Post Reply to Rock's House

This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

Message:

HTTP Link (optional):

Poster's Email (optional):

 


Post being replied to

Why should we count victories where we agree . . . by IrishJosh24

Some of the players were ineligible? Yes, we should "take" those wins away from Brian Kelly, and we should "take" them from the student-athletes who participated in the games. It's unfortunate for student-athletes who did nothing wrong. But we can't claim wins for games where players were ineligible.

And, for the record, we always knew that to be true. We volunteered to vacate those wins if players were ineligible. Then we agreed they were ineligible. And we appealed the NCAA's order to vacate the wins anyway. Predictably, we lost.

In any event, the new AD would not be acknowledging the NCAA's order "voluntarily." The order says the games shouldn't be counted in any win totals, which is why ND invented the shamrock-asterisk to note that it was, in fact, counting vacated victories in win totals. The new AD should just stop that silly practice.

We don't need a shamrock-asterisk. We shouldn't count the wins.