This is not unexpected, but it’s now been confirmed: USC will keep its 2004 Associated Press national championship, regardless of whether the BCS requires the Trojans to forfeit the ’04 BCS title — which they probably will. Thus, the Trojans will have two consecutive AP-only titles, and LSU fans will get to gleefully mock the “Zero-Pete” dynasty. (And we will fart in their general direction.)
Confirmation of the AP’s plans comes via a series of tweets by Chris Dufresne of the Los Angeles Times:
Confirmed: AP will NOT strip USC of 04 title: Sports Editor Terry Taylor sent me this email: “The 2004 poll stands,” she wrote: “The poll is intended to measure on field performance. If teams are allowed to play they’re allowed to be ranked, and USC certainly played in 2004.” Taylor said this is different than Cushing revote. “It would be impractical to revote. It’s been six years, memories have faded and poll board from that year no longer intact.”
So there you have it, folks. “WE ARE [STILL] THE CHAMPIONS, MY FRIENDS…” 😉
Or, if you prefer:
Here’s another way of visualizing it:
Heh.
Now, if USC can go undefeated each of the next two regular seasons, and the BCS champion is a one-loss team (or, say, undefeated Boise State or an undefeated Big East team, maybe), we could have four AP-only titles in a decade. Ha!
Wonder whether the second pennant should read 12-0 not 12-1. If the win over Oklahoma is simply “vacated” then does it really become a loss or just a nullity. Actually it should probably read 11-0…since the UCLA win came in December and that is another win that has been vacated…or will be once the appeal is over.
Oh, is the UCLA win vacated too? Shit, I didn’t realize that.
The UCLA win is not vacated. The penalty kicks in as a result of the (never was and still isn’t) sports agent paying for Reggie’s parents plane tickets to the Orange Bowl, which he and nobody else has any physical evidence of ever doing (receipts). That took place after the UCLA game.
USC and LSU should schedule a regular-season game, just to unofficially officially settle it. (And with the bowl ban, no worries about the postseason!)
According to Wikipedia — which is, of course, an error-proof, completely reliable repository of human knowledge (heh) — the UCLA game is indeed vacated.
The report specifically refers to vacating games in December 2004….The UCLA game was the only game in that month. The findings also refer to Bush entering into an agreement with the “agents” in the fall of 2004. The report also referred to a meeting between the agents and Bush’s mother and stepfather in Oct. 2004 and discussions with the stepfather in the fall of 2004. And the report specifically finds “that an agreement for representation was made in the fall of 2004.” Under the NCAA bylaws there does not have to be any payment for a violation…the mere agreement for representation violates 12.3.1.
So whether or not I agree with the findings it appears that the penalty…by specifically referring to games beginning in Dec. 2004 would encompass the UCLA game.
Pingback: Tweets that mention USC will keep 2004 AP title -- Topsy.com
Of course all of this is premature since USC is appealling and the penalties are stayed until the final ruling.
Once again the AP demonstrates its wisdom.
“… LSU fans will get to gleefully mock the “Zero-Pete” dynasty. (And we will fart in their general direction.)”
Je ris! :} Hey, are you Dissing the Cajuns? Haven’t the poor Shrimpers got enough o’ dat awready from the
BPBS Corporation? James Carville will be around to See you in the morning. ;>They is no wisdom in that David K. This is a complete embarrassment – numerous people were breaking the rules – they were cheating. I see USC fans more worried about what games they will “get credit” for, and instead of being shocked and appalled. I guess that everyone knew this type of thing was happening (except of course the AD – what was that envy comment about??) – so the only thing left to be shocked about is the penalty. People should try to hold their heads up high, admit that rules were broken, that the broken rules almost certain created a atmosphere that was helpful for the university for player recruitment during Pete’s tenure, and disavow those wins. Otherwise you end up like Pete Rose, and it is only a hop skip and a jump from the likes of Barry Bonds and Landis.
And finally, Reggie Bush’s pathetic statement about his love for USC is BS – it was simply self-serving. He knew that what he was doing was wrong and that the university would eventually suffer, who is he kidding?
Finally, I can’t believe that the AD hasn’t already been fired.
Really john? What numerous people were breaking the rules? What proof is there? How does that relate to the onfield performance of the teams if it was even true? I’m fairly certain USC played and won all those games until losing to Texas in January of 2006. I know I watched most of them and I can find video and other evidence that they happened. How exactly is re-writing history a solution? Were the Trojans on steroids? Did the entire team get benefits from an agent?
Basically what you are arguing for is that if one of your coworkers stole money/supplies from your company your entire division should be penalized, pay cuts, bad performance reviews, and the reviews you allready had should be expunged.
If, and I do mean IF there were shennanigans at USC then sure, there should be consequences, but re-writing history is a stupid consequence that doesn’t discourage the behavior in the future (the school and anyone involved has allready benefited from the past) and instead punishes those who had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it.
As for Barry Bonds, um, you do realize that for YEARS the higher ups at Major League Baseball ignored and looked the otherway at the rampant steroid use because the results (home run races) where in their best interest to bring in fans right? I have no sympathy for MLB and very little problem with Bonds from that standpoint. For the players who didn’t cheat? Sure they can be pissed at Bonds, but they should be MORE pissed that the leadership told them one thing while letting important people do something completely different.
Numerous people being bush, mayo and the assistant coach. Mayo being relevant to the football program in terms of forming a pattern of a lack of instituional control.
Anf “If they broke the rules?” Get with it. You and your fellow USC alums are the only ones that aren’t convinced. Please.
And you have to punish the school. It is too bad that current kids who may not be breaking the rules are getting punched as well. Otherwise, once a cheating player leaves, they are to be let off? Stop whing about it, because there is no other way.
And finally, about your little argement about the co-worker stealing: I do think that the whole division should be punished if they knew about it and didn’t say anything (almost certainly the case with Bush’s teammates), or the management should have known but they didn’t bother to have any oversight (which again was 100% the case at USC).
Pingback: TechFeeds.info