- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. The concerns from the deletion argument seems to have been addressed as of the time of this closing, the consensus seems to be leaning towards keep. Arguably one could view this as a no consensus as well, if the deletion side would like to bring new arguments to the table to address the concerns, there should be no prejudice to open a new AfD. Yamamoto Ichiro ( talk) 15:14, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- 2007 Backyard Brawl ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This subject was previously created as "2007 Pittsburgh vs. West Virginia football game" and was deleted in 2014 after this discussion. The same rationale for deletion holds now. In short, this game is not notable enough to warrant its own stand-alone article. Summary of the game at Backyard Brawl, 2007 Pittsburgh Panthers football team, and 2007 West Virginia Mountaineers football team will suffice. Jweiss11 ( talk) 04:49, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per the outcome of the original AFD. Nothing has changed since then. — X96lee15 ( talk) 12:46, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete Individual games of a rivalry are not inherently notable. It could potentially factor into notability if there were other reasons (that is to say, in my opinion, a single rivalry game is more likely to be notable than a single non-rivalry game that is otherwise identical), but nothing has been presented to that effect here. Smartyllama ( talk) 17:34, 31 October 2016 (UTC)Keep The article has since been expanded with evidence and sources that show sustaining coverage of this game as much as three years later, so I think it now satisfies WP:GNG on its own. Smartyllama ( talk) 21:34, 22 November 2016 (UTC)- Comment The content that was added to the article was simply that from the deleted article from two years ago. Nothing has changed since then. I don't believe there's any lasting notability of this game. — X96lee15 ( talk) 05:09, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
- Neutral There's definitely a case that could be made for this game, particularly in regards to "13–9" being a sort of in-joke between Pitt and WV fans. With a google search I see a few articles about the game published years later. ESPN's archived box score of the game is entitled simply " 13–9". Typically an ESPN box score would be titled something like "Pittsburgh vs. West Virginia - Box Score - December 2, 2007. Obviously, the article as it currently exists gives no indication of, well, anything. But if someone were to put in the work I think it could be passable. Lizard ( talk) 20:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 11:58, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- Keep I had this position in the original AFD and I hold it now. I believe that the coverage in the news more than surpasses WP:GNG. Certainly the article needs more content, but that's fixable.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 13:18, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:23, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 01:06, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk 19:24, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete: Am I missing something? This is a blank templated article and fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE. If this is the result of abuse, consider my comment rescinded. Jergling ( talk) 22:55, 16 November 2016 (UTC)- I agree that it needs more content, but that's editing issues and not deletion issues. How exactly does this fail
WP:INDISCRIMINATE--it actually is
WP:DISCRIMINATE for being focused and specific.--
Paul McDonald (
talk)
13:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
- Prose was added since my comment. It failed INDISC because it looked to be a set of indiscriminate statistics describing a trivial event with no assertion of notability. I don't know sports! -Jergling PC Load Letter 22:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
- I agree that it needs more content, but that's editing issues and not deletion issues. How exactly does this fail
WP:INDISCRIMINATE--it actually is
WP:DISCRIMINATE for being focused and specific.--
Paul McDonald (
talk)
13:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete Weak keep - This is just a box score. Should WP list box scores for all football games?-- Rpclod ( talk) 03:00, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the ping Smartyllama. I think the article is now borderline notable. Four references is fairly sparse and none really indicate particular notability for a Div 1 football game, but at least the article now has encyclopedic value.-- Rpclod ( talk) 23:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)- I am confused regarding the status. When I first viewed it, it was just an infobox without any reference. No evidence of notability was provided. Then content and somewhat sparse references were added, which seemed to push the article just into keep. Now it has reverted to an infobox. Seems like some WP:TNT is appropriate.-- Rpclod ( talk) 15:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- Comment. The place to write/expand about this topic is in the Backyard Brawl article, which, ironically, actually contains very little information about this supposedly "important" game. Ejgreen77 ( talk) 15:09, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - the article has since been expanded significantly. Pinging @ Jergling: and @ Rpclod: who based their votes on the lack of content rather than notability, in case they want to reconsider. Also changing my own vote above to keep as I feel the article now demonstrates that this particular game is notable. Smartyllama ( talk) 21:33, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, some keep comments were made when prose was added from previous deleted article, and while that prose should still be included in this candidate, I don't think the topic itself is notable, as it fails WP:PERSISTENCE and I don't think an individual game that isn't a championship is notable unless it has some landmark quality to it. The name "2007 Backyard Brawl" implies that there have been dozens of these games. Icebob99 ( talk) 16:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: a lot of content has been snipped from this page as a result of copyright concerns. As a result, it now has nothing but an infobox. If the article is not deleted, the closing admin should perform a history merge to the old version of the article and restore the prose content. Lankiveil ( speak to me) 01:39, 2 December 2016 (UTC).
