No they shouldn't have. They were only highly ranked because they beat a Pitt team ranked #3 to start the season, said Pitt squad finished with 3 wins. After that they played almost nothing but their weak opponents in the WAC, and in half of those games they won by 10 or less points. Even their bowl game wasn't impressive, barely beating a very mediocre Michigan.
@@kaminsod4077 nice well you can live in that parallel universe all you want. The rest of us will live in the real world where BYU has a consensus natty banner and you have to cry about it
@chasebart they only played 2 teams with 7 wins? 8 of the teams had losing records. Pound your chest. 😂 Fun fact... when did BYU have their first 10 win season? 1979, coincidentally the first year after ASU and Arizona last the WAC. Those teams owned byu at the time. You should thank them for leaving our these seasons would have never had happened with then losses to them. 😂
Loved Lavell Edwards. As a coach he was 40 years ahead of his time. Realized that a running play was a wasted play. One of his quotes was "we're going to run 70 plays this game, 68 will be pass plays. Try to stop us." The NFL has finally caught up with his philosophy. Scary to think what he might have done at a big school with athletes that were full-time football players and didn't have to attend class like they did at BYU.
All other American sports leagues see the lack of parity as a bad thing. FBS College football is the only one hell bent on killing what little parity they still have.
Like he stated in this video, it's all about marketing and what teams bring in the most money for games. It's all about money. It's not about who is the best team anymore. Teams are pushed in the rankings (SEC) to make strength of schedule look better so certain teams are made to look "dominant". This is why ESECPN always hypes up SEC teams now. Just pay attention this season. More SEC teams are pushed up high and as soon as they lose, others are pushed up high to keep the conference looking so "great". Notice how many fans now root for a conference (SEC) instead of their teams. The SEC marketing has worked. Now fans of teams that never even make it to a CCG can feel good by rooting for a conference. The marketing has worked.
What is often forgotten is BYU crushed Washington 31-3 in the first game of the following season (1985) after the Huskies disputed the '84 title with both teams returning essentially the same talent.
Its also forgotten that they won 24 games in a row before being crowned champs. That combine with the respect pollsters had for lavell gave em the title.
Anyone who read Barry Switzer’s book knows the pressure came not from the programs but from the networks. NBC paid big money for the rights to the Orange Bowl and the thought of no one tuning in because the National Champion was crowned days earlier was terrifying. He said he didn’t want to talk about BYU because his team needed to focus on their game, but NBC kept telling him to plug the game as “the real national title game.” So even though he still likes to visit the “Switzer water treatment plant” near Provo the bottom line is the networks are running the show. And thank goodness BYU is a national brand that is able to follow Pit, Houston, Boston College, TCU, UCF, Rutgers, and Cincinnati by leaving small conference purgatory. At this point, it’s hard to tell if Boise States, San Diago States or SMU will ever get that shot.
Actually it was about the Orange Bowl having a championship game. Sometimes we over analyze. It was about the Orange Bowl being able to host a national championship. Which, they did. Most people wanted Brigham Young to play Oklahoma and the general consensus of opinion was that would have determined a titleist. So, when Washington was represented, most people thought, perhaps justifiably if Oklahoma could beat Washington they would be a legitimate national champion. Washington was substituted for Brigham Young and Washington also had a chance to play Brigham Young. Brigham Young was top dog. People are asking why? It isn't that complicated. Brigham Young played a competitive schedule. Western Athletic Conference was a major football conference at the time. Eighth of eleven. Top eight probably are roughly equivalent to top six, now. Mountain West Conference is probably comparable to the Western Athletic Conference. That's why some people think it was a diminished national championship. But there are quality programs in the Mountain West Conference. Boise State is roughly comparable to Brigham Young University. So if Boise could finish 13-0 like they did in 2006 that is something to write home about. And, it was! Brigham Young and Boise State roughly comparable to the same thing. In 2006 the national champion was Florida. Florida was a team in contention but lost to Miami FL. Miami FL was 8-5 overall. Air Force Academy finished 8-4. Brigham Young defeated Air Force 30-25. I suspect Brigham Young defeating the Academy catapulted them over Florida although admittedly Florida would have been an especially tough team to beat. That's probably why Florida is recognized as a legitimate titleist. Together with Louisiana State. They tied for a conference championship. Louisiana State lost to Notre Dame. Notre Dame lost to the Academy. Brigham Young defeated Air Force in Colorado Springs, CO. I think Brigham Young demonstrated supremacy over Louisiana State by that fact. Florida lost to Miami, FL. Miami FL lost to Michigan. Brigham Young defeated Michigan. Brigham Young > Michigan > Miami FL> Florida. Obviously that's circumstantial.
@@christopherfoote4643 that's just stupid. A>B>C doesn't work in sports. In 2008, Texas beat OU, Texas Tech beat Texas, and OU beat Texas Tech. Only fans come up w/ your "analysis."
At the time, I thought the "big" conferences felt they had an exclusive club and regardless of what BYU did that season, they would never be in the club. I was disgusted with how the media treated BYU even though they did everything they were asked to do.
Those same power conferences made a serious effort to eliminate the automatic bid in basketball, but now they just settle for stealing all the at-large bids with mediocre .500 teams.
@@christopherfoote4643Conspiracy is a strong word, but to recall a few things that happened during that season: 1) One of the networks (ESPN, ABC?) had a call in poll where fans to express their opinion on whether BYU should be #1. 2) Bryant Gumbel called BYU, "Bo Diddley Tech." 3) Barry Switzer (HC of Oklahoma) was very vocal that BYU should not be considered a contender for the National Championship. None of that would have happened if it had been a school from a "big" conference.
I was actually in Europe during that season and didn't get to see a lot of the games. My parents sent me a newspaper shortly after BYU was named National Champions. It listed all of the contenders who all had one or more losses. The writer basically justified BYU's championship based on the fact that BYU had either defeated that team or a team they later lost to that season. I cut out the article and put it in my journal... I've got it somewhere in storage.
As I recall, it was a BYU math professor who came up with that . BYU could only win as many games as they played, of course, but every other team lost to somebody who lost to somebody (etc. etc.) who lost to BYU. It was an interesting observation, an may possibly hold more weight than some other arguments. But that was the problem back then. The national champion was determined by polls, opinions, and pretty much anything other than on the field. Today things are somewhat better, but money has so much become king that certain conferences have been allowed to band together to shut the other conference out. NIL only made things worse, even though I applaud seeing players get financially rewarded for the sacrifice it takes to play. But when the Big 5 (Big 4) have the big money locked up, what chance does does anyone else have of locking up the best talent? Oh well, bitch bitch bitch...
And 4 loss Texas team over a one loss BYU Team getting a better bowl game. That's f-up! That should tell you how much they really care about money more, like he mentioned in this video.
A team can only beat the teams in front of them and BYU did exactly that in 1984. They were the only team that went undefeated that year and no top five team wanted to play them in a major bowl. Prior to this, the formula to win the national title was a great defense, a strong running game with a complimentary passing game and finally great special teams. BYU changed the formula and proved a pass heavy team with a complimentary running game, a deep defense and good special teams. Miami followed this formula in 1989 & 1991 and Florida did this in 1996.
What an amazing story and great video! Underrated content, this was really awesome to watch, great job! Wow Robbie Bosco was ballin' the man could make plays happens and trusted his team in key spots. That epic battle against Hawaii, the epic come from behind victory against Michigan how close the AP poll was going into the Orange Bowl. Crazy stuff.
Great video! As a BYU fan myself, I find BYU's National Championship seriously upsets some people. It was nice to hear a non BYU, non BYU hating, voice to explain the circumstances surrounding the Natty and the downstream impacts.
And having BYU or any mid major program isn't a bad thing. I get why people upset with a mid major program from a small conference, meaning somewhat low tier Competition winning it all. But Having BYU win the natty help brings that vibe of a level playing field that anyone can win a National Championship. And help make College Football more fun to watch, like how the NCAA Basketball Tournament is fun to watch. I wish your team the best of luck in the Big 12 nowadays.
@@adriansmith5279 I agree. Its one of the reasons the NFL is particularly popular. I mean, since 2010, there have been 11 different teams that have won the Super Bowl. Thats 1/3 of the league in just over 10 years. People love thinking that their team is within striking distance of a Super Bowl. Anyway, good luck to your teams too!
@christopherfoote4643 I don't mind you correcting me. Because this is the 80s/early 80s, I wasn't even alive until the late 90s(now in my mid-20s). So is nice to hear that the WAC... nowadays doesn't even have a football league(despite them trying to bring it back recently), which was actually better than it was at the time.
@@adriansmith5279I wasn't necessarily correcting you. Western Athletic Conference was a diminished level major conference roughly 8/11. They were below the bar. I studied this extensively. Brigham Young fell under the bar but were buffered by Iowa. Iowa and Brigham Young share a title. They were co-champions. It became official in 1991. F.W.I.W. Iowa and Brigham Young share a title. Florida and Louisiana State share a title. Washington and Southern California share a title. It takes a village. Brigham Young, Florida and Washington are titleists. Nobody really won it.
In 1976 Arizona State finished as the only undefeated school in College Football, beat the number 5 ranked Nebraska in the Fiesta Bowl and only finished number 2. They should have been the first WAC school to win the National Championship. I applaud the 1984 BYU team for showing it could be done and they deserved that championship.
That was quite the colossal schedule they had there. LOL. If they'd only beaten................Wyoming.............a little more handily they would have gotten it.
Shoutout to JKJ on another solid video. You explaining why we haven't a non-power conference National Champions is spot on. Like ever since 1984 BYU Championship they really don't want another mid-major program winning. Not just because there no good enough, they want the brand name school and school that make the most money represent College Football. Like Boise State back in the 2000s was ahead of there time and in their peak. Had Prime Boise State play during the Playoff Era. Who knows?
Who doesn’t? The ap and coachs polls voted for it… what do you think the bcs was? Ap, coachs and average of computer polls. What happened with the committee? G5 gets in because they play one great team and several decent teams as well as got a little lucky. That’s been the minimum formula for a g5 to get in. So why don’t g5 teams get in? They for the most part don’t want to.
@@christopherfoote464384 BYU’s schedule vs 2006 Boise state’s schedule is pretty much a wash till the bowl game which wasn’t BYUs fault. I’d vote neither NC.
@@christopherfoote4643 no it’s literally always about opinion. From day one to now. I’m not suggesting, that’s what I said. Limited to the bowl alliance?
It didn't. There was a bowl alliance prior to the BCS and a bowl coalition prior to that. And in 1984 Oklahoma and Brigham Young were obligated to play in title games separated from each other.
It was #1 v #2 AS VOTED ON BY POLLSTERS (concentrated in the major media markets, with all of their regional biases at play). Then, with BCS, it is controlled BY THE SELF-STYLED MAJOR CONFERENCES with a token rep from the "mid-majors" (in itself a pejorative term). If NCAA was really serious about the sport and its players, they would reassume control of the game and use ADs and coaches from DII and DIII to do polling and evaluations of DI sports.
@@christopherfoote4643And each iteration bent on assuring that a "1984 scenario" could never happen again. IE - we have to keep BYU (or Boise State, or Fresno State, or Hawaii, .....) from ever having a shot. It was, and continues to be, a caste system - even within the "Major" conferences
It didn't. It would have happened in 1984 except that Brigham Young was obligated to the Holiday Bowl. Washington could have participated in the Holiday Bowl. In retrospect that would have settled it. Oklahoma was rated higher than Washington. Washington played for the national championship instead of Brigham Young. Brigham Young was an NCAA titleist. They advanced to the championship game. Michigan was capable of winning. That was demonstrated to the way the game represented itself. Iowa shares a title with Brigham Young University. Brigham Young played Iowa in 1991. That resolved a lot of it. Washington still needs to play Brigham Young in a title game.
