Toning down the rivalry rhetoric

Talk this week of the Utah State-BYU game finally being a rivalry — still a debatable point — got me thinking about rivalries in general.

Truth is, some are and some aren’t. A lot are simply one-sided series. That has largely been the case in the USU-BYU series. Aggie coach Gary Andersen noted last year that it isn’t a rivalry when one team wins all the games.

I think that’s generally true, with a few exceptions. At the same time, it’s funny how many teams think they have a rivalry going when the other team is almost unaware. I’ve seen stories and heard radio reports on BYU being a big “rival” with New Mexico, San Diego State, Air Force, TCU and Wyoming — none of which are actual rivals to BYU.

Likewise, I’ve heard people mention a Notre Dame-BYU rivalry (past or future), which is no more valid than calling Notre Dame-Stanford a rivalry. For years, BYU dealt with the same thing Notre Dame does: everyone who plays you thinks you’re a rival. For instance, I’ve heard of Notre Dame vs. Boston College, Purdue, Michigan State, Air Force, Michigan, Southern Cal and Navy being rivalries. In truth, only one or two of those are actual rivalries.

Is Colorado-Colorado State a rivalry? Kinda. It has become more so in recent years. But losing to the Rams isn’t going to ruin Colorado’s season on any year.

All I can say is that the word “rivalry” is one of the most overused terms in the language. Weber State-Utah State is not a rivalry. Neither is Baylor-Texas. They’re just games. A good rule of thumb is to remember every rival is an opponent, but not every opponent is a rival.
Sometimes it’s just another team on the schedule.

Feel free to add any examples of non-rivalry rivalries you know.

AUBURN-ALABAMA: NOW THAT’S A RIVALRY