Talk:Fifth Down Game (1990)

message: I submit that the 'living a lie' remark by Lou Holtz needs removed; it is INACCURATE and WRONG. I realize that the source cites Tim Layden of CNNSI - but Layden has his chronology wrong.
Colorado and Notre Dame met in BOTH the 1990 and 1991 Orange Bowls. The 1990 bowl followed the 1989 season, the year when Colorado's quarterback Sal Aunese died of stomach cancer and they used his demise to propel themselves to an unbeaten season and a number one ranking entering the Orange Bowl. Holtz made his comments before the FIRST game - NOT THE GAME that is referenced in this article. I submit the following evidence that Holtz said it before the 1990 game and not the 1991 game.
1) I remember it (admittedly not evidential at all)
2) Bill McCartney said it in his book "From Ashes To Glory" in the chapter entitled "1990 Orange Bowl."
3) I have the tapes of BOTH games with pre-game shows. It was featured on the 1990 game and not the 1991 game.
4) This Irish website  http://www.blueandgold.com/content/?aid=1465&pageID=1 points out it was in 1989. Note carefully where it says: Later that year, Holtz’s private “living a lie” speech to the team about Colorado’s football program would be aired by a Colorado station. (note: the year referenced in the previous paragraph talking about Notre Dame's win in the 1990 Orange Bowl is 1989 - not 1990.
Please remove the comment; the original article by Layden is simply wrong on the facts
199.184.196.144 18:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Because your referenced a source I could check (even if it's not perfectly clear, the page is essentially about the 1989 season) and McCartney's book (which I can't easily check, but could) and the reference I found was written years afterwards. It does make it more poetic that he would remark that about Colorado 90-91 season. I just don't understand why he would make the comment about the 89-90 season? What lie was Colorado living then? That they were #1 or could beat Notre Dame? That's my only (weak) argument against. --MECU≈talk 20:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In 1989, Colorado's quarterback, Sal Aunese, was diagnosed with stomach cancer in the spring. In July, it was revealed that he was the father of Coach McCartney's only daughter's out of wedlock son. In September, Aunese died after becoming a born again Christian. Colorado used the national story with that and had an emotional year where everyone was pulling for the underdog.
My suspicion is that Holtz - who is a rather clever motivational speaker - was trying to get his players to not get intimidated by the CU emotion. I also think it was wrong (as did Holtz and McCartney as well) for a mic to pick up a coach's private comments to his players.
It later came out that James Ryle, a preacher who is now affiliated with Promise Keepers and later McCartney's pastor, had given a prophecy that the Buffaloes would have a 'golden season.' After winning their opening game, McCartney accepted the prophecy as valid when the next day's newspaper said Colorado had opened a 'golden season.' Of course, it might also be because that was CU's 100th year of football, I don't know.
199.91.36.254 22:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Living A Lie Remark Needs Removed

message: Basically, this article and 1990 Colorado-Missouri football game have the same content, and describe the same situation. --OntarioQuizzer 17:58, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Maybe we need an article entitled "Missouri Getting Screwed By Big VIII/Big XII Referees" after the Nebraska game in '97.... Bsd987 01:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can only imagine the explosion of articles with similar titles. There seems to be a consenus to merge. I'll go ahead and do that. Kerowyn 00:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: I have tried to trim this article down by removing some of the most opinionated comments. 
I have also added some remarks to clarify the issues for those not familiar with American football.  Still need to add some links though.
sorry, forgot to sign that last remark.
Paul 17:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pared down 

message: Hello again.  I believe this article is now up to snuff.  What do you think?
Paul 19:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixed now? 

message: This article fails to mention that Johnson's spike of the ball on 4th down was almost certainly a direct consequence of the officials' mistake two downs earlier. One can only assume that any QB with half a brain would not be likely to literally throw away his team's final shot at victory. Johnson spiked the ball because the marker said it was third down, and he believed that he would have one more play after the spike. If the officials had marked off the downs properly, the most likely scenario is that Colorado would have run a play on fourth down, but would have been more rushed than they otherwise were (since the clock would still have been running). This is completely different from the 1940 Cornell scenario, in which Cornell actually made five attampts at the end zone. Of course, it is impossible to know exactly what would have happened had the Colorado-Mizzou referees not made that mistake, but one cannot say with certainty that Colorado would have lost. I will try to input this change into the article, but if someone else can provide more details, feel free to edit it.
: In response to your statement, "One can only assume that any QB with half a brain would not be likely to literally throw away his team's final shot at victory," I'd like to reference you to Reggie Ball literally throwing away his team's final shot at victory against Georgia in 2005. Failureofafriend (talk) 06:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maestroh, even if you're not logged in or on 'your' IP, please sign all your comments with four tildes: ~~~~. Thank you. --MECU≈talk 15:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the line covering this: "Oddly, McCartney did not make the more compelling argument that Colorado had not truly benefited from a "fifth down", since Johnson would most likely not have spiked the ball on what the officials were calling third down had it been correctly designated as fourth down." since it doesn't have a cite and hasn't for a month. While I agree that it is a better argument, it violates WP:OR unless it can be cited as such. If you find a reliable source, please feel free to restore this into the article with the citation. --MECU≈talk 18:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spiking the ball 