College football was a beauty contest in 1984. Money always played a part in college sports but there was a huge amount of pressure by TV networks who wanted a large audience for their games.
South Carolina waa probably the front-runner but lost to Navy. Navy was 4-6-1 and lost to Air Force and Notre Dame. They also tied Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh actually tied Brigham Young. Pittsburgh was 3-6-2 and Wisconsin was 7-4-1. Collectively that's 10-10-3. Or 5-5-1 independently. Meaning Brigham Young and Iowa are co-champions. Michigan was admitted to the Holiday Bowl but began 1985 5-0. A tournament would have required Michigan to be 5-0 in a post-season tournament to advance to a championship game. Michigan was represented. Brigham Young was an NCAA collegiate titleist. Iowa tied Wisconsin and therefore share a title.
College football has always been shady and about the money. But once players got the opportunity to cash in, it’s now a problem. These other schools get screwed over and should have their own championship game
I would have voted BYU the title in 84. But that long ago season always felt to me like several teams lost the title....more than BYU winning it. They just got real lucky.
No not really. They were only about 50.0% capable but they made it all up in 1996. That is why it's no longer a disputed national championship. It's official and it is an NCAA title.
No. I don't think so. You can call it luck but it took a lot of patience among other things. Luck might have played a part. But it is never lucky to win that many consecutive games. Plus Robbie Bosco was injured. If you think that is luck then you're not very intelligent.
@@TulsaSooner1979what is that supposed to mean? Western Athletic Conference was actually among the more distinguished. I did a retrospective on it. You might be surprised just how capable it was. It wasn't the best. But it wasn't the worst. By the way Brigham Young doesn't claim the title exclusively. They share it. That is partly why it was as controversial as it was. Iowa and Brigham Young share a title. That is fairly obvious.
I don't know. Was it luck? Illinois was 10-2 in 1983. If they had beaten two teams (Missouri and U.C.L.A.) Brigham Young defeated they're a consensus (unanimous) national champion. Illinois was 10-2. Brigham Young finished seventh. I don't think it was luck. It maybe included luck. I don't think it's lucky to finish 11-1 and potentially a titleist.
Just found your page and I’m loving the videos so far, I wish you would do something on the Rise & Fall and Rise & Fall again of UM Hurricanes. My Grandma whirled there 43 years in residency and met tons of players and coaches so it would be cool to watch And with the new Schnellenberger series Vs Louisville introduced it would be relevant
Yeah and Wichita State was especially very good weren't they? Yes they were. Losing in a tournament is inconsequential to winning a title. That is additional games that are unessential to a title. So Wichita State might actually BE a national champion. Ever consider that? I do. I consider it. Because it's reality and I like living in reality.
Florida was on probation for things that the NCAA doesn't consider wrong nowadays. They had Neal Anderson, John L. Williams and Lorenzo Hampton at RB. Their freshman QB, Kerwin Bell, didn't need to do much since they pounded teams into submission toward the end of the year. The NYT ranked them #1 at the end of their season
They were selected but it's questionable at best they were a titleist. The reason they were selected is because collectively they merited one. Louisiana State shares in it. They gave it to Florida but it's a co-championship. It should have been given to both. Louisiana State University tied Florida. They were co-champions. They both merited recognition. Louisiana State lost to Nebraska. So a more deserving titleist would have been Nebraska. Not Florida. That's why it wasn't as simple as selecting one team.
In 1996, Penn State was actually awarded the at-large spot in the Fiesta Bowl. Texas beat Nebraska in the Big XII title game and they were automatically given a berth in the alliance, thus had to picked for an Alliance bowl (Fiesta). Nebraska was also an at-large and was picked for the Orange Bowl.
@@brianlaneherder3666 Texas was picked last, but that's because the Fiesta had the final pick. But they were forced to pick them, as the Big XII champ had to be picked. But in actuality, it was Penn State picked over BYU
There was a bowl alliance in 1984. Michigan would have been an eight seed to a tournament of thirty two teams. North Carolina was an eight seed two seasons ago when they played Kansas. Kansas had to rally to win. North Carolina had to win five elimination games to advance. In 1985 Michigan began 5-0. Against tournament competition. Before losing to Iowa. In a title game. Iowa was 8-4-1 in 1984 and carried half of the load. They share a title. It became official in 1991. Brigham Young tied Iowa. Brigham Young might have won but blew an Extra point attempt that sailed left.
A final note BYU has joined the BIG12 conference in 2023, but that will also not guarantee them a spot as the 2007 Kansas team, known as a basketball school, was snubbed by the NCAA for having one loss while everyone else had two except for a one loss Ohio State who went to the title game and got pummeled and a undefeated Hawaii team who went to the Sugar Bowl and got pummeled as well! Kansas, winner of the Orange Bowl, was the only team from a BCS automatic-qualifying conference to finish the entire season with just one loss.
One loss is enough to eliminate them. If they were a national champion they probably don't lose to Missouri. Missouri lost to Oklahoma. Twice. Nobody thinks Kansas won a title.
According to the College Football Reference site, BYU had the 82nd ranked schedule. Florida's was ranked 5th without a bowl game. Their only loss was to Miami in a close game until the last minute. It was on a neutral site and Florida was starting a freshman for this opener. Miami was defending NC.
Miami FL was 8-5. Northwestern (last year) was 8-5. Northwestern and Michigan (6-5) are comparable. Brigham Young was comparable to Florida State (last season). F.W.I.W.
Florida also tied Louisiana State. So it wasn't about one game. It was about losing to Miami FL in arguably their national championship game. It's pretty hard to claim a national championship when you lose the only title game you qualify for and tie an SEC Championship Game. Isn't it?
Air Force lost to Brigham Young University. That eliminated Air Force although they did play Texas in the Bluebonnet Bowl. I don't necessarily follow it but Air Force nearly played Penn State and it's a possibility they might have beaten them. Making them a legitimate titleist.
Bosco would not be denied. Blaine Fowler came in just after the hit and did great. Bosco came back in and finished the game. Great performance. @@thelastjohnwayne
Thanks for the info I was just starting to get into College football at that time. I did not watch the game. I was living in Reno and just starting to go to Wolf Pack football games and then I got hooked on College football and I have been addicted ever since @@stevenbooth6792
The 2004 Utah Utes won every game by double digits including the Fiesta Bowl. They got the unlucky cards dealt of also having USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn also being undefeated at the end of the regular season. That team was the real team that had a shot if any of them did.
Worst then they were given the absolute worst BCS team of all time (Pitt, which was only in because the BIG East got a bid) and worst it made Alex Smith look like he should be number one pick (if you like safe 250 yards 2 tds and a game plan in NFC championship where Harbaugh only calls run plays)
Good vid. I could be wrong but I believe more than 3 made nfl teams. Trevor Matich, Glen Kowslowski, Vai Sikahema, the full back (don’t recall his name), Bosco was drafted. I believe there were more - could be wrong on that.
@@ericwhittle4657 The Jets beat the Colts in the 3rd Super Bowl because they knew how to throw the ball in a time where zone defense was not practiced in the NFL as they would run A gap trap followed by off tackle and GUT runs. BYU had an ability to pass that Nebraska couldn't have kept with, they would have most likely played a version of cover 0 defense against Nebraska and forced them to pass.
@@getbig2501 lol gotta love internet coaches that don't realize these things are easier said than done. Nebraska's defense regularly dismantled pass-happy teams, including Steve Spurrier and Danny Wuerffel in what was the most lopsided national title game ever played until as recently as last year, when Georgia finally beat the record. There's this assumption that because Nebraska was a run-oriented offense, that it somehow meant they had a defense oriented toward stopping the run as well, but that's simply not correct. Also, I'm sure you think you're the first person to ever think of running cover 0 or stuffing the box to force Nebraska to pass, but countless teams of that era tried (and failed) to do exactly that. That being said, it's kind of a moot point anyway, because Nebraska wasn't really even in title consideration in 1996. They had 2 losses (Nebraska went 60-3 from 1993-1997 and that 96 team had 2/3 losses during that 5 year stretch). But the arrogance to assume that beating Nebraska was as easy as just having a good passing attack and running a Cover 0 is super amusing. The greatest coaches of that era apparently couldn't figure out something as simple as that, but YOU did! Congrats! lol
People ignore that one of the main reasons byu won the title was bcs they had gone 11-1 the previous season (loss was week 1) and then won 24 straight. Pollsters respected that and lavell.
@@VLA1234-t2t who's crying? Not me. I'm just pointing out facts - the media and pollsters weren't in love with BYU. There were snide remarks on air, in the newspaper, and all around, especially from Oklahoma and Washington, who disputed the title after the fact.
@@danlower7834 the media gave em the title. They gave them respect once they realized the previous year wasnt a fluke. What part dont you understand? The moment they realized the 12 or so game winning streak wasnt fluke they gave em respect. It then ended as a 24 game win streak Stay mad
Actually Brigham Young wasn't ranked to begin the season. They finished seventh in 1983. There isn't any carry over. Had they beaten Baylor it might have elevated them to elite status. They beat Baylor in 1984. It was an elimination game. Several of the Cougars games were elimination games. Including Tulsa.
When I was 28 years old, used to play slow-pitch softball, and I used to go to the batting cages. The attendant there was a guy named Duncan. He was a former soccer player, and the kicker for that 1984 BYU championship team. Duncan told me that LeVell Edwards never smiled...
Nowadays people are way too comfortable talking out of their ass- By bowl season that 1984 Huskies team would have been a two touchdown favorite, and ran over & ran around that '84 BYU squad which didn't play one single game vs a top 25 opponent They barely beat eventual 3-7-1 Pitt in the opener, and escaped with nail biters vs Wyoming, Hawaii and Air Force in conference play... And ended their season with a 7 point bowl game victory vs a Michigan squad with no team speed , who finished with a 6-5 record. Sheesh, that 1984 BYU squad playing in a power 5 conference at the time would have been progressively beaten up, and the absence of quality depth would have seen them at best (generous) winning 6 games.
That was actually all taken into consideration. Washington passed on a Holiday Bowl invitation (knowing full well the ramifications) to play Oklahoma. In the Orange Bowl. You can say that Washington would have mopped the floor with the Cougars but I see little evidence of that happening. It's speculative and presumptive. And possibly a lie. Maybe instead of playing Oklahoma they should have played Brigham Young?
The title was between Brigham Young and Washington. It's unfortunate that Washington didn't simply accept the Holiday Bowl invitation. That was a suspicious decision that probably entered into the minds of the sportscasters. Ultimately I think that Brigham Young at least merited serious contemplation and maybe earned it. Defeating Michigan isn't an easy assignment. Most people understand why that's a difficult proposition.
It was an easy victory for Washington AT Michigan earlier in the season. Pummeled them...up 20-3 until a last second TD made it 20-11. And if UW accepts the Holiday Bowl invitation and blows out BYU, Oklahoma takes the national title in the Orange Bowl. Watch the Holiday Bowl and the Orange Bowl and see which game had the better teams...
@@rogerbrodniak5644if Washington accepts a Holiday Bowl invitation? Why didn't they? Quit feeding me this bullshit line about what obviously isn't what happened. Fantasy Island was cancelled. Nobody cares about what Washington might have done.
@@rogerbrodniak5644Bo Schembechler said Brigham Young was comparable to Illinois. Chris Zurbrugg was 2-0 against decent (0.500) Illinois. Jim Harbaugh was 0-0-1 against a 6-5-1 Illinois. Michigan was 6-5 and lost. That means they fell to 6-6. I'm thinking Brigham Young might have been better than Illinois. Fairly confident about it.