- Delete Every college football game gets news media coverage in the US; very few are notable for our purposes. This basically empty article certainly is not one of those very few.
Eggishorn
(talk)
(contrib)
04:28, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- comment I don't buy the argument that passing WP:GNG is a reason to delete.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 00:37, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- There are multiple areas where routine coverage in reliable sources (i.e., basic GNG) has been agreed upon as not sufficient. Academics and professors springs to mind, as does entertainers. I'm making the observation in the wrong place, perhaps, but given the obsessive level of attention that college football attracts in this country, I would argue that routine coverage of each and every iteration of a frequent match up does not make a football game notable unless that game was exceptionally or specially notable. If this game was in some way special, then that should have been in the article text and sources. Neither did I see any reason in my own searches to indicate that this was anything other than a routine meeting of these teams. I hope that helps explain the above !vote. Thank you.
Eggishorn
(talk)
(contrib)
06:15, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- WP:ROUTINE when it comes to sports covers basic box scores and listings. This game received much more coverage than that, and is clearly WP:NOTROUTINE.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 21:20, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- There are multiple areas where routine coverage in reliable sources (i.e., basic GNG) has been agreed upon as not sufficient. Academics and professors springs to mind, as does entertainers. I'm making the observation in the wrong place, perhaps, but given the obsessive level of attention that college football attracts in this country, I would argue that routine coverage of each and every iteration of a frequent match up does not make a football game notable unless that game was exceptionally or specially notable. If this game was in some way special, then that should have been in the article text and sources. Neither did I see any reason in my own searches to indicate that this was anything other than a routine meeting of these teams. I hope that helps explain the above !vote. Thank you.
Eggishorn
(talk)
(contrib)
06:15, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- Comment If consensus is that this is not notable, it should probably be redirected to Backyard Brawl as a plausible search term rather than deleted. It's certainly well-known enough to at least do that. Smartyllama ( talk) 01:12, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per the significant coverage in
reliable sources.
The subject meets WP:PERSISTENCE because it has received significant coverage after 2007 (2009, 2010, 2013, and 2016).
Post-2007 sources-
Tuchman, Robert (2013).
The 100 Sporting Events You Must See Live: An Insider's Guide to Creating the Sports Experience of a Lifetime. Dallas, Texas:
BenBella Books. p. 597.
ISBN
1935251147. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The book notes:
Pitt can claim more victories, but the Mountaineers have had their share of wins. During the 2007 "Brawl," the Panthers upset the Mountaineers by knocking them out of the BCS National Championship Game. It was the biggest upset for the Panthers and the "Game of the Year" after the votes were tallied by ESPNU. And it did nothing to quell the tension between these two neighboring schools.
- Pauley, Scott (2009-11-23).
"West Virginia vs. Pitt: Panther Fans Turn Down Tickets To The Backyard Brawl".
Bleacher Report. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
In the 2007 edition of the Backyard Brawl, West Virginia had everything to lose and Pitt had nothing to gain, as far as the 2007-08 season was concerned.
Hailed as the most important Brawl in history, the 2007 showdown saw the Panthers blatantly ruin a trip to the National Championship and an outright Big East title for WVU, by winning the game 13-9.
- Teel, David (2016-11-29).
"Backyard Brawl reunion could affect Hokies' bowl destination".
