I would, because the NCAA is corrupt and is no longer useful to college sports
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's not pretending it didn't happen. The title is awarded to the team that wins the tournament playing legally obtained players. If a school managed to sneak in the Celtics players and won the championship, we would all see them win the game, but they wouldn't be the champions because they didn't follow the rules. Nobody should ever recognize the UL championship in 2013 because they didn't play by the rules to win that game.Yes, because we have eyes. We all saw UL win the 2013 title and we all saw Michigan’s Fab 5 reach two straight national championship games.
It’s OK to point out that those things were done in a dirty manner, but to pretend they didn’t happen all is a nonsensical way of dealing with it.
It's not pretending it didn't happen. The title is awarded to the team that wins the tournament playing legally obtained players. If a school managed to sneak in the Celtics players and won the championship, we would all see them win the game, but they wouldn't be the champions because they didn't follow the rules. Nobody should ever recognize the UL championship in 2013 because they didn't play by the rules to win that game.
Pretty much this. If you go back through all the championship teams in the last 20 years, whether it is football or basketball, there would be players who accepted improper benefits (cash/cars/free rent on housing) etc. It's just whether they got caught or if the NCAA actually wanted to enforce the rules. Yes, that includes UK.Right but Kansas Used an ineligible player in their title against memphis if the NCAA enforced the rules
We all know Cam Newton was paid by aurburn
Duke in 2010 would have vacated if they were a normal program
Probably plenty of other examples
I get your point but I think there is also a discussion to be had where why does one corrupt organization get to take something away from one team and let another slide that does the same thing?
I agree that we should ask questions about why does it appear enforcement is different for certain schools, but whatever the NCAA does, or doesn't do, to another school doesn't change the fact that U of L cheated to win that title so they don't deserve the credit for it. Think of it like this. They used strippers and prostitutes in recruiting from 2010 - 2014. Had they been caught in 2012 instead of after the 2013 season, they never would have played in the championship game to begin with. They just managed to escape justice until after the tournament.Right but Kansas Used an ineligible player in their title against memphis if the NCAA enforced the rules
We all know Cam Newton was paid by aurburn
Duke in 2010 would have vacated if they were a normal program
Probably plenty of other examples
I get your point but I think there is also a discussion to be had where why does one corrupt organization get to take something away from one team and let another slide that does the same thing?
I can't agree with this. What you are essentially saying is that unless enforcement is perfect and the NCAA catches all illegal activity, then we should not enforce the rules on anyone.Pretty much this. If you go back through all the championship teams in the last 20 years, whether it is football or basketball, there would be players who accepted improper benefits (cash/cars/free rent on housing) etc. It's just whether they got caught or if the NCAA actually wanted to enforce the rules. Yes, that includes UK.
That's not what I am saying. I believe the NCAA has selective enforcement and is willing to turn a blind eye to their "Cash Cows". Take Dook for example. They have been caught numerous times giving impermissible benefits to basketball players (Zion, Lance Thomas), yet nothing at all came of it. There was clear cut proof. But because Dook and Coach K were the NCAA darlings who could do no wrong, the NCAA was willing to look the other way. Look at the decade long academic fraud/scandal at UNC. Keeping players eligible by providing fake classes and grades. Enforcement doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to do the right thing no matter if you are Pepperdine, East Carolina, UNC, or UK.I can't agree with this. What you are essentially saying is that unless enforcement is perfect and the NCAA catches all illegal activity, then we should not enforce the rules on anyone.
I agree the NCAA appears to be inconsistent, but the reality is we don't really know what hard evidence the NCAA has in many cases that aren't prosecuted. We read internet gossip and believe every word if it involves a rival we would like to see taken out. I try to take such things with a grain of salt. I think the NCAA made a huge mistake with UNC. In the end they felt it was an academic issue and not an athletics issue. I think UNC did it to keep athletes eligible even though there were non-athletes who also took those classes. The NCAA felt differently because regular students also enrolled in those classes. So it became an academic accrediting issue and not athletes receiving improper benefits issue. I think the motive was athletics, but I don't really know that for sure. In reality, that view is driven by my dislike of UNC. Whether the NCAA is consistent or not, U of L still cheated. Just because someone else may have also cheated and gotten by with it, doesn't make U of L's championship legitimate.That's not what I am saying. I believe the NCAA has selective enforcement and is willing to turn a blind eye to their "Cash Cows". Take Dook for example. They have been caught numerous times giving impermissible benefits to basketball players (Zion, Lance Thomas), yet nothing at all came of it. There was clear cut proof. But because Dook and Coach K were the NCAA darlings who could do no wrong, the NCAA was willing to look the other way. Look at the decade long academic fraud/scandal at UNC. Keeping players eligible by providing fake classes and grades. Enforcement doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to do the right thing no matter if you are Pepperdine, East Carolina, UNC, or UK.
