Oklahoma must forfeit 2005 football season

[Sirrich3]

http://www.yahoo.com/s/625157

OKLAHOMA CITY -- Oklahoma must erase its wins from the 2005 football season and will lose two scholarships for the 2008-09 and 2009-10 school years, the NCAA said Wednesday.

The penalties stem from a case involving two players, including the Sooners' starting quarterback, who were kicked off the team last August for being paid for work they had not performed at a Norman car dealership. The NCAA said Oklahoma was guilty of a "failure to monitor" the employment of the players.

Oklahoma President David Boren said the university will appeal the NCAA's "failure to monitor" finding and the ruling that Oklahoma must erase the wins from the 2005 season. Oklahoma has 15 days to notify the NCAA in writing of any such appeal.

The Sooners went 8-4 and beat Oregon in the Holiday Bowl to end the 2005 season. Records from that season involving quarterback Rhett Bomar and offensive lineman J.D. Quinn must be erased, the NCAA said, and coach Bob Stoops' career record will be amended to reflect the erased wins, dropping it from 86-19 in eight seasons to 78-19.

Oklahoma also will have two years of probation added to an earlier penalty, extending the Sooners' probation to May 23, 2010.

Those sanctions are in addition to those already self-imposed by Oklahoma, which has banned athletes from working at the car dealership until at least the 2008-09 academic year and moved to prevent the athletes' supervisor at the dealership, Brad McRae, from being involved with the university's athletics program until at least August 2011.

[zippyjuan]

Other than changing their record for 2005, not that much of a penalty as far as college sports is concerned. Most fans only care about what is happening with this season.

[Thesifer]

I don't understand why they would erase the wins from Stoops record and not the losses? It should be his record goes from 86-19 to 78-15 Not 78-19 If the Wins never happened, then neither did the losses.

But it is definitely better then some other penalties they have had to endure, like no televised coverage. Those years really suck! :(

[VTGreg]

I don't understand why they would erase the wins from Stoops record and not the losses? It should be his record goes from 86-19 to 78-15 Not 78-19 If the Wins never happened, then neither did the losses.

But it is definitely better then some other penalties they have had to endure, like no televised coverage. Those years really suck! :(

I was wondering that also. They did lose two scholarships for a few years and that will hurt, but overall it wasn't an incredibly stiff penalty. The violations also weren't very severe so it appears the penalty fit the crime.

[Thesifer]

I was wondering that also. They did lose two scholarships for a few years and that will hurt, but overall it wasn't an incredibly stiff penalty. The violations also weren't very severe so it appears the penalty fit the crime.


I was thinking about it last night, and the only thing I can come up with is that if you had a coach that had say 2 wins and 10 losses, who wasn't paying close enough attention to his players and gets in trouble, I think he would be pretty happy to have 2 wins plus 10 losses taken from him, almost like a Gift.

So maybe that is where keeping the losses comes in.

[guiseppewv]

I think you keep the losses because even breaking the rules they couldn't beat those teams, so if they were following the rules they couldn't beat them. On the other hand they didn't follow the rules when they beat the other teams, so if they were following the rules then maybe the other teams would have won. :shrug:

[Thesifer]

I think you keep the losses because even breaking the rules they couldn't beat those teams, so if they were following the rules they couldn't beat them. On the other hand they didn't follow the rules when they beat the other teams, so if they were following the rules then maybe the other teams would have won. :shrug:


You obviously didn't look at what "rules" were broken. Two players were receiving a paycheck from a car company that they weren't actually working at. How in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM does this have anything to do with if they would have won or loss?

[JWCCR]

any one know where to rent the movie Barfly?

[johnnymk]

any one know where to rent the movie Barfly?

Are you drunk or trying to be cute?

[zenbooty]

Are you drunk or trying to be cute?
:heh: :heh: :heh:

http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/STFU_NOOB.jpg

[Sirrich3]

Now that tis is done, Will the NCAa ever look into the Reggie Bush thing at USC?