Daily Press. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
Pittsburgh and West Virginia clashed in their Backyard Brawl for 69 consecutive football seasons, most famously and epically in 2007. The Panthers and Mountaineers have met 104 times dating to 1895, but not since 2011 and with a renewal not scheduled until 2022.
...
West Virginia and Pitt are separated by about 75 miles, and their rivalry was a staple long before each joined Virginia Tech in the Big East football conference during the early 1990s. Their most notable recent encounter was 2007, when the Panthers, four-touchdown underdogs, defeated the second-ranked Mountaineers 13-9 in the regular-season finale, denying the home team a possible invitation to the Bowl Championship Series title game.
-
"Backyard Brawl timeline".
Charleston Gazette-Mail. 2011-11-24. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
In one of the most painful losses in WVU history, Pittsburgh upsets the No. 2 Mountaineers 13-9 in the regular-season finale at Milan Puskar Stadium, ending the Mountaineers' national championship aspirations. The game also turned out to be Rich Rodriguez's last game as coach at West Virginia as he accepted an offer to take over at the University of Michigan.
- Bierman, Fred (2010-11-25).
"Weekly Matchups: The Day After Thanksgiving Blockbuster Edition".
The New York Times. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
Well I remember 2007, when unranked Pittsburgh knocked off No. 2 West Virginia in Morgantown to keep its rival out of the national championship game.
...
Back to the Backyard Brawl. Expect it to be a hard-hitting, low-scoring game. Both teams have struggled on offense and play hard-nosed defense. This is an underrated rivalry, and the teams have played some big games.
In 2007, unranked Pittsburgh upset No. 2 West Virginia at home, dashing the Mountaineers’ national title hopes. The stakes won’t be quite as high this time, but the game will be an entertaining start to what promises to be a great day of college football.
- Bird, Michael (2016-11-03).
"Let's talk college football title droughts. Which school is our Cleveland Indians?".
SB Nation. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
West Virginia
No Claimed National Titles
Closest Call: 2007
Is there a fan base in college football that would celebrate harder, buy more t-shirts, or burn more stuff than West Virginia’s if their team finally won a national championship?
West Virginia had unbeaten regular seasons in 1988 and 1993, but the Mountaineers where crushed in major bowl games, first by Notre Dame and then by Florida.
2007, on the other hand, was a legitimate chance. In a crazy year in college football, Rich Rodriguez’s team was clearly one of the best, as he had finally paired a good defense with his then-unstoppable offense. West Virginia merely had to take care of business against 4-7 Pitt to earn the right to play Ohio State in the BCS Championship, a game in which West Virginia would likely be favored.
Mountaineer fans, this is the point at which you should look away:
- Peaslee, Matthew (2016-02-11).
"WVU alum Pat McAfee begins comedy tour".
FanSided. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
There once was a time Pat McAfee was the most hated man in Morgantown.
It was in the hours and days after the worst loss in West Virginia football history: Dec. 1, 2007.
To most, it is known simply as 13-9. In the 100th edition of the Backyard Brawl, unranked Pitt came into Milan Puskar Stadium and surprised everyone watching around the nation with a huge upset of then No. 2 West Virginia.
McAfee missed a pair of field goals in the first half of that game. Had he converted the kicks, the Mountaineers would have been playing in the national championship. He missed, though, and WVU missed its chance at the limelight.
2007 sources- "Pitt throws curveball at BCS with win over No. 2 WVU". ESPN. Associated Press. 2007-12-02. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- Finder, Chuck (2007-12-02). "Unranked Panthers win 100th Backyard Brawl, 13-9". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- Thamel, Pete (2007-11-02). "Fitting End to a Tumultuous Season". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- Starr, Rick (2007). "WVU kicker McAfee gets death threats". Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- "Biggest Upsets of 2007". Sports Illustrated. December 2007. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- Gillies, Robbie (2007-12-20). "Top 10 Upsets Of 2007 College Football Season". RealClearSports. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
-
Tuchman, Robert (2013).
The 100 Sporting Events You Must See Live: An Insider's Guide to Creating the Sports Experience of a Lifetime. Dallas, Texas:
BenBella Books. p. 597.
