with both squads being very similar to the ones that ended the previous season.
It was the best available arrangement to give credibility to BYU's title,
or to destroy any credibility, and nearly everyone thought Washington would give
BYU their deserved comeuppance. Har-dee-har! I guess that game shut up
everyone except a few BYU-obsessed ankle biters 30 years later.Really - BYU won it fair and square. Well past time to congratulate them and
Actually Naval Vet everyone except a few UU "fans" say that BYU won the
national title. If any reporter or coach had thought otherwise they could have
voted otherwise - but it was unanimous. Every major poll thought that BYU had
won the national title.Of course the situation was fortuitous. How
does that change the reality?Face the facts, the people that
mattered back then thought BYU was the best team in the country and they well
knew who the Michigan team was (unlike current UU "fans"). In fact
there was a SOS element to the voting because it is in the minds of all the
voters. You don't need an actual number because there were no computer
polls back then. But the reality is that Utah recieved a worse ranking in the
human polls in 2006? (who can really remember) than the computer polls. I guess
none of the human voters thought much of Utah - and in the only poll that
mattered that year Utah was.... 6th.
Lets Debate I like the points. I am a BYU fan and at the time the system was in
place and BYU proved to be National Champions. I didn't like the BCS and I
was at the Sugar Bowl in 2008(2009) and I believe Utah by far was the best team
in the country. They should've been national champions, but under the dumb
system that was in place they didn't get the trophy. For me it
doesn't take away the team I watched in New Orleans that should've
been holding the national trophy. It is annoying on both sides to see the
comments that is so one sided. Let's try to be realistic and open minded
instead of only Blue or only Red exists. I think Urban Meyer said it best when
he was at Utah he said we can compete with anyone in the country, but if we have
a player go down we dont have the depth the other schools have. I agree. BYU
proved that, Utah proved that. What else needs to be said.
Lets also look (Yet again) at that Michigan team. They started the season by
beating #1 Miami. In 83 they had 3 losses and finished 8th and in 95 they had 1
loss and finished 2nd. Injuries took their toll on MU in 84 but by the time the
Holiday Bowl rolled around the were healthy. Also, Michigan lost to the second
best team in the country that year (Washington) by almost the same score that
they lost to BYU by. In other words, all the evidence points to the
fact that Michigan was a good team that year and that BYU and Washington were
equally better. Add in that BYU killed Washington the first game of the next
season and gee... I guess BYU really did win the national title. And I thought
that big trophy was a fake. That's OK Utah - Your 6th place
Sugar Bowl trophy is big and shinny.
I am both a Utah and USU graduate and cheered for the Utes to beat BYU back
then. But I have always considered piling on BYU for being ranked #1 in 1984 to
be sour grapes from anyone who has attempted that line of reasoning. One measure
of the quality of that BYU team that is often overlooked was the number of NFL
players it produced, and there was a significant amount. BYU in fact was holding
their own in the 1980's as an NFL factory on a rate comparable to most
college programs across the nation.It is an oversimplication for
"fans" posting here claiming they represent all Utah fans in their
biased comments the same way some "Cougar" fans might claim all Utah
fans hate the fact they won a national title. The best comparisons to what BYU
accomplished in 84 was what Utah did in 2004 and 2008.
There's not a Ute fan alive that wouldn't have taken the National
Championship the same way that BYU won it in 1984. Or any other team in the
country for that matter. You can digest it any way you want, but the Trophy is
STILL IN PROVO!
Re: Naval VetWhen you say that "All that the cougars
"accomplished", back in 1984, was "go undefeated", you miss a
very important fact.If you check your history books you'll
learn that after going undefeated they were actually proclaimed as "National
Champions'. You see, many teams go undefeated but only one team is awarded
the National Championship trophy. And while even Utah has gone undefeated they
still don't have a trophy in the trophy case that says they were National
Champions. I know it's a disappointment to Ute fans but you don't need
to let it twist the reality of the facts that it was something that the Cougars
really truly accomplished. You can spin it anyway you like... was
luck involved? Yes most likely it was but we'll take that kind of luck any
day of the week. Stay a faithful fan and maybe someday your team will get lucky
Lucky?Sounds like what he is hoping for from his quick to 3rd down
So help me understand the counter points shared as to why BYU should have the NC
back in 1984 when playing a team that finished 6-6 on the year? It is my
understanding that the two best teams, or at least close in accomplishments
shoudl be paired together to play for the NC. Here, we have a subpar Michigan
team playing a good BYU team. What I am trying to say is that the luck here is
in that BYU was awarded the NC rather than earning it. Earning it would have
been to have played a comparable team.Anyway, it doesn't
matter, it was 1984...GO UTES!!
