stevo
Full Member
Posts: 750
Member is Online
|
Post by stevo on Nov 7, 2023 13:29:32 GMT -6
Chris Vannini @chrisvannini
JMU AD Jeff Bourne says that if the NCAA allows the Dukes to be fully bowl eligible, the Sun Belt has agreed to let JMU play for the conference championship (as expected).
|
|
|
Post by leeroy on Nov 7, 2023 13:45:52 GMT -6
Chris Vannini @chrisvannini JMU AD Jeff Bourne says that if the NCAA allows the Dukes to be fully bowl eligible, the Sun Belt has agreed to let JMU play for the conference championship (as expected). CUSA should follow suit. If we win out, we'd be going to Lynchburg in a normal year.
|
|
|
Post by jsu02 on Nov 7, 2023 14:19:24 GMT -6
Chris Vannini @chrisvannini JMU AD Jeff Bourne says that if the NCAA allows the Dukes to be fully bowl eligible, the Sun Belt has agreed to let JMU play for the conference championship (as expected). CUSA should follow suit. If we win out, we'd be going to Lynchburg in a normal year. Should we then file with the NCAA?
|
|
|
Post by Whup Em All on Nov 7, 2023 14:23:22 GMT -6
CUSA should follow suit. If we win out, we'd be going to Lynchburg in a normal year. Should we then file with the NCAA? Honestly, as irritated as I am by what JMU is doing, if the NCAA caves and grants them a waiver, we should absolutely file for our own. We're over here doing things the right way, and JMU is benefitting. I'm kind of tired of it.
|
|
stevo
Full Member
Posts: 750
Member is Online
|
Post by stevo on Nov 7, 2023 14:26:51 GMT -6
Keep in mind this is JMU's second year playing in the Sun Belt. That will help them a little.
|
|
stevo
Full Member
Posts: 750
Member is Online
|
Post by stevo on Nov 7, 2023 14:29:44 GMT -6
Chris Vannini @chrisvannini
@bydavidteel asks JMU AD Jeff Bourne if the school would be pushing this if it was 6-3 instead of 9-0.
Bourne says it's a good Q, but adds, "Winning at this level, the way we have, accentuates the preparedness for where we are and I think it adds significantly to our case."
|
|
|
Post by troysux on Nov 7, 2023 14:34:30 GMT -6
Should we then file with the NCAA? Honestly, as irritated as I am by what JMU is doing, if the NCAA caves and grants them a waiver, we should absolutely file for our own. We're over here doing things the right way, and JMU is benefitting. I'm kind of tired of it. I think if the NCAA lets JMU in, they’ll let us in as well. Would CUSA let us in the championship game if that happens?
|
|
|
Post by jsu02 on Nov 7, 2023 14:40:40 GMT -6
Honestly, as irritated as I am by what JMU is doing, if the NCAA caves and grants them a waiver, we should absolutely file for our own. We're over here doing things the right way, and JMU is benefitting. I'm kind of tired of it. I think if the NCAA lets JMU in, they’ll let us in as well. Would CUSA let us in the championship game if that happens? I see no reason they wouldn't, provided we win out. Greg needs to call Judy and get an answer. If it is yes, he needs to go ahead and file. If it's granted to JMU, it should be granted to us.
|
|
|
Post by leeroy on Nov 7, 2023 15:03:29 GMT -6
Keep in mind this is JMU's second year playing in the Sun Belt. That will help them a little. Yes, on the conference side of things maybe, but as far as the NCAA goes, we are both 2nd year transition schools. Also, I don't see CUSA giving us grief since if it's not us, most likely CUSA newcomer NMSU will play Liberty for the ship.
|
|
|
Post by Cleburneslim on Nov 7, 2023 16:29:33 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Whup Em All on Nov 7, 2023 17:01:30 GMT -6
According to multiple reports online, the answer is yes. If JMU has (actual, not provisional) bowl eligibility, then the Belt would make them eligible for the CCG. They'd face troy state. And I hate to say it, but I'd be rooting HARD for the correspondence school in that one.
|
|
|
Post by Cleburneslim on Nov 7, 2023 20:42:03 GMT -6
According to multiple reports online, the answer is yes. If JMU has (actual, not provisional) bowl eligibility, then the Belt would make them eligible for the CCG. They'd face troy state. And I hate to say it, but I'd be rooting HARD for the correspondence school in that one. So if the answer from the NCAA is No then the SBC is no? If the SBC is behind their plight then shouldn't it be yes no matter what?
|
|
|
Post by brother on Nov 7, 2023 21:03:31 GMT -6
According to multiple reports online, the answer is yes. If JMU has (actual, not provisional) bowl eligibility, then the Belt would make them eligible for the CCG. They'd face troy state. And I hate to say it, but I'd be rooting HARD for the correspondence school in that one.