@@rogerbrodniak5644I don't remember the part about Washington accepting the Holiday Bowl and blowing out the Cougars. When did that happen? I missed that episode. Put down the crack pipe. I do remember Brigham Young beating Washington. 31-3. That part I remember.
@@rogerbrodniak5644it wasn't an easy victory. 20-11. Nine points. Washington didn't roll over on Brigham Young. They might have run away like a little girl from a challenge. Brigham Young was rated #1.
I sometimes think that BYU 's '84 nat'l title was akin to, say, Charlie Chaplin's '72 Oscar For Lifetime Achievement. Neither had ever won the award before, each certainly had a bevy of great previous performances worthy of such laurels, and both, in their own way, were controversial /unorthodox enough to ensure that the brass ring would unlikely come their way, if the powers that be had their way. But talented they each were, such that the breadth and magnitude of their achievement could not be ignored. It was only a matter of time ... 🏉 🎥
Washington should have been the champion that year, BYU's,marquee win against Pittsburgh, looks petty pathetic when you see Pitt went 3-7 on the season, UW's one loss was to a 9-3 USC team that finished the year ranked number 9 and beat the 9-1-1 Oklahoma, along with beating Michigan AT Michigan earlier in the season by a bigger margin than BYU did along with shalacking a Houston team that beat the no 8 team SMU. It was no contest.
College Football a big anti-trust violation. If it were semi-fair. There would be at least a 16 team playoff with all FBS conference champions as automatic qualifiers with the other 5 spots at large. You have to have the other 5 spots because the second place in SEC is 9 times out of 10 going to be stronger than the Sunbelt conference champion and would deserve shot as well. I believe this would balance things out. A 24 team playoff like the FCS has would be ideal as both conference champions and stronger at large teams from P5 conferences would all have shots at the title.
Ah, the '84 Cougars. I always feel compelled to post the results when talking about that team...... BEAT AIR FORCE FALCONS (8-4) 30-25 BEAT HAWAII WARRIORS (7-4) 18-13 BEAT MICHIGAN WOLVERINES (6-6) 24-17 BEAT UTAH UTES (6-5-1) 24-14 BEAT TULSA GOLDEN HURRICANE (6-5) 38-15 BEAT WYOMING COWBOYS (6-6) 41-38 BEAT BAYLOR BEARS (5-6) 47-13 BEAT SAN DIEGO STATE AZTECS (4-7-1) 34-3 BEAT NEW MEXICO LOBOS (4-8) 48-0 BEAT PITTSBURGH PANTHERS (3-7-1) 20-14 BEAT COLORADO STATE RAMS (3-8) 52-9 BEAT TEXAS EL PASO MINERS (2-9) 42-9 BEAT UTAH STATE AGGIES (1-10) 38-13 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- OPPONENTS BEATEN WERE 61-85-3 (41.7 %) OUTSCORED OPPONENTS 456-183 They honestly had about the easiest road to a title ever but 1984 also didn't have a lot of great options either. Even a year before there were six 1 loss teams who could claim the title and the Cougars were in that mix too. In 1984? Florida may have been the best at the end but had a loss and a tie and were on probation so there was no way they were getting a natty that year. Washington had a nice finish but were in the orange bowl because they couldn't be in the rose bowl - they just never could beat USC in Los Angeles. So no conference title probably means no natty either. So who's left? Nebraska and Boston College rounded out the final top five that year with two losses each. So either BYU was going to get the title or 11-1 Washington was going to without winning their league. I love to point to the schedule because it wasn't great but then again, 1984 wasn't exactly a historic year for football either. Honestly, tell me who you like from this list.... www.sports-reference.com/cfb/years/1984-polls.html
Yep. They had to have alot of things go their way + do what they can control. Same as cincy making the cfp, even going undefeated and beating #5 nd, they still needed 1 loss okst to lose to make playoffs lol
@dezznutz3743 so wasn't BYU unranked the 1st game of that season? Therefore, that's the starting point of a season. Especially given that Pittsburgh in 82 & 83 had a quarterback by the name of Dan Marino.
@kooperuranus1503 BYU fans are a laughing matter indeed, I mean, who would be a fan of a team who loses to East Carolina and Liberty. Who's glory days were 40 years ago? It's kinda sad, huh 🤣 🤣 😂.
Listening to your narration, as is the case with most other similar channels, is like listening to the Chris Farley interview sketches years ago, on SNL.
Michigan finished 6-6, 7th in the Big Ten and unranked that year and BYU barley beat them. the win over Pitt early in the year was good but I've never been convinced they were a top teen team yet alone the best team. But they should have been given the chance to prove it.
BYU's starting QB was injured early in the Holiday Bowl and played on a gimpy leg, and the team was plagued by turnovers throughout, but they still won. Stuff happens in football games, the only thing that matters is getting the win. And as a matter of fact, BYU did get a chance to play Washington, the team that finished #2 that year (but failed to win its conference), early in 1985. Yes, different year and different team, but the fact that BYU thrashed them 30-3 on that day gives the lie to the notion that they weren't in the same league as the traditional powers.
My hell these schools just want a chance to keep playing til they lose! That’s not asking much. Pretty funny that with NIL and the transfer portal, the smaller schools, or a school that isn’t located in the right place, basically have no chance to keep their best players. College football was fucked up a long time ago
I know you wrote this a month ago and I'm late the party, but i actually think the first few weeks of the season (with a lot of upsets and close calls) have born out that nil and the transfer portal are bringing more parity to college football, not less. Why would a talented recruiter sit on the bench at Alabama or Georgia for 4 years, when he could transfer to a "lesser" program where he would actually get playing time and get in front of NFL scouts. I really think nil/transfer portal is going to put a wrench into the "super conferences" master plan.
You don't just declare a championship, the college football world has to do it for you and if you had a really good year, where the championship is indisputable, it is then declared CONSENSUS.
By the way, it should also be pointed out that none of those teams that you listed were considered to be national champions by the college football world...... that is why they could not lay claim to a "national championship".
Or how 2014 TCU got screwed out of a playoff for not winning their conference, yet still made the playoffs 8 years later without winning their conference.....
@MattLindon-wv8jy They didn't get screwed out of their spot. There were 6 deserving teams, and only 4 spots. 2 of the 1 loss teams were going to have to be left out. And winning your conference is not a requirement, it just helps out. There were no non playoff teams in 2022 that had the resume to be ahead of TCU that year.
1.) It wasn't a national championship game. That didn't even play in a New Year's Bowl. 2.) They needed a bunch of real teams (who played non-Mickey Mouse schedules) to lose in their New Year's Bowl. Still, despite beating a then 6-5 squad (even if it is Michigan), the BYU NC claim is slightly less ridiculous than UCF's claimed 2017 title.
If they GAVE the title to BYU then they definitely should have GIVEN it to UCF and I am not a UCF fan. However, it was this charade that assured it would not happen again. Has it?
BTW, if not already stated, Michigan was eanked #1 to start the season. Injuries to 3 key offensive players ended that, but they were all healthy at the time of the Holiday bowl, on a winning streak, and would with those same players win the 1985 national championship. Michigan was no pushover and were under tremendous pressure to embarras BYU in that game. They didn't. Another note. Bosco fumbled twice heading it to the end zone, not protecting the ball well when he scrambled, he was an awkward runner holding the ball away from his body rather then tucking it under his armpit. Point being, there was actually a huge yardage disparity in the game in BYUs favor, and minus those big Oops by Bosco, the score could have should have been by a much wider margin. Credit Michigan for swatting the ball loose at the culminating point of both drives. The following season BYU opens against highly ranked Boston College, Bosco injured his arm, and never recovered from it.
In 1983 BYU lost their first game of the season to Baylor then won their next 11 going 11-1 that year. The went 13-0 in 1984 getting the National Championship and also having the longest winning streak 24-0 in 1983 and 1984!
Different times back then. There was no such thing as power five conferences. Strength of schedule didn't matter to the point that it was AP (writers) that voted on the rankings, and such ranking determined the national champion. College football was fun to watch back then because it was regional. Don't get me wrong games are fun to watch today, but it was just a different time.
This was 40 years ago, and the point of the video was to talk about how BYU's national championship changed college football. It was decided the way it was back then, and so people can complain all they want, but BYU did nothing wrong. They won it fair and square... because the national champion was selected subjectively. Now, it's more objective thanks to BYU. The playoff is something that should have happened decades ago. Would have loved to see BYU in a playoff back then, and just like March Madness we'll get to see that going forward. I used to have a problem with the way college football did things. Not anymore. The landscape has naturally changed to where power conferences include the cream of the crop, and BYU is now in one of those conferences. Nothing wrong with it imo.
@suuwooski6416 yes there were "nattys". What you meant to say is there were no national championship games. That is my point. He video said they played in one.
@@elche1976 Um, yes, they did. They played a game, and in winning it, they won the national championship. Ergo, national championship game. There were attempts at the time to line up two good candidates in a "championship" bowl game, but that often did not take place. If the favorite won their bowl game, they were champs. If they lost and the next-best won, the next-best was considered the champ. Simple. That's what happened in 1984. BYU was #1, they won their bowl game, so they were the national champions.
@SIB1963 byu education. Nowhere outside of your feelings has it ever or will be listed as the national championship game. Child. It was a regular a Holiday bowl, and byu won. After it, because byu can from behind against the 6-5 Michigan team, they were voted as championship. But these do called national championship game didn't exist outside of your fantasies until the bcs. I love byu fans. Their myopic views provide great comedy.
I was at U of Utah that year…a redshirt freshman….we actually play BYU pretty close most of the game but lost by I think it was 10 points…I played a couple plays against New Mexico but due to rules I was still a redshirt freshman
there was a lot of controversy around it but the one thing to note all the other schools said they didn't play in the national championship game cause they wanted to make money in the other bowl games, they were all given a chance and they turned it down so imo byu deserves the national championship
A part of me wants to see schools like BYU get their chance. But then I remember when I was a kid on New Year's Day 1985, and how totally bummed out I felt that the bowl games weren't going to mean anything that day, as BYU had essentially cliched the national title. I never want to feel that way as a college football fan again.
What helped was some WAC teams beat some big names, which resulted in the phrase, "Everybody has been beaten by somebody, who was beaten by BYU. But nobody has beaten anybody who has beaten BYU."
BYU beat a very average Michigan team to claim the title. This is why we have a playoff. If they would have played in a top tier bowl game, they would have deserved it. I think they played Michigan in the Holiday Bowl. They were not the Big ten champion.
Not sure how it’s done now but I always felt a playoff with all conference winners would solve disputes. It might humble power conferences and some of the conference jumpers might jump to the weak conferences to increase the chances of getting in the playoffs. It would bring balance to the confrences. No one agreed with me and I got bored with a sport that didn’t want balance.
I think it would be a great idea. Why not a 24 team playoff like the FCS has? All FBS conference champions could be automatic qualifiers and still strong Power 5 teams that didn’t win their conference a shot.
That’s what I was thinking, add in the highest ranked teams not conference champions and they can do it as the bowl games since many of the top bowls are conference based. Like the Rose Bowl was when I watched PAC 10 vs Big Ten.. I am sure is a way to preserve that or even if it’s a 2nd round game the power confrences have to beat weak confrence champs to get there.
Require everyone to play at least 2 Power 5 schools on your schedule. That gives the Group of 5 a chance to add Power 5 schools to their non-conference schedule. If they still go undefeated now they have an argument.
