Congrats to

#26
#26
So what do you do with the 2005 Ohio State-Penn State game?

Both schools had to vacate wins from that season.

You just said it. The team that got the win no longer does. It doesnt count as losses when a team gets a win vacated. I remember this from the Antonio Langham incident at Bama when they vacated the one seasons wins. Some Tennessee fans thought we broke beat them in between that huge Im wanting to say 11 year win streak. Then it was reported and explained that teams that lost to Bama that year still had losses but Bama just didn't get to count any of their wins. Odd I know.
 
#29
#29
You just said it. The team that got the win no longer does. It doesnt count as losses when a team gets a win vacated. I remember this from the Antonio Langham incident at Bama when they vacated the one seasons wins. Some Tennessee fans thought we broke beat them in between that huge Im wanting to say 11 year win streak. Then it was reported and explained that teams that lost to Bama that year still had losses but Bama just didn't get to count any of their wins. Odd I know.

Do you mean the 1993 tie-game?

That one Alabama actually (later) forfeited
 
#32
#32
The NCAA doesn't count bowls as tournament games. So bowl losses still count.

Strange rule.

I don't see the reasoning in treating postseason games differently from regular season games. Perhaps they're concerned about conference standings looking weird after some teams have a loss removed. That's still a stupid reason though.

It's just odd to, for example, say you cannot win games with ineligible players, but you can lose to teams with ineligible players.
 
#36
#36
You just said it. The team that got the win no longer does. It doesnt count as losses when a team gets a win vacated. I remember this from the Antonio Langham incident at Bama when they vacated the one seasons wins. Some Tennessee fans thought we broke beat them in between that huge Im wanting to say 11 year win streak. Then it was reported and explained that teams that lost to Bama that year still had losses but Bama just didn't get to count any of their wins. Odd I know.
They forefited their games that year. It's counted as a W in the UT record books. It was actually a 17-17 tie.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#37
#37
LOL. Then again, that's how I felt about that Outback Bowl when it happened.

That was the first UT game I watched with the woman I was at the time dating. I acted a damn fool. I am now married to her. She was the one.... After the display I put on during that game, & her tolerance for it, I had to lOck her up to a long term contract. She was a 5 star recruit for all the star gazers.
 
#38
#38
Strange rule.

I don't see the reasoning in treating postseason games differently from regular season games. Perhaps they're concerned about conference standings looking weird after some teams have a loss removed. That's still a stupid reason though.

It's just odd to, for example, say you cannot win games with ineligible players, but you can lose to teams with ineligible players.

I think the reasoning is that tournament games need to have a winner and a loser. It's not as important that total records sync up in the regular season as it is in tournament-play.
 
#39
#39
They forefited their games that year. It's counted as a W in the UT record books. It was actually a 17-17 tie.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

:hi:Ok my mistake on that . But I am positive if the AA vacates wins, that it doesn't switch the opponents L to a W. The forfeiture is unique to that. Refresh my memory as that has been many moons ago. Did Bama self impose the forfeiture? By the way just a fans perspective, it may be considered a win now but the way I remember that game will always be a gut wrenching tie. (Dawggone David Palmer) Everyone knew what was going to happen and still it happened.:ermm:
 

VN Store



Back
Top