(11-07-2023 04:08 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Expect Gill to cave due to the potential windfall for the SB. How much of a stink would they be raising if the potential was for them to go 6-6?

I don’t believe any of us would be even talking about this if w were heading for 6-6. This is absolutely being driven by the fact that it’s a very real possibility to make the NY6 bowl.

(11-07-2023 12:34 PM)rileylives Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 12:33 PM)bcp_jmu Wrote:  ^ agree, though here is the key sentence....


The artificial denial of such opportunities, which have otherwise been earned on the field, is clearly detrimental to our students' mental health and well-being. Further, this denial hinders our student-athletes' financial prospects and professional possibilities."

In what way is it hurting their financial prospects, they're not getting paid...

It's all through sponsors...

You don't think they'd get more in NIL deals if they were playing in a big bowl? You don't think playing well against a team like Texas or Alabama wouldn't impress scouts and gain them higher standing in the NFL Draft?

Knowing our luck, JMU would get the waiver, finish 12-0, then lose to Troy in the SBC Championship.

Waitwaitwait...did you say HARVARD EDUCATED? Okay, this is serious now...


(In all seriousness, I hope the waiver happens but won't be surprised if it still falls flat. Who knows how many folks behind the scenes...e.g. other conferences eyeing a NY6...may be working against it.)

(11-07-2023 01:34 PM)rileylives Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 01:16 PM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 12:30 PM)rileylives Wrote:  I'm not sure if they laid out their case the correct way, they basically laid it out as "let us play because we're super duper special"

"embarked on this transition in ways that no other institution has since the transition rules changed 23 years ago"

Are you a Harvard educated attorney? Just curious.

Well I did win a very long drawn-out message board discussion over bylaws with a certain Rice lawyer on these boards....

My point is simply perception. They are not the only team to make the transition to do well right out the gate.

The only comparable team is your own Marshall team, that got to go to bowls and win Championships both their first two seasons.

(11-07-2023 01:12 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 12:30 PM)rileylives Wrote:  I'm not sure if they laid out their case the correct way, they basically laid it out as "let us play because we're super duper special"

"embarked on this transition in ways that no other institution has since the transition rules changed 23 years ago"

They laid out 3 arguments for their reasoning.

1. On August 1st, the NCAA completely redid the transition rules from FCS to FBS anyway, so the original format shouldn't be valid

2. They are now 9-0 and are the 2nd highest ranked team in the G5

3. Mental Health of student athletes

The 4th hidden reason is that the State of Virginia is going to file a lawsuit if the appeal fails.

Essentially the appeal is going to give the NCAA a chance to say "new circumstances have arisen" without publicly acknowledging that they'll get sued if they say no.

Out of curiosity, what could a lawsuit include? Could, would it be heard in time to make a difference? We are 4 weeks away from a CCG. This all becomes moot if they were to somehow lose one of their last three games. Let’s say they beat UConn and either Coastal or App beats them, let alone both win, then is it fair to either of those teams to have to forgo representing the East in the CCG because the rules changed in the 13th hour? What about the mental health of those athletes?

(11-07-2023 02:35 PM)HoustonRoadRunner Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 02:31 PM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 01:34 PM)rileylives Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 01:16 PM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 12:30 PM)rileylives Wrote:  I'm not sure if they laid out their case the correct way, they basically laid it out as "let us play because we're super duper special"

"embarked on this transition in ways that no other institution has since the transition rules changed 23 years ago"

Are you a Harvard educated attorney? Just curious.

Well I did win a very long drawn-out message board discussion over bylaws with a certain Rice lawyer on these boards....

My point is simply perception. They are not the only team to make the transition to do well right out the gate.

Kudos for besting a “Rice lawyer”…must have been difficult because Rice University doesn’t have a law school.

On the other hand, the people who drafted JMU’s letter are “real” attorneys, one of whom is a Harvard educated lawyer, and who was previously general council to Rutgers and Michigan. That individual is JMU’s current Prez.

That shared, I doubt JMU’s Prez drafted the letter by himself, as JMU employs a general council, and I’m 100% certain the Virginia AG’s office was involved.

