BCS Strips USC of 2005 Orange Bowl Victory
by Joey Kaufman on Jun 10, 2010 5:09 PM PDT
in USC Football
Email
Print
To the surprise of absolutely nobody, the BCS, in accordance with the NCAA's recent findings regarding USC's "lack of institutional control," has stripped USC of its Orange Bowl victory over Oklahoma that occurred in January of 2005 according to The Kansas City Star. Next on the agenda could be a decision on behalf of the BCS to strip the Trojans of their BCS National Championship for that season. But as of this point in time, that has yet to occur. Per the KC Star:
The BCS will vacate the Orange Bowl triumph, a 55-19 pasting of Oklahoma, a game in which quarterback Matt Leinart threw five touchdown passes.
BCS executive director Bill Hancock issued the statement:
"In accordance with the findings released today by the NCAA, the University of Southern California's 2005 Orange Bowl game victory has been vacated. We take the integrity of NCAA rules seriously. As a procedural matter, the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee (POC) must meet to formally consider vacating USC's championship title and the game records. If the POC takes such action, there would be no BCS champion for the 2004-05 season. The POC will meet shortly to discuss this matter.
"In light of USC's statement that it intends to appeal, we want to make it clear that no action will go into effect until the appeal is heard and decided by the NCAA."
As Paragon and I have both stated on multiple occasions, we really don't care if the BCS or the NCAA wants to strip USC of wins. We all saw the games. We all know what happened. No matter what occurs from here on out, the score will always remain 55-19. That isn't going to change. I have the DVD of the game at home. It's still going to show the touchdown passes, the breathtaking runs, and bone-crunching tackles. Granted, it won't be "official" anymore, but at the end, it's largely irrelevant.
Fight On!
Want more? Follow me on Twitter @Joey_Kaufman
60 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Is it just me or does Pete Carroll’s head look disproportionately large compared to the rest of his body in this photo?
Cal Football: Some things, you just accept, repress, and move on.
I think the red color in his polo shirt is playing mind games on you.
by Julio Nievas on Jun 10, 2010 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Cal Football: Some things, you just accept, repress, and move on.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jun 10, 2010 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Wait, I can guess… it’s your expression after the 4 down goal-line stand in 2004!
"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"
I’ve erased that from my memory. I know not of which you speak.
Cal Football: Some things, you just accept, repress, and move on.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jun 11, 2010 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
Does that make this...
the most expensive and well attended scrimmage in history?
+1
--Conquest Chronicles , SBNation's USC Trojans blog
Follow me on Twitter @Joey_Kaufman
by Joey Kaufman on Jun 10, 2010 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Agree, WGAF/WGAS
I was there. Reggie Bush had virtually no impact on the game. USC was the best football team that season, and everyone will remember that game. The BCS is a crumbling experiment anyway. Bill Hancock will have a new job in 2014, if he is even employable.
NO ONE WHO MATTERS CARES ABOUT THE BCS!!!
Cue Orrin Hatch
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
Too bad we've got all douchbag representation at every level here in Cali.
Tony Villar, Waxman, Zev, Arnold, Boxer… excuse me, I’m going to throw up now.
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
As Paragon and I have both stated on multiple occasions, we really don’t care if the BCS or the NCAA wants to strip USC of wins. We all saw the games. We all know what happened. No matter what occurs from here on out, the score will always remain 55-19. That isn’t going to change. I have the DVD of the game at home. It’s still going to show the touchdown passes, the breathtaking runs, and bone-crunching tackles. Granted, it won’t be “official” anymore, but at the end, it’s largely irrelevant.
Yes, the NCAA cannot erase those memories from your brains, but doesn’t the fact that you won those games with a player that the NCAA has deemed ineligible sully that game? Clearly, with Reggie Bush you guys won. But nobody can say that without him that USC would have still won. Alright, well, I do realize the score was 55-19 and Bush “only” had 75 yards on 6 carries (12.5 yard average) and accumulated a total of 149 yards of offense, but still. If you remove him from the game… maybe Oklahoma plays USC differently and the outcome is a lot different.
If a Cal player were declared ineligible — let’s just say Aaron Rodgers. Let’s just say he was ineligible the moment we walked onto campus, and Cal just got the hammer from the NCAA invalidating all the games from 2003 and 2004 when Aaron Rodgers played for Cal, I would no longer be gloating about Cal’s 2003 win over you guys. I’d feel like all those games were tainted and had we not received the illegal benefits of an ineligible player’s performance that we might have lost those games — including that 2003 overtime win against you guys. But it seems to me like the prevailing view here is that you guys feel the opposite. Am I interpreting things wrong?
