OU forced to forfeit all 2005 wins . . .

[KSig RC]

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 . . .

Link to ESPNU story

Pretty sick penalty - I wonder if any of this will fall on Stoops, especially given the relative lack of national prominence the last few seasons.

[Kevin]

Actually, they don't forfeit the wins -- to forfeit means they'd be recorded as an "L." These will be recorded as vacated -- that means they essentially never happened. That's a huge difference.

I'm not too ticked about the ruling. Anyone in this town knows Brad McRae (the manager of the dealership) is absolute sleaze.

He should have been disassociated a long time ago simply because of his mullet.

At any rate, the only real hit is a 2 year 2-scholarship reduction which was self-imposed already. The University has also disassociated from that dealership, a purely symbolic act since that dealership is now under new management.

As far as hurting Stoops? Oh hell no. We in Oklahoma (well, minus the Okie-lite fans) are all big fans of Stoops. As to his national prominence? Who cares what the W-L record was 2 years ago as determined by the NCAA? Stoops still did win those games.. everyone will know that except for the "official" stat books.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Actually, they don't forfeit the wins -- to forfeit means they'd be recorded as an "L." These will be recorded as vacated -- that means they essentially never happened. That's a huge difference.

Note that this is a change from the original ESPN.com article, which was incorrect - that makes it less of a story, for sure.

Originally Posted by Kevin

As far as hurting Stoops? Oh hell no. We in Oklahoma (well, minus the Okie-lite fans) are all big fans of Stoops. As to his national prominence? Who cares what the W-L record was 2 years ago as determined by the NCAA? Stoops still did win those games.. everyone will know that except for the "official" stat books.

My reason for asking had nothing to do with the "official" stat books - after the initial national title years, while he's put up great seasons (8-4 and 11-3 are certainly nothing to sneeze at) the record has dropped off (relatively speaking, as I noted), and his 2007 recruiting class wasn't even top-25 while UT, A&M and Nebraska all made that list. Add to this the rumors of scandal beyond the Bomar incident that populate the blogosphere, and that's the reason for my asking - although it's good to see he's largely avoided blame.

[shinerbock]

This is a pretty weak penalty. However, the NCAA has been pretty weak of late.

I'm still patiently waiting for the NCAA to take action on the obvious USC violations, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

This is a pretty weak penalty. However, the NCAA has been pretty weak of late.

I'm still patiently waiting for the NCAA to take action on the obvious USC violations, but I'm not holding my breath.

Yeah, the penalties for USC and tOSU *should* be higher. The only real difference between those two and OU is that OU disclosed what was going on, cooperated with the NCAA and even imposed some pretty harsh penalties on itself.

The only additional penalty here was the amendment to the record book.

As for last year's recruiting class, the word is that a lot of recruits were negative recruited because of these violations. That said, the '07 class ahs been pretty damn good. It was ranked 14th that year which ain't shabby.

This year, thus far, Oklahoma is ranked #5 by Rivals currently. I imagine that they'll be doing even better now that prospects know that the penalties imposed here won't be serious.

[DeltAlum]

"On Aug. 3 -- the day before the Sooners began preseason practice -- Stoops dismissed Bomar and Quinn from the team after the university determined they had been paid for work not performed at Big Red Sports and Imports."

Oops. We bought a car for our son from these guys when he was at Oklahoma.

[kstar]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

This is a pretty weak penalty. However, the NCAA has been pretty weak of late.

I'm still patiently waiting for the NCAA to take action on the obvious USC violations, but I'm not holding my breath.

This is what gets me. OU's charges are failure to monitor, yet it was our investigators that found the initial wrongdoings and dismissed the players from the team.

Yet Bush's family was living in a mansion that they didn't own, and nothing happens?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by kstar

This is what gets me. OU's charges are failure to monitor, yet it was our investigators that found the initial wrongdoings and dismissed the players from the team.

Yet Bush's family was living in a mansion that they didn't own, and nothing happens?

Don't forget Dwayne Jarrett (sp) and his luxury apartment.

Or for tOSU, Troy Smith and the cash he took.

[Kevlar281]

So does that mean they have to return bowl money?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Kevlar281

So does that mean they have to return bowl money?

No. Did you even read the penalty?

[Kevlar281]

Originally Posted by Kevin

No. Did you even read the penalty?

Of course I read it. That’s why I’m asking. The games were wiped. OU didn’t lose or win the Holiday Bowl so I was curious to know if this had any affect on the bowl pay out. I think it’s a legitimate question.

/edit: ah apparently reading the whole article helps.

[DeltAlum]

Originally Posted by Kevlar281

So does that mean they have to return bowl money?

From the link:

"Paul Dee, the athletic director at Miami and the interim chairman of the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions, said Oklahoma will be allowed to keep the money it received for playing in the 2005 Holiday Bowl, because the NCAA does not regulate bowl games."