Oklahoma Vacates 2005 Season
Apologies for getting to some of these stories a little after the fact. I'm still catching up from being away last week.
DC Trojan had a nice take on the OU situation but I thought I would throw my .02 cents in.
A lot has been made of the NCAA vacating OU's wins from the 2005 football season. I for one find it to be a non-issue. For the fans of Texas or Oklahoma State there is dancing in the streets and partying like it is 1999.
I would agree that some of things that I have read over this issue in the past few months over at Burnt Orange Nation have made me chuckle but Peter Bean's general dislike for all things OU has always been tempered in humor and not just an unhealthy hatred for his bitter rival. Yes, the boys in powder blue from across town are also salivating at the opportunity to have the same sort of celebration in regards to USC. We'll see gents but you may be disappointed as the NCAA has hit a stone wall in regards to anyone cooperating and without cooperation you can't have an investigation. Because they are mired in mediocrity they can only take their frustrations out on those that they despise.
Pete Fiutak from CFN brings up some interesting observations in his article on Wednesday and he takes an interesting trip down memory lane all the way back to John Wooden.
It's all silly. I don't care that the wins don't technically count. You don't care that the wins don't technically count. Anyone with a brain doesn't care that the wins don't technically count. Those games happened, and that can't be changed. Or can they? .
I said essentially the same thing both here on CC and on SBN's Oklahoma Blog Crimson and Cream Machine. The only people that seem to care about the outcome are all of the USC haters out there and their opinions to most USC fans don't amount to much.
I would agree with Fiutak that OU's punishment is a slap on the wrist. Sure they lose a small amount of schollies but they get to keep the bowl money they earned that season and don't lose future bowl game privileges or TV money. Losing those is where it really hits you hard, and it just goes to show you that the NCAA has got it all screwed up in how they police their sports programs. Of course all the screaming and gnashing of teeth from the likes of BN or DumpDorrell are fun to observe as they demand some form of justice but their opinions are for their readers and don't necessarily speak for everyone else out there.
But Fiutak also draws the lineage as to how the NCAA became such a toothless wonder.
- You have to go all the way now that the precedent has been reestablished. John Wooden's ten national titles at UCLA? Bu-bye, thanks to Sam Gilbert. The national titles under Bear Bryant at Alabama? Memorex. In fact, you can pretty much wipe away anything that happened in the SEC, Southwest Conference and Big 8 before the mid-1980s, (and really, you can dump the all-time record books altogether on those conferences if you honestly want to punish teams for booster involvement). Actually, you can forget about most of the national champions in both football and basketball. If you're really going to do this, NCAA, then do it.
Now you have done it Pete! Your inbox is about to be flooded with hate mail from all those bruin fans that hold everything about John Wooden sacred and near and dear to their hearts. You will be beaten into submission with demands of proof about Gilbert and such and be forced to retract those words just like Dan Wetzel of Yahoo Sports was forced to do last year after his piece on Wooden was deemed a hit piece by those chosen to protect the reputation of Wooden like a knight protecting the Holy Grail.
In the end nobody cares except for a few rabid rivals who are frustrated by their programs lack of production and sense that they belong in the national discussion. They need to win something first before they act like they some sense of entitlement outside of the circles that they run in. They certainly don't have a care for what is in our best interests so I am not concerned about the blather they spew forth.
But to me here is the kicker:
Someday, someone will realize that it's absolutely fine for college players to accept gifts, money, cars, whatever from boosters, or anyone who wants to provide the swag. When that happens, Oklahoma will get the eight wins back from 2005. For most of us, those wins will have never left Norman.
Of course, the purists out there will probably go nuts over that statement. Someone is going to have to explain to me how the play on the field was affected by Bush's parents getting a free ride or by how that player from ucla receiving a bag of groceries. The integrity of organized sports was compromised years ago so I'm not sure why people are up in arms about it. I am by no means saying that we should accept it but throwing ourselves off a cliff or lighting our hair on fire over it isn't going to change a thing. Severe punishment, from the powers-that-be, is the only way to set up a deterrent but even then you won't stop it completely.
Dave from SBN's Oregon Blog Addicted to Quack also has some interesting thoughts.
I think Dave is right about ALL programs having some degree of violations occur at other programs some one is always looking to cut corners even if it is just teensy-weensy bit but I take issue with Dave's point about booster involvement when it comes to USC. That has not been the issue and I would challenge him to show me where in the last 10 years where SC's boosters have been involved with the issues that currently involve USC.