|
|
|
Post by Whup Em All on Nov 8, 2023 10:05:27 GMT -6
According to multiple reports online, the answer is yes. If JMU has (actual, not provisional) bowl eligibility, then the Belt would make them eligible for the CCG. They'd face troy state. And I hate to say it, but I'd be rooting HARD for the correspondence school in that one. So if the answer from the NCAA is No then the SBC is no? If the SBC is behind their plight then shouldn't it be yes no matter what? No... for a few reasons: 1) College Football Playoff: Umm. Nevermind. 2) Bowl Tie-ins: This boils down to the verbiage of individual contracts, so it's not automatic across the board, but it's definitely something to consider. The Belt wants its champion in the best bowl possible, and, short of a CFP bid, this means sending its champion to the best of the bowls with tie-ins to the conference. But if that champion is bowl-ineligible, the bowl committee may be contractually allowed to look to a different conference to fill its open slot. Bowls want prestige and fans. They don't (necessarily) want the unranked runner-up who lost to an ineligible champ. Often, the tie-in contract will reflect this, since it's in the bowl's best interest to sign the best team possible. Along those same lines, a higher-end bowl is not going to hold a vacancy open while bowls below them snag the better teams. Not when they have options. And JMU can't be invited until all 6-win teams have been signed ahead of them. 3) Rankings: Gah. Nevermind again. My whole point was based on a one-loss troy state, but they already have 2. Freakin' A. As for my rooting for the correspondence school comment... it's the principle of the thing. I hate the enemy empire and all they stand for, but JMU's antics have left a really bad taste in my mouth. If they're granted a waiver, I'd love nothing more than to see them embarrassed in the game they've fought so hard to get into. Ideally, both teams would lose... but since that's not really possible, in this single, isolated case, I'd rather see the correspondence school win than see JMU reap the rewards of their childish behavior. I'll bathe myself in bleach afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by jsu02 on Nov 8, 2023 10:42:36 GMT -6
So if the answer from the NCAA is No then the SBC is no? If the SBC is behind their plight then shouldn't it be yes no matter what? No... for a few reasons: 1) College Football Playoff: If an eligible JMU continued their unbeaten streak and won the CCG, they could be a lock for the CFP slot. (Major millions for the Belt.) If JMU is bowl ineligible, then they are CFP ineligible. This means the SBC would be much better off blocking an ineligible JMU from their CCG. Right now, Tulane and Liberty are in line ahead of the 2nd place Belt team. But if those two each take a loss between now and then, it could open the door for troy state to sneak into the CFP. But if the SBC allows an ineligible JMU to play in the CCG and they beat troy state, then all they would've managed to do is knock themselves out of CFP consideration. 2) Bowl Tie-ins: This boils down to the verbiage of individual contracts, so it's not automatic across the board, but it's definitely something to consider. The Belt wants its champion in the best bowl possible, and, short of a CFP bid, this means sending its champion to the best of the bowls with tie-ins to the conference. But if that champion is bowl-ineligible, the bowl committee may be contractually allowed to look to a different conference to fill its open slot. Bowls want prestige and fans. They don't (necessarily) want the unranked runner-up who lost to an ineligible champ. Often, the tie-in contract will reflect this, since it's in the bowl's best interest to sign the best team possible. Along those same lines, a higher-end bowl is not going to hold a vacancy open while bowls below them snag the better teams. Not when they have options. And JMU can't be invited until all 6-win teams have been signed ahead of them. 3) Rankings: If JMU does not play in the CCG, and troy state beats the East representative, then the Belt could wind up with a 12-0 JMU and 12-1 troy state heading into Bowl season. JMU's already ranked, and a 12-win troy state team could sneak into the rankings as well, giving the Belt TWO ranked teams. But if JMU plays in the CCG, they'll likely only end up with one. An 11-2 troy state team is not going to be ranked, and if the trojans win, it's doubtful two 12-1 teams would be ranked. Either JMU would fall out, replaced by the trojans, or JMU falls to No. 25 and troy state has to settle for "receiving votes". The Belt is still a G5 conference, after all, and like Rodney Dangerfield, doesn't get no respect. As for my rooting for the correspondence school comment... it's the principle of the thing. I hate the enemy empire and all they stand for, but JMU's antics have left a really bad taste in my mouth. If they're granted a waiver, I'd love nothing more than to see them embarrassed in the game they've fought so hard to get into. Ideally, both teams would lose... but since that's not really possible, in this single, isolated case, I'd rather see the correspondence school win than see JMU reap the rewards of their childish behavior. I'll bathe myself in bleach afterwards. Doesn't troy state already have 2 losses?
|
|