Look, I’ve heard through the grapevine that Paragon SC that you guys are on red-alert and are ready to ban people. I’m not here to kick you while you guys are down or start a flame war. I honestly want to understand why you guys seem so flippant about this whole situation. Does the fact that you guys won games with an ineligible player really have no impact on your perception of those games you won with the ineligible player?
Just looking for some honest explanations… Please don’t ban me. One ban-happy southern California SBN blog is enough. We really don’t need two.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by HydroTech on Jun 10, 2010 7:58 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Taking it as a serious question
it’s a fair question. The sentiment is symptomatic of several things, I suppose. In no particular order, and speaking only for myself:
Vacating wins is pointless. Who does it punish? What does it change? I know there’s a culture of making counter-factual arguments among college football fans, and while there are some that are reasonable arguments – e.g., Bush’s absence probably would have resulted in Fresno State winning in 2005 – at some level it’s imponderable. Might Oklahoma have played differently if Bush wasn’t on the field? Maybe. But the reason that SC scored all those touchdowns was as much a result of defensive play as anything else. Bush wasn’t pressuring Jason White to throw into triple coverage.
The NCAA may not distinguish between boosters and agents, I do. I am not arguing that Bush and his parents didn’t take benefits that violated NCAA regulations. The NCAA plainly doesn’t care where those came from, and that’s fair enough. For me personally, it matters only inasmuch as Bush wasn’t being paid to stay at SC by boosters. He played, he pocketed money, and he left as soon as he was eligible for the draft. It’s far from ideal, but it didn’t go down because that’s how he was recruited and retained.
I’m still not sure I believe that McNair knew, certainly not that soon. The Orange Bowl game against Oklahoma was, if I understood the various articles correctly, the first instance in which Bush was ineligible. I haven’t done a timeline comparison, but I don’t think that anyone was adjudged to have know that soon that he was on the take. (I could be wrong about that.) So based on what is nothing more than my assumption (to be above board) that the game happened early enough that no-one really knew from the SC coaches and Athletic Department, I’m not looking at this as a game won by using a player who was known to be ineligible. That would be more disappointing.
And I’d feel the same in reverse. The job of the team is to play whoever’s on the field on the day that they put on the pads and get out there. If Rodgers had been ineligible in 2003, I don’t think that it would really have changed my view of the game… SC failed to beat who was on the field. Might have / could have / should have doesn’t really cut it. Oklahoma didn’t take SC seriously and paid the price. If they had won, no-one would care about that Orange Bowl now except perhaps to give SC alums shit about how they wish they’d been declared ineligible before they got beaten.
"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"
Have to agree here
I understand both points of view in the situation, and I really don’t care much about the final scores at the time. It’s like saying Poland would have overran Germany had Hitler been deemed inelgible to his own doctrines. We can’t go and get everyone together who played on those teams and have them line up to give us a definitive answer, so there really is no viable solution. SC will lose it’s wins, yes, but everyone else who gained a loss from them will hold onto that forever. This is an imperfect solution to an erroneous problem, but there really is no better option.
Good luck, Trojans.
Things are gonna be tough for a while.
California Golden Blogs! It`s dat Woo WHOOOOO!
by Maisbikkja on Jun 10, 2010 10:29 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I disagree
I can see how it’s hard to retroactively feel differently about a game. You watched it 5 years ago, and it’s not like history has been changed – what happened happened.
The problem you encounter is with sentiments like “you didn’t beat us on the field, so it doesn’t matter.” Well, one of the big reasons that usc won so many games was cheating. Maybe Cal beats usc the last couple years if we have Aaron Rodgers at QB instead of Kevin Riley – of course, that’s illegal, and we’d have to vacate the win and go on probation, but we beat you on the field, so it doesn’t matter, right?
I’d also contend that having Bush receive all these benefits indirectly helps the program, at the time. High-schoolers see Reggie (an extremely high profile athlete) with the car, the cash, etc, and assume that if they go to usc, they’ll be taken care of too. All of these high school athletes are used to being the big man on campus, and they all assume they’ll be the next Reggie Bush.
So, yeah, I doubt usc fans will feel too much differently about the particular games, just like Cal fans don’t feel too much differently about Jason Kidd in the NCAA tournament. But saying it doesn’t matter because of the end result of the game isn’t right.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Feel free to live in the past and try to dissect it...
But…
Well, one of the big reasons that usc won so many games was cheating.
