info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
If that would have been, say, Alabama-Georgia instead of Penn State-Illinois
149 views
Skip to first unread message
The NOTBCS Guy
Oct 23, 2021, 5:26:50 PM10/23/21
to
...then there would be calls for an emergency Football Rules Committee meeting to change the overtime procedure to something similar to the NFL's in time for this year's playoff.
"Why don't they go one step further and replace college basketball overtime with a 3-point shooting contest? Or save everyone quite a bit of time, and a few injuries as well, and toss a coin?"
(Here's my crazy football OT solution: toss a coin, then the winner chooses which team will specify the distance for a win-or-lose free kick (unblocked) field goal, then the other team chooses which team has to kick it.)
"Why don't they go one step further and replace college basketball overtime with a 3-point shooting contest? Or save everyone quite a bit of time, and a few injuries as well, and toss a coin?"
(Here's my crazy football OT solution: toss a coin, then the winner chooses which team will specify the distance for a win-or-lose free kick (unblocked) field goal, then the other team chooses which team has to kick it.)
Eric Ramon
Oct 23, 2021, 5:37:48 PM10/23/21
to
Michael Falkner
Oct 23, 2021, 7:23:38 PM10/23/21
to
On Saturday, October 23, 2021 at 2:26:50 PM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
On the third part: Interesting, when you think of it.
It's not quite that unakin to something the Baltimore Ravens have proposed for the NFL -- and it got some traction in this year's owner's meetings. It's called "Spot and Choose" Overtime. Winner of the coin toss gets a choice, they can either choose where overtime starts (no kickoff), or, once the other team does, they can determine who gets the ball first at that spot. If they choose the spot, the other team then chooses who gets to start OT. (Unknown if this process reverts overtime back to sudden death.)
It may be explored again at a later date, but the NFL does not currently believe the current 10-minute system is broken.
Mike
Michael Falkner
Oct 23, 2021, 7:24:38 PM10/23/21
to
On Saturday, October 23, 2021 at 2:37:48 PM UTC-7, Eric Ramon wrote:
> that's a funny suggestion! But if you've got a worse kicker and you win the coin toss you're kind of screwed.
Not really. You let the other team spot, then you see if your kicker can do it. All winning the coin toss does is you get the choice to spot the free kick or, when the other team does, determine who kicks it.
> that's a funny suggestion! But if you've got a worse kicker and you win the coin toss you're kind of screwed.
Mike
RoddyMcCorley
Oct 24, 2021, 1:39:28 AM10/24/21
to
--
"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In
practice, there is." Ruben Goldberg
The NOTBCS Guy
Oct 24, 2021, 10:28:11 AM10/24/21
to
> It's not quite that unakin to something the Baltimore Ravens have proposed for the NFL -- and it got some traction in this year's owner's meetings. It's called "Spot and Choose" Overtime. Winner of the coin toss gets a choice, they can either choose where overtime starts (no kickoff), or, once the other team does, they can determine who gets the ball first at that spot. If they choose the spot, the other team then chooses who gets to start OT. (Unknown if this process reverts overtime back to sudden death.)
According to baltimoreravens.com, the proposal would have gone back to "first team that scores, wins," and kept the 10-minute time limit for regular season games.
Another crazy idea of mine, although I think a variation of this was actually used, at least in high schools, at some point in the 1970s: put the ball on the 50, then each play is, in effect, fourth and goal, but you cannot punt - i.e. teams alternate plays, but each play is from where the previous play ended; first team that scores, wins. Also, if you miss a field goal from inside the 50, the other team gets the ball on the 50. The version I remember being used worked a little differently; after each team ran four plays, the game was over, and the winner determined based on whose side of the field the ball was on; also, if a team turned the ball over, it lost all of its remaining plays and the ball was spotted on the 50.
xyzzy
Oct 24, 2021, 10:42:32 AM10/24/21
to
(And get off my lawn)
--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
liberal personality.” — Altie
Michael Falkner
Oct 24, 2021, 11:16:58 AM10/24/21
to
On Sunday, October 24, 2021 at 7:28:11 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> Another crazy idea of mine, although I think a variation of this was actually used, at least in high schools, at some point in the 1970s: put the ball on the 50, then each play is, in effect, fourth and goal, but you cannot punt - i.e. teams alternate plays, but each play is from where the previous play ended; first team that scores, wins. Also, if you miss a field goal from inside the 50, the other team gets the ball on the 50. The version I remember being used worked a little differently; after each team ran four plays, the game was over, and the winner determined based on whose side of the field the ball was on; also, if a team turned the ball over, it lost all of its remaining plays and the ball was spotted on the 50.
