Talk:1973 NCAA Division I football season

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Malcolmxl5 in topic Requested move 18 December 2014

Comments edit

Why didn't the Big-8 champion go to the Orange Bowl? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.176.24.172 (talk) 06:06, 3 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Dead link edit

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 20:38, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 18 December 2014 edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: pages moved. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 14:45, 11 January 2015 (UTC)Reply


– This page refers to only the Division I football season of these years. The categories for these pages already state Division I football season, and the infoboxes on 1975 list DI as well. The DII and DIII for these years are named as such. UCO2009bluejay (talk) 06:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

  • Strong support these should never have occupied "college football season" since the NCAA isn't the only college sports body, thus fails WP:PRECISE; for instance, the NAIA and CIAU both had football seasons for collegiate sport at this time in the real world, and none of these season articles should be so broad as to cover that wide a gulf. The current name should become either a diambiguation page or a set index. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 10:22, 18 December 2014 (UTC)Reply
  • Support move - The 1973 CFB season was the break point at which NCAA sports were divided into Division I, II and III, so this proposed move makes sense. I would like to hear what the new article titles might be for the pre-1973 articles, too. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:33, 7 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Support move; this makes a lot of sense. I think with these moves the "Other champions" sections will have to be eliminated since they will no longer fall within the scope of the article. The leads of all of these articles, and many of the the ones for seasons before and after this period, need work to, among other things, better to define the scope of the article at its outset. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Support move per nominator's rationale. Jrcla2 (talk) 14:01, 7 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Support move – makes plenty of sense. Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 21:56, 7 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Support move based on the reasoning of others.--Yankees10 03:51, 8 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.