Really?
Cheating happens from the inside in order to gain a competitive advantage. That’s not what happened here, or is even being alleged.
As even UCLA learned in the Deshaun Foster incident, it’s pretty hard to keep outside influences away all of the time.
Go back and read the report the NCAA can’t definitively determine when Reggie was ineligible.
Here is a question…If the New Era LLC isn’t filed till Nov 2005 then how are Lake and Micheals agency partners in Dec 2004? How is Bush then Deemed ineligible?
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
The thing that makes me the most angry ...
and this probably isn’t “right” … but the thing that pisses me off the most is the fact most football fans of other teams are ecstatic because they hate USC and the success they’ve had in the 00’s. Period.
Please don’t try and tell me everyone is happy because “justice has been served” or because everyone suddenly cares about integrity and character. That’s bulls***. I’d have a lot more respect for all the haters if they’d just admit the truth and stop acting as if the NCAA is their hero.
I needed a team so I wouldn’t turn into one of the eighty million pink hat-wearing Bud Light-drinking mulleted idiots at Fenway.
the thing is
the reason I hate usc is because of the cheating, and especially the arrogance surrounding it – Carroll and Garrett acted like they were untouchable and that it didn’t matter that they were playing a loaded deck. So to see usc actually get what was coming to it IS great news to those of us that hate usc because of their cheating and their attitude about it.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
No...
I’m wagering the “cheating” gave you a convenient reason to claim your hatred of USC is grounded in anything rational.
The evidence outlined in the report hardly illustrates any actions by the coaching staff or players that provided any sort of advantages on the field. If you were to be honest with yourself, if the supplied facts of the Bush affair went down with a Washington State player, would you feel anything either way?
As far as the arrogance, oh boo freaking hoo. I’m sorry that USC wasn’t penitent enough for the rest of the college football fanosphere, though it’s the same barb thrown at any sports team that has any degree of sustained success. Isn’t a weird coincidence how they all become “arrogant”?
by socaljml on Jun 11, 2010 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
To clarify a bit
I hate usc for their extreme arrogance, which manifested itself in this "we’re untouchable attitude regarding their malfeasance. Everyone knew that they weren’t playing fair, yet they continually, arrogantly, denied it. It’s very frustrating to lose to a team that is cheating, especially when said team implicitly flaunts it. So yeah, if usc sucked, I would still find their arrogance unbecoming, but I probably wouldn’t hate them as much as I do. Then again, I’ve never been called “faggot” at any other stadium…especially not by the rich alumni on the 50 yard line, who you would think would be the most levelheaded, rational fans in the stadium.
As for the WSU argument, it’s true that cheating happens at other schools, even mine! But the difference is, usually those schools self report it, not defiantly and arrogantly deny it until the bitter end, even after the report comes out. That’s a distinctly usc reaction.
And as for the arrogance in general – lots of teams are good, but many don’t share usc’s entitlement. I don’t get that sense from, say, arizona hoops, ohio state football, steelers football, red wings hockey, etc. There’s a difference between arrogance and success, though they certainly can feed off each other.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
You see what you want to see
I can see how fighting an NCAA investigation can be seen as extreme arrogance to someone who wants to see USC hurry up and get punished already.
Since a rather frenzied rivalry between Cal and USC developed at the turn of this century, it’s become impossible to dissociate a rival’s perspective from one fanbase’s take of the others. If you don’t get a sense of entitlement from Arizona hoops, Ohio State football, Steelers football, Red Wings hockey, perhaps you should talk to ASU, Michigan, Cleveland Brown and Blackhawks fans. I don’t know you, but I don’t think you’re capable of making a clear-eyed assessment of our team, much like anything disparaging I say about, say, Notre Dame, should be taken with a grain or twelve of salt.
You are free to hate whoever you want, and for whatever it’s worth, I am sincerely sorry that you were slurred at one of our games…. in the same manner that our alumni and fans often are at Memorial Stadium, it should be noted though.
As a Pittsburgh Penguins fan, I hated the Wings, because they beat the Pens in the 08 cup. Same with growing up a Michigan football fan, and as a Cal fan playing against Arizona in hoops (they were the dominant program in the PAC while Lavin was working his magic at ucla). I purposefully included these teams, because they are rivals of my teams. Usc is a different animal. Of course you guys are going to defend yourself, and that’s fine. But from my eyes (and those of the vast majority of college sports fans), usc has an extremely high level of arrogance and entitlement. Again, seeing usc get punished because of the very arrogance and entitlement for which we dislike them is very satisfying. It’s much more because of that than because of your success.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
then it is time for you to go back to CGB
You can revel in our misery there…
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
Seriously
Of all the perspectives I’m looking for today, “Why does some dude from Cal hate us?” wasn’t high on the list.
