(11-16-2023 08:39 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:05 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(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

Even local courts have to pay some attention to laws. There is zero basis for a lawsuit. None. Its just politicians stealing taxpayers money to make a name for themselves. The politicians making it happen should have to pay the legal fees.

We will see

(11-16-2023 06:43 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 06:13 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Its not necessarily that they would lose in court. JMU / the state has waited until the last minute to try to force this. JMU was originally denied the waiver back in April.

So, will another party be injured due to this? Yes. The team left out of the CCG.

Are you asking a court to issue a ruling that will cause injury to another entity, in which you want a ruling where you get a waiver for something you knew was the rule, in the next 9 days? There's not a judge who would or should take that on. They may allow it to go forward, but there will be too much case prep for it to happen that quickly. Could a judge order a stay? I suppose, but that would be disastrous and the CFP would likely not consider a team who could end up being deemed ineligible prior to the game.

In short, you cant wait until the last second, when you have a good end of season football record, to do this. They could have approached the courts at any time after April, but they didnt. Now they want to force a ruling in just mere days. I dont see that happening.

We will see...this is just such a dumb hill for the NCAA to die on.

Even if they end up keeping JMU out, you've now made an enemy with the VA state government, who has the time, resources, motivation, and political clout to make the NCAA regret this.

So congrats on that NCAA

Even if the NCAA was blatantly wrong here, the primary issue is one of timing. We are 9 days from the end of the season. Of that, you literally only have 2-3 court days in which to get in front of a judge because of the holidays.

So the odds of this affecting the CCG are out the window, whether the NCAA is right or wrong. They literally waited too late to take action.

What could happen after the sunbelt ccg teams are set, the NCAA could come back and say, ok, we'll give you a waiver. You are eligible for any bowl. That way JMU gets their wish, and noone was harmed in the process of sorting this out due to the very extreme late nature of the court filing.

The issue isn't bowl eligibility per say its NY6 eligibility.

As I've said if JMU was 7-3 this wouldn't be an issue. JMU would gets its bowl due to not having enough eligible teams and all would be fine.

But the NCAA is potentially shutting JMU out of millions of dollars for no good reason other than that's the rule. That rule could be argued as anti competitive and anti trust. No one saw this situation occurring which is why it wasn't brought up sooner

And again, it's such a stupid can of worms to open. Why make an enemy with a big state like Virginia over something stupid. Give them a waiver and pass the buck to the CFP who can then exclude them with no justification needed

JMU isn't shut out. They just need to get through their probationary period. The same thing exist with the basketball tournament. But its 4 years for Division II to Division I.

If JMU or Virginia AG tries to sue the NCAA, then Tulane and all the other G5 conferences and AG needs to sue them back for trying to pressure the NCAA in voiding a contract that the G5 already has and JMU willfully entered into for trying to screw the other G5 and teams of money they are contractually owed. JMU needs to know their place and stand down before they open a bigger can of worms.

(11-16-2023 08:45 PM)bullet Wrote:  JMU isn't shut out. They just need to get through their probationary period. The same thing exist with the basketball tournament. But its 4 years for Division II to Division I.

There is 0 way for JMU to make an NY6 bowl this year. To me that is shut out

From The Athletic's Chris V here is what's next

Quote:The letter states that JMU would seek monetary damages, a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction because it would be irreparably harmed without relief. It asks for a response from the NCAA by noon on Friday and hopes to have a court hearing on the matter on Nov. 21 or 22.

(11-16-2023 06:13 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Its not necessarily that they would lose in court. JMU / the state has waited until the last minute to try to force this. JMU was originally denied the waiver back in April.

So, will another party be injured due to this? Yes. The team left out of the CCG.

Are you asking a court to issue a ruling that will cause injury to another entity, in which you want a ruling where you get a waiver for something you knew was the rule, in the next 9 days? There's not a judge who would or should take that on. They may allow it to go forward, but there will be too much case prep for it to happen that quickly. Could a judge order a stay? I suppose, but that would be disastrous and the CFP would likely not consider a team who could end up being deemed ineligible prior to the game.

