Now before anyone goes crazy, obviously the only way this waiver is granted is if THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH BOWL ELIGIBLE TEAMS TO FILL BOWL SLOTS.

But at least we are putting it out there that we want to go to a bowl this year if we are bowl eligible (I think that will happen) and there is a shortage of bowl eligible teams.

So if you are a Ga. Southern fan we need to be pulling for more 5-7 or worse teams.

Where are you getting this information?

What is there to appeal? There are either open slots that can't be filled that Georgia Southern qualifies to fill under the rules, or there aren't?

I heard this at game vs. Idaho Saturday. I don't know what the "appeal" involves but apparently you have to fill out paperwork to NCAA asking for a waiver to go to a bowl if you are not technically eligible to go this year.

(10-14-2014 12:36 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  What is there to appeal? There are either open slots that can't be filled that Georgia Southern qualifies to fill under the rules, or there aren't?

(10-14-2014 12:40 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I heard this at game vs. Idaho Saturday. I don't know what the "appeal" involves but apparently you have to fill out paperwork to NCAA asking for a waiver to go to a bowl if you are not technically eligible to go this year.

I'm guessing it's more of a being ready just in case kind of situation.

Good for TK in being proactive to realize what's going on. It most likely won't happen, but the fact that he's ready to give it a shot says a lot. Our previous AD wouldn't have done anything like that (well we wouldn't be FBS either but that's another story).

1985....Parent bought season tickets....I was 8 years old

(10-14-2014 12:52 PM)jhbEAGLE Wrote:  1985....Parent bought season tickets....I was 8 years old

???....There is no appeal process. Its part of the rules to be eligible for a bowl. FCS transition teams are eligible after all other option are exhausted. Trying to make them eligible for a bowl during the transition period isn't going to happen.
Otherwise UTSA should have been bowling last year with their 7-5 record, but they were in 2nd year of transition and only eligible after all other options exhausted.

(10-14-2014 12:52 PM)jhbEAGLE Wrote:  1985....Parent bought season tickets....I was 8 years old

(Was this meant for the other thread?)

If GS ends the season alone at the top of the Belt, they should definitely get a chance to play in a bowl. No reason to have our conference champ sitting at home.

(10-14-2014 12:44 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  

(10-14-2014 12:36 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  What is there to appeal? There are either open slots that can't be filled that Georgia Southern qualifies to fill under the rules, or there aren't?

(10-14-2014 12:40 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I heard this at game vs. Idaho Saturday. I don't know what the "appeal" involves but apparently you have to fill out paperwork to NCAA asking for a waiver to go to a bowl if you are not technically eligible to go this year.

I'm guessing it's more of a being ready just in case kind of situation.

Good for TK in being proactive to realize what's going on. It most likely won't happen, but the fact that he's ready to give it a shot says a lot. Our previous AD wouldn't have done anything like that (well we wouldn't be FBS either but that's another story).

Or he would have just missed the deadline, assuming there even is one. If not, he would still have missed something.

(10-14-2014 12:59 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  

(10-14-2014 12:52 PM)jhbEAGLE Wrote:  1985....Parent bought season tickets....I was 8 years old

(Was this meant for the other thread?)

If GS ends the season alone at the top of the Belt, they should definitely get a chance to play in a bowl. No reason to have our conference champ sitting at home.

Except for those pesky things...what are they....rules?

(10-14-2014 01:10 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(10-14-2014 12:59 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  

(10-14-2014 12:52 PM)jhbEAGLE Wrote:  1985....Parent bought season tickets....I was 8 years old

(Was this meant for the other thread?)

If GS ends the season alone at the top of the Belt, they should definitely get a chance to play in a bowl. No reason to have our conference champ sitting at home.

Except for those pesky things...what are they....rules?

Yessss and that NCAA is a stickler about enforcing them equally and consistently /sarcasm

(10-14-2014 01:14 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(10-14-2014 01:10 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(10-14-2014 12:59 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  

(10-14-2014 12:52 PM)jhbEAGLE Wrote:  1985....Parent bought season tickets....I was 8 years old

(Was this meant for the other thread?)

If GS ends the season alone at the top of the Belt, they should definitely get a chance to play in a bowl. No reason to have our conference champ sitting at home.

Except for those pesky things...what are they....rules?

Yessss and that NCAA is a stickler about enforcing them equally and consistently /sarcasm

This rule has been enforced equally. Starting to enforce it unequally now doesn't make the situation you refer to better.

Actually there may be some paperwork that has to be done. I'd imagine they need to report things like compliance with transition rules (ie. prove they are on track to complete all parts of year 2 transition) to be ruled eligible for the second year transition provision should there be a shortage of teams.

(10-14-2014 12:57 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  ???....There is no appeal process. Its part of the rules to be eligible for a bowl. FCS transition teams are eligible after all other option are exhausted. Trying to make them eligible for a bowl during the transition period isn't going to happen.
Otherwise UTSA should have been bowling last year with their 7-5 record, but they were in 2nd year of transition and only eligible after all other options exhausted.

If you want to have a chance, you have to file the paperwork. It is my understanding that there is an "appeal" that has to be filed.

I'm pretty sure our current administration is filing all paperwork in a very timely fashion... I have never seen our alumni more pissed off than when we didn't.

(10-14-2014 01:17 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  This rule has been enforced equally. Starting to enforce it unequally now doesn't make the situation you refer to better.

I know it's been dismissed on these boards as a comparison, but the '01 UNT waiver for the New Orleans Bowl isn't that different from how this situation could play out. Allowing an undisputed conference champion (that would otherwise be ineligible) to play in a bowl seems reasonable.

(10-14-2014 01:22 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Actually there may be some paperwork that has to be done. I'd imagine they need to report things like compliance with transition rules (ie. prove they are on track to complete all parts of year 2 transition) to be ruled eligible for the second year transition provision should there be a shortage of teams.

This is mainly what I was getting at. There will have to be some sort of paperwork completed for this whole thing if it comes to pass, I'm just glad we're getting a head start on it just to be ready.

We haven't had a good track record of that....I don't want to relive Bidgate 2010 again.

(10-14-2014 01:24 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  

(10-14-2014 01:17 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  This rule has been enforced equally. Starting to enforce it unequally now doesn't make the situation you refer to better.

I know it's been dismissed on these boards as a comparison, but the '01 UNT waiver for the New Orleans Bowl isn't that different from how this situation could play out. Allowing an undisputed conference champion (that would otherwise be ineligible) to play in a bowl seems reasonable.

I was unaware of the 2001 waiver for UNT...thanks for sharing, that's really interesting.

(10-14-2014 01:35 PM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  

(10-14-2014 01:24 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  

(10-14-2014 01:17 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  This rule has been enforced equally. Starting to enforce it unequally now doesn't make the situation you refer to better.

I know it's been dismissed on these boards as a comparison, but the '01 UNT waiver for the New Orleans Bowl isn't that different from how this situation could play out. Allowing an undisputed conference champion (that would otherwise be ineligible) to play in a bowl seems reasonable.

I was unaware of the 2001 waiver for UNT...thanks for sharing, that's really interesting.

Granted, the waiver was for a losing record, not transition, but it doesn't seem like too much of a leap...

See nothing but positive from applying.