@Wookie - by your logic, almost no team ever "earned" a national
championship prior to the BCS era, because conference champions were tied into
specific bowl games. It was very rare for a #1 and #2 team to end up in a bowl
game. There was almost never an opportunity for the #1 and #2 teams to be
paired in a bowl game to determine a national champion.Ironically,
1984 was close to one of those years, when Washington and Oklahoma played each
other in the Orange Bowl as the #2 and #3 teams, Washington having just one loss
which kept them from the Rose Bowl. As mentioned in prior posts, BYU played
Washington in the very next game the following season and trounced them.Under the system in place, BYU "earned" their national
championship just like every other team in that era - with a very good team, and
undefeated year (or close to it), and some luck.And, anyone who says
Michigan was a "sub-par" team in 1984, when all their players were
healthy as they were against BYU (and as they were NOT for most of the season),
is tremendously ignorant of that Michigan team.
All cougar fans who think beating Washington in 1985 validated their fortuitous
backing-in to the national title the year before need look no further than 6-wks
later to their loss to 1-10 UTEP. Would a REAL national champion
lose to a 1-10 WAC team?Nope.Case closed.
LetsDebate:Miami finished 1984 ranked 18th. Being overrated to
start the season does not validate the victor, and coaches have said for years:
"You're only as good as your record."And in
Michigan's case, they were 6-6.In 2013, a 5-7 Utah team beat
Stanford. Stanford finished that season as an 11-3, 11th-ranked Pac-12
Champion. So we beat a better team [#11 Stanford (11-3) > #18 Miami (8-5)]
than the '84 Wolverines, yet I don't recall ever hearing cougar fans
argue we belonged in the title game vs. FSU to determine whether or not the
Seminoles were the best team in the country. And don't forget, Utah was an
injury riddled team as well.Bottom line -- just like Anae said: the
cougars were "lucky". They were lucky they got to play a weak 6-6
Michigan team, rather than an 11-1 Washington team. They were lucky that
Michigan's QB (Jim Harbaugh) was NOT healthy (broken arm), and got to face
Chris Zurbrugg, who was a Freshman, and who was recovering from 2 cracked
vertebrae in his back.
Naval Vet - you may want to Google "biggest college football upsets."
Flukes do indeed happen, even to very good teams, even to national champions.It's best not to close your case by grasping at irrelevant straws
with a very weak argument.Congratulate BYU for 1984, or forget it,
and move on. Continual whining about it only exposes an embarrassing level of
bitterness and jealousy.BTW - very sincere and enthusiastic kudos to
the Ute's 2004 and 2008 football squads. Those teams could possibly have
beaten anyone in the country. Any BYU fan who chooses to minimize those great
BCS-busting teams only exposes an embarrassing level of bitterness and
jealousy.Why does anyone choose affiliation with the Embarrassingly
Bitter and Jealous Fan Club? I don't know, but it doesn't seem to be
a lonely club.
LetsDebate:"It's best not to close your case by grasping at
irrelevant straws with a very weak argument."You said:"...anyone who says Michigan was a 'sub-par' team in 1984, when
all their players were healthy as they were against BYU (and as they were NOT
for most of the season), is tremendously ignorant of that Michigan team."I just showed you that their starting QB was NOT "healthy"
(broken arm), and who was replaced by a "Freshman", who was recovering
from a "cracked vertebrae". That is NOT called "grasping at
irrelevant straws". That's called "refuting your case with
facts".The "irrelevant grasping of straws" was your
insistence that because a Harbaugh-led Michigan team beat the eventual
18th-ranked team in the country, it somehow meant that beating a 6-6 Michigan
team led by a Freshman QB (with a cracked vertebrae no less) was an airtight
case favoring the cougars' claim to have been the best team in the country
that year. It wasn't. You were just lucky. That's all.
