NCAA: OKLAHOMA FORFEITS ALL 2005 WINS, LOSES SCHOLARSHIPS
You take that 31-15 defeat back, Tulsa: it never happened. The initial scanty report from the AP is that Oklahoma must forfeit all of their victories from 2005 and will lose additional scholarships per the NCAA’s sanctions in the Rhett Bomar improper benefits case.
Forfeiting games sounds drastic, but it’s more of a symbolic gesture than a punishment. Scholarship losses could be real bloodletting, depending on the number of schollies taken and the duration of the penalty.
Stoops: Bomar’d!.
More pending as we actually figure out what’s going on…
More: Two scholarships gone each year for the 08-09 seasons and continuation of an earlier probation, per the AP. Also restrictions on coaches recruiting off-campus, meaning Oklahoma’s going to be investing in some turbopowered text messaging devices.
…and still more! Here’s the NCAA’s brief on the ruling. Nowhere will you see the dreaded phrase “lack of institutional control,” but there is this comment on what affected the severity of the ruling:
the fact that the violations continued over several months, which led to two of the student-athletes competing while ineligible; and the university had appeared before the committee only one year earlier for a case in which the committee found that the institution failed to monitor the men’s basketball staff’s telephone contacts with prospective student-athletes.
Oklahoma might want to lay off appearing in front of the rules committee for a year or so, as they seem to be developing a memory.
Loading ...
51
JayTiger says:
Clarification for #47 – OU has to vacate its WINS from 2005, not the whole season; they get to keep the losses. So their record for 2005 is 0-4.
Couldn’t have happened to a more over-rated program.
July 12th, 2007 at 9:31 am
52
Cincy says:
#51… oh come on now… OU is many things, but over-rated is not one of them.
July 12th, 2007 at 10:09 am
53
jim98 says:
Really great job NCAA.
So let me get this straight…there’s a lack of oversight at Oklahoma, but not at Ohio St. where Troy Smith received cash payouts from a booster and Maurice Clarett used to tool around in a tricked-out Hummer. Or at USC where an agent buys Reggie Bush’s family a fucking house and Matt Leinart and Dwayne Jarrett pay next to nothing on their rent.
What a joke…either enforce the rules for every case or give the players a stipend, instead of punishing some and letting others slide.
July 12th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
54
blazin says:
No doubt that the NCAA will look favorably on the fact that one of Oklahoma’s self-imposed penalties is banning ” 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.
This has to be a step in the right direction since most bosses try to make employees do more work for less pay rather than more pay of no work. What kind of message is that for today’s youth?
July 12th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
55
Matt says:
Jim98, stop confusing the obvious: Jarrett and Leinart were roommates and that incident was REPORTED by USC to THE NCAA as a potential violation.
Reggie Bushes parents receiving extra benefits in the form of an allegedy rent-free house is not USC’s fault –unless you expect all schools to start doing forensic accounting on all football player’s PARENTS.
The NCAA would love nothing more than to throw the book at USC — if they could.
July 12th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
56
DevilGrad says:
Oklahoma also claimed to have “self-reported,” although the sanctions report notes that an anonymous emailer turned them in first. More generally, “self-reporting” tends to help only by limiting potential sanctions, particularly when the university has to revise its “self-report” multiple times before the real facts come out (see, e.g., Marshall 2001).
As for the Bush family, one suspects that the university could have figured out what was up without resorting to forensic accounting. That said, I give USC and/or its hangers-on full marks for discovering a new form of money laundering.
July 12th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
57
chris says:
SC did not invent a new way to launder, they copied the Woodson method.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
58
Guy Morris says:
So is OU gonna pay Baylor and A&M for the bowls they should have gone to that year? Both would now be 6-5.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:04 pm