ISBN
1935251147. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. The concerns from the deletion argument seems to have been addressed as of the time of this closing, the consensus seems to be leaning towards keep. Arguably one could view this as a no consensus as well, if the deletion side would like to bring new arguments to the table to address the concerns, there should be no prejudice to open a new AfD. Yamamoto Ichiro ( talk) 15:14, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- 2007 Backyard Brawl ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This subject was previously created as "2007 Pittsburgh vs. West Virginia football game" and was deleted in 2014 after this discussion. The same rationale for deletion holds now. In short, this game is not notable enough to warrant its own stand-alone article. Summary of the game at Backyard Brawl, 2007 Pittsburgh Panthers football team, and 2007 West Virginia Mountaineers football team will suffice. Jweiss11 ( talk) 04:49, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per the outcome of the original AFD. Nothing has changed since then. — X96lee15 ( talk) 12:46, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete Individual games of a rivalry are not inherently notable. It could potentially factor into notability if there were other reasons (that is to say, in my opinion, a single rivalry game is more likely to be notable than a single non-rivalry game that is otherwise identical), but nothing has been presented to that effect here. Smartyllama ( talk) 17:34, 31 October 2016 (UTC)Keep The article has since been expanded with evidence and sources that show sustaining coverage of this game as much as three years later, so I think it now satisfies WP:GNG on its own. Smartyllama ( talk) 21:34, 22 November 2016 (UTC)- Comment The content that was added to the article was simply that from the deleted article from two years ago. Nothing has changed since then. I don't believe there's any lasting notability of this game. — X96lee15 ( talk) 05:09, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
- Neutral There's definitely a case that could be made for this game, particularly in regards to "13–9" being a sort of in-joke between Pitt and WV fans. With a google search I see a few articles about the game published years later. ESPN's archived box score of the game is entitled simply " 13–9". Typically an ESPN box score would be titled something like "Pittsburgh vs. West Virginia - Box Score - December 2, 2007. Obviously, the article as it currently exists gives no indication of, well, anything. But if someone were to put in the work I think it could be passable. Lizard ( talk) 20:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 11:58, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- Keep I had this position in the original AFD and I hold it now. I believe that the coverage in the news more than surpasses WP:GNG. Certainly the article needs more content, but that's fixable.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 13:18, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:23, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 01:06, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk 19:24, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete: Am I missing something? This is a blank templated article and fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE. If this is the result of abuse, consider my comment rescinded. Jergling ( talk) 22:55, 16 November 2016 (UTC)- I agree that it needs more content, but that's editing issues and not deletion issues. How exactly does this fail
WP:INDISCRIMINATE--it actually is
WP:DISCRIMINATE for being focused and specific.--
Paul McDonald (
talk)
13:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
- Prose was added since my comment. It failed INDISC because it looked to be a set of indiscriminate statistics describing a trivial event with no assertion of notability. I don't know sports! -Jergling PC Load Letter 22:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
- I agree that it needs more content, but that's editing issues and not deletion issues. How exactly does this fail
WP:INDISCRIMINATE--it actually is
WP:DISCRIMINATE for being focused and specific.--
Paul McDonald (
talk)
13:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete Weak keep - This is just a box score. Should WP list box scores for all football games?-- Rpclod ( talk) 03:00, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the ping Smartyllama. I think the article is now borderline notable. Four references is fairly sparse and none really indicate particular notability for a Div 1 football game, but at least the article now has encyclopedic value.-- Rpclod ( talk) 23:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)- I am confused regarding the status. When I first viewed it, it was just an infobox without any reference. No evidence of notability was provided. Then content and somewhat sparse references were added, which seemed to push the article just into keep. Now it has reverted to an infobox. Seems like some WP:TNT is appropriate.-- Rpclod ( talk) 15:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- Comment. The place to write/expand about this topic is in the Backyard Brawl article, which, ironically, actually contains very little information about this supposedly "important" game. Ejgreen77 ( talk) 15:09, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - the article has since been expanded significantly. Pinging @ Jergling: and @ Rpclod: who based their votes on the lack of content rather than notability, in case they want to reconsider. Also changing my own vote above to keep as I feel the article now demonstrates that this particular game is notable. Smartyllama ( talk) 21:33, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, some keep comments were made when prose was added from previous deleted article, and while that prose should still be included in this candidate, I don't think the topic itself is notable, as it fails WP:PERSISTENCE and I don't think an individual game that isn't a championship is notable unless it has some landmark quality to it. The name "2007 Backyard Brawl" implies that there have been dozens of these games. Icebob99 ( talk) 16:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: a lot of content has been snipped from this page as a result of copyright concerns. As a result, it now has nothing but an infobox. If the article is not deleted, the closing admin should perform a history merge to the old version of the article and restore the prose content. Lankiveil ( speak to me) 01:39, 2 December 2016 (UTC).