In short, you cant wait until the last second, when you have a good end of season football record, to do this. They could have approached the courts at any time after April, but they didnt. Now they want to force a ruling in just mere days. I dont see that happening.

We will see...this is just such a dumb hill for the NCAA to die on.

Even if they end up keeping JMU out, you've now made an enemy with the VA state government, who has the time, resources, motivation, and political clout to make the NCAA regret this.

So congrats on that NCAA

Even if the NCAA was blatantly wrong here, the primary issue is one of timing. We are 9 days from the end of the season. Of that, you literally only have 2-3 court days in which to get in front of a judge because of the holidays.

So the odds of this affecting the CCG are out the window, whether the NCAA is right or wrong. They literally waited too late to take action.

What could happen after the sunbelt ccg teams are set, the NCAA could come back and say, ok, we'll give you a waiver. You are eligible for any bowl. That way JMU gets their wish, and noone was harmed in the process of sorting this out due to the very extreme late nature of the court filing.

If the NCAA had done the right thing several months ago when they had the chance, there wouldn't be a problem.

(11-16-2023 04:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Its not necessarily that they would lose in court. JMU / the state has waited until the last minute to try to force this. JMU was originally denied the waiver back in April.

So, will another party be injured due to this? Yes. The team left out of the CCG.

Are you asking a court to issue a ruling that will cause injury to another entity, in which you want a ruling where you get a waiver for something you knew was the rule, in the next 9 days? There's not a judge who would or should take that on. They may allow it to go forward, but there will be too much case prep for it to happen that quickly. Could a judge order a stay? I suppose, but that would be disastrous and the CFP would likely not consider a team who could end up being deemed ineligible prior to the game.

In short, you cant wait until the last second, when you have a good end of season football record, to do this. They could have approached the courts at any time after April, but they didnt. Now they want to force a ruling in just mere days. I dont see that happening.

We will see...this is just such a dumb hill for the NCAA to die on.

Even if they end up keeping JMU out, you've now made an enemy with the VA state government, who has the time, resources, motivation, and political clout to make the NCAA regret this.

So congrats on that NCAA

So would you get rid of the 4 year probation period in basketball?

(11-16-2023 08:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Its not necessarily that they would lose in court. JMU / the state has waited until the last minute to try to force this. JMU was originally denied the waiver back in April.

So, will another party be injured due to this? Yes. The team left out of the CCG.

Are you asking a court to issue a ruling that will cause injury to another entity, in which you want a ruling where you get a waiver for something you knew was the rule, in the next 9 days? There's not a judge who would or should take that on. They may allow it to go forward, but there will be too much case prep for it to happen that quickly. Could a judge order a stay? I suppose, but that would be disastrous and the CFP would likely not consider a team who could end up being deemed ineligible prior to the game.

In short, you cant wait until the last second, when you have a good end of season football record, to do this. They could have approached the courts at any time after April, but they didnt. Now they want to force a ruling in just mere days. I dont see that happening.

We will see...this is just such a dumb hill for the NCAA to die on.

Even if they end up keeping JMU out, you've now made an enemy with the VA state government, who has the time, resources, motivation, and political clout to make the NCAA regret this.

So congrats on that NCAA

So would you get rid of the 4 year probation period in basketball?

Yes absolutely

What purpose does it serve?

You need an invite to move up so there is no legitimate risk of teams moving up and down

If a D2 team can come in and win the NEC right away more power to them

Also those transitioning teams are eligible for the CBI and CIT/TBC

So it's not about the postseason, it simply punitive

Quote:The letter states that JMU would seek monetary damages, a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction because it would be irreparably harmed without relief. It asks for a response from the NCAA by noon on Friday and hopes to have a court hearing on the matter on Nov. 21 or 22.

[/quote]

And the rest of the G5 would need to sue the NCAA for monetary damages against the NCAA and JMU if they try to void our contractually obligated NY6 payout that JMU willfully entered when they joined FBS. JMU is just being ridiculous at this point. They have nothing to stand on.

(11-16-2023 08:51 PM)Porcine Wrote:  If the NCAA had done the right thing several months ago when they had the chance, there wouldn't be a problem.

