Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

USC vacates, is Ohio State next?

Posted on: June 6, 2011 6:09 pm
 

Ohio State, you're next.

 Well, maybe, but the non-story that was the BCS finally and absolutely vacating USC's 2004 title on Monday does have implications colored Scarlet and Gray. The way things are trending in Columbus, Ohio State could be the next to vacate a BCS bowl win. A BCS source told me that the same standard would hold for Ohio State if it was forced to vacate this year's Sugar Bowl: Wait until the case is decided and all appeals are exhausted.

 Admittedly, the stakes would be a bit smaller but no less embarrassing. A national championship wasn't involved in Ohio State's 31-26 win over Arkansas. Six players mysteriously reinstated for the bowl somehow were. Five of those six players were key contributors in the win. At issue is how many of those victories will end up standing when the NCAA is through with Ohio State.

 Those six players were cleared by the NCAA to play that particular game but this case has miles to go -- no pun intended re: Terrelle Pryor loaners -- before it is finalized.

 And, no, that doesn't mean Arkansas becomes Sugar Bowl champion if Ohio State vacates. Just like USC in 2004, if the Buckeyes vacate, there likely will be no 2011 Sugar Bowl champion in the BCS' eyes.

 USC is believed to be the first team in the wire service era (since at least 1936) to have a national championship removed. 

Category: NCAAF
Tags: BCS, NCAA, Ohio State, USC
 
Comments

Since: Aug 8, 2008
Posted on: June 6, 2011 6:45 pm
 

USC vacates, is Ohio State next?

Those players you are refering to were ineligle but were granted exception by the NCAA. The problem everybody but OSU fans have is that a double standard was applied. 

Any player guilty of those or similiar charges are automatically barred from competing and yet out of nowhere they are exempted to play in the bowl game and have the suspensions postponed until 2011.

Virtually every other school who has had players suspended, have not played those players in any bowl games. They have not tried or got exemptions.

What amazes me is that OSU were so stupid. This only brought unwanted attention to the program. 

They are going to get what they deserve. I wonder was the bowl success worth it?



Since: May 23, 2011
Posted on: June 6, 2011 6:35 pm
 

USC vacates, is Ohio State next?

what about AU this year and Ohio 02. Both played with ineligible players also

Which players were those?



Since: Jan 5, 2011
Posted on: June 6, 2011 6:35 pm
 

USC vacates, is Ohio State next?

Ohio states title was legit ppl. sorry to tell you. stop saying they played ineligible players until you show me proof.



Since: Aug 18, 2010
Posted on: June 6, 2011 6:31 pm
 

USC vacates, is Ohio State next?

If USC vacating a NC was a nonstory, why even bring this up.  It was a Sugar Bowl win; nice, but no NC by any means.  The NCAA did give tOSU permission to play the tat-5, but that was under false pretenses as Tressel was still lying then.  The only thing tOSU vacating the Sugar Bowl would do is take away tOSU's only bowl win over an SEC team.  Really, not that big of a deal when we look at the big picture. 



Since: Sep 7, 2010
Posted on: June 6, 2011 6:30 pm
 

USC vacates, is Ohio State next?

what about AU this year and Ohio 02. Both played with ineligible players also.



Since: May 23, 2011
Posted on: June 6, 2011 6:19 pm
 

USC vacates, is Ohio State next?

Take an extra minute or two and proof read next time.  Poor grammar and dead links kind of defeat the purpose.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com