@@dezznutz3743you do realize that when they go on two year missions they aren't playing football and are no longer in shape. It takes about a year after they come back just to get back into shape again dumb dumb
What does 1984 BYU football & 1990 UNLV basketball have in common? They were the consensus National Champion without playing in a traditional power conference. Next year it will be the 40th anniversary of that team defying the odds winning a natty without playing a traditional new year's bowl game. UNLV had to beat 6 teams (Arkansas Little Rock, Ohio State, Ball State, Loyola Marymount, Georgia Tech & Duke) to earn that title playing 21 of their 40 games in the Big West Conference. Did their weak conference schedule hurt them? No. That very team struggled against Ball State but they won. So thats the rarity of 2 schools west of the Mississippi that doesn't play in a power conference and got it done.
Brigham Young participated in an NCAA Division I title game. Michigan was 6-5 but were 5-0 in 1985 before losing to Iowa. They played a daunting schedule and would have been represented to a national championship if 1985 doubled as a tournament. Iowa back-ended it and Brigham Young front-ended it. The title Brigham Young won is an NCAA title. Michigan lost to Iowa. Iowa shares in it. Washington was a bowl alliance national champion. U.C.L.A. was a Belt Champion.
I said it before and will say it again. There will be two MASSIVE NCAA Sports conferences. The WAL MART Conference (previously known as the SEC) and the TARGET Conference (Previously known as the Big 10,Big 16 or whatever they do with the math over there). WALM MART. The conference commissioner is Jeff Foxworthy. TARGET. The conference commissioner is Larry the Cable Guy. Hold on, Larry is from Nebraska. get 'er done.
BYU literally beat Bos worst Michigan team for the Natty. Look at the win percentage of their opponents in 1984, its 42%. Michigan was 6-6 and that loss is still considered one of Michigans worst losses, up their with App St. and Akron.
@Dezz Exactly, you nailed it even using only their actual bowl game. Not to mention how slow the WAC was back in the day, and the absence of quality depth. Drop that 84 squad into a major conference at the time, and even if the attrition of the roster depth miraculously didn't change, that BYU squad wins 7 games. Their only top 25 win was vs Pitt week one, who ended up 3-7-1. They also eeked out wins vs Hawaii Wyoming, and Air Force. And, dang, that Michigan squad had zero team speed.
In the last several years, I have done a personal rankings based solely on which teams beat which other teams. I don't care about power-5 or not...but on how impressive the wins are. Without fail, there are some lesser conference teams that have made impressive runs into the top-10. However, in each of the last five years...the committee and I have agreed on the content of the playoff teams. Slight differences in seeding...yes. Teams in vs out? No. The system as implemented currently doesn't reward teams for on-field accomplishments as much as it should...it still gets confused with pre-season expectations...but the sample size so far has augured well for the committee's decisionmaking.
What’s impressive mean? Factoring margin of victory without teams knowing makes any system automatically flawed. You and the committee have done nothing. Things work themselves out. The committee never makes any sense and constantly contradicts themselves until the end when again it works its self out. There’s no argument for the committee’s “decision making”. The can’t keep one week consistent, let alone week to week or year to year. I don’t think they even know the criteria.
I understand the different sides of the debate, but if you go undefeated in whatever league you play in (in this context the league would be FBS) then you deserve a shot at a championship. If you're going to treat some league members as inferior based on brand, strength of schedule, etc. then you might as well just officially split the FBS into two leagues. That said, I'm hopeful that the 12 team format will be the best so far for all FBS schools, even if it's still imperfect. UCF, Utah (painful to admit as a BYU fan), etc. have gotten screwed over in the past, unfortunately
Yeah I agree. Honestly until another school from a non major conference wins, the 1984 BYU team will always be an anomaly when it comes to college football national champions. I know they almost always played in the Holiday Bowl back then but they should’ve played either Washington or Oklahoma.
No, BYU did not deserve the National Championship. In those days there was a long time held belief that if you didn't lose you should not go down in the rankings in spite of the level of competition you played. By ranking BYU after that one upset win, it set them on a path that would challenge that belief. The video even suggests that QB Bosco understood that they could "run the table" given the poor level of competition they would play the rest of the year. It was also greed and stupidity by the NCAA and polls that BYU wouldn't be able to beat a barely bowl eligible six win Michigan team in spite of being in the Holiday Bowl which was essentially a home game for BYU! The video ignores the fact that it was an independant Miami team that won the title the year before upsetting Nebraska in the Orange Bowl which was a home game for Miami! Nor does it mention two years before that the then non-power Clemson team of the ACC who also climbed the rankings in what was considered a basketball conference, who then got to play also in Miami. While part of the overall process, I think the BYU dilemma was the last nail but not the only one in the coffin. I personally point to the Miami-Nebraska game in which Tom Osborne went for a win instead of taking a tie. Because there was no over time at the top level then. By going for two and failing, Osborne failed his players by throwing away a outstanding season and sure title. He could have embarrassed the Orange Bowl by not having a winner and got football to have overtime nearly a decade sooner and it would have definitely sped up the talk of a title game all while leading to the rise of Miami football for which I could shoot him on that point alone!
As a fan of the bows, I’d like to think BYU’s struggle against the University of Hawaii would partially be to “Rivalry game” Hawaii and BYU have traditional rivalry in football between the two programs. Also, a lot of people in Hawaii are part of Mormon faith. So, there is a local connection between the Mormon church and the people of Hawaii.
Only two of BYU's opponents won at least seven games. They had played only one ranked opponent all season, preseason #3 Pittsburgh, a team that would finish 3-7-1 and unranked.
Huskies were best team in nation in '84...beating a quality OU squad in Orange bowl. Coach Switzer said Washington was by far the best team they'd played all year. cougs barely beat a poor 6-5 Michigan squad in their bowl game. Byu had weak schedule as they played in non power 5 conference.
Boise state got screwed over and over by BCS selection committee...they were only non power conference school in last 2 decades that should have national championship banner in their stadium! That bowl win over OU was priceless!! Lol
I remember in high school there was no playoffs. Champions were crowned by a vote of sportswriters. I'm all for expanded playoffs in college. Win it on the field. Boise State had a chance 10-15 years ago but there wasn't a playoff.
@@jonnybaze7449 I agree. I was just taking the current trend to the extreme. In my perfect world the conferences make geographic sense, there are no extra games for a conference championship and the perfect playoff includes 8 teams with the first round being a home game for the top 4. If you lose 3 games your chance of a championship should be zero. 2 loss teams should have to have a signature win and only "good" losses to have even a 50% chance of qualifying. It used to be that EVERY game during the regular season mattered!
They beat an average 6-6 Michigan team in the bowl and had to pull it out in the end. They played one ranked opponent the entire year which was Pitt (Pitt ended 3-7-1) and barely pulled out games vs Wyoming, Air Force and Hawaii.
I remember this season, BYU was a good team, but, and I know what the reaction will be. I question would they have been undefeated playing in the SEC, Big Eight, Big Ten teams? I don't think so, but I don't want to sound like Barry Switzer, so I'll leave it alone.
Should BYU have been crowned the 1984 National Champions? Within the next 20 years, will we see a non-Power school win the National Championship?
No they shouldn't have. They were only highly ranked because they beat a Pitt team ranked #3 to start the season, said Pitt squad finished with 3 wins. After that they played almost nothing but their weak opponents in the WAC, and in half of those games they won by 10 or less points. Even their bowl game wasn't impressive, barely beating a very mediocre Michigan.
@@kaminsod4077 too bad washington declined to play them in the Holiday bowl buddy
@@cbphoto87 Cougars fans should be eternally thankful for that, otherwise they would've gotten their asses handed to them.
@@kaminsod4077 nice well you can live in that parallel universe all you want. The rest of us will live in the real world where BYU has a consensus natty banner and you have to cry about it
@chasebart they only played 2 teams with 7 wins? 8 of the teams had losing records. Pound your chest. 😂
Fun fact... when did BYU have their first 10 win season? 1979, coincidentally the first year after ASU and Arizona last the WAC. Those teams owned byu at the time. You should thank them for leaving our these seasons would have never had happened with then losses to them. 😂
Loved Lavell Edwards. As a coach he was 40 years ahead of his time. Realized that a running play was a wasted play. One of his quotes was "we're going to run 70 plays this game, 68 will be pass plays. Try to stop us." The NFL has finally caught up with his philosophy. Scary to think what he might have done at a big school with athletes that were full-time football players and didn't have to attend class like they did at BYU.
I agree, he was awesome. Even taught my mom to drive at Granite High School circa 1960.
@@TPaine1776 That's cool.
BYU actually finished that season 4th in SRS, so I have no problem with their National Championship
Fourth doesn't get you there. They shared a title with Iowa.
All other American sports leagues see the lack of parity as a bad thing. FBS College football is the only one hell bent on killing what little parity they still have.
Like he stated in this video, it's all about marketing and what teams bring in the most money for games. It's all about money. It's not about who is the best team anymore. Teams are pushed in the rankings (SEC) to make strength of schedule look better so certain teams are made to look "dominant". This is why ESECPN always hypes up SEC teams now. Just pay attention this season. More SEC teams are pushed up high and as soon as they lose, others are pushed up high to keep the conference looking so "great". Notice how many fans now root for a conference (SEC) instead of their teams. The SEC marketing has worked. Now fans of teams that never even make it to a CCG can feel good by rooting for a conference. The marketing has worked.
CFB literally has never had parity lol
Yeah. It’s awesome.
Sad
@@HayyywardAnyone who places success of a conference over their own team are insufferable assholes.
What is often forgotten is BYU crushed Washington 31-3 in the first game of the following season (1985) after the Huskies disputed the '84 title with both teams returning essentially the same talent.
.....And BYU lost to UTEP the worst team in div 1 at the time (1985)
@@ReisterJPthey still went 11-3 and all their losses were by less than 1 td.
Its also forgotten that they won 24 games in a row before being crowned champs.
That combine with the respect pollsters had for lavell gave em the title.
@@VLA1234-t2t beating 7 win teams for 2 years
They also won their 6th straight WAC title in 1984. The dominated the conference for a whole decade.
You gotta mention that the BYU/Pitt game was ESPN’s first college football broadcast.
Wait fr? That’s dope
I don't think that's true, 1982 K State v Wisconsin was the first one
I don't think that's true, 1982 K State v Wisconsin was the first one
Anyone who read Barry Switzer’s book knows the pressure came not from the programs but from the networks. NBC paid big money for the rights to the Orange Bowl and the thought of no one tuning in because the National Champion was crowned days earlier was terrifying. He said he didn’t want to talk about BYU because his team needed to focus on their game, but NBC kept telling him to plug the game as “the real national title game.” So even though he still likes to visit the “Switzer water treatment plant” near Provo the bottom line is the networks are running the show. And thank goodness BYU is a national brand that is able to follow Pit, Houston, Boston College, TCU, UCF, Rutgers, and Cincinnati by leaving small conference purgatory. At this point, it’s hard to tell if Boise States, San Diago States or SMU will ever get that shot.
Read HOWARD COSELLS I NEVER PLAYED THE GAME
Its because mormons cant be trusted...
Actually it was about the Orange Bowl having a championship game. Sometimes we over analyze. It was about the Orange Bowl being able to host a national championship. Which, they did. Most people wanted Brigham Young to play Oklahoma and the general consensus of opinion was that would have determined a titleist.
So, when Washington was represented, most people thought, perhaps justifiably if Oklahoma could beat Washington they would be a legitimate national champion.
Washington was substituted for Brigham Young and Washington also had a chance to play Brigham Young. Brigham Young was top dog. People are asking why?
