A Sea Of Red

NCAA: Oklahoma must forfeit 2005 season

Associated Press

Updated: July 11, 2007, 3:14 PM ET

OKLAHOMA CITY -- The Oklahoma football program must forfeit all wins from the 2005 season and will lose scholarships as a result of players being paid for work they had not performed.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2933008

I think Bomar is up the road hoping to play for the BearKats.

He is indeed in Huntsville.

Sly Fox wrote:He is indeed in Huntsville.

Good place for criminals of all sorts.

Your Texas geography knowledge is impressive. Is that what put you over the top in the Quiz Bowl competition?

Sly Fox wrote:Your Texas geography knowledge is impressive. Is that what put you over the top in the Quiz Bowl competition?

Nope...our Program Director was Head Athletic Trainer at Sam for 12 years.

So does that mean Oregon wins the Holiday bowl?

I wonder if they'll put that trophy on the rack. "winner by default"

sly, do you think that the ncaa gave them a slap on the wrist again, or do you think it was a merited? I personally think that they got off easy. back in the day, we had the same thing and lost TV for a season, plus bowl game and scholarship losses. I just think that with the problems with Sampson in basketball, this, and the supplements, and other recruiting infractions that this should have been deemed a "lack of institutional control". They are even appealling the verdict, as if they had done no wrong. I think that because it was the "land thieves" that they got away with it.

I think they got off easy because the NCAA is gunshy about penalties against their bigtime breadwinners.

On the positive side, Fran now can call '05 a winning season thanks to the forfeit. Whoop(s)!

Sly Fox wrote:On the positive side, Fran now can call '05 a winning season thanks to the forfeit. Whoop(s)!

The wins were VACATED, not forfeited.

Does the word "semantics" appear in any quiz bowl questions?

01LUGrad wrote:Does the word "semantics" appear in any quiz bowl questions?

The Sooners are losing the wins, thus vacating. The 8 wins are not turning into losses, just being erased, again, "vacating." No wins are changing hands whatsoever. A FORFEIT would imply the 8 games would be turned to losses, with the other teams gaining wins...which, in this case is not happening. So....it is more than simply "semantics."
(of course, this was part of the explanation by <del>Cowterd</del> Cowherd today on the radio)

You are technically correct. So I guess Fran can now claim a non-losing season in '05.

You can imagine the howling here in Texas on how easy the Sooners are getting off on this blatant violation.

Sly, do you think it should have been the "lack of institutional control" verdict? Taking into account the other violations that they have had the past couple of years...

Absolutely. The dealer had a longstanding reputation for taking care of OU players and Stoops allowed this to happen by looking the other way. Its embarassing how easy they got off.