Statalyzer
8/2/2007, 03:09 PM
Ok, the storm has died down a bit, so here goes. BTW, I know some people here don't give a crap what a Texas fan's opinion of the NCAA's penalties on OU are. That's fine, you are free to stop reading. I do believe it's as objective as an opinion as I can make it.
A lot of OU fans seem to think the whole thing was an outrage because the Athletic Department didn't cheat directly and therefore there should no penalties at all. A lot of Texas/Okie State/A&M/Tech/NU/etc fans seems to think the whole thing was an outrage and OU was just slapped on the wrist and blatant cheating was condoned. I think the truth is in-between somewhere, so I'll bring up the 3 components in turn.
1 - Probation. This one really is a slap on the wrist, I don't think y'all have anything to complain about here. If another violation happened, the NCAA would just extend the probation and say "And if you do it one more time, we'll REALLY put you on some probation!" Paper tiger here, essentially no penalty at all. There is nothing for OU fans to cry "unfair" about here, nothing at all.
2 - Loss of 2 scholarships for the next few years. It's a gray area here but I don't think either side can complain too much. I know some here will disagree, but this was not excessive. Basically you just lost Bomar and Quinn's scholarships for as long as they would have been at OU, plus one extra year. I think losing 3 scholies would have been more appropriate, even though the third player was a walk-on, because illegal activity is equally illegal if done to a scholarship athlete or a walk-on. But either way, this one seems close to right, which is all you can ask.
Now, some will say "But the boosters cheated, not the school." That's true, but the NCAA cannot simply levy no penalty when a booster cheats, because if they do, there is no reason for any school to monitor the booster. If that's the case, a school could secret meet with a booster and tell them to pay the players, then just intentionally not check up on the records. That would look just the same unless the booster talked. I'm not saying OU did this, but w/o penalties, someone could; there must be an incentive to rigorously monitor, and a penalty when things slip past the monitors is the best way.
3 - Erasure of 8 wins from the 2005 season. This penalty is inanely stupid. The other teams still get a loss. If Team A plays Team B and Team B gets a loss, that means Team A won! If you add up all the records of every team that played that season and the number of wins aren't the same as the number of losses, then your rules are idiotic. Also makes no sense that individual stats now add up to so-many touchdowns yet the team doesn't get credit for those in the final score - how the hell can a player score a TD to give his team 0 points? As far as I am concerned, OU went 8-4 in 2005; this talk of an 0-4 season is retroactive magic doublespeak bull****. I don't blame you for being ****ed at this.
Honestly, as a fan of OU's biggest rival I'm ****ed also, because when I compare the teams on who won more games in the past X years, whose coach has a better win%, etc, I want Texas to be better fair and square, and if we're worse in those areas I hope that also happened fair and square. I hope Mack passes Stoops in wins/year by earning it out on the field, not by having some jackwad beauracrat go back in time and mess with the records to skew the competition. Forfeiting games shouldn't be part of unintentional participation of a player who pulled the wool over someone. Forfeiting should only be done in the case of systematic cheating by the athletic department or the sport's specific staff knowing full well what they are doing - and in that drastic case the opponents should have their L changed to a W. The middle ground where the W disappears and the L doesn't is stupid.
The NCAA screwed this one up big time, which doesn't surprise me. Longhorn and Raider fans ought to be able to sympathize with you guys on this one instead of making stupid claims of OU's winless season in 2005, as we've both been the vicitim of stupid NCAA decisions involving a player being suspended during a season just for being investigated, and then declared innocent later on but by then they've already missed the games for doing nothing wrong. I don't understand your rivals exulting over this - rival or not they should be able to judge it objectively and realize this half-forfeiture is totally irrational.
I hope Boren wins his appeal on issue #3.
A lot of OU fans seem to think the whole thing was an outrage because the Athletic Department didn't cheat directly and therefore there should no penalties at all. A lot of Texas/Okie State/A&M/Tech/NU/etc fans seems to think the whole thing was an outrage and OU was just slapped on the wrist and blatant cheating was condoned. I think the truth is in-between somewhere, so I'll bring up the 3 components in turn.
1 - Probation. This one really is a slap on the wrist, I don't think y'all have anything to complain about here. If another violation happened, the NCAA would just extend the probation and say "And if you do it one more time, we'll REALLY put you on some probation!" Paper tiger here, essentially no penalty at all. There is nothing for OU fans to cry "unfair" about here, nothing at all.
2 - Loss of 2 scholarships for the next few years. It's a gray area here but I don't think either side can complain too much. I know some here will disagree, but this was not excessive. Basically you just lost Bomar and Quinn's scholarships for as long as they would have been at OU, plus one extra year. I think losing 3 scholies would have been more appropriate, even though the third player was a walk-on, because illegal activity is equally illegal if done to a scholarship athlete or a walk-on. But either way, this one seems close to right, which is all you can ask.
Now, some will say "But the boosters cheated, not the school." That's true, but the NCAA cannot simply levy no penalty when a booster cheats, because if they do, there is no reason for any school to monitor the booster. If that's the case, a school could secret meet with a booster and tell them to pay the players, then just intentionally not check up on the records. That would look just the same unless the booster talked. I'm not saying OU did this, but w/o penalties, someone could; there must be an incentive to rigorously monitor, and a penalty when things slip past the monitors is the best way.
3 - Erasure of 8 wins from the 2005 season. This penalty is inanely stupid. The other teams still get a loss. If Team A plays Team B and Team B gets a loss, that means Team A won! If you add up all the records of every team that played that season and the number of wins aren't the same as the number of losses, then your rules are idiotic. Also makes no sense that individual stats now add up to so-many touchdowns yet the team doesn't get credit for those in the final score - how the hell can a player score a TD to give his team 0 points? As far as I am concerned, OU went 8-4 in 2005; this talk of an 0-4 season is retroactive magic doublespeak bull****. I don't blame you for being ****ed at this.
Honestly, as a fan of OU's biggest rival I'm ****ed also, because when I compare the teams on who won more games in the past X years, whose coach has a better win%, etc, I want Texas to be better fair and square, and if we're worse in those areas I hope that also happened fair and square. I hope Mack passes Stoops in wins/year by earning it out on the field, not by having some jackwad beauracrat go back in time and mess with the records to skew the competition. Forfeiting games shouldn't be part of unintentional participation of a player who pulled the wool over someone. Forfeiting should only be done in the case of systematic cheating by the athletic department or the sport's specific staff knowing full well what they are doing - and in that drastic case the opponents should have their L changed to a W. The middle ground where the W disappears and the L doesn't is stupid.
The NCAA screwed this one up big time, which doesn't surprise me. Longhorn and Raider fans ought to be able to sympathize with you guys on this one instead of making stupid claims of OU's winless season in 2005, as we've both been the vicitim of stupid NCAA decisions involving a player being suspended during a season just for being investigated, and then declared innocent later on but by then they've already missed the games for doing nothing wrong. I don't understand your rivals exulting over this - rival or not they should be able to judge it objectively and realize this half-forfeiture is totally irrational.
I hope Boren wins his appeal on issue #3.