USC still won't acknowledge National Championship loss to Texas
One of the most memorable National Championship games of the BCS era happened on Jan. 4, 2006 between Texas and USC. The two storied programs fought hard in the Rose Bowl, which ended with a Longhorns' upset over the Trojans. Most any College Football fan who was of age to remember the 2006 BCS National Championship game could likely recall the outcome of the game, but USC still says it never happened. Why? Because the Trojans were hit with NCAA violations and all of their wins from the 2005 football season were vacated.
Wins.
This revelation came forward last season in the game week notes provided by USC, where it listed the Trojans' all-time record against the Longhorns as 4-0 and entirely disregarded the loss to Texas in the BCS Championship. And this year, USC is standing firm in its thought that the loss to Texas was also vacated when it was hit with NCAA sanctions, and even put a note explaining itself in its Texas vs. USC game notes.
"Why does USC list a 5-0 record against Texas even though it lost to the Longhorns in the 2006 Rose Bowl (BCS Championship Game)? After all, Texas lists its record against USC as 1-5. Due to an NCAA penalty, USC was required by the NCAA to vacate its appearance in that Rose Bowl...and therefore the loss had to be vacated by the Trojans. However, Texas was not required to vacate its victory. That is the protocol for vacated games, per the NCAA, and it is how both teams’ record is re ected in the Of cial NCAA Football Record Book. So, yes, USC lost the game, but it can’t list it that way in its records, per the NCAA."
But here's the caveat. When the NCAA announced the sanctions against the University of Southern California, it specifically stated the Trojans' WINS would be vacated, and not the entire season.
"The NCAA Division I Infractions Appeals Committee has upheld the findings of NCAA violations and associated penalties for the University of Southern California," the
NCAA wrote in its official findings report of USC sanctions. "The case primarily involved agent and amateurism violations for a former football student- athlete and a former men's basketball student-athlete. The findings in this case include a lack of institutional control, impermissible inducements, extra benefits and exceeding coaching staff limits.
"The penalties include four years probation; a two-year football postseason ban; a one-year basketball postseason ban; vacation of regular and postseason wins for all three involved sports (football, basketball and women?s tennis); scholarship reductions for football and basketball; and recruiting restrictions for men's basketball."
I know USC is close to Hollywood, but the rest of those in college football don't live in La La land.