Now that's interesting...
> Another crazy idea of mine, although I think a variation of this was actually used, at least in high schools, at some point in the 1970s: put the ball on the 50, then each play is, in effect, fourth and goal, but you cannot punt - i.e. teams alternate plays, but each play is from where the previous play ended; first team that scores, wins. Also, if you miss a field goal from inside the 50, the other team gets the ball on the 50. The version I remember being used worked a little differently; after each team ran four plays, the game was over, and the winner determined based on whose side of the field the ball was on; also, if a team turned the ball over, it lost all of its remaining plays and the ball was spotted on the 50.
Mike
Johnny RSFCootball
Oct 24, 2021, 11:20:24 AM10/24/21
to
The NOTBCS Guy
Oct 24, 2021, 1:59:51 PM10/24/21
to
> BR1/\/G B4C|< T1ES1111!!1!1
>
> (And get off my lawn)
So what happens if a conference championship game, or a playoff semifinal, ends in a tie? Who advances? (Wait, don't tell me, let me guess: the higher-ranked team. In that case, then there is no tie, as, for all intents and purposes, the higher-ranked team begins the game ahead 1/2 to 0.)
>
> (And get off my lawn)
Meanwhile, if the CFP championship game ends in a tie, what do you do? Declare co-champions? Declare the higher seed as the CFP champion? Ask the NCAA? (The NCAA's response, assuming the bylaws aren't changed: "We don't care, as long as nobody gets a 'college football national champion ring' on a team that wasn't ranked #1 in the final Coaches or AP (or any other "national wire service") poll - and note that you CAN carve 'national champions' on, say, a conference championship or semi-final bowl game ring." I thought Auburn was told to take down a "2004 National Champions" banner at some point, but the NCAA does not seem to have a problem with Central Florida's "2017 National Champions" signage in its stadium - then again, it doesn't say that the championship is in football...)
Michael Falkner
Oct 24, 2021, 4:24:10 PM10/24/21
to
On Sunday, October 24, 2021 at 10:59:51 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> > BR1/\/G B4C|< T1ES1111!!1!1
> >
> > (And get off my lawn)
> So what happens if a conference championship game, or a playoff semifinal, ends in a tie? Who advances? (Wait, don't tell me, let me guess: the higher-ranked team. In that case, then there is no tie, as, for all intents and purposes, the higher-ranked team begins the game ahead 1/2 to 0.)
Most conferences have, as some form of a tiebreaker on some level, polls or CFP rankings as a tiebreaker in some regard -- or at least they used to. So it probably would be the higher-ranked team via the Committee.
> > BR1/\/G B4C|< T1ES1111!!1!1
> >
> > (And get off my lawn)
> So what happens if a conference championship game, or a playoff semifinal, ends in a tie? Who advances? (Wait, don't tell me, let me guess: the higher-ranked team. In that case, then there is no tie, as, for all intents and purposes, the higher-ranked team begins the game ahead 1/2 to 0.)
> Meanwhile, if the CFP championship game ends in a tie, what do you do? Declare co-champions?
>Declare the higher seed as the CFP champion? Ask the NCAA? (The NCAA's response, assuming the bylaws aren't changed: "We don't care, as long as nobody gets a 'college football national champion ring' on a team that wasn't ranked #1 in the final Coaches or AP (or any other "national wire service") poll - and note that you CAN carve 'national champions' on, say, a conference championship or semi-final bowl game ring." I thought Auburn was told to take down a "2004 National Champions" banner at some point, but the NCAA does not seem to have a problem with Central Florida's "2017 National Champions" signage in its stadium - then again, it doesn't say that the championship is in football...)
Mike
The NOTBCS Guy
Oct 24, 2021, 4:49:57 PM10/24/21
to
> >Declare the higher seed as the CFP champion? Ask the NCAA? (The NCAA's response, assuming the bylaws aren't changed: "We don't care, as long as nobody gets a 'college football national champion ring' on a team that wasn't ranked #1 in the final Coaches or AP (or any other "national wire service") poll - and note that you CAN carve 'national champions' on, say, a conference championship or semi-final bowl game ring." I thought Auburn was told to take down a "2004 National Champions" banner at some point, but the NCAA does not seem to have a problem with Central Florida's "2017 National Champions" signage in its stadium - then again, it doesn't say that the championship is in football...)