[guiseppewv]

You obviously didn't look at what "rules" were broken. Two players were receiving a paycheck from a car company that they weren't actually working at. How in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM does this have anything to do with if they would have won or loss?

Obviously you are mistaken. I did read the article and the rules that were broken.

It does make sense b/c they were breaking the rules. Rule breaking must have consequences. The consequence in this case is that you forfeit the games you won. :shrug: If the school would have done a better job of keeping an eye on their athletes this would not have happened. :shrug:

[guiseppewv]

Now that tis is done, Will the NCAa ever look into the Reggie Bush thing at USC?

They should. Fair is fair.

[Thesifer]

Obviously you are mistaken. I did read the article and the rules that were broken.

It does make sense b/c they were breaking the rules. Rule breaking must have consequences. The consequence in this case is that you forfeit the games you won. :shrug: If the school would have done a better job of keeping an eye on their athletes this would not have happened. :shrug:


You are correct in that statement. You are not correct in stating that that would have any effect for or against their ability to win a football game, or lose one.

[VTGreg]

You are correct in that statement. You are not correct in stating that that would have any effect for or against their ability to win a football game, or lose one.

I believe his point was that, since Oklahoma couldn't win the games they lost even with the players that were deemed ineligible because they broke the rules, they would have likely lost the games without those players.

What rules were broken is immaterial. Oklahoma was playing with ineligible players and thus the wins were stricken from the record books because there isn't a way to prove whether they would have won or lost without those players. That isn't the case for the losses.

[guiseppewv]

Dang, I need you to sum up my points more often. :) That was dead on. :thumb:

[gwilks98]

what about the rest of the players on the team? There shouldn't be penalties that involve those that had nothing to do with it.


Sidenote: My g/f is pissed. Now she feels like Auburn should have gotten the chance to play USC that year...

[zenbooty]

what about the rest of the players on the team? There shouldn't be penalties that involve those that had nothing to do with it. I disagree. A team wins, loses, breaks the rules, and forfeits as a team. Besides, its not like anyone loses their current job over this.

[gwilks98]

I disagree. A team wins, loses, breaks the rules, and forfeits as a team. Besides, its not like anyone loses their current job over this.

Then take away MLB victories for teams with players who choose to use steriods illegally. That's a more valid argument. Those athletes had an unfair physical advantage.

It's a BS excuse. Team Enron would all be in jail right now for the fall of some on the very top by that logic.

Take away those player's stats. Erase them individually from college ball if you want. But don't demean what the others have earned for the mistake of some. There are more appropriate ways to punish the school without involving the innocent players who worked hard that season.

[Thesifer]

Then take away MLB victories for teams with players who choose to use steriods illegally. That's a more valid argument. Those athletes had an unfair physical advantage.

It's a BS excuse. Team Enron would all be in jail right now for the fall of some on the very top by that logic.

Take away those player's stats. Erase them individually from college ball if you want. But don't demean what the others have earned for the mistake of some. There are more appropriate ways to punish the school without involving the innocent players who worked hard that season.


And seeing as how I seriously doubt that "working" or not working at a Car Place during the season as the case may be, can help them win the game, or is "cheating" in any way when it comes to actually playing football...

These two guys broke the rules, and were kicked off the team as soon as the head coach found out that they were doing it.

He didn't try and hide things like Barry Switzer. He reported them to the NCAA and kicked them off the team, just before their next season started, making it an even tougher challenge for the other teammates to step up.

[zenbooty]

Then take away MLB victories for teams with players who choose to use steriods illegally. That's a more valid argument. Those athletes had an unfair physical advantage.I wouldn't have a big problem with that. But I don't make the rules.


It's a BS excuse. Team Enron would all be in jail right now for the fall of some on the very top by that logic.If you want to correlate a sports game to real life, you go right ahead there :heh:!


Take away those player's stats. Erase them individually from college ball if you want. But don't demean what the others have earned for the mistake of some. There are more appropriate ways to punish the school without involving the innocent players who worked hard that season.with the transient nature of college football teams, players are only around four years tops, and are often gone and away long before any wrongdoing is discovered. So the NCAA chooses to punish the program instead of some individual beyond their reach. Since having their wins taken away is hardly going to have impact on any of these players as individuals, I really don't see what the big deal is. I mean, it IS just a game at the end of the day, right?

