The BCS announced Monday it would be revoking the 2004 national championship title from the University of Southern California because of improper benefits received by running back Reggie Bush.
While this decision is far from unexpected, it is still upsetting to see such an accomplishment taken from students and fans.
Their once-treasured championship memorabilia now holds little value thanks to the actions of the department.
While nothing can change the memories these fans have, and the ruling doesn't make their season any less impressive, they're now tainted.
This decision also raises the question: who was the national champion in 2004?
Most people can barely remember the victors past, and by making such a decision amid all the media attention, unless a new champion is declared, it will still remain USC's title in people's eyes.
While we don't necessarily believe the title should be ours since we were not a part of the championship game, leaving the title vacant doesn't serve anyone but USC.
The Football Writers Association of America is considering stripping the Grantland Rice Trophy from the Trojans and putting to a vote giving the trophy to Auburn.
We wouldn't mind some recognition for the 2004 season, but we don't feel we deserve the BCS title.
Being given a trophy retroactively doesn't make up for not being given the chance to play in the final game.
At the end of the day, there really is no solution to please everyone.
The BCS, being a fairly new system, has no precedent to look to for something like this.
In a perfect world, we could just rewind and play the national championship game with Oklahoma and the undefeated Tigers.
Unfortunately, we will never see what could have come from such a match-up, and dwelling on what could have been gets us nowhere.
Surely this is something that will be disputed at family gatherings and tailgates for years to come.
While we commend the BCS for not awarding a champion without merit, there is a clear lack of closure for the 2004 season now.
This may never be resolved entirely and these decisions are for BCS officials to make.
The worst part about all of this is that it is not an isolated incident.
Bush was not the first player to receive benefits against NCAA regulations, and he will most likely not be the last.
Auburn's own Cam Newton came under attack this season for an alleged pay-for-play plan during his recruitment.
Although his father took most of the heat from that controversy, the investigation was never formally closed.
What's to say more information won't come to light in the future condemning Newton or Gene Chizik? Auburn could face the same consequences.
We all trust in Chizik and the Auburn family, but USC fans and students trusted in their system as well.
We won our championship on the field and, for the time being, are free and clear of any blemishes this season.
Nobody knows what went on behind closed doors during Cam's, or any player's, recruitment, and there is no guarantee this won't come back on us.
All that matters now is what was decided on the field.
That's how it should be for the 2004 season and there is no way to undo what was done by the USC athletic department.
We will never know how things could have been.
That's the legacy that remains for 2004.
Do you like this story? The Plainsman doesn't accept money from tuition or student fees, and we don't charge a subscription fee. But you can donate to support The Plainsman.