It isn't that complicated. Brigham Young played a competitive schedule. Western Athletic Conference was a major football conference at the time. Eighth of eleven. Top eight probably are roughly equivalent to top six, now.
Mountain West Conference is probably comparable to the Western Athletic Conference. That's why some people think it was a diminished national championship.
But there are quality programs in the Mountain West Conference.
Boise State is roughly comparable to Brigham Young University.
So if Boise could finish 13-0 like they did in 2006 that is something to write home about. And, it was!
Brigham Young and Boise State roughly comparable to the same thing. In 2006 the national champion was Florida. Florida was a team in contention but lost to Miami FL. Miami FL was 8-5 overall. Air Force Academy finished 8-4. Brigham Young defeated Air Force 30-25. I suspect Brigham Young defeating the Academy catapulted them over Florida although admittedly Florida would have been an especially tough team to beat.
That's probably why Florida is recognized as a legitimate titleist.
Together with Louisiana State.
They tied for a conference championship. Louisiana State lost to Notre Dame. Notre Dame lost to the Academy. Brigham Young defeated Air Force in Colorado Springs, CO. I think Brigham Young demonstrated supremacy over Louisiana State by that fact. Florida lost to Miami, FL. Miami FL lost to Michigan. Brigham Young defeated Michigan. Brigham Young > Michigan > Miami FL> Florida.
Obviously that's circumstantial.
@@christopherfoote4643 that's just stupid. A>B>C doesn't work in sports. In 2008, Texas beat OU, Texas Tech beat Texas, and OU beat Texas Tech. Only fans come up w/ your "analysis."
@@TulsaSooner1979
What else do you go off of if you dont have a common opponent?
At the time, I thought the "big" conferences felt they had an exclusive club and regardless of what BYU did that season, they would never be in the club. I was disgusted with how the media treated BYU even though they did everything they were asked to do.
UCF fan here. I can sympathize with this.
Those same power conferences made a serious effort to eliminate the automatic bid in basketball, but now they just settle for stealing all the at-large bids with mediocre .500 teams.
@@christopherfoote4643Conspiracy is a strong word, but to recall a few things that happened during that season: 1) One of the networks (ESPN, ABC?) had a call in poll where fans to express their opinion on whether BYU should be #1. 2) Bryant Gumbel called BYU, "Bo Diddley Tech." 3) Barry Switzer (HC of Oklahoma) was very vocal that BYU should not be considered a contender for the National Championship. None of that would have happened if it had been a school from a "big" conference.
@@nuraby_9228 I wonder if they woulda gotten away with it, if BYU didn't sue for anti-trust violations against them in football......
@@kevinblatter2369 If it was Bryant Gumbel, had to be NBC.
I was actually in Europe during that season and didn't get to see a lot of the games. My parents sent me a newspaper shortly after BYU was named National Champions. It listed all of the contenders who all had one or more losses. The writer basically justified BYU's championship based on the fact that BYU had either defeated that team or a team they later lost to that season. I cut out the article and put it in my journal... I've got it somewhere in storage.
As I recall, it was a BYU math professor who came up with that . BYU could only win as many games as they played, of course, but every other team lost to somebody who lost to somebody (etc. etc.) who lost to BYU. It was an interesting observation, an may possibly hold more weight than some other arguments. But that was the problem back then. The national champion was determined by polls, opinions, and pretty much anything other than on the field. Today things are somewhat better, but money has so much become king that certain conferences have been allowed to band together to shut the other conference out. NIL only made things worse, even though I applaud seeing players get financially rewarded for the sacrifice it takes to play. But when the Big 5 (Big 4) have the big money locked up, what chance does does anyone else have of locking up the best talent? Oh well, bitch bitch bitch...
The 1996 byu team you referenced was better than the 1984 team and as you mentioned were screwed because of the bowl alliance. That was a great team
Yeah so were the 2004 and 2008 undefeated Utah football teams
@@carterdalby9011 Absolutely. Loved watching the Utes push around an Alabama team that thought they were national champions.
And 4 loss Texas team over a one loss BYU Team getting a better bowl game. That's f-up! That should tell you how much they really care about money more, like he mentioned in this video.
A team can only beat the teams in front of them and BYU did exactly that in 1984. They were the only team that went undefeated that year and no top five team wanted to play them in a major bowl. Prior to this, the formula to win the national title was a great defense, a strong running game with a complimentary passing game and finally great special teams. BYU changed the formula and proved a pass heavy team with a complimentary running game, a deep defense and good special teams. Miami followed this formula in 1989 & 1991 and Florida did this in 1996.
Agreed!! That team should have been the one to play Florida State in the Sugar Bowl, not Florida
What an amazing story and great video! Underrated content, this was really awesome to watch, great job! Wow Robbie Bosco was ballin' the man could make plays happens and trusted his team in key spots. That epic battle against Hawaii, the epic come from behind victory against Michigan how close the AP poll was going into the Orange Bowl. Crazy stuff.
Great video! As a BYU fan myself, I find BYU's National Championship seriously upsets some people. It was nice to hear a non BYU, non BYU hating, voice to explain the circumstances surrounding the Natty and the downstream impacts.
And having BYU or any mid major program isn't a bad thing. I get why people upset with a mid major program from a small conference, meaning somewhat low tier Competition winning it all. But Having BYU win the natty help brings that vibe of a level playing field that anyone can win a National Championship. And help make College Football more fun to watch, like how the NCAA Basketball Tournament is fun to watch.
I wish your team the best of luck in the Big 12 nowadays.
@@adriansmith5279 I agree. Its one of the reasons the NFL is particularly popular. I mean, since 2010, there have been 11 different teams that have won the Super Bowl. Thats 1/3 of the league in just over 10 years. People love thinking that their team is within striking distance of a Super Bowl. Anyway, good luck to your teams too!
@christopherfoote4643 I don't mind you correcting me. Because this is the 80s/early 80s, I wasn't even alive until the late 90s(now in my mid-20s). So is nice to hear that the WAC... nowadays doesn't even have a football league(despite them trying to bring it back recently), which was actually better than it was at the time.
@@adriansmith5279I wasn't necessarily correcting you. Western Athletic Conference was a diminished level major conference roughly 8/11. They were below the bar. I studied this extensively. Brigham Young fell under the bar but were buffered by Iowa.
Iowa and Brigham Young share a title. They were co-champions. It became official in 1991. F.W.I.W. Iowa and Brigham Young share a title. Florida and Louisiana State share a title. Washington and Southern California share a title. It takes a village. Brigham Young, Florida and Washington are titleists. Nobody really won it.
In 1976 Arizona State finished as the only undefeated school in College Football, beat the number 5 ranked Nebraska in the Fiesta Bowl and only finished number 2. They should have been the first WAC school to win the National Championship. I applaud the 1984 BYU team for showing it could be done and they deserved that championship.
That was quite the colossal schedule they had there. LOL. If they'd only beaten................Wyoming.............a little more handily they would have gotten it.
Michigan was 6-5 going into the Holiday Bowl, 5th in the Big Ten that year. Folks they were not good, let alone a worthy opponent!
That's expecting a lot for a team to go from seven to one. Their only help could have been Oklahoma tying Michigan. You're thinking of the 1975 team.
Brigham Young earned the opportunity to play in the national championship game. I'm still waiting for that event.
Shoutout to JKJ on another solid video. You explaining why we haven't a non-power conference National Champions is spot on. Like ever since 1984 BYU Championship they really don't want another mid-major program winning. Not just because there no good enough, they want the brand name school and school that make the most money represent College Football.
Like Boise State back in the 2000s was ahead of there time and in their peak. Had Prime Boise State play during the Playoff Era. Who knows?
Who doesn’t? The ap and coachs polls voted for it… what do you think the bcs was? Ap, coachs and average of computer polls. What happened with the committee? G5 gets in because they play one great team and several decent teams as well as got a little lucky. That’s been the minimum formula for a g5 to get in.
So why don’t g5 teams get in? They for the most part don’t want to.
@@christopherfoote464384 BYU’s schedule vs 2006 Boise state’s schedule is pretty much a wash till the bowl game which wasn’t BYUs fault. I’d vote neither NC.
@@christopherfoote4643 no it’s literally always about opinion. From day one to now.
I’m not suggesting, that’s what I said.
Limited to the bowl alliance?
the mighty whities players were and still are like 25 and 26 years old
Idk why it took until 1998 for them to do 1 vs 2 lmao. Sounds like common sense.
It didn't. There was a bowl alliance prior to the BCS and a bowl coalition prior to that. And in 1984 Oklahoma and Brigham Young were obligated to play in title games separated from each other.
Prior to the BCS. The Big Ten vs Pac-10 champions were obligated to play each other in the Rose Bowl even if either one was ranked 1 or 2
It was #1 v #2 AS VOTED ON BY POLLSTERS (concentrated in the major media markets, with all of their regional biases at play). Then, with BCS, it is controlled BY THE SELF-STYLED MAJOR CONFERENCES with a token rep from the "mid-majors" (in itself a pejorative term).
If NCAA was really serious about the sport and its players, they would reassume control of the game and use ADs and coaches from DII and DIII to do polling and evaluations of DI sports.
@@christopherfoote4643And each iteration bent on assuring that a "1984 scenario" could never happen again. IE - we have to keep BYU (or Boise State, or Fresno State, or Hawaii, .....) from ever having a shot. It was, and continues to be, a caste system - even within the "Major" conferences
It didn't. It would have happened in 1984 except that Brigham Young was obligated to the Holiday Bowl. Washington could have participated in the Holiday Bowl. In retrospect that would have settled it. Oklahoma was rated higher than Washington.
Washington played for the national championship instead of Brigham Young. Brigham Young was an NCAA titleist. They advanced to the championship game. Michigan was capable of winning. That was demonstrated to the way the game represented itself. Iowa shares a title with Brigham Young University. Brigham Young played Iowa in 1991.
That resolved a lot of it. Washington still needs to play Brigham Young in a title game.
College football was a beauty contest in 1984. Money always played a part in college sports but there was a huge amount of pressure by TV networks who wanted a large audience for their games.
It's still a beauty contest.
If one team in that stretch didn't lose we would be talking about something else. BYU took care of business and can't be faulted for that.
South Carolina waa probably the front-runner but lost to Navy. Navy was 4-6-1 and lost to Air Force and Notre Dame. They also tied Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh actually tied Brigham Young. Pittsburgh was 3-6-2 and Wisconsin was 7-4-1. Collectively that's 10-10-3. Or 5-5-1 independently. Meaning Brigham Young and Iowa are co-champions. Michigan was admitted to the Holiday Bowl but began 1985 5-0. A tournament would have required Michigan to be 5-0 in a post-season tournament to advance to a championship game. Michigan was represented. Brigham Young was an NCAA collegiate titleist. Iowa tied Wisconsin and therefore share a title.
I've needed this video for so long man thank you goat!
Great content here
Great video! Glad the algorithm recommended it to me. I bet your channel is about to pop off
College football has always been shady and about the money. But once players got the opportunity to cash in, it’s now a problem. These other schools get screwed over and should have their own championship game
I would have voted BYU the title in 84. But that long ago season always felt to me like several teams lost the title....more than BYU winning it. They just got real lucky.
@@christopherfoote4643 the luck that was involved was concerning other teams from real conferences.
No not really. They were only about 50.0% capable but they made it all up in 1996. That is why it's no longer a disputed national championship. It's official and it is an NCAA title.
No. I don't think so. You can call it luck but it took a lot of patience among other things. Luck might have played a part. But it is never lucky to win that many consecutive games. Plus Robbie Bosco was injured. If you think that is luck then you're not very intelligent.