- Delete Every college football game gets news media coverage in the US; very few are notable for our purposes. This basically empty article certainly is not one of those very few.
Eggishorn
(talk)
(contrib)
04:28, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- comment I don't buy the argument that passing WP:GNG is a reason to delete.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 00:37, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- There are multiple areas where routine coverage in reliable sources (i.e., basic GNG) has been agreed upon as not sufficient. Academics and professors springs to mind, as does entertainers. I'm making the observation in the wrong place, perhaps, but given the obsessive level of attention that college football attracts in this country, I would argue that routine coverage of each and every iteration of a frequent match up does not make a football game notable unless that game was exceptionally or specially notable. If this game was in some way special, then that should have been in the article text and sources. Neither did I see any reason in my own searches to indicate that this was anything other than a routine meeting of these teams. I hope that helps explain the above !vote. Thank you.
Eggishorn
(talk)
(contrib)
06:15, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- WP:ROUTINE when it comes to sports covers basic box scores and listings. This game received much more coverage than that, and is clearly WP:NOTROUTINE.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 21:20, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- There are multiple areas where routine coverage in reliable sources (i.e., basic GNG) has been agreed upon as not sufficient. Academics and professors springs to mind, as does entertainers. I'm making the observation in the wrong place, perhaps, but given the obsessive level of attention that college football attracts in this country, I would argue that routine coverage of each and every iteration of a frequent match up does not make a football game notable unless that game was exceptionally or specially notable. If this game was in some way special, then that should have been in the article text and sources. Neither did I see any reason in my own searches to indicate that this was anything other than a routine meeting of these teams. I hope that helps explain the above !vote. Thank you.
Eggishorn
(talk)
(contrib)
06:15, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- Comment If consensus is that this is not notable, it should probably be redirected to Backyard Brawl as a plausible search term rather than deleted. It's certainly well-known enough to at least do that. Smartyllama ( talk) 01:12, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per the significant coverage in
reliable sources.
The subject meets WP:PERSISTENCE because it has received significant coverage after 2007 (2009, 2010, 2013, and 2016).
Post-2007 sources-
Tuchman, Robert (2013).
The 100 Sporting Events You Must See Live: An Insider's Guide to Creating the Sports Experience of a Lifetime. Dallas, Texas:
BenBella Books. p. 597.
ISBN
1935251147. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The book notes:
Pitt can claim more victories, but the Mountaineers have had their share of wins. During the 2007 "Brawl," the Panthers upset the Mountaineers by knocking them out of the BCS National Championship Game. It was the biggest upset for the Panthers and the "Game of the Year" after the votes were tallied by ESPNU. And it did nothing to quell the tension between these two neighboring schools.
- Pauley, Scott (2009-11-23).
"West Virginia vs. Pitt: Panther Fans Turn Down Tickets To The Backyard Brawl".
Bleacher Report. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
In the 2007 edition of the Backyard Brawl, West Virginia had everything to lose and Pitt had nothing to gain, as far as the 2007-08 season was concerned.
Hailed as the most important Brawl in history, the 2007 showdown saw the Panthers blatantly ruin a trip to the National Championship and an outright Big East title for WVU, by winning the game 13-9.
- Teel, David (2016-11-29).
"Backyard Brawl reunion could affect Hokies' bowl destination".
Daily Press. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
Pittsburgh and West Virginia clashed in their Backyard Brawl for 69 consecutive football seasons, most famously and epically in 2007. The Panthers and Mountaineers have met 104 times dating to 1895, but not since 2011 and with a renewal not scheduled until 2022.