The NCAA DOES have the obligation to do the right thing and uphold their contract with the G5 schools that says JMU is ineligible. Period. End of story. We aren't going to rip up a contract and forfeit money owed to everybody BUT JMU.

(11-16-2023 09:03 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

Quote:The letter states that JMU would seek monetary damages, a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction because it would be irreparably harmed without relief. It asks for a response from the NCAA by noon on Friday and hopes to have a court hearing on the matter on Nov. 21 or 22.

And the rest of the G5 would need to sue the NCAA for monetary damages against the NCAA and JMU if they try to void our contractually obligated NY6 payout that JMU willfully entered when they joined FBS. JMU is just being ridiculous at this point. They have nothing to stand on.
[/quote]

Absolutely. Any goodwill JMU has built is completely gone. They’re acting like a desperate petulant toddler.

(11-16-2023 08:51 PM)Porcine Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 06:13 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Its not necessarily that they would lose in court. JMU / the state has waited until the last minute to try to force this. JMU was originally denied the waiver back in April.

So, will another party be injured due to this? Yes. The team left out of the CCG.

Are you asking a court to issue a ruling that will cause injury to another entity, in which you want a ruling where you get a waiver for something you knew was the rule, in the next 9 days? There's not a judge who would or should take that on. They may allow it to go forward, but there will be too much case prep for it to happen that quickly. Could a judge order a stay? I suppose, but that would be disastrous and the CFP would likely not consider a team who could end up being deemed ineligible prior to the game.

In short, you cant wait until the last second, when you have a good end of season football record, to do this. They could have approached the courts at any time after April, but they didnt. Now they want to force a ruling in just mere days. I dont see that happening.

We will see...this is just such a dumb hill for the NCAA to die on.

Even if they end up keeping JMU out, you've now made an enemy with the VA state government, who has the time, resources, motivation, and political clout to make the NCAA regret this.

So congrats on that NCAA

Even if the NCAA was blatantly wrong here, the primary issue is one of timing. We are 9 days from the end of the season. Of that, you literally only have 2-3 court days in which to get in front of a judge because of the holidays.

So the odds of this affecting the CCG are out the window, whether the NCAA is right or wrong. They literally waited too late to take action.

What could happen after the sunbelt ccg teams are set, the NCAA could come back and say, ok, we'll give you a waiver. You are eligible for any bowl. That way JMU gets their wish, and noone was harmed in the process of sorting this out due to the very extreme late nature of the court filing.

If the NCAA had done the right thing several months ago when they had the chance, there wouldn't be a problem.

It wasnt several months ago, it was 7 months ago.

I dont know if JMU should get a waiver, I dont care if they do get a waiver. What I'm saying is that no court is going to step in and force a waiver over a rule that is in place, and has been in place all along, in which JMU could have already challenged it in court months ago, which will cause damage to another team.

This isnt some wrong doing done to JMU at the last moment. JMU has known this was the rule, and was ruled against a waiver 7 months ago. You dont sit on your butt for over half of a year, and then start threatening to sue at the very last moment just because you are undefeated late in the season.

(11-16-2023 09:05 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 08:51 PM)Porcine Wrote:  If the NCAA had done the right thing several months ago when they had the chance, there wouldn't be a problem.

The NCAA DOES have the obligation to do the right thing and uphold their contract with the G5 schools that says JMU is ineligible. Period. End of story. We aren't going to rip up a contract and forfeit money owed to everybody BUT JMU.

Are you going to need a swoon couch?

(11-16-2023 04:54 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:39 PM)solohawks Wrote:  But the invite rule is in place to upgrade.
You cannot just jump up and down anymore as an independent

Yeah, but what prevents two commishes from just straight swapping every season?

I'm expecting an answer back of "Come on, who's gonna want to go down?" But there's tons of examples in college sports administrative stuff like this of "come on, who'd ever do THAT?" where we suddenly have to think about it.

Like the Pac-12 fighting in court over the process of what

It would be very expensive for a school to pay the new upgrade fee every other year. What would the ROI be in doing this?

(11-16-2023 09:06 PM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 09:03 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

Quote:The letter states that JMU would seek monetary damages, a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction because it would be irreparably harmed without relief. It asks for a response from the NCAA by noon on Friday and hopes to have a court hearing on the matter on Nov. 21 or 22.

