The Big XII is trying crush the poor and steal what little they have. http://bit.ly/3oHAN7

Great reporting arkstfan. One thing I noticed, however, is that your entire thesis is built on the "criteria for bowl eligibility" yet you never refer to where it is written, who wrote it or how long this 'agreement' is good for (do you assume that we are all familiar with this document?). It appears to me that the whole conversation is moot if this is an agreement between all the conferences and still has another 4 years to run.

I understand the Big XII is floating an idea, with the help of ESPN, to get even more of their (i.e. BCS) teams to a bowl. Perhaps they are beginning the lobbying process for when the next agreement is to be ratified. It's hard to surmise their intent if we don't know which document/contract they're working off of.

thanks for the help.

It is an NCAA rule that the Big XII wants to change.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowl_eligibility

(11-05-2009 11:04 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  It is an NCAA rule that the Big XII wants to change.

So when the NCAA meets in January this rule can be changed by the delegates of all the FBS conferences.

It's going to be interesting to see how the non-AQ's react to this proposition.

(11-05-2009 11:04 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  It is an NCAA rule that the Big XII wants to change.

I am not an attorney, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express . . . LOL !!!

It seems to me that bowl contracts recently signed by the non-AQ conferences could now be in jeopardy. The bowls signed the contracts based upon rules set in place by the NCAA and with the belief that the rules would remain in tact during the life of the new bowl contracts.

If the NCAA changes the rules, then it appears the bowls may have an opportunity to void the contracts as the rules upon which the contracts are based have changed significantly.

ESPN owns a lot of bowls and they have the money and the legal resources to make changes to their bowls.

I don't think that is a significant risk but it could lead to the creation of new bowls after the four year certification cycle start covering 2010-13

The more and more of this "shafting" that goes on, the more likely the court system will have to settle it, or legislators will have to get involved.

Am I hearing now that some Power $ix conferences are opting out of bowls unless they face another Power $ix ?