Bottom line, I’m of the opinion this situation will be resolved based on legal merits, not on the “perception” of fans from other institutions. Stay tuned! This situation is about to get very interesting.

Going to be real interesting when the NCAA hits them with the "lol no" response

Kind of like how the SBC 3 were going to be forced to stay in C-USA an extra year?

(11-07-2023 02:46 PM)rileylives Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 02:28 PM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 12:37 PM)rileylives Wrote:  Let me be clear, I actually want them to be allowed to play, I just think that the case they made is poor...

I'd like to know which way you think would have been best.

(11-07-2023 12:34 PM)rileylives Wrote:  In what way is it hurting their financial prospects, they're not getting paid...

It's all through sponsors...

I'd also like to know why you think additional games (CCG and bowl game) won't have an impact on their financial prospects. Set aside the hypotheticals of potential for additional NIL deals and/or increased future earnings with additional film for NFL scouts; feel free to just address the fact that bowl games can give more than $65k to each team's players for participating.

2) prospects routinely sit out bowl games, they provide no additional revenue in fact, only add to the risk in future NFL earnings.

Top prospects? Sure. A guy on JMU's team going from an Undrafted Free Agent to a 3rd Rounder is 100% possible if they show out against Troy and a strong P5 team. Those guys could lose money by not being eligible to play in the post season.

My understanding is that it's anti-competitive/anti-trust in nature as it pertains to the NCAA doing business in the Commonwealth. Would love to read the draft up of the suit. I have to believe that the NCAA would (in this current environment) want to dodge anything remotely close to this type of legal pressure. Who knows.

(11-07-2023 05:21 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Knowing our luck, JMU would get the waiver, finish 12-0, then lose to Troy in the SBC Championship.

Southern Miss did that to Houston :) A chance to win it on the field is all anyone can ask for though.

Football is supposed to be fun. They have proven on the field they are FBS. Jacksonville has proven on the field they are FBS. Let them play. No team that has been major college since there have been major colleges are going to abuse them. They are being punished because they have recently moved up.

I'm having a problem with the logic here.

If the rule is to protect the athletes what exactly are they being protected from?

FBS vs FCS games are already on the schedule.

Could the rule discourage teams from scheduling a full FBS schedule before they're prepared in an effort to protect the athlete and the university? Attorneys likely had a say in the decision to create the rule in the first place.

The Sun Belt created the opportunity and now may see the benefit if it happens. Just another reason Gill is a flat out stud.

If a player get's seriously inured it could get nasty for all of us.

(11-07-2023 05:54 PM)Oldyeller Wrote:  I'm having a problem with the logic here.

If the rule is to protect the athletes what exactly are they being protected from?

FBS vs FCS games are already on the schedule.

Could the rule discourage teams from scheduling a full FBS schedule before they're prepared in an effort to protect the athlete and the university? Attorneys likely had a say in the decision to create the rule in the first place.

The Sun Belt created the opportunity and now may see the benefit if it happens. Just another reason Gill is a flat out stud.

If a player get's seriously inured it could get nasty for all of us.

The rule exists to discourage teams from moving up to FBS to get into bowls. It's to protect the FCS. Nothing more.

(11-07-2023 05:41 PM)Luckyshot Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 05:21 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Knowing our luck, JMU would get the waiver, finish 12-0, then lose to Troy in the SBC Championship.

Southern Miss did that to Houston :) A chance to win it on the field is all anyone can ask for though.

what's that phrase .... I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees...?

.

(11-07-2023 05:21 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Knowing our luck, JMU would get the waiver, finish 12-0, then lose to Troy in the SBC Championship.

If both win out that’s a better win than the other G5 champions will have

(11-07-2023 05:21 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Knowing our luck, JMU would get the waiver, finish 12-0, then lose to Troy in the SBC Championship.

I wouldn’t hate that.

We just would also need Tulane, Liberty, Toledo, Air Force, and Fresno to all lose again.