...
West Virginia and Pitt are separated by about 75 miles, and their rivalry was a staple long before each joined Virginia Tech in the Big East football conference during the early 1990s. Their most notable recent encounter was 2007, when the Panthers, four-touchdown underdogs, defeated the second-ranked Mountaineers 13-9 in the regular-season finale, denying the home team a possible invitation to the Bowl Championship Series title game.
-
"Backyard Brawl timeline".
Charleston Gazette-Mail. 2011-11-24. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
In one of the most painful losses in WVU history, Pittsburgh upsets the No. 2 Mountaineers 13-9 in the regular-season finale at Milan Puskar Stadium, ending the Mountaineers' national championship aspirations. The game also turned out to be Rich Rodriguez's last game as coach at West Virginia as he accepted an offer to take over at the University of Michigan.
- Bierman, Fred (2010-11-25).
"Weekly Matchups: The Day After Thanksgiving Blockbuster Edition".
The New York Times. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
Well I remember 2007, when unranked Pittsburgh knocked off No. 2 West Virginia in Morgantown to keep its rival out of the national championship game.
...
Back to the Backyard Brawl. Expect it to be a hard-hitting, low-scoring game. Both teams have struggled on offense and play hard-nosed defense. This is an underrated rivalry, and the teams have played some big games.
In 2007, unranked Pittsburgh upset No. 2 West Virginia at home, dashing the Mountaineers’ national title hopes. The stakes won’t be quite as high this time, but the game will be an entertaining start to what promises to be a great day of college football.
- Bird, Michael (2016-11-03).
"Let's talk college football title droughts. Which school is our Cleveland Indians?".
SB Nation. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
West Virginia
No Claimed National Titles
Closest Call: 2007
Is there a fan base in college football that would celebrate harder, buy more t-shirts, or burn more stuff than West Virginia’s if their team finally won a national championship?
West Virginia had unbeaten regular seasons in 1988 and 1993, but the Mountaineers where crushed in major bowl games, first by Notre Dame and then by Florida.
2007, on the other hand, was a legitimate chance. In a crazy year in college football, Rich Rodriguez’s team was clearly one of the best, as he had finally paired a good defense with his then-unstoppable offense. West Virginia merely had to take care of business against 4-7 Pitt to earn the right to play Ohio State in the BCS Championship, a game in which West Virginia would likely be favored.
Mountaineer fans, this is the point at which you should look away:
- Peaslee, Matthew (2016-02-11).
"WVU alum Pat McAfee begins comedy tour".
FanSided. Archived from
the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
The article notes:
There once was a time Pat McAfee was the most hated man in Morgantown.
It was in the hours and days after the worst loss in West Virginia football history: Dec. 1, 2007.
To most, it is known simply as 13-9. In the 100th edition of the Backyard Brawl, unranked Pitt came into Milan Puskar Stadium and surprised everyone watching around the nation with a huge upset of then No. 2 West Virginia.
McAfee missed a pair of field goals in the first half of that game. Had he converted the kicks, the Mountaineers would have been playing in the national championship. He missed, though, and WVU missed its chance at the limelight.
2007 sources- "Pitt throws curveball at BCS with win over No. 2 WVU". ESPN. Associated Press. 2007-12-02. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- Finder, Chuck (2007-12-02). "Unranked Panthers win 100th Backyard Brawl, 13-9". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- Thamel, Pete (2007-11-02). "Fitting End to a Tumultuous Season". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- Starr, Rick (2007). "WVU kicker McAfee gets death threats". Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- "Biggest Upsets of 2007". Sports Illustrated. December 2007. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- Gillies, Robbie (2007-12-20). "Top 10 Upsets Of 2007 College Football Season". RealClearSports. Archived from the original on 2016-12-05. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
-
Tuchman, Robert (2013).
The 100 Sporting Events You Must See Live: An Insider's Guide to Creating the Sports Experience of a Lifetime. Dallas, Texas:
BenBella Books. p. 597.
ISBN
1935251147. Retrieved 2016-12-05.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.