Will UM Win The 1993 National Basketball Championship?

Submitted by superstringer on October 24th, 2014 at 12:07 PM

So the UNC academic scandal -- which is outrageous, for an institution of that supposed quality -- goes back to 1993.  http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11752073/north-carolina-tar-heels-academic-fraud-compounded-inaction-lack-oversight-chancellor-says

If they start vacating UNC wins throughout that period... I don't know if it goes back to the 1993 championship game, but... depending on the timing of events, that potentially could vacate their 1993 championship.

If they vacate a championship, does the other team get the championship?  Or is it officially a year with no champion?

And let's compound the problem.  For a long time, we officially weren't in that championship game either, due to C-Web.  But that 20-year ban is over, right?  As of today, were we officially in that game -- is it in the media guide, etc.?  I do think we can hang the banner for being in the Final 4 that year (although I understand we haven't done that yet).  If as of now we officially were in that game, and if UNC now officially was not, can we now get awarded the championship?

And last question.  Would we want that banner anyway?

Comments

jmblue

October 24th, 2014 at 12:09 PM ^

Vacated games aren't forfeited.  They are treated as though they didn't happen.

Webber/Taylor/Traylor/Bullock were banned from contact with the University for 10 years.  The ban had nothing to do with the vacating of games, which is permanent.

EZMIKEP

October 24th, 2014 at 12:13 PM ^

All other details are a small side note.

Was Reggie Bush not the best player in college football the year he won the Heisman trophy? These ongoing dramas are just that. They'll never change who the best team or player actually was regardless of what notes on paper change.

LJ

October 24th, 2014 at 12:28 PM ^

Yeah, but part of the reason he was on USC may have been because of the improper benefits.  Which is why it's correct to strip them of those wins.

Put it this way: say a team starts handing out $100,000 cash to any recruit who signs with them, and they pick up every one of the top 15 recruits that year.  When they win the national championship, it will of course be because they are the best team, but they are only assembled togetether because the school cheated.  And the win should absolutely be vacated, and it's absolutely unfair to the #2 team, who might have been the best team if everyone had followed the rules.

It's an extreme example, but it's the same concept of what happens with every other cheating team.

LSAClassOf2000

October 24th, 2014 at 12:12 PM ^

I believe the rule for vacating wins basically say that the team vacating them merely gives them up, but the team that lost doesn't get the win. It basically creates a scenario - for record purposes - that is akin to the game having never been played. 

evenyoubrutus

October 24th, 2014 at 12:17 PM ^

This discussion has already been... well, discussed.  We don't suddenly have a Rose Bowl win over USC, or a win over OSU in 2010, etc, so this is no different here.  Vacating a win is not the same as transferring a win

turd ferguson

October 24th, 2014 at 12:17 PM ^

If UNC officially wasn't in that game and UM officially wasn't in that game, then were fans who thought we were at the game (or watching the game) wrong about that?  If that's the case, then many of us just lost our alibi for the night of April 5, 1993.  We'd better hope there aren't any unsolved crimes from that night.

MGoCombs

October 24th, 2014 at 1:10 PM ^

The NCAA is presenting us with a new area of metaphysics and existentialism. If two teams played a game, but neither existed, did the game actually happen? Did it matter to our experience as fans, and more importantly as beings? What did it all mean? All of these questions will be explored in John U. Bacon's new PHIL 345 class: The Metaphysics of NCAA Violations.

bronxblue

October 24th, 2014 at 12:20 PM ^

It won't go to UM, but given how shady that time of Michigan basketball was I'm not sure if they would even be able to receive it if that was an option.

I'll just wait until 2015 when UM will win one for real.

Class of 1817

October 24th, 2014 at 12:31 PM ^

WE WILL HOLD THE ASTERISK VICTORIOUSLY ABOVE OUR HEADS. 

Actually, since we vacated that game...maybe Kentucky and Kansas should both get to hang the asterisks from their rafters.

JHendo

October 24th, 2014 at 1:00 PM ^

...according to the record books already, UNC played some phantom team in the National Championship game that season.  Michigan takes credit for the loss, but on paper, they weren't really there (due to the Ed Martin scandal).

Tater

October 24th, 2014 at 2:38 PM ^

The NCAA's policies are just plain stupid.  They should make games forfeits instead of vacating them.  

The only thing that is great about this is that Sparty would be given 2007 and they won't be.