![]() | Fifth Down Game (1990) was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'Closure came in the summer of 1998' is the opinion of the dickhead who wrote this article and should be removed. There is no evidence to suggest that this occured at the referenced event. I also think my edit removing this was reversed by MECU, who happens to be from Colorado and probably has an agenda.
:I am aware that the article is from 1998. But it says nothing of closure, only remorse. Closure would imply that Mizzou and Mizzou fans have put it to rest. This is hardly the case. And as far as the comment about 'un-Christian behavior' goes, his so-called remorse was tied to the Promise Keepers. I would suggest that it is fair to assume that the author of the wiki article intended an implied link between his christianity and remorse. And as for your speculation about forfeiting the game, it is just that, speculation. The SI-CNN article makes no reference to this, implied or otherwise.
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)Maestroh 199.184.196.144 18:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
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)Maestroh
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)
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.
Hello again. I believe this article is now up to snuff. What do you think?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This article has a number of errors and NPOV comments. 1) . But after the referee had blown his whistle, he took his eyes off Johnson to look over at the crowd on the side of the field. The Missouri defender who had tackled Johnson got up to celebrate and Johnson took that opportunity to get up just enough to put the ball over the end zone. The referee on the field looked back to see the ball over the goal line and called it a touchdown.
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT!!!
I have this game on tape, and I concede that whether or not Johnson made it over the line before he went down is questionable. However, the official came in signaling touchdown almost immediately. If this particular report is correct, I'd like to see a footnoted verification from a non-Missouri source.
2) The Orange Bowl victory over Notre Dame was considered very controversial as well (Notre Dame Coach Lou Holtz had told his team in a pregame speech that Colorado was "living a lie"),
THIS IS INCORRECT.
Lou Holtz DID say that Colorado had been living a lie, but he said it before the 1990 Orange Bowl that followed the 1989 unbeaten season NOT the 1991 Orange Bowl following Fifth Down. Holtz made his remarks in December 1989 at a practice - the Fifth Down did not occur until 10/6/1990. It should be removed.
Maestroh
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.
Although I'm not on my IP, this is Maestroh.
Your assessment is correct. Johnson spiked the ball on fourth down. At the time he did it, the announcers thought it an absolute disaster. But they then decided that they had somehow miscounted the number of downs. In the heat of battle, it wasn't possible to assess the fact that the referees were wrong. In fact, one announcer insisted that the refs were NOT wrong.
After the game went to commercial, they did a review and figured out that the downs were incorrect. Both announcers were named Dave, I remember that.
clearly the section the game famous for the "5th down" for sixty years before the colorado game needs a bit more written on it. that remains one of the most famous moments in college football history, and is a lot bigger, and worthy of the title "5th down" than the colorado game. at least both should be given equal status in the article? don't believe me? watch cbs not mention colorado at all in this tape of "the infamous 5th down" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKvefN4PmT4
128.252.188.235 03:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
OK, that's good. I see this has been around a while as a GA candidate. I think there are some WP:OR issues. In Fallout, the article is interpreting NCAA rules; a cite to someone else saying this would be best. Later: "With a loss at Missouri, the Colorado record would have been 10–2–1, and the Buffaloes surely would not have been considered for the national title with that record." If this can be cited to some sports commentator, great, but if not then however probable the statement, isn't it speculation? In another place, it says "the tight end would have been able to score a touchdown and presumably put the game away, but he slipped due to the poor conditions of the field." That he slipped is probably self-evident, but is it really clear why he slipped? or what might have happened had he not slipped? If it can be attributed to a coach or commentator, then it can be cited as his speculation. I think these are the main issues holding back a GA. Gimmetrow 13:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I read the NFL's play-by-play for the Bengals-Ravens game on November 5, 2006, and it disputes source #20. The Bengals did NOT have a fifth down in the first quarter. The person writing the article thought that Johnson's eight yard run was on 1st and 10, but it was actually on 2nd and 1, thus giving the Bengals a first down. That source should be removed. 71.202.242.152 ( talk) 03:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
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:
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)
Also, in the background section, it states incorrectly that if a team fails to make a first down after 4 attempts, the other team gets the ball "where last played". Of course, usually a team will punt or, if close enought, attempt a field goal on 4th down, but if they "go for it" on 4th down and still fail to make a first down, the other team gets the ball where it was spotted as result of the play.
69.29.207.109 (
talk)
04:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm reassessing this article for WP:GA Sweeps. After reading it, there's a lot of work that needs to be done on this article. Most of my comments are the same as Pete's in a section above, but I have others as well:
I'll put this on hold for five days. If a good deal of progress is not made by then, it fails. If all this is done, I'll do a more detailed review. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:24, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:10, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:43, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:09, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Fifth Down Game (1990) was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
'Closure came in the summer of 1998' is the opinion of the dickhead who wrote this article and should be removed. There is no evidence to suggest that this occured at the referenced event. I also think my edit removing this was reversed by MECU, who happens to be from Colorado and probably has an agenda.