But Dave is also right about the NCAA attempting to right-the-ship once upon a time:
I am fully prepared for some form of punishment from the NCAA and I would be shocked if there wasn't any, this story is way too big and the ramifications way too important for the NCAA not to do something about it. But, regardless of the outcome it will not change the fact that USC is the premier football program right now and that Pete Carroll is the best coach out there. Humiliation is lot like the flu, over time it goes away. I could care less if people call us a bunch of cheaters...I would say cheaters at what? As Fiutak said the integrity of the game has not been assaulted. To me, it is what matters on the field. I am not these players' mothers or over-seers so they do need to some sense of accountability. I may not like it when they break the rules and I will all ways have an opinion on these sorts of issues but in the end at least to me, it is for others to worry about.
The way that SC has jumped on the throat of most of college football, except for a couple of key games, shows me that they will always be in the discussion. The love fest from the MSM has been so over exposed that it is nauseating at times so we shouldn't really be surprised at all of anger towards our program. The mock outrage that Stewie Mandel puts forth is laughable because he has been just as guilty in building SC up so now he has to tear them down. It's a typical journalistic tactic but that's not our fault we just have to deal with it and there is probably a lot more success and scrutiny to come.
FIGHT ON!
0 recs |
7 comments
Comments
I have no idea
As far as the Bush scandal is concerned, we may get off easy, or they may throw the book at us. They have to be plenty mad by now with the lack of cooperation in Reggie's camp.
by frak on
Jul 14, 2007 11:36 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
There's no in between
It's either one or the other for USC, and unfortunately (for me) the former seems more likely at this point.
by SuperBruinMan on
Jul 15, 2007 11:44 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Hmmm
I dislike this attitude. I agree that it is in many ways a stupid rule. But it is still a rule. Reggie Bush, Rhett Bomar and J.D. Quinn were not taking money as an act of defiance. They were in it for themselves and themselves alone. As long as the rule exists, there should be punishments for breaking it.
The troubling trend with Oklahoma and Colorado is that it seems programs are only caught if they self report (or in the case of past Colorado indiscretions a whistleblower is involved). If this is the case, who knows what kind of cheating is going on. While the Oklahoma and USC incidents each involve a third (or even fourth) party, many schools may be getting away with their own payments. If schools realize they can get away with whatever they want it could lead to anything.
About Bush: here is Yahoo's timeline, which includes all of their allegations. I'd like to point out that while a school might be more accountable for the actions of boosters, involvement with an agent is much worse for the players eligibility. Bomar, Quinn and Troy Smith were all allowed to continue playing after taking money from boosters; Mike Williams was never allowed to play again after signing with an agent. If Yahoo's allegations are true, Bush first received money from potential agents in November 2004, making him permanently ineligible from that point on.
by SuperBruinMan on
Jul 16, 2007 12:18 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I tend to agree
The only thing that might save us should Bush's case finally break open is the involvement of the athletic department. If USC is not involved in anyway, we might avoid the sanctions that OU endured.
At this point, I believe that what happened between Bush and the agents happened without knowledge of Pete Carroll. However if McNair had knowledge of Bush's dealings and did not report it, I maintain that the NCAA should throw the book at us. I have heard that the NCAA does recognize the difference between booster gifts and non-boosters(agents) gifts. Although now, with the clamp down on the witnesses in this case, I don't see the NCAA showing any mercy to USC.
All I can hope is that a fair judgement can be made to punish those involved, being Bush and the agents, and not the school if they didn't know. I know that I'm biased on the subject, but I just think its a shame that 1 or 2 people can destroy a season for an entire team.
Trying to look at it through an opponents point of view, I can see how this is frustrating. Playing by the rules, and running a clean program at UCLA and other places, hasn't always translated into victory on the field. So I understand that there is a vast majority of people that want to see Bush and USC punished.
by frak on
Jul 16, 2007 11:26 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Off Topic
by SuperBruinMan on
Jul 16, 2007 11:33 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I don't understand...
by DC Trojan on
Jul 16, 2007 1:19 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
As far as agents are concerned
Back in the 90's USC player Shawn Walters had taken some gifts, and was suspended. He sat out a year, repaid the money he had taken, and returned. As I said, I may be wrong about this, but I think that there is a distinction between signing a contract, and taking gifts.
by frak on
Jul 16, 2007 11:34 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs






