NCAA about to kill USC...

Nothing ever happened to Ohio State,FSU or OU, nothing much happened to Alabama.Nothing will happen to USC. just like nothing would happen to Florida, LSU, Michigan or Texas if they ever got caught doing anything. That is the nature of the business we love to watch on Saturday.
 
tigger, everybody knows Vince got the "Heisman" that really counted that year:

vince-young-heisman-pose-trophy.jpg


That should be the poster pic for the term "schadenfreude".
 
If anyone is expecting USC or Reggie Bush to get what they deserve then you will be very disappointed. The NCAA has all but sanctioned OU's cheating throughout the years as well as many other schools. They really don't care if you cheat as long as you cover it up enough that they don't have to look for it.

There is NO WAY that VY would even consider accepting that Heisman. Everyone in their right mind knows it belongs to him, but he isn't going to take it this way.

I do hope they take it from Reggie and vacate it though. It was stolen to begin with.
 
How exactly was the Heisman stolen? It was awarded to the player receiving the most votes, theres no indication that any of the voters were paid, threatened or denied their votes.
 
The only thing that will hurt any school is current perception. Past wins and stats mean nothing. That is like telling a jury to ignore that last statements. Scholarhips, TV and/or bowl games are the only true deterent.
 
There is a lot of discussion about the 2004 championship. If you check LSU's trophy case I think you will find a nice crystal football there. I don't think a meaningless group of sportswriters is going to go back and change their votes anyway.
 
The nice trophy is LSU's case is for 2003 not 2004. USC only won the AP trophy in 2003. I really have mixed emotions on this. I greatly doubt anyone is going to change the past - no matter what. On the other hand I am still pissed over 2004 and will be even more upset if it is proven that one of the major players that got them into the bowl game shouldn't have been playing.
 
The OP used the term landslide.

Only 933 points? Yeah he practically won it while receiving 79 first place points to Reggie Bush's 784. Everyone has a different idea of what landslide means. I think it is fair to say Reggie Bush won in landslide fashion.

Reggie Bush had an awesome college career. Apparently the voters thought so too.
 
Tex Pete more or less owned the sooner on this one. i always hate that myth too.....so stupid. it was a year when there were only 2 horses, so vince had one of the strongest runner up showings ever......that is not a landslide.
 
I didn't get a job I wanted the other day. The said I came in 2nd. Big deal. You either win or you lose. Vince lost because
1) the votes are cast before the biggest game of the season - how stupid is that?
2) Vince sat most of the 2nd half of all but 3 games.
3) The media is just plain stupid. Reggie wasn't the best player on his team. I'd give that to Mattie boy.

Guarantee if they voted after the Rose Vince gets almost every 1st place vote. He knows it. The world knows it. No one talks about Reggie being the greatest of all time anymore. They still talk about the Rose and Vince though. I travel a lot, and random people I meet that see my Texas shirt will come up and ask me about Vince.
 
The problem with the Heisman Trophy today it is voted on before the Bowl games.

Of the last 8 winners who would have won after the Bowl game?

2000 Chris Weinke FSU...humm No Way
2001 Eric Crouch Nebraska...humm No Way
2002 Carson Palmer USC....Yes
2003 Jason White OU.....humm No Way
2004 Matt Leinart USC....Yes
2005 Reggie Bush USC.....humm No Way
2006 Troy Smith OSU....No
2007 Tim Tebow Florida....Yes

Smith won by the largest margin, but that margin would have disappeared after OSU was completely destoryed by Florida.

Reggie Bush in the Rose Bowl game was outted by Texas' defense and Pete Carrol, no way he wins over Vince Young after the Rose Bowl.

Bush showed in the Rose Bowl he wasn't an everydown back, the Saints must not have watched the game.
 
If Vince hadn't lost the Heisman he might not have had the greatest championship game performance ever. He probably would have only had the 2nd or 3rd best.
 
how exactly are people arguing that the heisman vote wasn't a landslide? there were basically 2 people to choose from and they picked reggie 10 to 1 over vince. regardless of any other numbers, that would seem to be a landslide.

which just makes it all the more absurd. considering it should have been obvious vince was the heisman even before the Rose Bowl, the fact that he not only lost, but lost 10 to 1 is such a slap in the face it's hard to believe it happened.

while i wouldn't blame vince if he took the heisman in the hypothetical scenario that it is offered (hey, who wouldn't want a heisman trophy?), i would hope he turns it down and the slight remains forever as a reminder to the voters of how stupid they are.


besides, vince already walked out on the field in the greatest game of all time and rendered the voting meaningless. the satisfaction of that performance should be greater than any that could be gained from having that trophy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top