(11-16-2023 12:52 AM)toddjnsn Wrote:  They weren't cheated out of anything. Otherwise the rules would have been different and would have had exemptions like "If you win your conference regular season" or "If you are undefeated" or "If you are ranked in the Top 25". It's not like nobody came up with that hypothetical to the NCAA before when wishing to bump up to FBS (eyes roll).

The rules were in place before the rules change on the transfer portal. The rule for no bowl is to prevent FCS schools from stock piling transfer out of the FBS. Now, it is hard for FCS schools to get transfers from FBS, talk to North Dakota State, that rule should be removed as well.

(11-15-2023 07:48 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  Undefeated JMU and undefeated Liberty would be a dream matchup.

Make it happen!

You must be really bored.

espn bring on a 30 for 30 about JMU 2023!

(11-16-2023 01:39 AM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 12:32 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 10:35 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 07:45 PM)Turtle Power 98 Wrote:  Now JMU is talking about suing and getting politicians involved. They are like a spoiled child who can't take no for an answer. Or they are like a temp or first day employee who comes in the office, and on the first day closes the door to the boss office and demands a raise and tells the boss what he or she is doing wrong. The fight isn't worth it and they are damaging JMU's reputation.

Liberty had to get a waiver to even get to FBS since they didn't have a conference invite. I'd be careful about calling anyone a spoiled brat.

Well that rule (requiring a conference invite) was an antitrust violation and they knew they would lose.

Rules are rules according to many posters on here. Liberty should have just waited until they had a conference invite like everyone else had to do.

Not everyone had to have a conference invite that is FBS currently. Didn't Troy move up without a Conference invite in 2001?

Not everyone transitioned with a 2 year bowl ban either

(11-16-2023 07:27 AM)Sitting bull Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 07:48 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  Undefeated JMU and undefeated Liberty would be a dream matchup.

Make it happen!

You must be really bored.

Well, the 2009 Fiesta Bowl, between unbeaten TCU and unbeaten Boise, was a heckuva game.

(11-16-2023 09:00 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Not everyone transitioned with a 2 year bowl ban either

Who transitioned without a bowl ban? I thought everyone transitioning a classification had some type of postseason ban with the NCAA.

(11-16-2023 01:39 AM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 12:32 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 10:35 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 07:45 PM)Turtle Power 98 Wrote:  Now JMU is talking about suing and getting politicians involved. They are like a spoiled child who can't take no for an answer. Or they are like a temp or first day employee who comes in the office, and on the first day closes the door to the boss office and demands a raise and tells the boss what he or she is doing wrong. The fight isn't worth it and they are damaging JMU's reputation.

Liberty had to get a waiver to even get to FBS since they didn't have a conference invite. I'd be careful about calling anyone a spoiled brat.

Well that rule (requiring a conference invite) was an antitrust violation and they knew they would lose.

Rules are rules according to many posters on here. Liberty should have just waited until they had a conference invite like everyone else had to do.

Legal rules whether popular or not. Illegal collusion like on nil is something else.

(11-16-2023 09:36 AM)IceJus10 Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 09:00 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Not everyone transitioned with a 2 year bowl ban either

Who transitioned without a bowl ban? I thought everyone transitioning a classification had some type of postseason ban with the NCAA.

Marshall didnt have a bowl ban. Won the MAC their first year and played Ole Miss in the Motor City Bowl

Similarly, when Idaho downgraded to FCS, they were playoff eligible right away

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...n-football

Lawsuit on the way.

I had high hopes for Charlie Baker. A successful politician who understood the nuances or getting deals done. If the NCAA had someone like that 10 years ago they could've foreseen the rising, bipartisan, support for NIL. Instead they kept their heads in the sand and red and blue states passed their own laws leaving us in the wild west.

The Tez Walker thing was a disgrace, then you flip and let him play (which was the right and easy call all along) which meant the NCAA both caved on their rule they were so high on AND they still got the bad press of enforcing it to begin with. JMU is a similar thing, it's low hanging fruit for good publicity and there are about a thousand ways you can tailor it bureaucratically if you want to avoid setting a blanket precedent. Or you could just scrap the rule entirely as it's a relic that serves no legitimate purpose. Instead you stick with a draconian rule and the most watched pregame show in college sports on Saturday is going to be three hours of bashing the NCAA. Oh, and you're getting sued which lately has been the way to force the NCAA to give in on enforcement, so the chances are still there that JMU will get eligibility anyway, and the NCAA will be ridiculed as a loser or for backing down.