> Actually, any "recognized enough" entity which can name a #1 team can have a team, under NCAA rules, declared National Champions. It's one of the reasons the Colley computer (IIRC, it was one of the computer polls the BCS used to use) ranking Central Florida #1 which made the whole to-do that Scott Frost did after the first undefeated season legal under NCAA rules.
Which mysterious "NCAA rule" is this?" (Is it next to the "graduate transfer rule" that doesn't seem to be in the bylaws either, or at least not a version of the rule that a lot of people seem to think exists (i.e. anybody can transfer without sitting out a year once they graduate)?) The only reference to an FBS college football "national champion" in the NCAA Bylaws is a footnote saying what schools can give out "championship rings" without it being considered an illegal benefit.
> Actually, any "recognized enough" entity which can name a #1 team can have a team, under NCAA rules, declared National Champions. It's one of the reasons the Colley computer (IIRC, it was one of the computer polls the BCS used to use) ranking Central Florida #1 which made the whole to-do that Scott Frost did after the first undefeated season legal under NCAA rules.
Supposedly, Central Florida's claim is based on it being mentioned in the "NCAA FBS Record Book" (http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2021/FBS.pdf) - but it is listed under "Final National Poll Leaders" and not "National Champions."
Johnny RSFCootball
Oct 24, 2021, 5:05:07 PM10/24/21
to
Michael Falkner
Oct 25, 2021, 8:03:54 AM10/25/21
to
On Sunday, October 24, 2021 at 1:49:57 PM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> > Actually, any "recognized enough" entity which can name a #1 team can have a team, under NCAA rules, declared National Champions. It's one of the reasons the Colley computer (IIRC, it was one of the computer polls the BCS used to use) ranking Central Florida #1 which made the whole to-do that Scott Frost did after the first undefeated season legal under NCAA rules.
> Which mysterious "NCAA rule" is this?" (Is it next to the "graduate transfer rule" that doesn't seem to be in the bylaws either, or at least not a version of the rule that a lot of people seem to think exists (i.e. anybody can transfer without sitting out a year once they graduate)?) The only reference to an FBS college football "national champion" in the NCAA Bylaws is a footnote saying what schools can give out "championship rings" without it being considered an illegal benefit.
Remember (you probably do, but this is for others) that the NCAA sponsors no FBS direct national championship. By 18.02.1.1, direct recognition of an NCAA national championship requires the NCAA runs the process.
> > Actually, any "recognized enough" entity which can name a #1 team can have a team, under NCAA rules, declared National Champions. It's one of the reasons the Colley computer (IIRC, it was one of the computer polls the BCS used to use) ranking Central Florida #1 which made the whole to-do that Scott Frost did after the first undefeated season legal under NCAA rules.
> Which mysterious "NCAA rule" is this?" (Is it next to the "graduate transfer rule" that doesn't seem to be in the bylaws either, or at least not a version of the rule that a lot of people seem to think exists (i.e. anybody can transfer without sitting out a year once they graduate)?) The only reference to an FBS college football "national champion" in the NCAA Bylaws is a footnote saying what schools can give out "championship rings" without it being considered an illegal benefit.
But here's your answer: Rule 16.1.4.2 of the NCAA By-Laws (https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/reports/getReport/90008 -- page 236 of the actual book, 249 of the PDF):
"16.1.4.2 Awards for Winning Conference and National Championships. [A] Awards for winning an individual
or team conference or national championship may be presented each year, limited in value and number as specified in
Figure 16-2. Awards for winning a conference or national championship in a team sport may be provided only to student athletes who were eligible to participate in the championship event. The total value of any single award received for a
national championship may not exceed $415. The total value of any single award received for a conference championship
may not exceed $325, and each permissible awarding agency is subject to a separate $325 limit per award. Each permissible
awarding agency may provide only a single award for each championship to each student-athlete. Separate awards may be
presented to both the regular-season conference champion and the postseason conference champion (with a separate $325
limitation), but if the same institution wins both the regular-season and postseason conference championship, the combined
value of both awards shall not exceed $325. [R] (Revised: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/02, 8/7/14)"
Figure 16-2 (https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/bylaw?ruleId=320&refDate=20211025) is a chart which indicates who and what awards can be given. The Institution or the Conference can give out the awards if a "national wire-service poll or national coaches association" recognizes them as such.