:I am aware that the article is from 1998. But it says nothing of closure, only remorse. Closure would imply that Mizzou and Mizzou fans have put it to rest. This is hardly the case. And as far as the comment about 'un-Christian behavior' goes, his so-called remorse was tied to the Promise Keepers. I would suggest that it is fair to assume that the author of the wiki article intended an implied link between his christianity and remorse. And as for your speculation about forfeiting the game, it is just that, speculation. The SI-CNN article makes no reference to this, implied or otherwise.
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)Maestroh 199.184.196.144 18:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
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)Maestroh
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)
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.
Hello again. I believe this article is now up to snuff. What do you think?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This article has a number of errors and NPOV comments. 1) . But after the referee had blown his whistle, he took his eyes off Johnson to look over at the crowd on the side of the field. The Missouri defender who had tackled Johnson got up to celebrate and Johnson took that opportunity to get up just enough to put the ball over the end zone. The referee on the field looked back to see the ball over the goal line and called it a touchdown.
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT!!!
I have this game on tape, and I concede that whether or not Johnson made it over the line before he went down is questionable. However, the official came in signaling touchdown almost immediately. If this particular report is correct, I'd like to see a footnoted verification from a non-Missouri source.
2) The Orange Bowl victory over Notre Dame was considered very controversial as well (Notre Dame Coach Lou Holtz had told his team in a pregame speech that Colorado was "living a lie"),
THIS IS INCORRECT.
Lou Holtz DID say that Colorado had been living a lie, but he said it before the 1990 Orange Bowl that followed the 1989 unbeaten season NOT the 1991 Orange Bowl following Fifth Down. Holtz made his remarks in December 1989 at a practice - the Fifth Down did not occur until 10/6/1990. It should be removed.
Maestroh
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.
Although I'm not on my IP, this is Maestroh.
Your assessment is correct. Johnson spiked the ball on fourth down. At the time he did it, the announcers thought it an absolute disaster. But they then decided that they had somehow miscounted the number of downs. In the heat of battle, it wasn't possible to assess the fact that the referees were wrong. In fact, one announcer insisted that the refs were NOT wrong.
After the game went to commercial, they did a review and figured out that the downs were incorrect. Both announcers were named Dave, I remember that.
clearly the section the game famous for the "5th down" for sixty years before the colorado game needs a bit more written on it. that remains one of the most famous moments in college football history, and is a lot bigger, and worthy of the title "5th down" than the colorado game. at least both should be given equal status in the article? don't believe me? watch cbs not mention colorado at all in this tape of "the infamous 5th down" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKvefN4PmT4
128.252.188.235 03:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
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)
OK, that's good. I see this has been around a while as a GA candidate. I think there are some WP:OR issues. In Fallout, the article is interpreting NCAA rules; a cite to someone else saying this would be best. Later: "With a loss at Missouri, the Colorado record would have been 10–2–1, and the Buffaloes surely would not have been considered for the national title with that record." If this can be cited to some sports commentator, great, but if not then however probable the statement, isn't it speculation? In another place, it says "the tight end would have been able to score a touchdown and presumably put the game away, but he slipped due to the poor conditions of the field." That he slipped is probably self-evident, but is it really clear why he slipped? or what might have happened had he not slipped? If it can be attributed to a coach or commentator, then it can be cited as his speculation. I think these are the main issues holding back a GA. Gimmetrow 13:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I read the NFL's play-by-play for the Bengals-Ravens game on November 5, 2006, and it disputes source #20. The Bengals did NOT have a fifth down in the first quarter. The person writing the article thought that Johnson's eight yard run was on 1st and 10, but it was actually on 2nd and 1, thus giving the Bengals a first down. That source should be removed. 71.202.242.152 ( talk) 03:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
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:
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)
Also, in the background section, it states incorrectly that if a team fails to make a first down after 4 attempts, the other team gets the ball "where last played". Of course, usually a team will punt or, if close enought, attempt a field goal on 4th down, but if they "go for it" on 4th down and still fail to make a first down, the other team gets the ball where it was spotted as result of the play.
69.29.207.109 (
talk)
04:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm reassessing this article for WP:GA Sweeps. After reading it, there's a lot of work that needs to be done on this article. Most of my comments are the same as Pete's in a section above, but I have others as well:
I'll put this on hold for five days. If a good deal of progress is not made by then, it fails. If all this is done, I'll do a more detailed review. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:24, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:10, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:43, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:09, 30 September 2017 (UTC)