[Thesifer]

I wouldn't have a big problem with that. But I don't make the rules.

If you want to correlate a sports game to real life, you go right ahead there :heh:!

with the transient nature of college football teams, players are only around four years tops, and are often gone and away long before any wrongdoing is discovered. So the NCAA chooses to punish the program instead of some individual beyond their reach. Since having their wins taken away is hardly going to have impact on any of these players as individuals, I really don't see what the big deal is. I mean, it IS just a game at the end of the day, right?

That's what everyone says. But that doesn't seem to be how people act when dealing with it. :) We still don't have a playoff system because they would lose the money from the different Bowls. Teams strive to do better because it brings in more money for the college.

If a team isn't winning consistently the coach is fired so we can bring in "better" talent that can bring back the fans.

Everything they do for college football is just like Professional Football, so when it all comes down to it, football in your backyard is a game. Football in college or NFL (or many other sports for that matter especially when they tag "Professional" on there) Are more then just "Games."

[VTGreg]

That's what everyone says. But that doesn't seem to be how people act when dealing with it. :) We still don't have a playoff system because they would lose the money from the different Bowls. Teams strive to do better because it brings in more money for the college.

If a team isn't winning consistently the coach is fired so we can bring in "better" talent that can bring back the fans.

Everything they do for college football is just like Professional Football, so when it all comes down to it, football in your backyard is a game. Football in college or NFL (or many other sports for that matter especially when they tag "Professional" on there) Are more then just "Games."

These are all very valid points, but in this case no one will lose their job or feel less accomplished because of this move. Adjusting the record books does just that and only that. The players and coaches will not be better or worse since the games were already played and they believe that they were the best team because they won the game.

The only impact this will have on the current and future players is due to the scholarship reduction.

[Thesifer]

These are all very valid points, but in this case no one will lose their job or feel less accomplished because of this move. Adjusting the record books does just that and only that. The players and coaches will not be better or worse since the games were already played and they believe that they were the best team because they won the game.

The only impact this will have on the current and future players is due to the scholarship reduction.


I understand that the punishment isn't that big of a deal. I've believed that from the beginning. I guess I'm just more on the side of erasing an entire season, then just picking and choosing. But I'm also not the head of the NCAA :)

[guiseppewv]

Then take away MLB victories for teams with players who choose to use steriods illegally. That's a more valid argument. Those athletes had an unfair physical advantage.

It's a BS excuse. Team Enron would all be in jail right now for the fall of some on the very top by that logic.

Take away those player's stats. Erase them individually from college ball if you want. But don't demean what the others have earned for the mistake of some. There are more appropriate ways to punish the school without involving the innocent players who worked hard that season.

I agree with ZB - you win and lose as a team plus you get puncished as a team. There is no way you are going to tell me that other players on the team didn't know about this.

I think the MLB teams should forfeit all games that can be proved a player on their team was on steroids. The players should also be banned from baseball. Start with Bonds and work your way down.

[Thesifer]

I agree with ZB - you win and lose as a team plus you get puncished as a team. There is no way you are going to tell me that other players on the team didn't know about this.

I think the MLB teams should forfeit all games that can be proved a player on their team was on steroids. The players should also be banned from baseball. Start with Bonds and work your way down.

I agree with the steroids case.

I don't agree in the case with Oklahoma. Only because what they were doing wasn't cheating. It was "Against the rules" and wrong, but it wasn't cheating. In no way did it help the team.

And you are correct that the other players probably knew about it or found out about it, because that is most likely how Bob Stoops found out about it. Players from OU didn't like Rhett Bomar very much.

He was stuck up, thought he was the best player on the team, and that he was their ticket. When in reality he was an OK Quarterback, that wasn't smart enough to wait and try and make it to the NFL before "Cashing in."

But as for steroids, or anything dealing with cheating on the field or enhancing your players, then everyone is to blame.