After the creation of the CFP, this was further clarified (Source: https://www.al.com/sports/2018/08/ncaa_recognizes_ucfs_national.html#:~:text=UCF%2C%20after%20all%20the%20pomp%20and%20circumstance%2C%20is,a%20team%20that%20finished%20the%20season%20No.%201.) -- eugh, I hate that. That link may not work for you... -- to state that all "major selectors" (which, in this case, meant BCS computers and polls) carried similar recognition. If a team not the CFP champion was named the top rank team in any "major selector", they were designated _a_ national champion by the NCAA, for the purposes of this rule, listed below the CFP champion.
Hence, when the Colley Matrix, a former BCS computer process -- and, hence, a "major selector" -- named UCF #1 for the 2007-08 season, the rule triggered, and recognition could be given under the NCAA rules.
> Supposedly, Central Florida's claim is based on it being mentioned in the "NCAA FBS Record Book" (http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2021/FBS.pdf) - but it is listed under "Final National Poll Leaders" and not "National Champions."
Mike
The NOTBCS Guy
Oct 25, 2021, 11:26:54 AM10/25/21
to
> > > Actually, any "recognized enough" entity which can name a #1 team can have a team, under NCAA rules, declared National Champions. It's one of the reasons the Colley computer (IIRC, it was one of the computer polls the BCS used to use) ranking Central Florida #1 which made the whole to-do that Scott Frost did after the first undefeated season legal under NCAA rules.
>
> > Which mysterious "NCAA rule" is this?" (Is it next to the "graduate transfer rule" that doesn't seem to be in the bylaws either, or at least not a version of the rule that a lot of people seem to think exists (i.e. anybody can transfer without sitting out a year once they graduate)?) The only reference to an FBS college football "national champion" in the NCAA Bylaws is a footnote saying what schools can give out "championship rings" without it being considered an illegal benefit.
> Remember (you probably do, but this is for others) that the NCAA sponsors no FBS direct national championship. By 18.02.1.1, direct recognition of an NCAA national championship requires the NCAA runs the process.
>
> But here's your answer: Rule 16.1.4.2 of the NCAA By-Laws (https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/reports/getReport/90008 -- page 236 of the actual book, 249 of the PDF):
>
> "16.1.4.2 Awards for Winning Conference and National Championships. [A] Awards for winning an individual
> or team conference or national championship may be presented each year, limited in value and number as specified in
> Figure 16-2. Awards for winning a conference or national championship in a team sport may be provided only to student athletes who were eligible to participate in the championship event. The total value of any single award received for a
> national championship may not exceed $415. The total value of any single award received for a conference championship
> may not exceed $325, and each permissible awarding agency is subject to a separate $325 limit per award. Each permissible
> awarding agency may provide only a single award for each championship to each student-athlete. Separate awards may be
> presented to both the regular-season conference champion and the postseason conference champion (with a separate $325
> limitation), but if the same institution wins both the regular-season and postseason conference championship, the combined
> value of both awards shall not exceed $325. [R] (Revised: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/02, 8/7/14)"
>
> Figure 16-2 (https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/bylaw?ruleId=320&refDate=20211025) is a chart which indicates who and what awards can be given. The Institution or the Conference can give out the awards if a "national wire-service poll or national coaches association" recognizes them as such.
>
> After the creation of the CFP, this was further clarified (Source: https://www.al.com/sports/2018/08/ncaa_recognizes_ucfs_national.html#:~:text=UCF%2C%20after%20all%20the%20pomp%20and%20circumstance%2C%20is,a%20team%20that%20finished%20the%20season%20No.%201.) -- eugh, I hate that. That link may not work for you... -- to state that all "major selectors" (which, in this case, meant BCS computers and polls) carried similar recognition. If a team not the CFP champion was named the top rank team in any "major selector", they were designated _a_ national champion by the NCAA, for the purposes of this rule, listed below the CFP champion.
Er, nowhere in the article that you link does it say that being named a national champion by a "major selector" (which, BTW, is not defined in the NCAA Bylaws anywhere) qualifies anyone to receive a specific national championship ring - just to be included in the list of "final national poll leaders." (If I am mistaken, please quote the text that corrects this.) If you're wondering why the NCAA didn't declare the players who received "national championship rings" ineligible from that point, it is because I seriously doubt that anybody received a ring solely for being a "national champion," but instead, received, say, a ring for being that year's AAC champion or being in that year's Peach Bowl (both of which are allowed) that has "National Champion" carved on it (which, for some reason, is also allowed - see Auburn 2004 for another example of this).
