Vacated wins...what's the point?

[18IsTheMan]

Why does the NCAA continue to hand out this "punishment"? It's 100% symbolic. The opposing team in those games is not credited with the win instead of a loss. Schools still get to keep all the ticket and concessions revenue from those games. Besides, everyone knows who won the game so it doesn't change anything meaningful. It just seems like a silly punishment to still be handing out.

 

[Prestonyte]

With the amount of time it takes to "punish" the guilty - what's the point?
What is the message? - Cheat all you want and by the time we get around to proving it - no real impact.

 

[18IsTheMan]

With the amount of time it takes to "punish" the guilty - what's the point?
What is the message? - Cheat all you want and by the time we get around to proving it - no real impact.

Of note, the statistics of eligible players still count in vacated wins. So, really, what IS the point?

 

[Big JC]

It is like most things the NCAA does, useless. If, when a program was caught cheating, the entire coaching staff had to be fired and would all be banned from coaching for a period of 5 years, that may cause programs to think twice about cheating. As things stand today, if a program can win big by cheating, the punishment is a bargain.

 

[18IsTheMan]

It is like most things the NCAA does, useless. If, when a program was caught cheating, the entire coaching staff had to be fired and would all be banned from coaching for a period of 5 years, that may cause programs to think twice about cheating. As things stand today, if a program can win big by cheating, the punishment is a bargain.

Right. UT had to vacate 11 wins, which is one full season. If they were penalized all revenue from those games, that would be a different story.

"We're gonna take the W away, but all the stats for eligible players still count and you get to keep all the money."

 

[Big JC]

Right. UT had to vacate 11 wins, which is one full season. If they were penalized all revenue from those games, that would be a different story.

"We're gonna change the W to an L, but all the stats for eligible players still count and you get to keep all the money."

They really don't change it to an "L", they simply remove the "W" from the win column. The teams UT beat that season don't get to claim a victory.

 

[18IsTheMan]

They really don't change it to an "L", they simply remove the "W" from the win column. The teams UT beat that season don't get to claim a victory.

Oops, yeah, you're right. My slip-up. They don't even get stuck with a loss.

 

[Backscrather]

To stay relevant.

 

[Lurker123]

Think of it this way, if for some weird reason we were forced to vacate wins from last year, would you give Clemson and UT fans any less crap?

 

[18IsTheMan]

Think of it this way, if for some weird reason we were forced to vacate wins from last year, would you give Clemson and UT fans any less crap?

Nope. Because everyone knows it boils down to who had the better team on the field, however it is they got there. Short of bribing refs to throw the game or players taking PEDS, there's not much you can do to taint the victory in the minds of fans.

 

[ToddFlanders]

I think it's all kind of silly, but a little less silly if the teams they beat get to change a "loss" to a "win" on their record. Might as well have the ruling affect all the teams that were involved.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I think it's all kind of silly, but a little less silly if the teams they beat get to change a "loss" to a "win" on their record. Might as well have the ruling affect all the teams that were involved.

Of all the bizarre aspects of the "punishment", I believe that's the most bizarre.

 

[Deleted11512]

If they vacated future wins, instead of past wins, it would probably be more effective.

 

[Cockyclay]

Nope. Because everyone knows it boils down to who had the better team on the field, however it is they got there. Short of bribing refs to throw the game or players taking PEDS, there's not much you can do to taint the victory in the minds of fans.

When you say PED's, are you referring to things like Osterine? Because no one seemed to care about those wins.

 

[Psycock]

Yes it means nothing and certainly is not a deterrent to future rule violations. What about directly fining the school since they don`t want to mess with bowl games. No one wants to be hit in the wallet. Taking away more scholarships would be the only other effective punishment and would seem to be the most natural consequence. No one cares about "vacating wins" so they should stop pretending anyone does.

 

[Big JC]

Yes it means nothing and certainly is not a deterrent to future rule violations. What about directly fining the school since they don`t want to mess with bowl games. No one wants to be hit in the wallet. Taking away more scholarships would be the only other effective punishment and would seem to be the most natural consequence. No one cares about "vacating wins" so they should stop pretending anyone does.

I'd say NIL has taken the sting out of reducing scholarships. A program with a huge NIL budget can lose 20 scholarships and simply pay players enough NIL money to pay for school and still have plenty of money to buy cars, weed and tattoos.

The death penalty for a couple years is the only thing that will really deter the worst sorts of cheating.