@@TulsaSooner1979what is that supposed to mean? Western Athletic Conference was actually among the more distinguished. I did a retrospective on it. You might be surprised just how capable it was. It wasn't the best. But it wasn't the worst. By the way Brigham Young doesn't claim the title exclusively. They share it. That is partly why it was as controversial as it was. Iowa and Brigham Young share a title. That is fairly obvious.
I don't know. Was it luck? Illinois was 10-2 in 1983. If they had beaten two teams (Missouri and U.C.L.A.) Brigham Young defeated they're a consensus (unanimous) national champion. Illinois was 10-2. Brigham Young finished seventh. I don't think it was luck. It maybe included luck. I don't think it's lucky to finish 11-1 and potentially a titleist.
Just found your page and I’m loving the videos so far, I wish you would do something on the Rise & Fall and Rise & Fall again of UM Hurricanes. My Grandma whirled there 43 years in residency and met tons of players and coaches so it would be cool to watch
And with the new Schnellenberger series Vs Louisville introduced it would be relevant
Reminds me of the perfect season Wichita State pulled off in basketball a few years ago.
Yeah and Wichita State was especially very good weren't they? Yes they were. Losing in a tournament is inconsequential to winning a title. That is additional games that are unessential to a title. So Wichita State might actually BE a national champion. Ever consider that? I do. I consider it. Because it's reality and I like living in reality.
Florida was on probation for things that the NCAA doesn't consider wrong nowadays. They had Neal Anderson, John L. Williams and Lorenzo Hampton at RB. Their freshman QB, Kerwin Bell, didn't need to do much since they pounded teams into submission toward the end of the year. The NYT ranked them #1 at the end of their season
No, pay to play is still illegal. It’s just not enforced rn.
They were selected but it's questionable at best they were a titleist. The reason they were selected is because collectively they merited one.
Louisiana State shares in it.
They gave it to Florida but it's a co-championship. It should have been given to both. Louisiana State University tied Florida. They were co-champions. They both merited recognition. Louisiana State lost to Nebraska. So a more deserving titleist would have been Nebraska. Not Florida. That's why it wasn't as simple as selecting one team.
In 1996, Penn State was actually awarded the at-large spot in the Fiesta Bowl. Texas beat Nebraska in the Big XII title game and they were automatically given a berth in the alliance, thus had to picked for an Alliance bowl (Fiesta). Nebraska was also an at-large and was picked for the Orange Bowl.
Berth*
Birth lolol
@@jarlwhiterun7478 Brain fried lol. But yes
That's right, I remember. It was a huge upset by Texas when Nebraska seemed to be cruising to another national title.
@@brianlaneherder3666 Texas was picked last, but that's because the Fiesta had the final pick. But they were forced to pick them, as the Big XII champ had to be picked. But in actuality, it was Penn State picked over BYU
There was a bowl alliance in 1984. Michigan would have been an eight seed to a tournament of thirty two teams. North Carolina was an eight seed two seasons ago when they played Kansas. Kansas had to rally to win. North Carolina had to win five elimination games to advance.
In 1985 Michigan began 5-0. Against tournament competition. Before losing to Iowa. In a title game. Iowa was 8-4-1 in 1984 and carried half of the load. They share a title. It became official in 1991. Brigham Young tied Iowa. Brigham Young might have won but blew an Extra point attempt that sailed left.
A final note BYU has joined the BIG12 conference in 2023, but that will also not guarantee them a spot as the 2007 Kansas team, known as a basketball school, was snubbed by the NCAA for having one loss while everyone else had two except for a one loss Ohio State who went to the title game and got pummeled and a undefeated Hawaii team who went to the Sugar Bowl and got pummeled as well! Kansas, winner of the Orange Bowl, was the only team from a BCS automatic-qualifying conference to finish the entire season with just one loss.
One loss is enough to eliminate them. If they were a national champion they probably don't lose to Missouri. Missouri lost to Oklahoma. Twice. Nobody thinks Kansas won a title.
@@christopherfoote4643 As I said everyone else finished the year with two losses but it didn't eliminate them hence the bias!
According to the College Football Reference site, BYU had the 82nd ranked schedule. Florida's was ranked 5th without a bowl game. Their only loss was to Miami in a close game until the last minute. It was on a neutral site and Florida was starting a freshman for this opener. Miami was defending NC.
I didn't realize how weak their schedule was until seeing this video.
Miami FL was 8-5. Northwestern (last year) was 8-5. Northwestern and Michigan (6-5) are comparable. Brigham Young was comparable to Florida State (last season). F.W.I.W.
Florida also tied Louisiana State. So it wasn't about one game. It was about losing to Miami FL in arguably their national championship game. It's pretty hard to claim a national championship when you lose the only title game you qualify for and tie an SEC Championship Game. Isn't it?
What’s crazy is the WAC could have had back to back national champions had Air Force won out in 1985
Air Force lost to Brigham Young University. That eliminated Air Force although they did play Texas in the Bluebonnet Bowl. I don't necessarily follow it but Air Force nearly played Penn State and it's a possibility they might have beaten them. Making them a legitimate titleist.
I did not know that Robbie Bosco was severely limping that entire 1984 Bowl game against Michigan
Cheap shot penalized late hit by Michigan caused the Bosch limp. It was quite blatant that Michigan was trying to knock him out of the game.
@@stevenbooth6792 I wondered what happened. But it looks like Bosco was a tough kid and he gutted it out.
Bosco would not be denied. Blaine Fowler came in just after the hit and did great. Bosco came back in and finished the game. Great performance. @@thelastjohnwayne
Thanks for the info I was just starting to get into College football at that time. I did not watch the game. I was living in Reno and just starting to go to Wolf Pack football games and then I got hooked on College football and I have been addicted ever since @@stevenbooth6792
Its football. People get hurt
Great video. Instant subscribe
The 2004 Utah Utes won every game by double digits including the Fiesta Bowl. They got the unlucky cards dealt of also having USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn also being undefeated at the end of the regular season. That team was the real team that had a shot if any of them did.
Don't forget Boise State
If Utah fans want to see what a national championship trophy looks like, they can always drive down to Provo. Same thing for a Heisman trophy
Worst then they were given the absolute worst BCS team of all time (Pitt, which was only in because the BIG East got a bid) and worst it made Alex Smith look like he should be number one pick (if you like safe 250 yards 2 tds and a game plan in NFC championship where Harbaugh only calls run plays)
There cannot be a team from Utah winning a tier one sport right? Just isn’t physically possible!
Good vid. I could be wrong but I believe more than 3 made nfl teams. Trevor Matich, Glen Kowslowski, Vai Sikahema, the full back (don’t recall his name), Bosco was drafted. I believe there were more - could be wrong on that.
BYU should’ve won their 2nd national championship in 96
I hate to burst your bubble but there is no way they beat Nebraska or Florida that year.
The '90's Huskers were not to be f-d with, and Tom Osborne is one of the greatest college football coaches ever.
@@ericwhittle4657 we can never know because they were to pussy to play BYU
@@ericwhittle4657 The Jets beat the Colts in the 3rd Super Bowl because they knew how to throw the ball in a time where zone defense was not practiced in the NFL as they would run A gap trap followed by off tackle and GUT runs. BYU had an ability to pass that Nebraska couldn't have kept with, they would have most likely played a version of cover 0 defense against Nebraska and forced them to pass.
@@getbig2501 lol gotta love internet coaches that don't realize these things are easier said than done. Nebraska's defense regularly dismantled pass-happy teams, including Steve Spurrier and Danny Wuerffel in what was the most lopsided national title game ever played until as recently as last year, when Georgia finally beat the record. There's this assumption that because Nebraska was a run-oriented offense, that it somehow meant they had a defense oriented toward stopping the run as well, but that's simply not correct. Also, I'm sure you think you're the first person to ever think of running cover 0 or stuffing the box to force Nebraska to pass, but countless teams of that era tried (and failed) to do exactly that.
That being said, it's kind of a moot point anyway, because Nebraska wasn't really even in title consideration in 1996. They had 2 losses (Nebraska went 60-3 from 1993-1997 and that 96 team had 2/3 losses during that 5 year stretch). But the arrogance to assume that beating Nebraska was as easy as just having a good passing attack and running a Cover 0 is super amusing. The greatest coaches of that era apparently couldn't figure out something as simple as that, but YOU did! Congrats! lol
People ignore that one of the main reasons byu won the title was bcs they had gone 11-1 the previous season (loss was week 1) and then won 24 straight.
Pollsters respected that and lavell.
BYU was unranked until week 2 in 1984 by those same pollsters. So much for respect.
@@danlower7834 they gave them a natty dan. Cry about it.
The moment they realized that 1983 wasnt a fluke they gave them respect. Cry about it
@@VLA1234-t2t who's crying? Not me. I'm just pointing out facts - the media and pollsters weren't in love with BYU. There were snide remarks on air, in the newspaper, and all around, especially from Oklahoma and Washington, who disputed the title after the fact.
@@danlower7834 the media gave em the title. They gave them respect once they realized the previous year wasnt a fluke. What part dont you understand? The moment they realized the 12 or so game winning streak wasnt fluke they gave em respect.
It then ended as a 24 game win streak
Stay mad
Actually Brigham Young wasn't ranked to begin the season. They finished seventh in 1983. There isn't any carry over. Had they beaten Baylor it might have elevated them to elite status. They beat Baylor in 1984. It was an elimination game. Several of the Cougars games were elimination games. Including Tulsa.
When I was 28 years old, used to play slow-pitch softball, and I used to go to the batting cages. The attendant there was a guy named Duncan. He was a former soccer player, and the kicker for that 1984 BYU championship team. Duncan told me that LeVell Edwards never smiled...
Nowadays people are way too comfortable talking out of their ass- By bowl season that 1984 Huskies team would have been a two touchdown favorite, and ran over & ran around that '84 BYU squad which didn't play one single game vs a top 25 opponent They barely beat eventual 3-7-1 Pitt in the opener, and escaped with nail biters vs Wyoming, Hawaii and Air Force in conference play... And ended their season with a 7 point bowl game victory vs a Michigan squad with no team speed , who finished with a 6-5 record. Sheesh, that 1984 BYU squad playing in a power 5 conference at the time would have been progressively beaten up, and the absence of quality depth would have seen them at best (generous) winning 6 games.
That was actually all taken into consideration. Washington passed on a Holiday Bowl invitation (knowing full well the ramifications) to play Oklahoma. In the Orange Bowl. You can say that Washington would have mopped the floor with the Cougars but I see little evidence of that happening. It's speculative and presumptive. And possibly a lie. Maybe instead of playing Oklahoma they should have played Brigham Young?
BYU and the Utes have been screwed out of multiple Championship appearances and opportunities due to G5 hate bs, glad the Cougars got their ‘chip.
They weren't cheated. They share a title with Iowa. They played Iowa in 1991 and tied.
The title was between Brigham Young and Washington. It's unfortunate that Washington didn't simply accept the Holiday Bowl invitation. That was a suspicious decision that probably entered into the minds of the sportscasters. Ultimately I think that Brigham Young at least merited serious contemplation and maybe earned it. Defeating Michigan isn't an easy assignment. Most people understand why that's a difficult proposition.
It was an easy victory for Washington AT Michigan earlier in the season. Pummeled them...up 20-3 until a last second TD made it 20-11. And if UW accepts the Holiday Bowl invitation and blows out BYU, Oklahoma takes the national title in the Orange Bowl. Watch the Holiday Bowl and the Orange Bowl and see which game had the better teams...
@@rogerbrodniak5644if Washington accepts a Holiday Bowl invitation? Why didn't they? Quit feeding me this bullshit line about what obviously isn't what happened. Fantasy Island was cancelled.
