(11-24-2019 09:22 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:Do not have Army on the list. They play at Hawaii.. And then vs Navy in 2 weeks.

They ain't bowlin'. :)

They played 2 FCS teams, so upsetting @Hawaii still won't make them bowl eligible at 6-6. They'd need to beat Navy AFTER bowl selections to become bowl eligible.

The only way they're possibly going is beating both and for some reason having a "conditional" invite between them and another team to go bowling. I highly highly doubt that'll happen.

Only way is if enough potential 6-6 teams fail -- still allowing a place for Army at 6-7 losing to Navy. Doubt it though.

Disagree. If Army beats Hawaii and Navy to become legit bowl eligible, they will go to a bowl game. In the various horse-trading that goes on, a spot will be found for Army, just like it was last year when they were bowl eligible but without a tie-in. And last year there were more eligible teams than bowl slots.

(11-24-2019 10:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 09:22 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:Do not have Army on the list. They play at Hawaii.. And then vs Navy in 2 weeks.

They ain't bowlin'. :)

They played 2 FCS teams, so upsetting @Hawaii still won't make them bowl eligible at 6-6. They'd need to beat Navy AFTER bowl selections to become bowl eligible.

The only way they're possibly going is beating both and for some reason having a "conditional" invite between them and another team to go bowling. I highly highly doubt that'll happen.

Only way is if enough potential 6-6 teams fail -- still allowing a place for Army at 6-7 losing to Navy. Doubt it though.

Disagree. If Army beats Hawaii and Navy to become legit bowl eligible, they will go to a bowl game. In the various horse-trading that goes on, a spot will be found for Army, just like it was last year when they were bowl eligible but without a tie-in. And last year there were more eligible teams than bowl slots.

I'm not so sure about that. The difference from last year to this year was going into the Navy game, they were already bowl eligible even if they lost.... Also think they had a specific tie in.

(11-24-2019 10:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 10:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 09:22 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:Do not have Army on the list. They play at Hawaii.. And then vs Navy in 2 weeks.

They ain't bowlin'. :)

They played 2 FCS teams, so upsetting @Hawaii still won't make them bowl eligible at 6-6. They'd need to beat Navy AFTER bowl selections to become bowl eligible.

The only way they're possibly going is beating both and for some reason having a "conditional" invite between them and another team to go bowling. I highly highly doubt that'll happen.

Only way is if enough potential 6-6 teams fail -- still allowing a place for Army at 6-7 losing to Navy. Doubt it though.

Disagree. If Army beats Hawaii and Navy to become legit bowl eligible, they will go to a bowl game. In the various horse-trading that goes on, a spot will be found for Army, just like it was last year when they were bowl eligible but without a tie-in. And last year there were more eligible teams than bowl slots.

I'm not so sure about that. The difference from last year to this year was going into the Navy game, they were already bowl eligible even if they lost.... Also think they had a specific tie in.

Last year, Army was bowl eligible before the Navy game. But they did not have a specific tie in.

(11-24-2019 10:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 10:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 10:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 09:22 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:Do not have Army on the list. They play at Hawaii.. And then vs Navy in 2 weeks.

They ain't bowlin'. :)

They played 2 FCS teams, so upsetting @Hawaii still won't make them bowl eligible at 6-6. They'd need to beat Navy AFTER bowl selections to become bowl eligible.

The only way they're possibly going is beating both and for some reason having a "conditional" invite between them and another team to go bowling. I highly highly doubt that'll happen.

Only way is if enough potential 6-6 teams fail -- still allowing a place for Army at 6-7 losing to Navy. Doubt it though.

Disagree. If Army beats Hawaii and Navy to become legit bowl eligible, they will go to a bowl game. In the various horse-trading that goes on, a spot will be found for Army, just like it was last year when they were bowl eligible but without a tie-in. And last year there were more eligible teams than bowl slots.

I'm not so sure about that. The difference from last year to this year was going into the Navy game, they were already bowl eligible even if they lost.... Also think they had a specific tie in.

Last year, Army was bowl eligible before the Navy game. But they did not have a specific tie in.

I don't know why I thought they did have a tie in. But anyways, them being bowl eligible made it easy to select them.

I do know 20-25 they do have specific tie ins. even years- Independence Bowl. Odd years- ESPN contracted bowls.

(11-24-2019 10:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Last year, Army was bowl eligible before the Navy game. But they did not have a specific tie in.

Since it would certainly become public knowledge which specific school was elbowed aside to make room for Army, one wonders whether Army might elect not to play that game to avoid the bad press in that fanbase.

The bowls most feasible for Army are played the Friday after Army/Navy, the following Saturday, and Monday. The ideal would be day after Christmas Independence but the downside of that risk is you have to do a conditional invite and that means if Army falters you get a 6-6 MAC that doesn't have any options.

Hawaii could clear it all up early Sunday morning.

(11-24-2019 10:53 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 10:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Last year, Army was bowl eligible before the Navy game. But they did not have a specific tie in.

Since it would certainly become public knowledge which specific school was elbowed aside to make room for Army, one wonders whether Army might elect not to play that game to avoid the bad press in that fanbase.

I doubt that would be a big PR issue for Army. Army has a sympathetic national profile because they are a service academy, so if anything any churlishness on the part of an Eastern Tennessee Tech fan base that misses out will reflect poorly on them in the media rather than Army.

(11-25-2019 10:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 10:53 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 10:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Last year, Army was bowl eligible before the Navy game. But they did not have a specific tie in.

Since it would certainly become public knowledge which specific school was elbowed aside to make room for Army, one wonders whether Army might elect not to play that game to avoid the bad press in that fanbase.

I doubt that would be a big PR issue for Army. Army has a sympathetic national profile because they are a service academy, so if anything any churlishness on the part of an Eastern Tennessee Tech fan base that misses out will reflect poorly on them in the media rather than Army.

Anyone criticizing a school for being pissy about getting cut really ought to grow up and find another topic to take their time.

I think Army going would in large part hinge on the bowl that was available. As was brought up- the Army/Navy game is only 1 week prior to bowl games compared to 2 last year. So all those pre-Christmas bowls are no go for Army....

(11-25-2019 10:40 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 10:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 10:53 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 10:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Last year, Army was bowl eligible before the Navy game. But they did not have a specific tie in.

Since it would certainly become public knowledge which specific school was elbowed aside to make room for Army, one wonders whether Army might elect not to play that game to avoid the bad press in that fanbase.

I doubt that would be a big PR issue for Army. Army has a sympathetic national profile because they are a service academy, so if anything any churlishness on the part of an Eastern Tennessee Tech fan base that misses out will reflect poorly on them in the media rather than Army.

Anyone criticizing a school for being pissy about getting cut really ought to grow up and find another topic to take their time.

I'd say that anyone that gets pissy about their school missing a bowl game because of Army really ought to grow up and find another topic to take their time. Talk about a first-world problem.

(11-24-2019 02:55 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 02:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 02:04 PM)Realigned Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 07:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 07:36 AM)ken d Wrote:  We now have 72 schools eligible. Counting Missouri, there are 15 schools who could become eligible next week without resorting to APR qualifiers. Vegas hasn't posted spreads for this week yet, but it's likely there won't be more than 6-7 of those schools favored. Missouri would have to win against Arkansas (likely) and either win its appeal or get in by virtue of the NCAA not ruling on the appeal in a timely fashion. The NCAA is probably rooting for Arkansas.

This will probably go right down to the wire.

Yes, I hope Mizzou wins, just to force the NCAA's hand and make them rule on the appeal. You know they would rather not, but sadly Arkansas would struggle to beat Wofford right now so it's likely they will have to.

As long as their probation is under appeal, doesn’t that mean they would retain bowl eligibility until they get a ruling? Or do I have that reversed?

You are correct. It's screwy, but under the rules, once Missouri appealed, they became eligible. The NCAA has to deny the appeal for them to be ineligible. If Mizzou beats Arkansas and the NCAA does not act in any way, then Mizzou would go to a bowl game.

but then if the NCAA upholds, they would be out for next season... AND guys that would be seniors would be allowed to transfer to another school with no penalty. So it's hardly a win for Missouri.

IMO they should just go ahead and take the bowl ban now.

(11-25-2019 11:07 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I think Army going would in large part hinge on the bowl that was available. As was brought up- the Army/Navy game is only 1 week prior to bowl games compared to 2 last year. So all those pre-Christmas bowls are no go for Army....

No question, Army is tight fit.

Army is in a structurally poor position, in that they do not have a tie-in. That means they have to hope conferences can't fill their spots, including secondary ties. E.g., the Indy Bowl has secondary ties with CUSA and the AAC to fill in for the SEC and ACC, so for Army to be eligible a spot would have to be open after all four of those ties have been accounted for first.

That's why Army has signed those deals for 2020 - 2025, so that it can't be left out so easily.

But I still say that *if* there is a spot that Army is eligible to fill, they will get the bid over other "floaters". Army is going to have a lot more curb appeal for a low-end bowl than any 6-6 G5 bottom feeder. And that's who they will be compared to.

Quote:Army is going to have a lot more curb appeal for a low-end bowl than any 6-6 G5 bottom feeder. And that's who they will be compared to.

Army with 2 FCS wins would need to win @Hawaii + Navy to be above any G5 bottom feeder. They're either going to be above -- or not eligible. If they beat @Hawaii or Navy, they'll be 6-7, but will be not eligible except for a "waiting list". By rule, they couldn't overtake a 6-6 Kent State. :)

This somewhat newer Army/Navy game being had during post-season time is a nightmare. They need to get rid of it. They agreed to set it up -- you pay the price.

The best I could see if Army beats @Hawaii -- is them giving a conditional bowl to Army vs bottom 6-6 team in a bowl "TBD". But I doubt even that will go Army's way.

(11-25-2019 02:49 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:Army is going to have a lot more curb appeal for a low-end bowl than any 6-6 G5 bottom feeder. And that's who they will be compared to.

Army with 2 FCS wins would need to win @Hawaii + Navy to be above any G5 bottom feeder. They're either going to be above -- or not eligible. If they beat @Hawaii or Navy, they'll be 6-7, but will be not eligible except for a "waiting list". By rule, they couldn't overtake a 6-6 Kent State. :)

This somewhat newer Army/Navy game being had during post-season time is a nightmare. They need to get rid of it. They agreed to set it up -- you pay the price.

The best I could see if Army beats @Hawaii -- is them giving a conditional bowl to Army vs bottom 6-6 team in a bowl "TBD". But I doubt even that will go Army's way.

If Army loses to finish 5-7 aren't they guaranteed to be below any other 5-7 team due to having two wins over FCS teams?

If they win and finish 6-7 then at least they're ahead of any 5-7 teams. After this weekend we'll know whether any of those will be needed.

I don't see how the Army/Navy game impacts anything unless we end up exactly one team short of filling all spots.

(11-25-2019 03:00 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  If Army loses to finish 5-7 aren't they guaranteed to be below any other 5-7 team due to having two wins over FCS teams?

No, because that 5-7 would only include one of the FCS teams ... they would be 6-7 if the second FCS win counted.

2-0, 6-6 (+one non-counter), eligible (but determined late)
1-1, 5-7 (+one non-counter), alternate (APR list)

It's rather that if any of Boston College, Ohio University, Nebraska and/or Kent State lose this week, they are from two to thirteen points behind in the APR.

This is the current rule:

Quote: (a) An institution that would have met the exception in Bylaw 18.7.2.1.1 but for the fact that one victory was against a Football Championship Subdivision opponent that had not averaged 90 percent of the permissible maximum number of grants-in-aid per year in football during a rolling two-year period and the institution's waiver request, per Bylaw 18.7.2.1.1.1, was denied.

Not applicable, the issue isn't that their one FCS game isn't a counting school, the issue is that a second FCS game doesn't count.

Quote: (b) An institution that participated in 13 regular-season contests and finished the season with a record of six wins that count toward meeting the definition of a "deserving team" and seven losses.

Again, it would be 6-6 or 5-7, not 6-7, the second FCS game doesn't count.

Quote: [c] An institution that is in its final year of reclassification from the Football Championship Subdivision to the Football Bowl Subdivision and meets the definition of a "deserving team" pursuant to Bylaw 18.7.2.1 or the exception in Bylaw 18.7.2.1.1.

Not applicable.

Quote: (d) An institution that finished its season with a minimum of five wins that count toward meeting the definition of a "deserving team" and a maximum of seven losses but achieved a multiyear Academic Progress Rate that permits postseason participation. Alternates identified pursuant to this condition shall be identified as eligible in descending order based on the institutions' multiyear Academic Progress Rates.

At 5-7 (plus one non-counter), this is what would apply.

The way I read the rules Army is only eligible if they win out. Personally I don’t think anyone intended for schools counting two FBS to get eligible but 5-6 vs FBS with one FCS win isn’t any higher ground than 5-6 vs FBS with two FCS wins.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(11-25-2019 08:55 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The way I read the rules Army is only eligible if they win out. Personally I don’t think anyone intended for schools counting two FBS to get eligible but 5-6 vs FBS with one FCS win isn’t any higher ground than 5-6 vs FBS with two FCS wins.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If Army wins out they will be 7-6 overall but 6-6 for bowl eligibility purposes as two wins would be versus FCS and only one can count..

That makes them fully eligible, not in the APR waiting list, but also no better or worse than a team that is 6-6 with no FCS wins or 6-6 with one FCS win.

(11-25-2019 03:00 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 02:49 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:Army is going to have a lot more curb appeal for a low-end bowl than any 6-6 G5 bottom feeder. And that's who they will be compared to.

Army with 2 FCS wins would need to win @Hawaii + Navy to be above any G5 bottom feeder. They're either going to be above -- or not eligible. If they beat @Hawaii or Navy, they'll be 6-7, but will be not eligible except for a "waiting list". By rule, they couldn't overtake a 6-6 Kent State. :)

This somewhat newer Army/Navy game being had during post-season time is a nightmare. They need to get rid of it. They agreed to set it up -- you pay the price.

The best I could see if Army beats @Hawaii -- is them giving a conditional bowl to Army vs bottom 6-6 team in a bowl "TBD". But I doubt even that will go Army's way.

If Army loses to finish 5-7 aren't they guaranteed to be below any other 5-7 team due to having two wins over FCS teams?

If they win and finish 6-7 then at least they're ahead of any 5-7 teams. After this weekend we'll know whether any of those will be needed.

I don't see how the Army/Navy game impacts anything unless we end up exactly one team short of filling all spots.

If Army beats Hawaii they will be 6-6 overall but not bowl eligible as two wins are versus FCS.

But they also still have the Navy game and if they win that, then they would be 7-6 and fully bowl eligible, not in the APR waiting line.

Now Army has no guaranteed bowl ties, so they need for some bowl to have an open slot. But if a bowl has an open slot Army would be in the running to fill it along with any other eligible floaters.

(11-25-2019 11:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 03:00 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 02:49 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:Army is going to have a lot more curb appeal for a low-end bowl than any 6-6 G5 bottom feeder. And that's who they will be compared to.

Army with 2 FCS wins would need to win @Hawaii + Navy to be above any G5 bottom feeder. They're either going to be above -- or not eligible. If they beat @Hawaii or Navy, they'll be 6-7, but will be not eligible except for a "waiting list". By rule, they couldn't overtake a 6-6 Kent State. :)

This somewhat newer Army/Navy game being had during post-season time is a nightmare. They need to get rid of it. They agreed to set it up -- you pay the price.

The best I could see if Army beats @Hawaii -- is them giving a conditional bowl to Army vs bottom 6-6 team in a bowl "TBD". But I doubt even that will go Army's way.

If Army loses to finish 5-7 aren't they guaranteed to be below any other 5-7 team due to having two wins over FCS teams?

If they win and finish 6-7 then at least they're ahead of any 5-7 teams. After this weekend we'll know whether any of those will be needed.

I don't see how the Army/Navy game impacts anything unless we end up exactly one team short of filling all spots.

If Army beats Hawaii they will be 6-6 overall but not bowl eligible as two wins are versus FCS.

But they also still have the Navy game and if they win that, then they would be 7-6 and fully bowl eligible, not in the APR waiting line.

Now Army has no guaranteed bowl ties, so they need for some bowl to have an open slot. But if a bowl has an open slot Army would be in the running to fill it along with any other eligible floaters.

the problem for Army like I mentioned earlier is that said bowl probably would have to be after Christmas. That knocks out 10 of the bowl games. Another 6 bowls are the NY6 so that's gone. Several others are just no chance(Cap One, Outback, Gator, etc.). It's going to be far tougher than you think for Army.

(11-26-2019 12:06 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 11:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 03:00 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(11-25-2019 02:49 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:Army is going to have a lot more curb appeal for a low-end bowl than any 6-6 G5 bottom feeder. And that's who they will be compared to.

Army with 2 FCS wins would need to win @Hawaii + Navy to be above any G5 bottom feeder. They're either going to be above -- or not eligible. If they beat @Hawaii or Navy, they'll be 6-7, but will be not eligible except for a "waiting list". By rule, they couldn't overtake a 6-6 Kent State. :)

This somewhat newer Army/Navy game being had during post-season time is a nightmare. They need to get rid of it. They agreed to set it up -- you pay the price.

The best I could see if Army beats @Hawaii -- is them giving a conditional bowl to Army vs bottom 6-6 team in a bowl "TBD". But I doubt even that will go Army's way.

If Army loses to finish 5-7 aren't they guaranteed to be below any other 5-7 team due to having two wins over FCS teams?

If they win and finish 6-7 then at least they're ahead of any 5-7 teams. After this weekend we'll know whether any of those will be needed.

I don't see how the Army/Navy game impacts anything unless we end up exactly one team short of filling all spots.

If Army beats Hawaii they will be 6-6 overall but not bowl eligible as two wins are versus FCS.

But they also still have the Navy game and if they win that, then they would be 7-6 and fully bowl eligible, not in the APR waiting line.

Now Army has no guaranteed bowl ties, so they need for some bowl to have an open slot. But if a bowl has an open slot Army would be in the running to fill it along with any other eligible floaters.

the problem for Army like I mentioned earlier is that said bowl probably would have to be after Christmas. That knocks out 10 of the bowl games. Another 6 bowls are the NY6 so that's gone. Several others are just no chance(Cap One, Outback, Gator, etc.). It's going to be far tougher than you think for Army.

Wouldn't the Armed Forces Bowl make the most sense for all concerned? If Army would be the 78th and last qualifier if they win out, then they could take the B1G spot in that game against a MWC opponent on January 4th. In all likelihood, they would be one of two conferences (also SEC) who will have unfilled slots.

If they were to beat Hawaii but then lose to Navy the following week, then that slot could go to whichever non-qualifier has the best APR score. With a January 4th date, the uncertainty is less of a factor for making travel plans.