USC stripped of 2004 BCS title

Armageddon - all of that is meaningless to this discussion of stripping titles and vacating wins.

More importantly the NCAA sanctions were a slap on the wrist for USC which benefitted greatly from the exposure and everything else rhat came with being a national champ.

30 schollies over three years? Give me a break.

If the NCAA wanted this to quit it would be simple - no postseason for five years, no TV appearances for five years and no scholarships for five years.

Short of something like that happening to one of these programs, this is all a bunch of meaningless wrist slapping.

And acting as if the BCS and NCAA aren't one in the in ter$s of being partners in hypocritical slime is about as intellectually dishonest as it gets

 

No scholies for five years = death penalty. Even I think that would be too harsh.

But hey, your MO is to nuke first, ask questions later and not worry whether the response was appropriate.

 

Seriously, can the BCS people demand a refund of their payout to USC?

 

Armageddon - my point is simple - the BCS benefits greatly from having ohio state and USC involved which is why the NCAA is not particularly interested in taking real steps to punish these schools.if u want to enfore rules you need to make breaking those rules hurt so bad teams think twice about crossing the line.

Five years with no scholarships and no TV exposure - and TV revenue - and no bowl - and no cut from the conference bowl money - would be a punishment that would clearly send a message that the NCAA is serious.

 

It's a tough balancing act. If the NCAA gets too harsh, the schools and the BCS conferences will merely secede and form their own organization with their own rules.

I'd think if that were to happen, especially in college basketball, you'd be getting an IRL/CART situation, where the whole sport will suffer for years.

 

Which begs the question why, after going through the revote on NFL rookie of the year last season after Cushing got suspended for PEDs?