Talk:Choke at Doak

noteworthy?

This game definitely belongs in the "memorable games" section of the Florida – Florida State rivalry article, but is it worthy of its own separate entry? There were no national title implications, no national records set, nothing to make it memorable outside of the fan bases of the schools involved.

A couple seasons ago, there was a huge debate over the notability of the Appalachian State upset of Michigan, with many wikipedians arguing that even that game was not worthy of its own entry. (See here.) If there's an argument about an unquestionably historic contest like that, I don't see how the 94 UF/FSU game could meet the standards for inclusion.

(And before anybody accuses me of being a Gator homer, let me point out that I'd be making the same arguments re: every other meeting in this series (no matter who won) besides the 1996/7 Sugar Bowl, which was a national championship game.) Zeng8r (talk) 22:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, there were national championship implications to the game. Had Florida State won, they would have had a shot at grabbing Miami's Orange Bowl berth and playing #1/#2 Nebraska for a possible piece of the pie. Florida may have also, as they were 4th heading into the game and the Bowl Coalition had a provision to release the SEC Champion from the traditional Sugar Bowl berth if it would create a "title game" (a win over FSU and in the SEC CG may have allowed them to leapfrog Miami to #3). Regardless, even if the Orange Bowl still opted to invite Miami over the UF-FSU winner, the winner (had there been one) would have still been in line to claim a share of the national championship if Penn State and Nebraska both lost (though Florida would have been in a stronger position to share a title in light of FSU's head-to-head loss to Miami).

Secondly, the analogy to the debate over the Michigan-Appalachian State article is seriously flawed for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that (1) it involved a game that was contemporaneous with the article's creation (notability is significantly more difficult to assess and more contestable the more current the event is) and (2) the AfD was ultimately defeated anyway.

Third, the game involved the biggest fourth quarter comeback in NCAA I-A history, which itself makes it "unquestionably historic" (see: The Comeback).

Finally, the game is referenced and given prominent treatment by a number of online news articles (even though it predated the Internet Era by years), books, and video games, is frequently replayed on both ESPN Classic and Sun Sports as a "classic." and is an enduring and important part of college football lore, generally, and UF-FSU lore, specifically. There's no real notability issue here.-PassionoftheDamon (talk) 00:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Individual regular season games don't need title implications to be notable (e.g. 1921 Centre vs. Harvard football game), and that precedent has been upheld at AFD (e.g. 2005 Texas vs. Texas A&M football game). However, what makes you say there weren't title implications? Florida was the fourth-ranked team in the nation at the time. If they had beaten Florida State by a significant margin and finished with one loss there is a real possibility they would have been in contention for the national championship (for at least one selector). Also, since you mentioned the 2007 Appalachian State vs. Michigan football game, I should point out that it was not only kept, but speedy kept, and I have my doubts that it was "unquestionably historic". Although an upset, it was a season opener, so expectations were based solely upon (notoriously unreliable) preseason estimates. Second, it wasn't an upset by a large margin or a miraculous comeback. Third, Michigan turned out to be a fairly mediocre Division I-A team that season and Appalachian State was the best team in Division I-AA and won that division's championship through a playoff system.

With all that said, (and I'm an impartial observer) this game is clearly notable even using the WP:GNG while discounting game recaps. Here are some other non-recaps that mention this at least a year after the fact: "Gators Seek to Negate 15 Minutes of Shame Against Seminoles", The Washington Post; "100 things about 100 years of Gator football", St. Petersburg Times; "The Choke at Doak haunting memory for UF", Ocala Star-Banner; "Win One for Spurrier?", Miami Herald; "Eating Crow in Gainesville", Sarasota Herald Tribune; "UF, FSU hope game ranks among the best", News Herald (Panama City); "Gators Turn Victory into Certain Disaster", Ocala Star-Banner; and many more here.

However, even though the media widely calls it "Choke at Doak", the title may nevertheless have NPOV concerns. I propose renaming it 1994 Florida vs. Florida State football game with a redirect from Choke at Doak and any other colloquial names. Also, in the first line of the lead, something along the lines of: "The 1994 Florida vs. Florida State football game—often called the Choke at Doak, the Rally at Tallahassee, and the [whatever else]—was a regular season college football..." I will also post a message at the the college football project in order to solicit other people's input. Strikehold (talk) 00:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Many of the same arguments could be made for including about 90% of the games in Florida - Florida State rivalry. Also, most of the games listed in The World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party and Wide_Right_(Florida_State). Also, most of the games mentioned in articles about any other college rivalry. Also, pretty much any contest between any semi-successful pro or amateur teams in any sport that garnered some press coverage.

Looks like we have several hundred more articles to write, at least. Better get started. Zeng8r (talk) 02:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)