Honesty test for Ute fans...

[TheBYUGuy]

The question was based on his statement that he was out of the country and unable to watch the NBA playoffs in 1997. You are saying you would rather get an NBA championship that you don't enjoy or get to watch than experience a western conference finals championship first hand?

For me, yes. You don't have to see it live in order to enjoy it. I watched the BYU-Utah game 5 hours after everyone else on Saturday but still enjoyed it. I'd rather have the Jazz win the title in my absence than not win it at all.

[UtahDan]

You don't have to see it live in order to enjoy it.

See I keep telling people this in relation to the Utes 1944 NCAA tournament championship, which I enjoyed immensely. I'm glad someone gets me.

[BoylenOver]

Utah did everything it could (twice) to be in a position to win a BCS title, and it didn't happen.

Would the trophy/banner be nice? Sure, but I don't feel bad that circumstances outside of the control of what our program could do kept them from achieving that.

I enjoyed the ride last year, and just like other have alluded to, Utah's '98 Final Four run means infinitely more to me than their '44 title because I was alive to experience it while it was happening.

[LA Ute]

Utah did everything it could (twice) to be in a position to win a BCS title, and it didn't happen.

Would the trophy/banner be nice? Sure, but I don't feel bad that circumstances outside of the control of what our program could do kept them from achieving that.

I enjoyed the ride last year, and just like other have alluded to, Utah's '98 Final Four run means infinitely more to me than their '44 title because I was alive to experience it while it was happening.

I agree. I got to go to the Final Four in 1998, and that was a really magical experience.

As for 1984, I have always felt that it is too bad that the primary topic of discussion then was whether BYU deserved the NC. It's really all anyone was talking about. Regardless of how you come down on that issue, it is too bad for BYU fans that their NC carries that question mark. But I concede that it's just part of NCAA football lore now and BYU fans are justly proud of it.

I am happy with the Sugar Bowl and Fiesta Bowl wins, and the 1998 hoops run, because there is no question about the Utes deserving any of them.

[Maximus]

I agree. I got to go to the Final Four in 1998, and that was a really magical experience.

As for 1984, I have always felt that it is too bad that the primary topic of discussion then was whether BYU deserved the NC. It's really all anyone was talking about. Regardless of how you come down on that issue, it is too bad for BYU fans that their NC carries that question mark. But I concede that it's just part of NCAA football lore now and BYU fans are justly proud of it.

I am happy with the Sugar Bowl and Fiesta Bowl wins, and the 1998 hoops run, because there is no question about the Utes deserving any of them.

There is no question that BYU deserved and is the 1984 champion, except from Washington and Ute fans. Guess what Washington, come back when you win your conference.

[LA Ute]

There is no question that BYU deserved and is the 1984 champion, except from Washington and ute fans.

How can I take seriously the opinion of a guy who doesn't even capitalize "Ute?"

[Moliere]

I agree. I got to go to the Final Four in 1998, and that was a really magical experience.

As for 1984, I have always felt that it is too bad that the primary topic of discussion then was whether BYU deserved the NC. It's really all anyone was talking about. Regardless of how you come down on that issue, it is too bad for BYU fans that their NC carries that question mark. But I concede that it's just part of NCAA football lore now and BYU fans are justly proud of it.

I am happy with the Sugar Bowl and Fiesta Bowl wins, and the 1998 hoops run, because there is no question about the Utes deserving any of them.

Whether the championship is deserved or not is almost always debated no matter if it is BYU or someone else. That is not new.

What people tend to forget is what it took to win that championship. It was not won by the 1984 season alone. It was won beginning in 1979 (or maybe even before then) and having BYU run off 5 or 6 years of incredible football during that time. BYU was very consistent and had many 1 loss seasons and finally got over the hump in 1984 with a perfect record. In fact, the 1983 Holiday Bowl was as much a part of that championship as were all the games played in 1984. Sure the 1984 schedule and bowl opponent were not the best, but the championship was not just won during the 1984 season.

If Utah would have had 1 loss seasons in 2005, 2006, and 2007 they would have played for the BCS championship eventually. Utah's runs in 2004 and 2008 were great accomplishments, but so was BYU's run from 1979 to 1984. They are different accomplishments in different eras.

Personally I like having an undisputed NC trophy but I would love to have a BCS trophy as well. It should have happened in 2001 and back in 1996 we should have been invited to a Bowl Alliance game but didn't get either one. But at least we knocked on the door and made it a little easier for someone to get in.

[BoylenOver]

If Utah would have had 1 loss seasons in 2005, 2006, and 2007 they would have played for the BCS championship eventually. Utah's runs in 2004 and 2008 were great accomplishments, but so was BYU's run from 1979 to 1984. They are different accomplishments in different eras.

Eventually, but not in 2008. Even with a late loss by Texas, we would've been behind USC, OU, and UF on the last week of the season despite a hypothetical 12-1 season in 2007.

TCU finished last season in the top 10 and started this season in the top 15, and while they are stuck between three undefeated teams, they would still be on the outside looking in if there were two.

Strange as it may seem, Utah probably had a better shot at a MNC under the old system than it did with the BCS.

[Solon]

Hey Trolljunkie, the only thing any of these teams ever did was win all its games.

In recognition of its undefeated season, the byu was awarded a championship by the press - a great award and something worth commemorating.

In recognition of their undefeated seasons, the Utes got a ton of money, some national chatter, and appearances in bowl games normally off-limits to their conference.

Either way, the three teams in question did nothing other than win all their games.

Plenty of teams have been awarded national championships that have a loss (or a tie); plenty of undefeated teams haven't gotten one (Joe Pa has had four undefeated teams not receive national championships). Can you really hold it against the players and teams that they didn't receive adequate recognition? Do you hold it against Van Gogh that nobody liked his art until he shot himself in the gut?

In the end, since it's all about recognition, maybe it's an LDS thing. I think this just plays into what one historian described as “an inferiority complex vis-à-vis the rest of the United States” driven by “[f]eelings of embarrassment” over Mormonism’s unique cultural quirks. Is that what this is all about?

Your obsession with 1984 is so Uncle-Rico.

[U-Ute]

Strange as it may seem, Utah probably had a better shot at a MNC under the old system than it did with the BCS.

Oh, there's no doubt about that. The BCS was setup because they wanted to make sure that a smaller undefeated school outside of the money conferences didn't win the national championship again.

U-Ute

[Fiyero]

TCU finished last season in the top 10 and started this season in the top 15, and while they are stuck between three undefeated teams, they would still be on the outside looking in if there were two.

TCU will return so many players that there's talk they could start next season in the top 3. But the problem is, they could have started this season #2 yet they still would have been jumped by Alabama and Texas.