The next time Baker goes to Washington trying to get any help in regulating NIL, why would any politician from either side want to assist? Decisions like this make the NCAA an easy supervillain. There's no advantage to being tied to helping them solve any of their own, self created problems.

Such an easy thing to avoid...now they are going to lost in court again and look worse than they would have if they had just given them the darn waiver

What was the reason they overturned the Tez Walker ruling? I wonder if that precedent would be the nail in the coffin if Virginia AG pursued legal action in getting the NCAA to at least abolish this rule moving forward. Which it doesn't just help JMU or Jax State or Kennesaw St. but any team transitioning from FCS to FBS or D-II to D-I/FCS.

(11-15-2023 07:48 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  Undefeated JMU and undefeated Liberty would be a dream matchup.

Make it happen!

This.

JMU still has a couple of very tough games standing in the way of 12-0.

But a matchup of 12-0 JMU vs. 13-0 LU would be, far and away, the most interesting and hype-worthy bowl outside of NY6, and maybe including some of the NY6, too.

(11-16-2023 02:46 PM)Just Joe Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...n-football

Lawsuit on the way.

JMU's issue is that A) this is the rule, B) member institutions make the rules and C) JMU knew this was the rule.

So, court action is not very likely to be successful. Its going to be a monumental waste of finances.

Also, even if they win, they will likely find themselves in the Idaho Potato bowl instead of whatever bowl they were going to get due to not enough teams being able to fill the bowls.

And this lawsuit would put the Sunbelt in a bad position. The final regular season game is in 9 days from now, and the Sunbelt CCG in 16 days. This "lawsuit" wont get resolved in that timeframe. This isnt some grievance or ill-will being done to JMU by the NCAA, this is JMU demanding the NCAA change the rules and grant them a waiver. IN any case, whats the sunbelt going to do while this case is playing out? In 9 days there needs to be an announce of the teams in the ccg.

(11-16-2023 03:24 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 07:48 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  Undefeated JMU and undefeated Liberty would be a dream matchup.

Make it happen!

This.

JMU still has a couple of very tough games standing in the way of 12-0.

But a matchup of 12-0 JMU vs. 13-0 LU would be, far and away, the most interesting and hype-worthy bowl outside of NY6, and maybe including some of the NY6, too.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/10JhviFuU...y.gif&ct=g

JMU should go on the offensive like UNC did. Worked for them.

(11-16-2023 03:16 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Such an easy thing to avoid...now they are going to lost in court again and look worse than they would have if they had just given them the darn waiver

Why would they lose in court?

There is no reason.

(11-16-2023 03:20 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  What was the reason they overturned the Tez Walker ruling? I wonder if that precedent would be the nail in the coffin if Virginia AG pursued legal action in getting the NCAA to at least abolish this rule moving forward. Which it doesn't just help JMU or Jax State or Kennesaw St. but any team transitioning from FCS to FBS or D-II to D-I/FCS.

They claimed they didn't have full information.

In any event, these are two entirely different rules.

(11-16-2023 03:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 03:16 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Such an easy thing to avoid...now they are going to lost in court again and look worse than they would have if they had just given them the darn waiver

Why would they lose in court?

There is no reason.

Im sure a western VA court will be sympathetic to JMU's antitrust claims

The rule exists solely to deter FCS upgrades. Thats it

(11-16-2023 05:39 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  The rules were in place before the rules change on the transfer portal. The rule for no bowl is to prevent FCS schools from stock piling transfer out of the FBS. Now, it is hard for FCS schools to get transfers from FBS, talk to North Dakota State, that rule should be removed as well.

That too, but before the transfer portal, the rule is in place to make the upgrade/downgrade decision a PERMANENT decision.

If it's a four-year process so you don't have teams bouncing up and down annually based on their rosters.

(11-16-2023 09:00 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Not everyone transitioned with a 2 year bowl ban either

Most teams who transitioned from FCS to FBS had bad records, so it was moot. Since 1998...
Liberty 6-6
Coastal 3-9
Charlotte 2-10
App St 7-5
Georgia St 0-12
South Alabama 2-11
Texas St 4-8
UMass 1-11
WKU 0-12
FIU 3-7
UConn 3-6-2
MTSU 3-8
Buffalo 0-11
UAB 5-6

Ga Southern 9-3
UTSA 8-4
Troy 7-4
USF 7-4

None of those last four went to bowls, not sure which "by rule" vs "just not invited"