>
> > Which mysterious "NCAA rule" is this?" (Is it next to the "graduate transfer rule" that doesn't seem to be in the bylaws either, or at least not a version of the rule that a lot of people seem to think exists (i.e. anybody can transfer without sitting out a year once they graduate)?) The only reference to an FBS college football "national champion" in the NCAA Bylaws is a footnote saying what schools can give out "championship rings" without it being considered an illegal benefit.
> Remember (you probably do, but this is for others) that the NCAA sponsors no FBS direct national championship. By 18.02.1.1, direct recognition of an NCAA national championship requires the NCAA runs the process.
>
> But here's your answer: Rule 16.1.4.2 of the NCAA By-Laws (https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/reports/getReport/90008 -- page 236 of the actual book, 249 of the PDF):
>
> "16.1.4.2 Awards for Winning Conference and National Championships. [A] Awards for winning an individual
> or team conference or national championship may be presented each year, limited in value and number as specified in
> Figure 16-2. Awards for winning a conference or national championship in a team sport may be provided only to student athletes who were eligible to participate in the championship event. The total value of any single award received for a
> national championship may not exceed $415. The total value of any single award received for a conference championship
> may not exceed $325, and each permissible awarding agency is subject to a separate $325 limit per award. Each permissible
> awarding agency may provide only a single award for each championship to each student-athlete. Separate awards may be
> presented to both the regular-season conference champion and the postseason conference champion (with a separate $325
> limitation), but if the same institution wins both the regular-season and postseason conference championship, the combined
> value of both awards shall not exceed $325. [R] (Revised: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/02, 8/7/14)"
>
> Figure 16-2 (https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/bylaw?ruleId=320&refDate=20211025) is a chart which indicates who and what awards can be given. The Institution or the Conference can give out the awards if a "national wire-service poll or national coaches association" recognizes them as such.
>
> After the creation of the CFP, this was further clarified (Source: https://www.al.com/sports/2018/08/ncaa_recognizes_ucfs_national.html#:~:text=UCF%2C%20after%20all%20the%20pomp%20and%20circumstance%2C%20is,a%20team%20that%20finished%20the%20season%20No.%201.) -- eugh, I hate that. That link may not work for you... -- to state that all "major selectors" (which, in this case, meant BCS computers and polls) carried similar recognition. If a team not the CFP champion was named the top rank team in any "major selector", they were designated _a_ national champion by the NCAA, for the purposes of this rule, listed below the CFP champion.
Michael Falkner
Oct 25, 2021, 2:06:21 PM10/25/21
to
On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 8:26:54 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> Er, nowhere in the article that you link does it say that being named a national champion by a "major selector" (which, BTW, is not defined in the NCAA Bylaws anywhere) qualifies anyone to receive a specific national championship ring - just to be included in the list of "final national poll leaders." (If I am mistaken, please quote the text that corrects this.) If you're wondering why the NCAA didn't declare the players who received "national championship rings" ineligible from that point, it is because I seriously doubt that anybody received a ring solely for being a "national champion," but instead, received, say, a ring for being that year's AAC champion or being in that year's Peach Bowl (both of which are allowed) that has "National Champion" carved on it (which, for some reason, is also allowed - see Auburn 2004 for another example of this).
The GIF shown by AL.com in the article says it.
> Er, nowhere in the article that you link does it say that being named a national champion by a "major selector" (which, BTW, is not defined in the NCAA Bylaws anywhere) qualifies anyone to receive a specific national championship ring - just to be included in the list of "final national poll leaders." (If I am mistaken, please quote the text that corrects this.) If you're wondering why the NCAA didn't declare the players who received "national championship rings" ineligible from that point, it is because I seriously doubt that anybody received a ring solely for being a "national champion," but instead, received, say, a ring for being that year's AAC champion or being in that year's Peach Bowl (both of which are allowed) that has "National Champion" carved on it (which, for some reason, is also allowed - see Auburn 2004 for another example of this).
I'll give you the quote, but it's in the picture below where UCF is listed below Alabama:
"Beginning in 2014, the College Football Playoff was used to determine national champions in FBS. All "major selectors" not otherwise listed also selected the CFP champion as it's highest rated team in those seasons. In years where a "major selector" had a team other than the CFP champion as it's highest rated team in its final poll, that team is listed below the CFP champion."
That is in the 2018 NCAA Record Book -- and, unless that has changed in recent years, they should be in all succeeding as well as _a_ national champion, under the rule I stated above, since the NCAA does not administer said championship in FBS.