And the rest of the G5 would need to sue the NCAA for monetary damages against the NCAA and JMU if they try to void our contractually obligated NY6 payout that JMU willfully entered when they joined FBS. JMU is just being ridiculous at this point. They have nothing to stand on.

Absolutely. Any goodwill JMU has built is completely gone. They’re acting like a desperate petulant toddler.
[/quote]

The Commonwealth of Virginia is arguing that the bowl ban clause for reclassifying institutions violates antitrust laws by excluding new entrants to protect the financial interest of incumbents.

If the courts rule that the bowl ban is illegal under antitrust laws, other schools are welcome to sue the NCAA for not enforcing an illegal contract provision. But illegal contract provisions can't be enforced, so those lawsuits will fail. The "I suffered harm because my illegal cartel arrangement failed to protect my financial interests" argument doesn't work well.

edit- Not to mention, there are huge implications for the NCAA if the courts side with VA. It could be argued that all rules over divisional reclassification are effectively null and void. It could create chaos. The NCAA needs to consider its options carefully. If VA loses in court, there is very little downside for the Commonwealth. JMU just has to play in a lesser bowl, which is basically the status quo. If the NCAA loses in court, there are massive downsides.

(11-16-2023 09:09 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 08:51 PM)Porcine Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 06:13 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Its not necessarily that they would lose in court. JMU / the state has waited until the last minute to try to force this. JMU was originally denied the waiver back in April.

So, will another party be injured due to this? Yes. The team left out of the CCG.

Are you asking a court to issue a ruling that will cause injury to another entity, in which you want a ruling where you get a waiver for something you knew was the rule, in the next 9 days? There's not a judge who would or should take that on. They may allow it to go forward, but there will be too much case prep for it to happen that quickly. Could a judge order a stay? I suppose, but that would be disastrous and the CFP would likely not consider a team who could end up being deemed ineligible prior to the game.

In short, you cant wait until the last second, when you have a good end of season football record, to do this. They could have approached the courts at any time after April, but they didnt. Now they want to force a ruling in just mere days. I dont see that happening.

We will see...this is just such a dumb hill for the NCAA to die on.

Even if they end up keeping JMU out, you've now made an enemy with the VA state government, who has the time, resources, motivation, and political clout to make the NCAA regret this.

So congrats on that NCAA

Even if the NCAA was blatantly wrong here, the primary issue is one of timing. We are 9 days from the end of the season. Of that, you literally only have 2-3 court days in which to get in front of a judge because of the holidays.

So the odds of this affecting the CCG are out the window, whether the NCAA is right or wrong. They literally waited too late to take action.

What could happen after the sunbelt ccg teams are set, the NCAA could come back and say, ok, we'll give you a waiver. You are eligible for any bowl. That way JMU gets their wish, and noone was harmed in the process of sorting this out due to the very extreme late nature of the court filing.

If the NCAA had done the right thing several months ago when they had the chance, there wouldn't be a problem.

It wasnt several months ago, it was 7 months ago.

I dont know if JMU should get a waiver, I dont care if they do get a waiver. What I'm saying is that no court is going to step in and force a waiver over a rule that is in place, and has been in place all along, in which JMU could have already challenged it in court months ago, which will cause damage to another team.

This isnt some wrong doing done to JMU at the last moment. JMU has known this was the rule, and was ruled against a waiver 7 months ago. You dont sit on your butt for over half of a year, and then start threatening to sue at the very last moment just because you are undefeated late in the season.

JMU and their success has amplified how wrong the process is. The NCAA has to do things the hard way and here we are having to do things the hard way.

(11-16-2023 09:00 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 08:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Its not necessarily that they would lose in court. JMU / the state has waited until the last minute to try to force this. JMU was originally denied the waiver back in April.

So, will another party be injured due to this? Yes. The team left out of the CCG.

