Forum
      

If Alabama has to vacate wins...

15 years 5 months ago #21965 by UGAChemDawg
If Alabama has to vacate wins... was created by UGAChemDawg
Then Southern Cal should have to vacate two national championships and a Heisman trophy.

Will it happen? Of course not.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • UGAChemDawg
  • Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Junk Yard Dawg
More
15 years 5 months ago #21966 by dapolla
Replied by dapolla on topic Re:If Alabama has to vacate wins...
Like we've said before on this forum, the Heisman trophies and national championships are determined by voters, not the NCAA. Therefore, NCAA sanctions hold little or no bearing on those increasingly meaningless titles. The only things the NCAA can do are:

1) Force the teams to either forfeit wins (meaning the original loser gets credit for the victory) or vacate wins (meaning that no one officially won the game, which is ludicrous and which is the slap on the wrist that big schools like Alabama get)

2) Take away scholarships.

3) Prohibit the teams from playing on television for a set amount of time.

4) Prohibit post-season play, like bowl games.

5) Deny eligibility for future conference and/or national championships.

They cannot, however, take away voted-upon national titles, though vacated wins MIGHT in the history books take divisional or conference titles away from them. Nor can they force the committee that votes on the Heisman to take away Reggie Bush's trophy.

Nevertheless, SC's victories were already tainted by the following:

1) 2003's title was split with LSU. A split taints any national title (ask any Ohio State fan who won the 1942 national championship, for example) on its own merits, but to split it with the most dominant team in the country, from the most dominant CONFERENCE in the country, by winning the Rose Bowl at home against Michigan? TAINTED.

2) The 2004 national title was won over an Oklahoma team who played NO ONE during the regular season, outside of Texas, and despite two other teams (Auburn and Utah) finishing the regular and postseasons undefeated. Auburn, of course, played an extra game (the SEC Championship), where they blew out Tennessee 48-28, and beat a defensive juggernaut in the Sugar Bowl (Va Tech).

Those are the complaints I have. Not that USC should vacate titles, but that they never should have been eligible for them in the first place. You put that 2003 LSU team up against the 2003 USC team and I guarantee at least a two-touchdown margin of victory for the Tigers. Put the 2004 Auburn team up against the '04 Trojans and it might be 27-21, but it's Tigers on top again. Who ever heard of an SEC team going undefeated and being denied the national title? Oh, right, it happened to US in 1946...

Red and Black, Win or Lose

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
15 years 5 months ago #21968 by Buc
Replied by Buc on topic Re:If Alabama has to vacate wins...
Good post dapolla, I especially like the following comment . . . .

Who ever heard of an SEC team going undefeated and being denied the national
title
? Oh, right, it happened to US in 1946...

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
15 years 5 months ago #21969 by wlayton
Replied by wlayton on topic Re:If Alabama has to vacate wins...
Great post...

PVBDAWG

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
Time to create page: 0.027 seconds