Yeah...little surprised myself
CBK usually brings it better than that.
I am glad the NCAA helped him shoot his load and made him feel better…
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
Nice one Para
Why are there so many Scumbag Fans?
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 11, 2010 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions
From a fellow CGBer
That really almost seemed uncharacteristic coming from CBKwit…
It`s really the kind of thing we`re accustomed to seeing from Twist or royrules, but this is unique.
California Golden Blogs! It`s dat Woo WHOOOOO!
Hmmm...took a second look
you must have no life…
Again, seeing usc get punished because of the very arrogance and entitlement for which we dislike them is very satisfying.
But from my eyes (and those of the vast majority of college sports fans), usc has an extremely high level of arrogance and entitlement.
Comes form winning…let me know when you get to that level then we will talk…
Don’t care what other fans think. Especially those who come to our site gloating…
Pathetic
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
You didn't know that Reggie Bush wasn't clean while he was on the team.
No one did. So what the hell are you talking about? No one sat and watched a 2004-05 football game and thought “I’m so frustrated because I’m losing to a cheater!”
If you haven’t been called a faggot at another stadium you need to travel more. I’m heard worse than that at Notre Dame, and they’re so polite they’re practically Canadaian.
MAGNIFICENT GRAND CHAMPION CC NCAA BRACKET 2010
Oh hey and fun fact
Cal is the only stadium where I was forced to punch a charging hippie in the face shortly before he was tackled by security.
I wouldn’t throw stones.
MAGNIFICENT GRAND CHAMPION CC NCAA BRACKET 2010
This is a good story.
I was leaving the stadium with the band, and about two dozen hippies—and I mean hippies, they had their faces painted, most of them were barefoot and they were carrying tree branches—came careening out of the woods off of that hill and straight towards our line.
It looked like they were losing their nerve and they started to slow down but they still came close enough to bump into us, so I thwacked one in the head. He fell back and one of our DPS officers took him out. I got chewed out for that one; that’s okay, I’ve been chewed out before. Don’t mess!
Any fan base has their crazies. The only school where it’s bad enough that I actually hold them responsible for it is Oregon. Man, you can really feel unsafe up there.
MAGNIFICENT GRAND CHAMPION CC NCAA BRACKET 2010
Hey wise guy, this should be your sig picture
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
You're the Big Rabbit around here no?
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
Funniest Visual I have enjoyed in months; you gang-banged with the cast from Hair!
about two dozen hippies—and I mean hippies, they had their faces painted, most of them were barefoot and they were carrying tree branches—came careening out of the woods off of that hill
Again please show me where USC cheated?
You can’t be that dense…please site me a specific instance in the report where “USC” cheated.
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
On page 42, it notes that Carroll took a tax exception that he really, kinda, sorta probably shouldn’t have taken. Got a better refund, because of that!
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Oh and thats why we beat Cal
Why are there so many Scumbag Fans?
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 11, 2010 5:37 PM PDT up reply actions
I’d personally argue that “lack of institutional control” is exactly the way to correctly identify USC’s transgressions. There is no “specific instance” where USC cheated, like stealing plays or taking steroids or putting ipecac in the opposing team’s gatorade; that’s the point, and that’s why “USC” and not Reggie Bush and his parents are being punished. “USC” fostered an environment which benefited the football, basketball, and women’s tennis (lolz) teams in a manner which gave them an unfair favorability relative to other schools in terms of how they treat their players. Obviously players will be drawn to that.
Very well, you could argue that the 2004 and 2005 teams didn’t directly benefit from the so-called transgressions (I personally don’t buy into the “well if Bush hadn’t gotten benefits Cal would’ve won that game in ’04 and gone to the MNC” argument), but could you say that the unprecedented and sustained success from 2006 onward had nothing to do with recruits taken in during 2004-2005? And that those recruits were not affected at all by this artificially favorable atmosphere towards the team?
You are correct. Players did not cheat, the team did not cheat, Pete Carroll did not cheat, Reggie Bush’s mom didn’t cheat, but USC cheated in a way that gave them an unfair advantage over the rest of the Pac 10 (but probably not most of the SEC, heh) by failing to keep the tightest of tight lids over their football team with regard to beneficial monetary deals from outside sources. That’s why the institution of USC is being punished. Just my 2c.
