'Major' Violations at Oregon

[Taco90]

What's going to happen? I bet they have to forfeit their spring game. NCAA is tough these days.

 

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/9177148/ncaa-oregon-ducks-agree-major-violations-committed-football-program

[Valhalla]

When is it Alabama's turn to be investigated lol?

[DaveTV1]

They'll probably be given the same punishment as Auburn did.

[KirtFalcon]

Major violaions ........ probably followed by minor punishments

 

If it were a Big 12 school, they would probably get the death penalty

[sawemoff]

So about that Auburn vs Oregon MNC...

[GWalum07]

Major violaions ........ probably followed by minor punishments

 

If it were a Big 12 school, they would probably get the death penalty

Not really only Baylor gets in trouble ever. The NCAA is a bunch of crooks that care nothing about the S/A only the bottom line. It's all about the all mighty dollar now. No trying to derail the thread but Oregon will be fine but if everything is true about Auburn they should be treated like SMU but it will never happen. Not because they don't deserve it but because they aren't a small private school. Miami, USC, Baylor, SMU are some of the biggest examples of the NCAA rulings that were too harsh. Yes they were cheating but everyone in the country cheats. The only legit case I can recall in recent years is the Ohio State case but the argument can be made the NCAA came down too harsh on the Buckeyes as well. I guess all I am trying to prove is that the NCAA is nothing but a bunch of cash hoarding crooks and I think we all agree.

[Taco90]

So about that Auburn vs Oregon MNC...

Maybe 50 years from now TCU will claim that as a National Championship. (Yes aggies I'm making fun of you)

[KirtFalcon]

Not really only Baylor gets in trouble ever. The NCAA is a bunch of crooks that care nothing about the S/A only the bottom line. It's all about the all mighty dollar now. No trying to derail the thread but Oregon will be fine but if everything is true about Auburn they should be treated like SMU but it will never happen. Not because they don't deserve it but because they aren't a small private school. Miami, USC, Baylor, SMU are some of the biggest examples of the NCAA rulings that were too harsh. Yes they were cheating but everyone in the country cheats. The only legit case I can recall in recent years is the Ohio State case but the argument can be made the NCAA came down too harsh on the Buckeyes as well. I guess all I am trying to prove is that the NCAA is nothing but a bunch of cash hoarding crooks and I think we all agree.

 

The only legit case was Ohio St.? You have got to be kidding. USC had numerous MAJOR infraction and if you asked me, they got off too easily.

[h-town12]

Maybe 50 years from now TCU will claim that as a National Championship. (Yes aggies I'm making fun of you)

 

 

It'll be just as right as the one they claim from the Ft. Worth newspaper.

[Taco90]

It'll be just as right as the one they claim from the Ft. Worth newspaper.

 

Yeah, this never happened. Try to stay on topic.

[h-town12]

Yeah, this never happened. Try to stay on topic.

 

My bad. It would be as right as the one they claim in 1935 from the Williamson system.

[Lobo97]

My bad. It would be as right as the one they claim in 1935 from the Williamson system.

So are we saying that it's okay to make a false claim as long as someone else also does it (basically, two wrongs make a right)?

[Valhalla]

 

My bad. It would be as right as the one they claim in 1935 from the Williamson system.

Claiming anything but the AP is stupid in my opinion.

[h-town12]

So are we saying that it's okay to make a false claim as long as someone else also does it (basically, two wrongs make a right)?

 

Back in the day, IMO if you had multiple news sources announce you as the champion you had a better claim. If only one source give you the nc, that is iffy to me.

[sawemoff]

Back in the day, IMO if you had multiple news sources announce you as the champion you had a better claim. If only one source give you the nc, that is iffy to me.

 

So you admit A&M's championships are "iffy"?

[justafan903]

Only one they claim is 1939 I believe

[h-town12]

 

So you admit A&M's championships are "iffy"?

 

No. I said if you only had one random news source proclaiming you as the champion that made it "iffy". The only instance for this happening with A&M's NCs is 1927, and they were awarded it by Sagarin, who most claim to be somewhat credible. They were also undefeated in '27, something 1 of the only other 4 NC claiming teams can say.

[sawemoff]

No. I said if you only had one random news source proclaiming you as the champion that made it "iffy". The only instance for this happening with A&M's NCs is 1927, and they were awarded it by Sagarin, who most claim to be somewhat credible. They were also undefeated in '27, something 1 of the only other 4 NC claiming teams can say.

 

From an article about A&M's retroactive championships:

 

In 1919, either Harvard or Illinois won the title, depending on who you talked to. But the National Championship Foundation, which was formed in 1980, polled its voters to choose retroactive championships for every year dating back to 1869. For 1919, they declared a three-way tie between Harvard, Notre Dame, and Texas A&M.

 

The Billingsley Report, the creation of programmer Richard Billingsley, also retroactively declared champions beginning in 1996, including the undefeated 1919 Aggies. It is purely mathematical, arguably quite flawed, and has become an actual component of the BCS Standings.

 

In 1927, Illinois was the closest thing to a consensus champion those confusing 1920s could offer. But the Sagarin Ratings, the computer formula devised in the 1980s by Jeff Sagarin and more familiarly used for basketball, declared the Aggies the national champs that year.

 

So you're telling me all of those seasons multiple outlets named A&M the NC?

[h-town12]

 

From an article about A&M's retroactive championships:

 

In 1919, either Harvard or Illinois won the title, depending on who you talked to. But the National Championship Foundation, which was formed in 1980, polled its voters to choose retroactive championships for every year dating back to 1869. For 1919, they declared a three-way tie between Harvard, Notre Dame, and Texas A&M.

 

The Billingsley Report, the creation of programmer Richard Billingsley, also retroactively declared champions beginning in 1996, including the undefeated 1919 Aggies. It is purely mathematical, arguably quite flawed, and has become an actual component of the BCS Standings.

 

In 1927, Illinois was the closest thing to a consensus champion those confusing 1920s could offer. But the Sagarin Ratings, the computer formula devised in the 1980s by Jeff Sagarin and more familiarly used for basketball, declared the Aggies the national champs that year.

 

So you're telling me all of those seasons multiple outlets named A&M the NC?

 

 

I was going by a list I found on the internet that listed the publications that named NC. You didn't link your article, so I don't know what context to take from your quote.