Nobody cares about what Washington might have done.
@@rogerbrodniak5644Bo Schembechler said Brigham Young was comparable to Illinois. Chris Zurbrugg was 2-0 against decent (0.500) Illinois.
Jim Harbaugh was 0-0-1 against a 6-5-1 Illinois. Michigan was 6-5 and lost. That means they fell to 6-6.
I'm thinking Brigham Young might have been better than Illinois. Fairly confident about it.
@@rogerbrodniak5644I don't remember the part about Washington accepting the Holiday Bowl and blowing out the Cougars. When did that happen? I missed that episode. Put down the crack pipe. I do remember Brigham Young beating Washington. 31-3. That part I remember.
@@rogerbrodniak5644it wasn't an easy victory. 20-11. Nine points. Washington didn't roll over on Brigham Young. They might have run away like a little girl from a challenge. Brigham Young was rated #1.
I sometimes think that BYU 's '84 nat'l title was akin to, say, Charlie Chaplin's '72 Oscar For Lifetime Achievement. Neither had ever won the award before, each certainly had a bevy of great previous performances worthy of such laurels, and both, in their own way, were controversial /unorthodox enough to ensure that the brass ring would unlikely come their way, if the powers that be had their way. But talented they each were, such that the breadth and magnitude of their achievement could not be ignored. It was only a matter of time ... 🏉 🎥
Washington should have been the champion that year, BYU's,marquee win against Pittsburgh, looks petty pathetic when you see Pitt went 3-7 on the season, UW's one loss was to a 9-3 USC team that finished the year ranked number 9 and beat the 9-1-1 Oklahoma, along with beating Michigan AT Michigan earlier in the season by a bigger margin than BYU did along with shalacking a Houston team that beat the no 8 team SMU. It was no contest.
College Football a big anti-trust violation. If it were semi-fair. There would be at least a 16 team playoff with all FBS conference champions as automatic qualifiers with the other 5 spots at large.
You have to have the other 5 spots because the second place in SEC is 9 times out of 10 going to be stronger than the Sunbelt conference champion and would deserve shot as well. I believe this would balance things out. A 24 team playoff like the FCS has would be ideal as both conference champions and stronger at large teams from P5 conferences would all have shots at the title.
Not to mention, other football leagues are legally prohibited from scheduling football games on Saturdays. True anti-trust
Ah, the '84 Cougars. I always feel compelled to post the results when talking about that team......
BEAT AIR FORCE FALCONS (8-4) 30-25
BEAT HAWAII WARRIORS (7-4) 18-13
BEAT MICHIGAN WOLVERINES (6-6) 24-17
BEAT UTAH UTES (6-5-1) 24-14
BEAT TULSA GOLDEN HURRICANE (6-5) 38-15
BEAT WYOMING COWBOYS (6-6) 41-38
BEAT BAYLOR BEARS (5-6) 47-13
BEAT SAN DIEGO STATE AZTECS (4-7-1) 34-3
BEAT NEW MEXICO LOBOS (4-8) 48-0
BEAT PITTSBURGH PANTHERS (3-7-1) 20-14
BEAT COLORADO STATE RAMS (3-8) 52-9
BEAT TEXAS EL PASO MINERS (2-9) 42-9
BEAT UTAH STATE AGGIES (1-10) 38-13
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OPPONENTS BEATEN WERE 61-85-3 (41.7 %)
OUTSCORED OPPONENTS 456-183
They honestly had about the easiest road to a title ever but 1984 also didn't have a lot of great options either. Even a year before there were six 1 loss teams who could claim the title and the Cougars were in that mix too. In 1984? Florida may have been the best at the end but had a loss and a tie and were on probation so there was no way they were getting a natty that year. Washington had a nice finish but were in the orange bowl because they couldn't be in the rose bowl - they just never could beat USC in Los Angeles. So no conference title probably means no natty either. So who's left? Nebraska and Boston College rounded out the final top five that year with two losses each. So either BYU was going to get the title or 11-1 Washington was going to without winning their league.
I love to point to the schedule because it wasn't great but then again, 1984 wasn't exactly a historic year for football either. Honestly, tell me who you like from this list....
www.sports-reference.com/cfb/years/1984-polls.html
Yep. They had to have alot of things go their way + do what they can control.
Same as cincy making the cfp, even going undefeated and beating #5 nd, they still needed 1 loss okst to lose to make playoffs lol
Pittsburgh at the start of the year was ranked #3.
BYU beat the worst Michigan squad of the 1980s. In fact that was Michigans worst win percentage until the coronavirus happened in 2020.
@@IAMGavinMitchell pre-season rankings mean nothing. Especially when you end with 3 wins on the season.
@dezznutz3743 so wasn't BYU unranked the 1st game of that season? Therefore, that's the starting point of a season. Especially given that Pittsburgh in 82 & 83 had a quarterback by the name of Dan Marino.
Interesting video!
As a Utah Utes fan, I absolutely resent this whether it was deserved or not. That being said, Lavell Edwards is one of the best coaches of all time.
Typical Ute fan.
@@kooperuranus1503 say what you will, but we are a very passionate bunch.
😆😅🤣
@kooperuranus1503 BYU fans are a laughing matter indeed, I mean, who would be a fan of a team who loses to East Carolina and Liberty. Who's glory days were 40 years ago? It's kinda sad, huh 🤣 🤣 😂.
Again, a yewt fan who can't leave anything "BYU" alone.
Yewts #1 job; hate on BYU
Yewts #2 job; root for Utah
Listening to your narration, as is the case with most other similar channels, is like listening to the Chris Farley interview sketches years ago, on SNL.
Michigan finished 6-6, 7th in the Big Ten and unranked that year and BYU barley beat them. the win over Pitt early in the year was good but I've never been convinced they were a top teen team yet alone the best team. But they should have been given the chance to prove it.
It’s like they should have used a playoff system from the get go…
BYU's starting QB was injured early in the Holiday Bowl and played on a gimpy leg, and the team was plagued by turnovers throughout, but they still won. Stuff happens in football games, the only thing that matters is getting the win.
And as a matter of fact, BYU did get a chance to play Washington, the team that finished #2 that year (but failed to win its conference), early in 1985. Yes, different year and different team, but the fact that BYU thrashed them 30-3 on that day gives the lie to the notion that they weren't in the same league as the traditional powers.
For poll voters in 1984 trying to pick a national champion it was like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end.
My hell these schools just want a chance to keep playing til they lose! That’s not asking much. Pretty funny that with NIL and the transfer portal, the smaller schools, or a school that isn’t located in the right place, basically have no chance to keep their best players. College football was fucked up a long time ago
I know you wrote this a month ago and I'm late the party, but i actually think the first few weeks of the season (with a lot of upsets and close calls) have born out that nil and the transfer portal are bringing more parity to college football, not less. Why would a talented recruiter sit on the bench at Alabama or Georgia for 4 years, when he could transfer to a "lesser" program where he would actually get playing time and get in front of NFL scouts. I really think nil/transfer portal is going to put a wrench into the "super conferences" master plan.
When BYU played Tennessee in 2019, the TV announcer said Both programs have a National Championship.
I wish more teams claimed their titles from random years. Missouri was declared Champs in 07 and Boise State in 06/09
UTEP 1985!
penn state in 69 and 94
You don't just declare a championship, the college football world has to do it for you and if you had a really good year, where the championship is indisputable, it is then declared CONSENSUS.
By the way, it should also be pointed out that none of those teams that you listed were considered to be national champions by the college football world...... that is why they could not lay claim to a "national championship".
@@ptor175Penn State was mightily screwed in 1994. Tom Osborne of Nebraska hasn't won the championship yet so they gave it to him
This title started the ball rolling that finally led to the BCS in the late 1990’s and the College Football Playoff in 2014.
Given that TCU got absolutely curb-stomped by Georgia in the last championship game, the playoff format isn't without problems.
Or how 2014 TCU got screwed out of a playoff for not winning their conference, yet still made the playoffs 8 years later without winning their conference.....
@MattLindon-wv8jy They didn't get screwed out of their spot. There were 6 deserving teams, and only 4 spots. 2 of the 1 loss teams were going to have to be left out. And winning your conference is not a requirement, it just helps out. There were no non playoff teams in 2022 that had the resume to be ahead of TCU that year.
While Georgia may have curb stomped TCU, TCU 100% belonged in the playoffs. Remember, they beat Michigan in the semi-finals.
1.) It wasn't a national championship game. That didn't even play in a New Year's Bowl. 2.) They needed a bunch of real teams (who played non-Mickey Mouse schedules) to lose in their New Year's Bowl. Still, despite beating a then 6-5 squad (even if it is Michigan), the BYU NC claim is slightly less ridiculous than UCF's claimed 2017 title.
If they GAVE the title to BYU then they definitely should have GIVEN it to UCF and I am not a UCF fan. However, it was this charade that assured it would not happen again. Has it?
BTW, if not already stated, Michigan was eanked #1 to start the season. Injuries to 3 key offensive players ended that, but they were all healthy at the time of the Holiday bowl, on a winning streak, and would with those same players win the 1985 national championship. Michigan was no pushover and were under tremendous pressure to embarras BYU in that game. They didn't. Another note. Bosco fumbled twice heading it to the end zone, not protecting the ball well when he scrambled, he was an awkward runner holding the ball away from his body rather then tucking it under his armpit. Point being, there was actually a huge yardage disparity in the game in BYUs favor, and minus those big Oops by Bosco, the score could have should have been by a much wider margin. Credit Michigan for swatting the ball loose at the culminating point of both drives. The following season BYU opens against highly ranked Boston College, Bosco injured his arm, and never recovered from it.
If it weren't for the stupid Rose Bowl, we would have had a college football playoff system in the 1970s.
In 1983 BYU lost their first game of the season to Baylor then won their next 11 going 11-1 that year. The went 13-0 in 1984 getting the National Championship and also having the longest winning streak 24-0 in 1983 and 1984!
That should have been Washington’s national title, 1984 BYU was the equivalent of UCFs “natty” in 2017
Yes.
So claim it so and it shall be done.
Different times back then. There was no such thing as power five conferences. Strength of schedule didn't matter to the point that it was AP (writers) that voted on the rankings, and such ranking determined the national champion. College football was fun to watch back then because it was regional. Don't get me wrong games are fun to watch today, but it was just a different time.
Washington should have been #1. Realignment is shit though. Money has ruined what made College Ball fun. It's just exploitative NFL at this point.
Cowards don't get to be national champions. They ducked out of playing BYU because their coaching staff knew they had no chance against BYU.
@@allanbird3725yk thats a lie
This was 40 years ago, and the point of the video was to talk about how BYU's national championship changed college football. It was decided the way it was back then, and so people can complain all they want, but BYU did nothing wrong. They won it fair and square... because the national champion was selected subjectively.
Now, it's more objective thanks to BYU. The playoff is something that should have happened decades ago. Would have loved to see BYU in a playoff back then, and just like March Madness we'll get to see that going forward. I used to have a problem with the way college football did things. Not anymore. The landscape has naturally changed to where power conferences include the cream of the crop, and BYU is now in one of those conferences. Nothing wrong with it imo.
The weakest and least-deserving "National Champion" in college football history.
Good video
Byu didn't pkay in the national championship game, as you started off the video. They played vs a non ranked team.
Thats bcs there was no natty until the bcs era
@suuwooski6416 yes there were "nattys". What you meant to say is there were no national championship games. That is my point. He video said they played in one.
@@elche1976 Um, yes, they did. They played a game, and in winning it, they won the national championship. Ergo, national championship game.
