(08-21-2012 07:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-20-2012 10:21 PM)dwalker85 Wrote:  

(08-20-2012 08:58 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-20-2012 06:59 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(08-20-2012 07:30 AM)TripleA Wrote:  They did it later to USC in football. Always a first time for everything.

The NCAA doesnt award a national title in FBS football therefore they cant strip the title....only the wins.

Technicalities. The BCS vacated the title. Same principle. Do you think the BCS would vacate it, and the NCAA would not?

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/f...-bcs_N.htm

Excerpt:

No NCAA men's or women's basketball national championship has been vacated, although the NCAA has vacated Final Four appearances for several men's basketball teams, including Michigan, Memphis and Massachusetts. Those teams would have had titles vacated if they had won them.

And that is why I believe that if the Tigers had won vs Kansas, it would be Kansas vacating a Final Four and Rose's SAT would have been overlooked. Why else was Kansas not sanctioned?

Did you read the last sentence in that paragraph you quoted? It says:

Those teams would have had titles vacated if they had won them.

Yes Andy, I did. But I'm not sure you got the gist of what I was saying. Kansas' Darrell Arthur had his high school transcripts changed which should make him ineligible. But the Jayhawks won the title and the NCAA didn't continue the investigation. My argument was that had the Tigers won, the NCAA wouldn't have continued to investigate Rose's SAT situation. Therefore, Rose wouldn't have been deemed ineligible and the Tigers wouldn't have vacated the season.

Regardless, it's in the past. Go Tigers Go!

(08-21-2012 08:39 AM)dwalker85 Wrote:  

(08-21-2012 07:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-20-2012 10:21 PM)dwalker85 Wrote:  

(08-20-2012 08:58 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-20-2012 06:59 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  The NCAA doesnt award a national title in FBS football therefore they cant strip the title....only the wins.

Technicalities. The BCS vacated the title. Same principle. Do you think the BCS would vacate it, and the NCAA would not?

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/f...-bcs_N.htm

Excerpt:

No NCAA men's or women's basketball national championship has been vacated, although the NCAA has vacated Final Four appearances for several men's basketball teams, including Michigan, Memphis and Massachusetts. Those teams would have had titles vacated if they had won them.

And that is why I believe that if the Tigers had won vs Kansas, it would be Kansas vacating a Final Four and Rose's SAT would have been overlooked. Why else was Kansas not sanctioned?

Did you read the last sentence in that paragraph you quoted? It says:

Those teams would have had titles vacated if they had won them.

Yes Andy, I did. But I'm not sure you got the gist of what I was saying. Kansas' Darrell Arthur had his high school transcripts changed which should make him ineligible. But the Jayhawks won the title and the NCAA didn't continue the investigation. My argument was that had the Tigers won, the NCAA wouldn't have continued to investigate Rose's SAT situation. Therefore, Rose wouldn't have been deemed ineligible and the Tigers wouldn't have vacated the season.

Regardless, it's in the past. Go Tigers Go!

I got it. I just disagree. I don't think Kansas winning had anything to do with Arthur not being investigated further. I think one of the biggest problems with the NCAA is its inconsistency from case to case.

And I don't think the NCAA would have dropped the Rose thing if Memphis had won the title. That's why I pointed out the last sentence, which says we would have had the title vacated. I agree with that.

I just don't buy into the theory that the NCAA won't strip a NC winner of its title, if they found the right evidence, but they would strip a school if it doesn't win. People said the same thing about the BCS, until they popped USC.

Andy, the BCS title is not sanctioned by the NCAA so they can't strip it.

(08-21-2012 01:30 PM)TOGC Wrote:  Andy, the BCS title is not sanctioned by the NCAA so they can't strip it.

I got that. More than once. Go back and read closely. You apparently misunderstood my posts. I was talking about BASKETBALL with the NCAA, not football.

I was using the BCS stripping USC as an example, and said if the BCS would do it (meaning in FOOTBALL), then the NCAA could do it IN BASKETBALL.

And the last line of the article I cited was that if Memphis or Miami had won the NC title in BASKETBALL, then the NCAA would have stripped them of it.

THE LAST LINE OF MY POST YOU ARE RESPONDING TO SAYS:

People said the same thing about the BCS, until they popped USC.

I said the BCS popped USC. See it now?

Saying that because one organization did it (BCS) the other one (NCAA) would do it is a logical fallacy. They are apples and oranges.

(08-21-2012 05:01 PM)TOGC Wrote:  Saying that because one organization did it (BCS) the other one (NCAA) would do it is a logical fallacy. They are apples and oranges.

Did you read the OTHER sentence in that article, that I highlighted:

...if Memphis or Miami had won the NC title in BASKETBALL, then the NCAA would have stripped them of it.

That isn't me saying it. Beyond that, it's just an opinion, so quit stating yours as a fact. Oh wait... j/k