1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

BYU '84 ... Are they in the '84 BCS if it existed then?

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Football_Bat, Dec 4, 2006.

  1. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    BYU won the 1984 national championship by squeaking past a 6-5 Michigan team in the Holiday Bowl. I submit that in the current structure, BYU would probably weasel into the big four bowls on the Boise State plan but would not sniff a national championship.

    So is the system better or worse?
     
  2. Columbo

    Columbo Active Member

    Not against Michigan..... Michigan gets screwed again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  3. Freelance Hack

    Freelance Hack Active Member

    BYU was a power in the 80s. Few teams wanted to play in Provo (IIRC, Miami went there once as a No. 1 and got beat). Just because they weren't in a power conference doesn't diminish what they did.

    They ran the table. No one else did. While they should have played someone better in the Holiday Bowl, they still deserved the national title.
     
  4. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    That Michigan team was dreadful; once Jim Harbaugh got hurt, it couldn't move the football.
    BYU or Boise get in in 2006, but not both since both are in the Mountain West. It would come at the expense of an at-large (Michigan or LSU) and the Big 10 and SEC wouldn't let that happen.
    Keep in mind, in 1984, most bowls didn't have conference tie-ins other than the champions. So a BYU could get a good opponent (it didn't, it got Michigan)
    Boise State is this year's BYU
     
  5. sportschick

    sportschick Active Member

    Boise State's not in the Mountain West. It's a WAC team.
     
  6. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    Oopsie...
    Those tie-ins are even worse...

    GMAC, MPC Computers, New Mexico, Sheraton Hawaii.
     
  7. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    There is a big difference.

    BYU was rated No. 1 in the polls (AP and UPI at the time if I remember correctly). Being No. 1 in the two main polls carries a lot of weight in BCS. So I'm thinking they would have at least made the championship game.
     
  8. joe king

    joe king Active Member

    Same could be said about Boise State this year. No BCS team wants to play on the smurf turf. The Broncos aren't in a power conference (which doesn't diminish what they've done) but they ran the table. If, as you argue, BYU deserved that national title, why, then, does Boise State not deserve the chance to play for one this year?
     
  9. busuncle

    busuncle Member

    Maybe Boise State does deserve it. But the question was whether BYU would have made the national title game in 1984 had it existed then. I think BYU probably would have made it based on their strength in the human polls.
    For whatever reason, human pollsters are less impressed with Boise State. (The Broncos actually get more respect from the computers).
     
  10. Freelance Hack

    Freelance Hack Active Member

    I think Boise deserved a shot. Louisville did, too. Any one-loss or undefeated team not named Michigan deserves a shot.

    Unfortunately, we have a system that will not allow multiple teams to take their shot. It almost would be better to go back to having bowls with conference tie-ins. It's certainly not any more controversial than the current set-up.
     
  11. JayFarrar

    JayFarrar Well-Known Member

    Actually some large paper or magazine should work with the computer people and have them do the BCS No. 1 and BCS No. 2 title games for the last 25 years.
    It would be interesting to see how it would work out.
     
  12. Bubbler

    Bubbler Active Member

    I hate it when historical arguments are based on present factors. BYU's national title has to placed in the framework of its time.

    The ONLY reason BYU played a 6-5 Michigan team is because the then-major bowls (Orange, Rose, Sugar, Cotton) were slavish to their conference tie-ins. The then-WAC champion was obligated to play in the Holiday Bowl. No room for compromise, no argument about playing "up" into one of the majors.

    And knowing the major conferences -- and at that time -- the major independents, they would have fought like hell to keep BYU out of their private garden party anyway.

    There was no Big East football in 1984. The ACC and SEC were different, the Southwest Conference was still viable, and Independent football was still a major force. The WAC (basically today's Mountain West) as it was then constituted might have had a better chance by snapping up one of the automatic bids, though I doubt it.

    BYU's title was among the things that eroded the old bowl tie-in system. Good riddance.

    Now if BCS go could the same route in favor of a playoff, that's the next step.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page