Mike
Michael Falkner
Oct 25, 2021, 2:07:46 PM10/25/21
to
On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 8:26:54 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> Er, nowhere in the article that you link does it say that being named a national champion by a "major selector" (which, BTW, is not defined in the NCAA Bylaws anywhere) qualifies anyone to receive a specific national championship ring - just to be included in the list of "final national poll leaders." (If I am mistaken, please quote the text that corrects this.) If you're wondering why the NCAA didn't declare the players who received "national championship rings" ineligible from that point, it is because I seriously doubt that anybody received a ring solely for being a "national champion," but instead, received, say, a ring for being that year's AAC champion or being in that year's Peach Bowl (both of which are allowed) that has "National Champion" carved on it (which, for some reason, is also allowed - see Auburn 2004 for another example of this).
Whoops. Forgot one thing about your statement there: I would have to think that the parade at Disney World (set up by UCF), etc. would be a MAJOR PROBLEM with the NCAA had the NCAA not had this rule -- made quite a bit archaic in the day and age of the BCS and CFP -- but it still existed.
> Er, nowhere in the article that you link does it say that being named a national champion by a "major selector" (which, BTW, is not defined in the NCAA Bylaws anywhere) qualifies anyone to receive a specific national championship ring - just to be included in the list of "final national poll leaders." (If I am mistaken, please quote the text that corrects this.) If you're wondering why the NCAA didn't declare the players who received "national championship rings" ineligible from that point, it is because I seriously doubt that anybody received a ring solely for being a "national champion," but instead, received, say, a ring for being that year's AAC champion or being in that year's Peach Bowl (both of which are allowed) that has "National Champion" carved on it (which, for some reason, is also allowed - see Auburn 2004 for another example of this).
Mike
The NOTBCS Guy
Oct 25, 2021, 2:44:46 PM10/25/21
to
On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 11:06:21 AM UTC-7, Michael Falkner wrote:
> On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 8:26:54 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
>
> > Er, nowhere in the article that you link does it say that being named a national champion by a "major selector" (which, BTW, is not defined in the NCAA Bylaws anywhere) qualifies anyone to receive a specific national championship ring - just to be included in the list of "final national poll leaders." (If I am mistaken, please quote the text that corrects this.) If you're wondering why the NCAA didn't declare the players who received "national championship rings" ineligible from that point, it is because I seriously doubt that anybody received a ring solely for being a "national champion," but instead, received, say, a ring for being that year's AAC champion or being in that year's Peach Bowl (both of which are allowed) that has "National Champion" carved on it (which, for some reason, is also allowed - see Auburn 2004 for another example of this).
> The GIF shown by AL.com in the article says it.
>
> I'll give you the quote, but it's in the picture below where UCF is listed below Alabama:
>
> "Beginning in 2014, the College Football Playoff was used to determine national champions in FBS. All "major selectors" not otherwise listed also selected the CFP champion as it's highest rated team in those seasons. In years where a "major selector" had a team other than the CFP champion as it's highest rated team in its final poll, that team is listed below the CFP champion."
It says the poll selected the team "as its highest rated team" - NOT as "a national champion." Two different things.
> On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 8:26:54 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
>
> > Er, nowhere in the article that you link does it say that being named a national champion by a "major selector" (which, BTW, is not defined in the NCAA Bylaws anywhere) qualifies anyone to receive a specific national championship ring - just to be included in the list of "final national poll leaders." (If I am mistaken, please quote the text that corrects this.) If you're wondering why the NCAA didn't declare the players who received "national championship rings" ineligible from that point, it is because I seriously doubt that anybody received a ring solely for being a "national champion," but instead, received, say, a ring for being that year's AAC champion or being in that year's Peach Bowl (both of which are allowed) that has "National Champion" carved on it (which, for some reason, is also allowed - see Auburn 2004 for another example of this).
> The GIF shown by AL.com in the article says it.
>
> I'll give you the quote, but it's in the picture below where UCF is listed below Alabama:
>
> "Beginning in 2014, the College Football Playoff was used to determine national champions in FBS. All "major selectors" not otherwise listed also selected the CFP champion as it's highest rated team in those seasons. In years where a "major selector" had a team other than the CFP champion as it's highest rated team in its final poll, that team is listed below the CFP champion."
>Whoops. Forgot one thing about your statement there: I would have to think that the parade at Disney World (set up by UCF), etc. would be a MAJOR PROBLEM with the NCAA had the NCAA not had this rule -- made quite a bit archaic in the day and age of the BCS and CFP -- but it still existed.