Are you asking a court to issue a ruling that will cause injury to another entity, in which you want a ruling where you get a waiver for something you knew was the rule, in the next 9 days? There's not a judge who would or should take that on. They may allow it to go forward, but there will be too much case prep for it to happen that quickly. Could a judge order a stay? I suppose, but that would be disastrous and the CFP would likely not consider a team who could end up being deemed ineligible prior to the game.

In short, you cant wait until the last second, when you have a good end of season football record, to do this. They could have approached the courts at any time after April, but they didnt. Now they want to force a ruling in just mere days. I dont see that happening.

We will see...this is just such a dumb hill for the NCAA to die on.

Even if they end up keeping JMU out, you've now made an enemy with the VA state government, who has the time, resources, motivation, and political clout to make the NCAA regret this.

So congrats on that NCAA

So would you get rid of the 4 year probation period in basketball?

Yes absolutely

What purpose does it serve?

You need an invite to move up so there is no legitimate risk of teams moving up and down

If a D2 team can come in and win the NEC right away more power to them

Also those transitioning teams are eligible for the CBI and CIT/TBC

So it's not about the postseason, it simply punitive

Its:
1) to discourage moveups unless schools are really committed;
2) to see if the schools really meet the requirements; and
3) to preserve what other schools built for themselves until the new school has served a probationary period.

Note that new employees often don't get benefits until a certain period of time passes. Its very common in a lot of situations.

Its not punitive at all. Its consistent. You may not like it, but there is nothing fundamentally wrong with it. It is in the NCAA and Division's interest to discourage moveups. It is supposed to be a little painful.

I think there are WAY too many schools in Division I and moving up should be discouraged. The old 8 years probation was too long, but 4 years is very reasonable. And the FBS transition period is only half that.

(11-16-2023 10:15 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:54 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:39 PM)solohawks Wrote:  But the invite rule is in place to upgrade.
You cannot just jump up and down anymore as an independent

Yeah, but what prevents two commishes from just straight swapping every season?

I'm expecting an answer back of "Come on, who's gonna want to go down?" But there's tons of examples in college sports administrative stuff like this of "come on, who'd ever do THAT?" where we suddenly have to think about it.

Like the Pac-12 fighting in court over the process of what

It would be very expensive for a school to pay the new upgrade fee every other year. What would the ROI be in doing this?

Some of the boogeymen FCS school scenarios against FBS schools can be hilarious if you don't sucked into arguing them.

(11-16-2023 10:15 PM)We Are the Dukes of JMU Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 09:06 PM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 09:03 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

Quote:The letter states that JMU would seek monetary damages, a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction because it would be irreparably harmed without relief. It asks for a response from the NCAA by noon on Friday and hopes to have a court hearing on the matter on Nov. 21 or 22.

And the rest of the G5 would need to sue the NCAA for monetary damages against the NCAA and JMU if they try to void our contractually obligated NY6 payout that JMU willfully entered when they joined FBS. JMU is just being ridiculous at this point. They have nothing to stand on.

Absolutely. Any goodwill JMU has built is completely gone. They’re acting like a desperate petulant toddler.

The Commonwealth of Virginia is arguing that the bowl ban clause for reclassifying institutions violates antitrust laws by excluding new entrants to protect the financial interest of incumbents.

If the courts rule that the bowl ban is illegal under antitrust laws, other schools are welcome to sue the NCAA for not enforcing an illegal contract provision. But illegal contract provisions can't be enforced, so those lawsuits will fail. The "I suffered harm because my illegal cartel arrangement failed to protect my financial interests" argument doesn't work well.

edit- Not to mention, there are huge implications for the NCAA if the courts side with VA. It could be argued that all rules over divisional reclassification are effectively null and void. It could create chaos. The NCAA needs to consider its options carefully. If VA loses in court, there is very little downside for the Commonwealth. JMU just has to play in a lesser bowl, which is basically the status quo. If the NCAA loses in court, there are massive downsides.
[/quote]

If the NCAA folds without fighting there are massive downsides. And there is really no risk JMU wins on any appeal.

(11-16-2023 10:22 PM)Porcine Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 09:09 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 08:51 PM)Porcine Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 06:13 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  We will see...this is just such a dumb hill for the NCAA to die on.

Even if they end up keeping JMU out, you've now made an enemy with the VA state government, who has the time, resources, motivation, and political clout to make the NCAA regret this.