Cal Football: Some things, you just accept, repress, and move on.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jun 11, 2010 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions
I find the argument that it helped recruiting laughable
It took the entire NCAA 4 years to prove that one guy knew that Reggie Bush was getting favorable treatment, but you really think high schoolers from outside the university, the city, and the state knew about an ‘artificially favorable atmosphere?’
MAGNIFICENT GRAND CHAMPION CC NCAA BRACKET 2010
Recruits have tons of contact with players on their visits, and I’m sure the players told them how awesome it was and what good shit they get. Definitely.
Cal Football: Some things, you just accept, repress, and move on.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jun 11, 2010 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Definitely?
Your standard of proof is apparently “shit I made up.”
MAGNIFICENT GRAND CHAMPION CC NCAA BRACKET 2010
“People like money” is not “shit I made up.”
The NCAA spent how many years investigating this? As an institution that is renowned for wrist-slaps, does the fact that USC was leveled one of the harshest punishments since (or perhaps including) SMU really mean nothing to you? You really think USC is completely and utterly 100% innocent and that the NCAA, which is known for cronyism, backroom deals, and bow-before-the-dollar business decisions is really trying to completely screw one of its biggest and most profitable entities? It just doesn’t add up.
Cal Football: Some things, you just accept, repress, and move on.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jun 11, 2010 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I have lost my patience with your sorry ass...
Lets try to use your Cal education a little more carefully…Are you one of their special admits?
Can you show me ANYWHERE in the NCAA report where ANYONE from ’SC paid ANY player. Where any player OTHER than Reggie Bush and OJ Mayo received benefits, which were from outside sources.
You can’t be that Fucking stupid. Too Many bong hits I guess.
Show me your evidence…otherwise shut the fuck up and go back to that shit hole you came from. All that education and you can’t fucking READ?
I am more than willing to listen to informed opinions but this is not that. I am a patient, respectful person for the most part until I am pushed like I am now. Llike most decent people I don’t like it when people shit in my living room. I don’t go to CGB with gas can in hand looking to stir shit up.
Your jealously and butt hurt attitude betrays you…
But oh well it takes all types I guess, we all can’t be as dense as you are so I will let the master finish it for me…
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
I bow to you Sir!
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
Please bend over you are punking yourself
Why are there so many Scumbag Fans?
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 11, 2010 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Just one minute!
What about all those free joints up in Oregon and Washington?
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
Not only are you Funny you just plain stupid
Why are there so many Scumbag Fans?
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 11, 2010 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions
No.
I just don’t care. I don’t believe that you can change the past, it happened. What do Reggie’s problems have to do with Matt Leinart’s stellar game, or Steve Smith’s awesome TD catch. A team took the field and they deserve to be honored, the isolated actions of one individual mean little in that context. I have no problem with punishing Bush, take his Heisman if you like, but the past happened and all the self serving rage in the world can’t change that.
Grapevine?
no grapevine needed…I said I would do it in the Rec’d Fanpost up top…
If its respectful then fire away, the banning was more about trolls.
Lots of IF’s out there. Reggie’s parents taking money didn’t make him run any faster or juke any better. it was not Performance Enhancing.
I’ll put it in in simpler terms…you can’t unring a bell..you obviously don’t get down here much…we tend not to live in the past here. that is what they do over there WRT to the beatification of Wooden. The games were great, there was way too much talent on that team not to be in awe…. but we have always been about the future not living in the past.
When you are irrelevant in the CFB landscape like they (UCLA) have been for many years you tend to hang onto the past a little too much. SC fans were that way in the 90’s…
if it makes you feel better about the all the ass kickings that SC laid on teams then fine…heck just like the ‘03 season the two best teams didn’t even play in the BCS title game and we still have the AP title which is far more credible in my eyes…
I watched th DVD of the game recently…it still 55-19 at the end…go figure.
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
Thanks for the serious replies. I said through the “grapevine” because I heard that from TwistNHook. I did not see your fanpost warning before I made my above comment.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Night follows day, shock
"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"
Hydro, so you really take someone elses proformance as yours WOW get a life man.
Why are there so many Scumbag Fans?
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 11, 2010 8:40 AM PDT reply actions
Wow I forgot to mention since the Ncaa seems to think I will forget watching that game, or did I maybe it didn't happen must have been a dream.
Hey Ncaa I guess Sept 11 didn’t happen to, any other event in History.
Why are there so many Scumbag Fans?
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 11, 2010 8:44 AM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