(11-07-2023 05:56 PM)Luckyshot Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 05:54 PM)Oldyeller Wrote:  I'm having a problem with the logic here.

If the rule is to protect the athletes what exactly are they being protected from?

FBS vs FCS games are already on the schedule.

Could the rule discourage teams from scheduling a full FBS schedule before they're prepared in an effort to protect the athlete and the university? Attorneys likely had a say in the decision to create the rule in the first place.

The Sun Belt created the opportunity and now may see the benefit if it happens. Just another reason Gill is a flat out stud.

If a player get's seriously inured it could get nasty for all of us.

The rule exists to discourage teams from moving up to FBS to get into bowls. It's to protect the FCS. Nothing more.

Which also is an an example of it being a bad rule for it's purpose. It's stopped no one from moving up. I don't think it's even made anyone so much as question moving up.

(11-07-2023 06:16 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 05:21 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Knowing our luck, JMU would get the waiver, finish 12-0, then lose to Troy in the SBC Championship.

If both win out that’s a better win than the other G5 champions will have

I’m fine with this. JMU is very beatable. Let Troy bring it, and if they win, let’s hope that’s the quality win that puts them in the NY6.

Once the CCG is over, it’s every man for the Sun Belt. The season is forgotten. We want wins across the board.

(11-07-2023 02:41 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 02:28 PM)HoustonRoadRunner Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 01:30 PM)bcp_jmu Wrote:  NCAA also set it's own trap...saying that post-season is really super important to students, and punishing them is the last thing they want to do if a school "screws up" - we have done the opposite of screw up, yet we are in a post-season ban that punishes students........................................

and .....................

...........

.........

that's it.

Other teams have sat thru that same bowl ban... It is the rules, you don't get special treatment because you happen to be undefeated

Just because something is a written rule doesn't make it a good rule.

Just because a law has existed for a hundred years doesn't make it a good law. Things have changed all the time for contracts/rules/laws when it was decided what was written was in fact not a good thing.

The only question that should be valid is whether this rule is a good or bad thing for teams involved in NCAA.

How long it's existed, how many teams had to go through it, if it's written on gold leaf and was signed in blood by JMU. All of that is irrelevant to the question above.

Maybe not, but jmwho knew it was a rule when they moved up. They had no problem with it at that time . . . Now suddenly, they don’t wanna play by the rule. .. . despite knowing of its existence in advance of moving up.

Pretty much everyone else that moved up the way they did had to abide by said rule.

eff ‘em, let them adhere to the rule as well . . .

. . . In any event, I wish the hell they’d quit crying about it . . .

(11-07-2023 07:41 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 02:41 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 02:28 PM)HoustonRoadRunner Wrote:  

(11-07-2023 01:30 PM)bcp_jmu Wrote:  NCAA also set it's own trap...saying that post-season is really super important to students, and punishing them is the last thing they want to do if a school "screws up" - we have done the opposite of screw up, yet we are in a post-season ban that punishes students........................................

and .....................

...........

.........

that's it.

Other teams have sat thru that same bowl ban... It is the rules, you don't get special treatment because you happen to be undefeated

Just because something is a written rule doesn't make it a good rule.

Just because a law has existed for a hundred years doesn't make it a good law. Things have changed all the time for contracts/rules/laws when it was decided what was written was in fact not a good thing.

The only question that should be valid is whether this rule is a good or bad thing for teams involved in NCAA.

How long it's existed, how many teams had to go through it, if it's written on gold leaf and was signed in blood by JMU. All of that is irrelevant to the question above.

Maybe not, but jmwho knew it was a rule when they moved up. They had no problem with it at that time . . . Now suddenly, they don’t wanna play by the rule. .. . despite knowing of its existence in advance of moving up.

Pretty much everyone else that moved up the way they did had to abide by said rule.

eff ‘em, let them adhere to the rule as well . . .

. . . In any event, I wish the hell they’d quit crying about it . . .

Yea we're all on the same page here but it's about the money. The crap sandwich is tough with the chest thumping world beater stuff but can we make some money?!!! We neeed the money! Put aside the obvious and think fat pay check.