Michael Falkner
Oct 25, 2021, 10:13:04 PM10/25/21
to
On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 11:44:46 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> Why would the NCAA care about a "national college football champion parade" in a subdivision where it doesn't conduct a national championship? The only thing the NCAA cares about is an athlete receiving a "championship ring" for being something other than the national champion of the coaches' association or a national wire-service poll, presumably to prevent a team from giving rings out as payment for playing.
I could see it determined, especially given the venue, an "impermissible benefit".
> Why would the NCAA care about a "national college football champion parade" in a subdivision where it doesn't conduct a national championship? The only thing the NCAA cares about is an athlete receiving a "championship ring" for being something other than the national champion of the coaches' association or a national wire-service poll, presumably to prevent a team from giving rings out as payment for playing.
Mike
The NOTBCS Guy
Oct 26, 2021, 10:52:20 AM10/26/21
to
> > Why would the NCAA care about a "national college football champion parade" in a subdivision where it doesn't conduct a national championship? The only thing the NCAA cares about is an athlete receiving a "championship ring" for being something other than the national champion of the coaches' association or a national wire-service poll, presumably to prevent a team from giving rings out as payment for playing.
> I could see it determined, especially given the venue, an "impermissible benefit".
In that case, every parade that any team gets would be an "impermissible benefit." Remember, this is the NCAA that, for five years (2009-10 through 2013-14), had a rule saying that, while you could give an athlete a bagel, you couldn't give them one with cream cheese.
> I could see it determined, especially given the venue, an "impermissible benefit".
Actually, Bylaw 16.11.1.7(c) says that an athlete may "provide or arrange (for the following benefits)" for an athlete:
"Participation in receptions and festivities associated with championships, conference tournaments or all-star events hosted by and conducted on the institution's campus."
Strange...it doesn't mention events held off-campus, such as Walt Disney World.
Michael Falkner
Oct 26, 2021, 1:32:17 PM10/26/21
to
On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 7:52:20 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> > > Why would the NCAA care about a "national college football champion parade" in a subdivision where it doesn't conduct a national championship? The only thing the NCAA cares about is an athlete receiving a "championship ring" for being something other than the national champion of the coaches' association or a national wire-service poll, presumably to prevent a team from giving rings out as payment for playing.
> > I could see it determined, especially given the venue, an "impermissible benefit".
> In that case, every parade that any team gets would be an "impermissible benefit." Remember, this is the NCAA that, for five years (2009-10 through 2013-14), had a rule saying that, while you could give an athlete a bagel, you couldn't give them one with cream cheese.
The bagel is just as impermissible as the cream cheese. Stop splitting hairs, you corporate fucks.
> > > Why would the NCAA care about a "national college football champion parade" in a subdivision where it doesn't conduct a national championship? The only thing the NCAA cares about is an athlete receiving a "championship ring" for being something other than the national champion of the coaches' association or a national wire-service poll, presumably to prevent a team from giving rings out as payment for playing.
> > I could see it determined, especially given the venue, an "impermissible benefit".
> In that case, every parade that any team gets would be an "impermissible benefit." Remember, this is the NCAA that, for five years (2009-10 through 2013-14), had a rule saying that, while you could give an athlete a bagel, you couldn't give them one with cream cheese.
> Actually, Bylaw 16.11.1.7(c) says that an athlete may "provide or arrange (for the following benefits)" for an athlete:
> "Participation in receptions and festivities associated with championships, conference tournaments or all-star events hosted by and conducted on the institution's campus."
> Strange...it doesn't mention events held off-campus, such as Walt Disney World.
And here's the other part of it: They would have to be recognized as a champion for that festivity to be legal under 16.11.1.7(c) to begin with.
Mike
The NOTBCS Guy
Oct 26, 2021, 2:53:25 PM10/26/21
to
On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 10:32:17 AM UTC-7, Michael Falkner wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 7:52:20 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> > > > Why would the NCAA care about a "national college football champion parade" in a subdivision where it doesn't conduct a national championship? The only thing the NCAA cares about is an athlete receiving a "championship ring" for being something other than the national champion of the coaches' association or a national wire-service poll, presumably to prevent a team from giving rings out as payment for playing.
> > > I could see it determined, especially given the venue, an "impermissible benefit".
