(12-18-2014 10:19 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I think you guys are taking an extremely liberal interpretation of the word "sponsor". I don't think it means that Hawaii can sponsor a game between Notre Dame and say...Texas.

You would need an exact interpretation of the term sponsor in this regard. You guys are seriously stretching it. .

I brought it up as a mere hypothetical. But based on the actual rule, as it states, there is really no stretch of the interpretation on our end. That may not have been the intention of the rule, in fact I am sure it is not - much like the rule that allows for a CCG was never intended for a power conference to use for a football championship - but it doesn't mean the interpretation is a stretch or wrong, or the move would be against NCAA rules. Likewise if they did actually use this loophole, even if the NCAA disapproved, based on never changing the CCG rule when they didn't want the SEC to do it, I don't think they would change this rule, in the unlikely even the Big 12 did adopt my crazy suggestion.

(12-19-2014 10:53 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-18-2014 10:19 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I think you guys are taking an extremely liberal interpretation of the word "sponsor". I don't think it means that Hawaii can sponsor a game between Notre Dame and say...Texas.

You would need an exact interpretation of the term sponsor in this regard. You guys are seriously stretching it. .

I brought it up as a mere hypothetical. But based on the actual rule, as it clearly states, there is no stretch of the interpretation on our end. I think it is purposely worded that way precisely so that those teams could use it to host teams for games -not in the manner I suggested as a CCG - but so that they could host games similar to how Dallas and Atlanta do (the kickoff games) and teams could play and not lose a home game. Anyway much like the CCG rule itself: it may not have been intended to be used that way, but that doesn't matter. The wording allows it.

It is a stretch. If someone was really going to attempt to do this, to drive a truck through this loophole, they would have to do more than just label it, "TCU v. Baylor, sponsored by the University of Hawai'i."

At the very least, I'd schedule a doubleheader at Aloha Stadium, and maybe call it the "Honolulu Holiday Classic", with Hawai'i playing in one game and the Big 12 teams playing in the other game, to make it look like one of those exempt early-season basketball tournaments for which a team's games are exempt even if they don't play one of the Hawai'ian teams.

(12-19-2014 11:53 AM)Wedge Wrote:  At the very least, I'd schedule a doubleheader at Aloha Stadium, and maybe call it the "Honolulu Holiday Classic", with Hawai'i playing in one game and the Big 12 teams playing in the other game, to make it look like one of those exempt early-season basketball tournaments for which a team's games are exempt even if they don't play one of the Hawai'ian teams.

Whatever works. I really stated it as an off the cuff remark as way to get around the NCAA rule. But by the wording of the rule, it would not be a "stretch." Again there is a difference in the intent of the rule, and the actual wording: otherwise we don't have ANY conference championship games in the FBS Division. It would require the NCAA to change that rule as well. Note I was not really trying to discuss how feasible it would be for the Big 12 to do it (even though I did), It was purely a discussion of how they could get around the rule if the really were desperate to have a CCG game.

(12-19-2014 11:53 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-19-2014 10:53 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-18-2014 10:19 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I think you guys are taking an extremely liberal interpretation of the word "sponsor". I don't think it means that Hawaii can sponsor a game between Notre Dame and say...Texas.

You would need an exact interpretation of the term sponsor in this regard. You guys are seriously stretching it. .

I brought it up as a mere hypothetical. But based on the actual rule, as it clearly states, there is no stretch of the interpretation on our end. I think it is purposely worded that way precisely so that those teams could use it to host teams for games -not in the manner I suggested as a CCG - but so that they could host games similar to how Dallas and Atlanta do (the kickoff games) and teams could play and not lose a home game. Anyway much like the CCG rule itself: it may not have been intended to be used that way, but that doesn't matter. The wording allows it.

It is a stretch. If someone was really going to attempt to do this, to drive a truck through this loophole, they would have to do more than just label it, "TCU v. Baylor, sponsored by the University of Hawai'i."

At the very least, I'd schedule a doubleheader at Aloha Stadium, and maybe call it the "Honolulu Holiday Classic", with Hawai'i playing in one game and the Big 12 teams playing in the other game, to make it look like one of those exempt early-season basketball tournaments for which a team's games are exempt even if they don't play one of the Hawai'ian teams.

All the NCAA would have to say is this counts as your post-season game, so neither of the teams involved are allowed to play another game.

They would be justified since the opponents wouldn't likely be known until the week before the game, so it wouldn't qualify as a regular season game, and wouldn't qualify as a CCG.

So B12 would be in worse shape, no team in an access bowl.

(12-19-2014 10:53 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-18-2014 10:19 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I think you guys are taking an extremely liberal interpretation of the word "sponsor". I don't think it means that Hawaii can sponsor a game between Notre Dame and say...Texas.

You would need an exact interpretation of the term sponsor in this regard. You guys are seriously stretching it. .

I brought it up as a mere hypothetical. But based on the actual rule, as it states, there is really no stretch of the interpretation on our end. That may not have been the intention of the rule, in fact I am sure it is not - much like the rule that allows for a CCG was never intended for a power conference to use for a football championship - but it doesn't mean the interpretation is a stretch or wrong, or the move would be against NCAA rules. Likewise if they did actually use this loophole, even if the NCAA disapproved, based on never changing the CCG rule when they didn't want the SEC to do it, I don't think they would change this rule, in the unlikely even the Big 12 did adopt my crazy suggestion.

Fair enough.