OU forfeits 2005 season

What difference does it make now if they have to forfeit wins from 2 years ago?

Good question about the dude from U of Miami...:laugh:

 

Yes, let's bash the U -- a small, private D-1 university.

Forget the fact the OU broke major NCAA rules. How often have teams had to forfeit an entire season?

 

I think I'll drive my Kia Rio that I bought from
Big Red Sports & Imports right through thier
picture windows. (Big Red Sports is on the
east side of I-35 and Big Red Imports
is on the west side of I-35)

Seriously, I did buy my car from an
OSU jock who didn't get caught.

Seriously, the ownership of Big Red
has changed since the 2005
footbal season.

 

Why don't they forfeit this COMING season? Who cares about a season 2 years ago. Do you think those players are going to tell their grandkids they were 0-12? Forfeiting past losses from past season is like that belly vibrating belt that is supposed to burn fat...totally useless.

 

I, too, wonder about such penalties. They should have to forfeit monies from that season. That's the only language that these universities speak meaningfully when it comes to past transgressions.

 

Caught with the cream on their crimson whiskers, it doesn't taste as good having to puke it back up.

 

In OKlahoma the head coach of the main school
is the highest paid government (via the education group)
official (not counting endorsements, most of which
are gratus). Yes the head football coach at
OU (University of Oklahoma) makes more than
the government. We have the best team money
can buy in Texas

 

This is why I ask myself what happen to the student athlete who is to graduate in 4 years. You know one who plays their sport goes to class and does not break the law or goes to jail. If you break the law they say you are just a kid, but at 18 to 22 years old you should know better, I don't care how good of a player you are. The ones who give the money to these players should pay a price by going to jail, if there is a law against it and if there isn't a law there should be one. But these players have been thinking they are different from HS on, that they should get special things because of who they are on many of them. If these schools would bring in the right kind of people, they would miss so much of this kind of stuff. Right kind of school president, AD, coaches and student athlete would do away with most of this.

 

To me the ruling doesn't make alot of sense. Why do you have to forfeit just the wins? Didn't this players play in the loses too? But the biggest reason it doesn't make sense is that the rules they broke didn't help make them any better athletes. It didn't help them win those eight games that season. And it certainly didn't help in their four loses that season.

It is a retarted penalty. Take away the scholarships of those two players for in the future. I can understand that. Make the players pay back the money they gained illegally (only by NCAA standards though - not criminally illegal that I'm aware of) I can even understand that.

But taking away wins that's just silly. And it punishes the "majority" that was doing it the right way. The team was already penalized enough when they had to find a new starting quarterback right before the season started in '06.