2017 ESPN Tourney Challenge Winner
- Aug 16, 2011
Game over. 33-30.
Game over. 33-30.
Anywho, just my opinion, but some folks on this board might want to learn how to "take it as well as they give it." Too many well connected posters get banned, or have their IPs redirected or other petty nonsense, just because they respond intellectually to moderators who are calling them idiots, morons, etc.
Let me know when they reverse a game outcome. I'll help you. They won't.
See link below...NCAA regulations do not allow for vacating wins under these circumstances. End. Of. Story.
Hey Dash, actually, the NCAA has reversed game outcomes in the past.
Therefore the Big East statement that, " By rule once the game is declared over the score is final and there is no recourse to reverse an outcome. (Rule 1, Section 1, Article 3, Paragraph b of the 2011 NCAA Football Rules and Interpretations.)" is incorrect.
In 1993, Alabama was forced to forfeit, not vacate, 9 games retroactively. For example, Alabama beat Vanderbilt 16-3, but the NCAA conference officials required Alabama to retrospectively forfeit the game, thus awarding Vanderbilt a victory.
Fan- I take umbridge with you saying this is "lucky" for Syracuse. There's no reasonable way to replay the last 2 minutes of that game, and Syracuse could easily take this to court if the win would have been overturned. Getting the situation on a court docket would take longer than the length of the season, enough time for the team to qualify for a bowl game.
Perhaps the NCAA could overturn a game ending situation, but it would be incredibly difficult to do so with the situation we've just experienced. Also, I feel any decision to reverse an outcome would be more unpopular and draw much more ire than a botched call does.
Why would a court have jurisdiction over this dispute? I don't think the aggrieved party would have any standing here, unless you got really creative with the complaint.
That's apples to oranges. Bama had to give up those wins because of off-field issues. Colorado didn't have to give up its win against Missouri in the 5th Down game, where a refereeing decision directly impacted the final score.
Clearly, in the USC-Utah game, the game was "declared over", yet the score was NOT "final".
So, I wouldn't go to a strict constructionist view of the bylaw to MAKE. A. POINT.
. . . since the PAC-12 was willing to add points to USC, you have to at least contemplate a scenario where Utah had seemingly won the game, had the score disallowed due to a dead ball penalty, and later had said call rescinded. For example, say they faked the FG, a la Michigan State vs. ND last year in OT, and the receiver was so wide open that the Utah bench stormed the field before he crossed the goalline. Under Pac-12 precedent, Utah wins even if the TD is disallowed on the field.
Since the PAC-12 just recently shook the boat by retroactively changing the score of a game, after the game was declared final, the obvious possibility arose that a game outcome may be reversed. Therefore, this bad PAT call raised some interesting issues.
There is no question that fanfan wanted the game reversed. The only answer can be that he is not really a Syracuse fan
This point I am making is simply a normative observation: Toledo scored more actual points during regulation. This observation has absolutely nothing to do with pretending that the game "would have played out" exactly the same way that it did, had the PAT been ruled correctly. It is not necessary to imagine "what would have happened" in order to make the very simply analysis that, at the end of regulation, Syracuse had scored fewer points. That is why this snafu is somewhat unique. The posters arguing that the game would have turned out differently, are arguing a straw-man.
What distorted view of reality do you have? You really think anyone in the media that actually matters at this point in time gives a stuff about the outcome of the Syracuse - Toledo game?Haha, so typical. "If you disagree with me, then you are not a Syracuse fan"
-the recourse of someone who has just lost an argument.
I have mixed feelings about the "win:" I want the victory in the W column, but I hate to see the Cuse lose so much face nationally: obviously, many national commentators are burying Cuse, mocking us for desperately clinging to a win gift-wrapped by a Big East officiating crew. So close to the Pin Stripes bowl, this doesn't help our effort to win back national respect.
As someone interested in athletic administration, probably the best outcome would be to vacate the game because of gambling concerns, with an effort to replay the game. The line was Toledo +2, and anyone familiar with the history of sports gambling and the Donaghy saga will not dismiss gambling concerns as a conspiracy theory. The possibility of some funny business isn't a matter to be taken lightly.
Probably the best case scenario, as a fan, would be for the NCAA to step in, change the score to 32-30, put the replay officials on probation, and vacate Toledo's loss but uphold our win. That accommodates pretty much everyone. The fact that Toledo got seriously screwed makes us look bad. If the NCAA vacated Toledo's loss, we wouldn't look so bad by comparison.