There were attempts at the time to line up two good candidates in a "championship" bowl game, but that often did not take place. If the favorite won their bowl game, they were champs. If they lost and the next-best won, the next-best was considered the champ. Simple. That's what happened in 1984. BYU was #1, they won their bowl game, so they were the national champions.
@SIB1963 byu education. Nowhere outside of your feelings has it ever or will be listed as the national championship game. Child. It was a regular a Holiday bowl, and byu won. After it, because byu can from behind against the 6-5 Michigan team, they were voted as championship. But these do called national championship game didn't exist outside of your fantasies until the bcs. I love byu fans. Their myopic views provide great comedy.
@@elche1976 And yet...BYU was the 1984 National Champion. You'll just somehow have to find a way to make peace with that fact.
I was at U of Utah that year…a redshirt freshman….we actually play BYU pretty close most of the game but lost by I think it was 10 points…I played a couple plays against New Mexico but due to rules I was still a redshirt freshman
Is this the worst championing sports history? They barely beat any real competitors
C c x c xz c c s c c
@JKJ002 You're actually wrong. The Bowl Coalition had the tie in with Notre Dame. Not the Bowl Alliance.
Awesome video. I was checking out you channel, great find for me. Have you considered a "Rise & Fall" video of the Miami Hurricanes? Or, to cliché?
there was a lot of controversy around it but the one thing to note all the other schools said they didn't play in the national championship game cause they wanted to make money in the other bowl games, they were all given a chance and they turned it down so imo byu deserves the national championship
Great job!
You read my mind with the NCAA football over the past 15, 30, and 45 years. Money.
A part of me wants to see schools like BYU get their chance. But then I remember when I was a kid on New Year's Day 1985, and how totally bummed out I felt that the bowl games weren't going to mean anything that day, as BYU had essentially cliched the national title. I never want to feel that way as a college football fan again.
According to who? The pollsters? Who cares?
That doesn’t make any sense lol… other teams should be given chances to finish well so the NY6 bowls can mean more?
Need a rise of Kansas football video soon!
What helped was some WAC teams beat some big names, which resulted in the phrase, "Everybody has been beaten by somebody, who was beaten by BYU. But nobody has beaten anybody who has beaten BYU."
BYU beat a very average Michigan team to claim the title. This is why we have a playoff. If they would have played in a top tier bowl game, they would have deserved it. I think they played Michigan in the Holiday Bowl. They were not the Big ten champion.
TIL the 1984 season was a proto-2007 Chaos year.
Not sure how it’s done now but I always felt a playoff with all conference winners would solve disputes. It might humble power conferences and some of the conference jumpers might jump to the weak conferences to increase the chances of getting in the playoffs. It would bring balance to the confrences. No one agreed with me and I got bored with a sport that didn’t want balance.
I think it would be a great idea. Why not a 24 team playoff like the FCS has? All FBS conference champions could be automatic qualifiers and still strong Power 5 teams that didn’t win their conference a shot.
That’s what I was thinking, add in the highest ranked teams not conference champions and they can do it as the bowl games since many of the top bowls are conference based. Like the Rose Bowl was when I watched PAC 10 vs Big Ten.. I am sure is a way to preserve that or even if it’s a 2nd round game the power confrences have to beat weak confrence champs to get there.
Require everyone to play at least 2 Power 5 schools on your schedule. That gives the Group of 5 a chance to add Power 5 schools to their non-conference schedule. If they still go undefeated now they have an argument.
The American Conference is really good
They cant hang anymore. PERIOD. BYU had an advantage because all of their players are 2 years olders than the players on all the other squads.
@@dezznutz3743you do realize that when they go on two year missions they aren't playing football and are no longer in shape. It takes about a year after they come back just to get back into shape again dumb dumb
Kind of like 8-0 BYU in 2024. Every opponent is a power 4 opponent
The G5 schools should just become the new D1 AA, and play for their own National Championship.
What does 1984 BYU football & 1990 UNLV basketball have in common? They were the consensus National Champion without playing in a traditional power conference.
Next year it will be the 40th anniversary of that team defying the odds winning a natty without playing a traditional new year's bowl game.
UNLV had to beat 6 teams (Arkansas Little Rock, Ohio State, Ball State, Loyola Marymount, Georgia Tech & Duke) to earn that title playing 21 of their 40 games in the Big West Conference. Did their weak conference schedule hurt them? No. That very team struggled against Ball State but they won.
So thats the rarity of 2 schools west of the Mississippi that doesn't play in a power conference and got it done.
Brigham Young participated in an NCAA Division I title game. Michigan was 6-5 but were 5-0 in 1985 before losing to Iowa. They played a daunting schedule and would have been represented to a national championship if 1985 doubled as a tournament. Iowa back-ended it and Brigham Young front-ended it. The title Brigham Young won is an NCAA title. Michigan lost to Iowa. Iowa shares in it. Washington was a bowl alliance national champion.
U.C.L.A. was a Belt Champion.
I said it before and will say it again. There will be two MASSIVE NCAA Sports conferences. The WAL MART Conference (previously known as the SEC) and the TARGET Conference (Previously known as the Big 10,Big 16 or whatever they do with the math over there). WALM MART. The conference commissioner is Jeff Foxworthy. TARGET. The conference commissioner is Larry the Cable Guy. Hold on, Larry is from Nebraska. get 'er done.
BYU literally beat Bos worst Michigan team for the Natty. Look at the win percentage of their opponents in 1984, its 42%. Michigan was 6-6 and that loss is still considered one of Michigans worst losses, up their with App St. and Akron.
@Dezz Exactly, you nailed it even using only their actual bowl game.
Not to mention how slow the WAC was back in the day, and the absence of quality depth. Drop that 84 squad into a major conference at the time, and even if the attrition of the roster depth miraculously didn't change, that BYU squad wins 7 games. Their only top 25 win was vs Pitt week one, who ended up 3-7-1. They also eeked out wins vs Hawaii Wyoming, and Air Force. And, dang, that Michigan squad had zero team speed.
Beat a 6-6 5th in the Big Ten team on its 3rd string QB
National title?
I think not
In the last several years, I have done a personal rankings based solely on which teams beat which other teams. I don't care about power-5 or not...but on how impressive the wins are.
Without fail, there are some lesser conference teams that have made impressive runs into the top-10. However, in each of the last five years...the committee and I have agreed on the content of the playoff teams. Slight differences in seeding...yes. Teams in vs out? No.
The system as implemented currently doesn't reward teams for on-field accomplishments as much as it should...it still gets confused with pre-season expectations...but the sample size so far has augured well for the committee's decisionmaking.
What’s impressive mean? Factoring margin of victory without teams knowing makes any system automatically flawed.
You and the committee have done nothing. Things work themselves out. The committee never makes any sense and constantly contradicts themselves until the end when again it works its self out.
There’s no argument for the committee’s “decision making”. The can’t keep one week consistent, let alone week to week or year to year. I don’t think they even know the criteria.
Birthplace of the air raid offense. So many coaches who expanded on the west coast, and air raid offense started there
One thing about BYU is most of these kids left on their mission as boys and two years later they were young men.
But than they come back out of shape. It's not an advantage
I understand the different sides of the debate, but if you go undefeated in whatever league you play in (in this context the league would be FBS) then you deserve a shot at a championship. If you're going to treat some league members as inferior based on brand, strength of schedule, etc. then you might as well just officially split the FBS into two leagues. That said, I'm hopeful that the 12 team format will be the best so far for all FBS schools, even if it's still imperfect.
UCF, Utah (painful to admit as a BYU fan), etc. have gotten screwed over in the past, unfortunately
Yeah I agree. Honestly until another school from a non major conference wins, the 1984 BYU team will always be an anomaly when it comes to college football national champions. I know they almost always played in the Holiday Bowl back then but they should’ve played either Washington or Oklahoma.
No, BYU did not deserve the National Championship. In those days there was a long time held belief that if you didn't lose you should not go down in the rankings in spite of the level of competition you played. By ranking BYU after that one upset win, it set them on a path that would challenge that belief. The video even suggests that QB Bosco understood that they could "run the table" given the poor level of competition they would play the rest of the year. It was also greed and stupidity by the NCAA and polls that BYU wouldn't be able to beat a barely bowl eligible six win Michigan team in spite of being in the Holiday Bowl which was essentially a home game for BYU! The video ignores the fact that it was an independant Miami team that won the title the year before upsetting Nebraska in the Orange Bowl which was a home game for Miami! Nor does it mention two years before that the then non-power Clemson team of the ACC who also climbed the rankings in what was considered a basketball conference, who then got to play also in Miami. While part of the overall process, I think the BYU dilemma was the last nail but not the only one in the coffin. I personally point to the Miami-Nebraska game in which Tom Osborne went for a win instead of taking a tie. Because there was no over time at the top level then. By going for two and failing, Osborne failed his players by throwing away a outstanding season and sure title. He could have embarrassed the Orange Bowl by not having a winner and got football to have overtime nearly a decade sooner and it would have definitely sped up the talk of a title game all while leading to the rise of Miami football for which I could shoot him on that point alone!
Eeked past 6-6 Michigan!😢
I was proud of Brigham Young U for winning that national title. Steve Young rightfully earned that Heisman Trophy.
*being vote nc.
As a fan of the bows, I’d like to think BYU’s struggle against the University of Hawaii would partially be to
“Rivalry game”
Hawaii and BYU have traditional rivalry in football between the two programs. Also, a lot of people in Hawaii are part of Mormon faith. So, there is a local connection between the Mormon church and the people of Hawaii.
Only two of BYU's opponents won at least seven games. They had played only one ranked opponent all season, preseason #3 Pittsburgh, a team that would finish 3-7-1 and unranked.
Huskies were best team in nation in '84...beating a quality OU squad in Orange bowl. Coach Switzer said Washington was by far the best team they'd played all year. cougs barely beat a poor 6-5 Michigan squad in their bowl game. Byu had weak schedule as they played in non power 5 conference.
Huskies were even more dominant in '91....being crowned co-champs with Miami was a joke!
Boise state got screwed over and over by BCS selection committee...they were only non power conference school in last 2 decades that should have national championship banner in their stadium! That bowl win over OU was priceless!! Lol
BYU would have lost to at least a half dozen teams that year, probably more. "Wins on the field" don't mean anything if they're against garbage teams.
I remember in high school there was no playoffs. Champions were crowned by a vote of sportswriters. I'm all for expanded playoffs in college. Win it on the field. Boise State had a chance 10-15 years ago but there wasn't a playoff.
Yes but no. Titles were and are still claimed by the universities. Why does the playoff change anything? Why is destroying cfb good?
Why bother with regular season. Just start a double elimination tournament in September.
@@mikebronicki8264 well because the regular season was the greatest in all of sports and an ex facto post season.
@@jonnybaze7449 I agree. I was just taking the current trend to the extreme. In my perfect world the conferences make geographic sense, there are no extra games for a conference championship and the perfect playoff includes 8 teams with the first round being a home game for the top 4. If you lose 3 games your chance of a championship should be zero. 2 loss teams should have to have a signature win and only "good" losses to have even a 50% chance of qualifying. It used to be that EVERY game during the regular season mattered!
They beat an average 6-6 Michigan team in the bowl and had to pull it out in the end. They played one ranked opponent the entire year which was Pitt (Pitt ended 3-7-1) and barely pulled out games vs Wyoming, Air Force and Hawaii.
I remember this season, BYU was a good team, but, and I know what the reaction will be. I question would they have been undefeated playing in the SEC, Big Eight, Big Ten teams? I don't think so, but I don't want to sound like Barry Switzer, so I'll leave it alone.
They played a 1AA schedule. It was an issue. Very few people considered them the national champion at the time.