Think of how sad it is when the highlight of a person's life is his high
school athletic accomplishments. It's a similar kind of pathetic existence
to obsess about the perceived injustice of your rival's greatest
accomplishment 30 years later. That Embarrassingly Bitter and Jealous Fan Club
really has a hold on many members.Case closed. 'Nuff said.
The End. LOL. Move on. Talk to the hand. That's All Folks. End of
story. I'm done.
I would think that being a Naval Vet would give a person enough fulfillment,
purpose, and perspective on life to avoid getting all worked up over a
30-year-old football game. You may want to look up the word Shadenfreud.
It's not a very attractive descriptor for one so proud of his military
service.Revel in the glorious memories of your favorite team's
best moments. Be gracious to your rivals in their best moments. Even with some
spirited banter, don't spend too much time denigrating the current or
recent status of your rivals. For heaven's sake, don't spend a minute
carping about your rival's 30-year-old accomplishment.@LetsDebate - Embarrassingly Bitter and Jealous Fan Club - good one, and such
an appropriate designation for some obsessed fans. Such an unworthy club for
our nation's bravest.
MrPlate:"You may want to look up the word Shadenfreud."You might want to look that word up too. It's
"schadenfreude"; not "shadenfreud". And you might also want to
look into enlisting in the service yourself. I would have loved to have seen
the look on your face after graduating from Basic Training, only to find out
that life/service in the military has absolutely nothing to do with cougar
sports. You'd have been so crushed.And THAT little brother is
Since I'm loyal to my cougars, AND gracious toward their opponents,
including the Utes, why would I be surprised or unable to handle that military
service is not about cougar sports? It wouldn't have occurred to me to
think about it.On the other hand, Naval Vet, you must have been
tremendously relieved to get out of the military, because I know life/service in
the military has absolutely nothing to do with hating BYU sports, which is so
very important to you. I'm sorry if that was a crushing realization upon
graduating from Basic Training.I have to assume you're
referencing yourself when you say "And THAT little brother is
schadenfreude," because only one of us has expressed gleeful hope of seeing
someone else crushed by supposed false expectations, and it ain't me.
Schadenfreude isn't usually something to brag about, but way to own it
proudly.I wish Cougars and Utes well in all their competitions, and
hope all fans quit that club referenced by LetsDebate and find simple enjoyment
whether either team wins or loses. And THAT, my big brother (since that's
important to you), is NOT Schadenfreude.
@navalvet, etc.In typical ute fan fashion you try and rewrite
history and desecrate the biggest accomplishment of any FBS program ever in the
state of Utah... The bottom line is that BYU won, they have the trophy and
according to the majority of AP writers and FBS coaches they finished the year
(1984)on top... Thus the National Championship...In fact, if BYU
were in the big bad pac12 They would be one of only 5 schools in the entire
conference who have EVER earned this achievement... USC, Washington, BYU, UCLA
and Stanford... Only USC, Washington, BYU and UCLA have a
championship that was decided by Polls (which started in 1936)... Only USC and
Washington have Championships more recent than BYU (USC has 2003 and 2004 but
they were only AP Championships as they were stripped of the Coaches Poll
Championships... And Washington has only a Coaches Poll Championship in 1991 as
Miami received the AP Championship that year)... In summary, BYU
would be the only team in this comparison that has won both the AP and Coaches
Poll Championship in the same year since 1972... OUCH... Yet the pac12 is
suppose to be some tough conference... Why?
I think there were at least nine players on the 84 team that played pro ball.
They were a good team with good players. Some of you mention luck, well I think
that always occurs. I don't recall which undefeated team Utah had but
Oregon State should have beaten Utah but didn't. So do we say it was luck
or was it extra effort by Utah to pull it out. I prefer the latter. The
cougars had their share of luck in 84 but still won. It is always fun to see
the local teams have success. Why do we have to belittle any team or the
athletes that play. That's why I moved to Utah was to watch the four
Universities along the Wasatch front. I have thoroughly enjoyed it.