This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^I agree that we should ask questions about why does it appear enforcement is different for certain schools, but whatever the NCAA does, or doesn't do, to another school doesn't change the fact that U of L cheated to win that title so they don't deserve the credit for it. Think of it like this. They used strippers and prostitutes in recruiting from 2010 - 2014. Had they been caught in 2012 instead of after the 2013 season, they never would have played in the championship game to begin with. They just managed to escape justice until after the tournament.
nopeWe all would, yes
actually recruits were involvedIf a title gets stripped for something that brings an on-court advantage then I agree with that and won’t count it.
UL’s 2013 title question is technically a little murky because it was actually stripped for them buying players (not recruits) ugly hookers.
On the one hand that’s disturbing not to mention barf gross. Otoh ugly hookers don’t give you an on-court advantage, so all by itself I wouldn’t have axed a title for it——especially not when I know Daddy NCAA would have looked the other way if exactly the same thing had happened on Tobacco Road. In UL’s case that title was probably cheated for anyway since years later it came out Rick was paying recruits, in the “University 6” sting. But that was just dumb luck that the NCAA took away a title that really was invalid. The only reason they actually took it away at the time was the hookers thing so I still considered it a real earned title at that time.
Take something simpler. If you recall, our amazing defensive end Jeremy Jarmon was kicked out of football by the NCAA in advance of the 2008 season for taking a banned substance. That whole situation was so ridiculous. What actually happened was he had bought a weight-loss supplement at Fayette Mall GNC where the sales rep swore to Jarmon the supplement was clean and approved. It really wasn’t approved and it turns out it had something in it the NCAA didn’t like, listed way down in the small print of ingredients. Something mild and perfectly legal for over-the-counter sales. On the level of caffeine or ginseng or something, but the NCAA had it on their list.
As pathetic as that situation already sounds, Jarmon only ever took that supplement for a few weeks in FEBRUARY. And the creepy NCAA took away his entire college eligibility for it. Denied his appeal citing their “strict interpretation” policy. And then of course right after that the whole Lance Thomas case starts to go down at Duke and suddenly the NCAA has never heard of “strict interpretation” and they have to be fair and consider all the factors and of course nothing ever happened to Duke or to Lance as far as NCAA infractions or stripped wins, even though that literally was a freaking felony.
Let’s say we had won a football title (!!!!!!!!!!!!) during the years Jeremy Jarmon played, and the NCAA had stripped away our title over that. I would still count that title all day long every day and seven times on Sundays.
I don't think that's true, as far as I can find we only have 2 vacated wins in our historynope
some people believe in rules and punishment for breaking those rules
do you count all the wins UK has vacated?
if they were all counted we would still have the all time wins lead
Very well said.I agree the NCAA appears to be inconsistent, but the reality is we don't really know what hard evidence the NCAA has in many cases that aren't prosecuted. We read internet gossip and believe every word if it involves a rival we would like to see taken out. I try to take such things with a grain of salt. I think the NCAA made a huge mistake with UNC. In the end they felt it was an academic issue and not an athletics issue. I think UNC did it to keep athletes eligible even though there were non-athletes who also took those classes. The NCAA felt differently because regular students also enrolled in those classes. So it became an academic accrediting issue and not athletes receiving improper benefits issue. I think the motive was athletics, but I don't really know that for sure. In reality, that view is driven by my dislike of UNC. Whether the NCAA is consistent or not, U of L still cheated. Just because someone else may have also cheated and gotten by with it, doesn't make U of L's championship legitimate.
I agree the NCAA appears to be inconsistent, but the reality is we don't really know what hard evidence the NCAA has in many cases that aren't prosecuted. We read internet gossip and believe every word if it involves a rival we would like to see taken out. I try to take such things with a grain of salt. I think the NCAA made a huge mistake with UNC. In the end they felt it was an academic issue and not an athletics issue. I think UNC did it to keep athletes eligible even though there were non-athletes who also took those classes. The NCAA felt differently because regular students also enrolled in those classes. So it became an academic accrediting issue and not athletes receiving improper benefits issue. I think the motive was athletics, but I don't really know that for sure. In reality, that view is driven by my dislike of UNC. Whether the NCAA is consistent or not, U of L still cheated. Just because someone else may have also cheated and gotten by with it, doesn't make U of L's championship legitimate.
BINGO. if you win a game on the court you win it period. can never be taken away .Of course. Everyone would, and if anyone says they wouldn't they are most assuredly lying.
Even if you cheated? Wow. Can't imagine arguing with that infallible logic. Why play fair at all then?BINGO. if you win a game on the court you win it period. can never be taken away .
Thanks. I hadn’t heard that but in that case I agree the title should have been stripped. Heck of a guardian, huh? 😰actually recruits were involved
from what i read one recruit did not want to do it and he was pressured into it by his "guardian"
so yea it was used as an advantage
really that is all you can find?I don't think that's true, as far as I can find we only have 2 vacated wins in our history
To many uk fans cal has final fours at 3 different schools. I even hear the “he didn’t know excuse” so of course we wouldOf course. Everyone would, and if anyone says they wouldn't they are most assuredly lying.
This link must be wrongreally that is all you can find?
we vacated 52 games in 87-88