message: Came across this article. I corrected a couple of very confusing sentences. Generally seems good, in line with WP:MOS and the sources cited seem reasonable (ie, it only cites CU's sports page for game results, which could probably be cited to ESPN or SI.) However, an article must not cite other wikipedia articles, so under no circumstances is 1990 NCAA Division I-A football season a reliable source. (That article may, of course, be linked in a "See also" section.) Gimmetrow 04:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed that reference and replaced it with the 2006 Media Guide by Georgia Tech, where someone could also see their claim as National Champions. ESPN and SI can't be used for these since they only give schedules for the past few years, they don't have historical information such as this. That may change in the future, but I checked and they only had as far back as 2002 on ESPN and I couldn't find anything but the current season at SI. Thank you for the pointers. --MECU≈talk 18:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Thank you for the comments. I changed the rules "might be interpreted as" to a more definite statement. The following text after that explain why the rules say that, so I don't believe that can be WP:OR. I agree with your second point, that although everyone familiar with college football would agree, that it's still speculation. I will search for a source. As for the last, it is fairly evident watching that he slips due to the field. But I will find a source for this one since it should be fairly easy. The previous 10-2-1 might be harder to find though. --MECU≈talk 21:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I've added a reference of McCartney complaining the field was slippery and copied another reference there from the QB saying it was slippery as well. I removed the conjecture that the "tight end would have been able to score, and presumably put the game away" since that is WP:OR and there isn't an available source for it (that I could find) and the fact is he slipped, it doesn't matter "what would have happened". --MECU≈talk 21:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, seems to have the bugs worked out. I think "It has been called..." phrases sound better stating who called them such, but it's not worth fussing over, and it seems a "Good Article" at this point. (Special congratulations for not using the word "also"!) For further improvement and FAC specifically, this article could probably benefit from greater discussion of other "fifth down" situations (the "comprehensive" requirement), and some other statements could use referencing. Eg: "The Missouri game caused Colorado's ranking to decline to 14th." This should cite that they were 14th, and ideally that this game was responsible. Gimmetrow 00:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note on sources 

message: I just came on this article rather randomly, and was not familiar with the game. As a GA, I think there are several pretty critical issues that should be addressed. I'm not nominating for WP:GAR, because I think these could all be addressed pretty easily by anyone concerned with this article:
* The lead section should probably give a bit more information on what happened, why it was controversial.
* The background section may be more detailed than it needs to be; there are other articles for a detailed description of the rules of football. So maybe it could be shortened with more concise language. If kept at its present length, it should probably be split into at least two or maybe three paragraphs, for readbility. And it needs some citations.
* The recap of the entire game is useful, but it's not really the point of the article; it seems the significant stuff all happened in the last 3 minutes. There should be a new section or a sub-section for the final 3 minutes of the game, so that a reader quickly scanning through the article can find the important part easily.
* There is only a single paragraph (second-to-last of "Game recap" section) devoted directly to the subject of the article. It should probably be split (within the new section suggested above) into paragraphs, and expanded, detailing specifics like the first four downs, the cause of the confusion, the fifth down, and the goal line controversy (which is apparently separate).
On the whole, it sounds like an interesting controversy, worthy of a bit more detailed and carefully-structured coverage. -Pete (talk) 21:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some work needed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fifth Down Game (1990). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060427032413/http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_n1_v221/ai_19006779 to http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_n1_v221/ai_19006779
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:10, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fifth Down Game (1990). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060613162821/http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?SID=1144&CID=550162 to http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?SID=1144&CID=550162
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:43, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fifth Down Game (1990). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708175404/http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/champions_national.html to http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/champions_national.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:09, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified