(07-05-2017 02:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-05-2017 08:21 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(07-04-2017 08:01 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-04-2017 12:56 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-03-2017 10:44 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Seems like this could really impact California team participation in NCAA championships and bowl games, many of which are held in "banned" states. E.g., the 2018 Final Four is in San Antonio. I presume if UCLA advances that far, they won't be able to participate?

And what about the PAC tie-ins with bowls in Texas, or playing in the Cotton Bowl there? Presumably, no dice.

And also there would seem to be negative recruiting implications. Can't send coaches or staff to certain states to recruit players.

FCS Championship in Frisco, Texas. The three California schools, if they go into the playoffs and get to that point will be in a pickle as well.

Potentially, the California teams would have to forfeit. It would be the end of either championships in certain states, or the end of the NCAA.

I doubt it's the end of the NCAA and I doubt the California state government is going to risk the backlash they would be sure to receive if one of their state schools were to be forced to forfeit the opportunity to play in a major bowl or national championship game due to it being played in a state on their ban list.

I'm not sure you are 100% in touch with reality here. My reading of the mainstream media is that the backlash is more likely to occur if California was to bend on the ban so as to allow their schools to do something as trivial/insignificant as play in a major bowl or national championship.

To CNN, WAPO, NY Times, etc. the principles behind the California ban are far, far more important than whether a school gets to play a Major Bowl game or not.

I'm certainly not in touch with California reality. But hey if they don't allow their public schools to participate in NCAA tournament games and bowls located in banned states and forfeit the associated tournament unit and bowl pay outs then more power to them.