So congrats on that NCAA

Even if the NCAA was blatantly wrong here, the primary issue is one of timing. We are 9 days from the end of the season. Of that, you literally only have 2-3 court days in which to get in front of a judge because of the holidays.

So the odds of this affecting the CCG are out the window, whether the NCAA is right or wrong. They literally waited too late to take action.

What could happen after the sunbelt ccg teams are set, the NCAA could come back and say, ok, we'll give you a waiver. You are eligible for any bowl. That way JMU gets their wish, and noone was harmed in the process of sorting this out due to the very extreme late nature of the court filing.

If the NCAA had done the right thing several months ago when they had the chance, there wouldn't be a problem.

It wasnt several months ago, it was 7 months ago.

I dont know if JMU should get a waiver, I dont care if they do get a waiver. What I'm saying is that no court is going to step in and force a waiver over a rule that is in place, and has been in place all along, in which JMU could have already challenged it in court months ago, which will cause damage to another team.

This isnt some wrong doing done to JMU at the last moment. JMU has known this was the rule, and was ruled against a waiver 7 months ago. You dont sit on your butt for over half of a year, and then start threatening to sue at the very last moment just because you are undefeated late in the season.

JMU and their success has amplified how wrong the process is. The NCAA has to do things the hard way and here we are having to do things the hard way.

Too bad, they should go back to FCS if they dont like it.

(11-16-2023 10:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 09:00 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 08:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-16-2023 04:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Its not necessarily that they would lose in court. JMU / the state has waited until the last minute to try to force this. JMU was originally denied the waiver back in April.

So, will another party be injured due to this? Yes. The team left out of the CCG.

Are you asking a court to issue a ruling that will cause injury to another entity, in which you want a ruling where you get a waiver for something you knew was the rule, in the next 9 days? There's not a judge who would or should take that on. They may allow it to go forward, but there will be too much case prep for it to happen that quickly. Could a judge order a stay? I suppose, but that would be disastrous and the CFP would likely not consider a team who could end up being deemed ineligible prior to the game.

In short, you cant wait until the last second, when you have a good end of season football record, to do this. They could have approached the courts at any time after April, but they didnt. Now they want to force a ruling in just mere days. I dont see that happening.

We will see...this is just such a dumb hill for the NCAA to die on.

Even if they end up keeping JMU out, you've now made an enemy with the VA state government, who has the time, resources, motivation, and political clout to make the NCAA regret this.

So congrats on that NCAA

So would you get rid of the 4 year probation period in basketball?

Yes absolutely

What purpose does it serve?

You need an invite to move up so there is no legitimate risk of teams moving up and down

If a D2 team can come in and win the NEC right away more power to them

Also those transitioning teams are eligible for the CBI and CIT/TBC

So it's not about the postseason, it simply punitive

Its:
1) to discourage moveups unless schools are really committed;
2) to see if the schools really meet the requirements; and
3) to preserve what other schools built for themselves until the new school has served a probationary period.

Note that new employees often don't get benefits until a certain period of time passes. Its very common in a lot of situations.

Its not punitive at all. Its consistent. You may not like it, but there is nothing fundamentally wrong with it. It is in the NCAA and Division's interest to discourage moveups. It is supposed to be a little painful.

I think there are WAY too many schools in Division I and moving up should be discouraged. The old 8 years probation was too long, but 4 years is very reasonable. And the FBS transition period is only half that.

1. You've empowered the conferences to do that work. Let the NEC or ASun make that determination

2. If they don't meet the requirements then they don't get to stay. Why does a post-season ban have to accompany transition? It makes no sense to punish a program, a team and its student athletes who are proving themselves on the field.

Also, why allow a transitioning team to fast track one men and women's sport except basketball? Arbitrary and capricious unless you want to admit it's about the money and making sure the new guy isn't getting his too fast and making it attractive for others to move up too.

3. Don't really understand this one..I'm interpreting this as a pay your dues argument. "You're too new to get our one NCAA bid and we don't want you taking it from a more tenured school." Again if you don't want a D2 school taking your auto bid don't invite them?