(07-01-2019 02:30 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 09:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 09:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Simple. The case would be that the AAC is attempting to comply with the divisional rule to the the best of its ability, but the rule is flawed and not specific with regards to exactly how a league with an odd number of members is to properly comply. Furthermore, the rule obviously intends to allow a team with unbalanced divisions to hold a CCG—thus the AAC’s attempt to get as close to fulfilling the CCG requirements as possible is in reasonable compliance since the rule fails to specify how a conference with an odd number of teams is to comply. It’s the same reason I don’t think a waiver will be denied in the first place and why I think the rule should be modified to cover this exact detail.

You seem to be presenting this as if it is a rule of the Federal Government that somehow has to comply with certain "reasonable standards" or whatever, because it has the force of law. Like when the EPA issues an environmental regulation, and a company sues because of vagueness or arbitrariness or something like that.

But it's not, it's a rule of the NCAA. I doubt any court will think there is a case here, but then again I'm not a lawyer so I don't know.

Maybe we shall see.

If the NCAA denies the AAC pretty much the same waiver that the MAC and CUSA got, then the AAC has a due process claim and some variety of breach-of-contract claim. (That won't happen, of course, because why would it?). A membership organization is also a contract, and so contract law comes into play.

I think Attackcoog is confusing things though by not being clear about WHAT waiver is being discussed: a temporary one to give the AAC time to get to 12 in a leisurely manner, or a permanent one that allows the AAC to match their top 2? (or a permanent version of the MAC/CUSA 13 team waiver?)

Why would the NCAA reject an AAC waiver request? I suppose the most likely scenario would be the AAC being a choosing beggar about just exactly WHAT waiver they want, refusing a "skip a divisional game" waiver because they want CCG rule reform. Overplaying their hand is pretty on-brand for the AAC.

My bad if I wasn’t clear. I’m referring to the same waiver the MAC was given. There would be no precedent for a divisionless waiver. Frankly—I just don’t see such a waiver being denied in the first place.