> > In that case, every parade that any team gets would be an "impermissible benefit." Remember, this is the NCAA that, for five years (2009-10 through 2013-14), had a rule saying that, while you could give an athlete a bagel, you couldn't give them one with cream cheese.
> The bagel is just as impermissible as the cream cheese. Stop splitting hairs, you corporate fucks.
Bagels (along with "fruits and nuts") were specifically allowed from 2009 to 2013, before this was replaced with the generic term "snacks."
> On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 7:52:20 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> > > > Why would the NCAA care about a "national college football champion parade" in a subdivision where it doesn't conduct a national championship? The only thing the NCAA cares about is an athlete receiving a "championship ring" for being something other than the national champion of the coaches' association or a national wire-service poll, presumably to prevent a team from giving rings out as payment for playing.
> > > I could see it determined, especially given the venue, an "impermissible benefit".
> > In that case, every parade that any team gets would be an "impermissible benefit." Remember, this is the NCAA that, for five years (2009-10 through 2013-14), had a rule saying that, while you could give an athlete a bagel, you couldn't give them one with cream cheese.
> The bagel is just as impermissible as the cream cheese. Stop splitting hairs, you corporate fucks.
> > Actually, Bylaw 16.11.1.7(c) says that an athlete may "provide or arrange (for the following benefits)" for an athlete:
> > "Participation in receptions and festivities associated with championships, conference tournaments or all-star events hosted by and conducted on the institution's campus."
> > Strange...it doesn't mention events held off-campus, such as Walt Disney World.
> Exactly.
>
> And here's the other part of it: They would have to be recognized as a champion for that festivity to be legal under 16.11.1.7(c) to begin with.
Besides - what championship did UCF win to justify its Walt Disney World parade in 2014?
Here's a possible explanation: Bylaw 16.1.7 - "A conference, an institution, the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee, a national governing body (or the international equivalents) or the awarding agency may provide actual and necessary expenses for a student-athlete to receive a noninstitutional award or recognition for athletics or academic accomplishments." I assume that a celebratory parade counts as "recognition for athletic accomplishments," and there is no "championships requirement" involved.
Michael Falkner
Oct 26, 2021, 4:38:31 PM10/26/21
to
On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 11:53:25 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 10:32:17 AM UTC-7, Michael Falkner wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 7:52:20 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> > > In that case, every parade that any team gets would be an "impermissible benefit." Remember, this is the NCAA that, for five years (2009-10 through 2013-14), had a rule saying that, while you could give an athlete a bagel, you couldn't give them one with cream cheese.
> > The bagel is just as impermissible as the cream cheese. Stop splitting hairs, you corporate fucks.
> Bagels (along with "fruits and nuts") were specifically allowed from 2009 to 2013, before this was replaced with the generic term "snacks."
Speaking of splitting hairs -- who has a fucking bagel without cream cheese?
> On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 10:32:17 AM UTC-7, Michael Falkner wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 7:52:20 AM UTC-7, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> > > In that case, every parade that any team gets would be an "impermissible benefit." Remember, this is the NCAA that, for five years (2009-10 through 2013-14), had a rule saying that, while you could give an athlete a bagel, you couldn't give them one with cream cheese.
> > The bagel is just as impermissible as the cream cheese. Stop splitting hairs, you corporate fucks.
> Bagels (along with "fruits and nuts") were specifically allowed from 2009 to 2013, before this was replaced with the generic term "snacks."
> > > Actually, Bylaw 16.11.1.7(c) says that an athlete may "provide or arrange (for the following benefits)" for an athlete:
> > > "Participation in receptions and festivities associated with championships, conference tournaments or all-star events hosted by and conducted on the institution's campus."
> > > Strange...it doesn't mention events held off-campus, such as Walt Disney World.
> > Exactly.
> >
> > And here's the other part of it: They would have to be recognized as a champion for that festivity to be legal under 16.11.1.7(c) to begin with.
> Actually, I think the bylaw refers to things associated with events that the school is hosting - not that the school won or even necessarily competed in.
>
> Besides - what championship did UCF win to justify its Walt Disney World parade in 2014?
>
> Here's a possible explanation: Bylaw 16.1.7 - "A conference, an institution, the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee, a national governing body (or the international equivalents) or the awarding agency may provide actual and necessary expenses for a student-athlete to receive a noninstitutional award or recognition for athletics or academic accomplishments." I assume that a celebratory parade counts as "recognition for athletic accomplishments," and there is no "championships requirement" involved.
(Not on you, just stating it...)
Mike
0 new messages