Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

Schadenfreude made reference to the NCAA's move to 12-game schedules and bowl eligibility in another thread - http://www.ay-ziggy-zoomba.com/phpBB2/v ... 6519#66519 - and it reminded me that I wanted to get a definitive answer on the subject.

So I put on my trusty reporter's hat on and contacted the good folks at the NCAA Home Office.

Here's the official stance on what will define bowl-eligible during 12-game seasons: They don't know yet. The young lady I spoke with seemed to think the board was in no hurry to make a decision, either.

The board discussed, but did not take action on, the subject when they were approving the 12-game schedule. They said they supported the idea of teams needing a winning record to gain bowl eligibility, but (here's the key point) did not define what "winning record" meant.

The NCAA approved "temporary legislation" during the last two 12-game seasons that allowed teams that were 6-6 to go to a bowl. While that legislation has lapsed, of course, it certainly gives a pretty clear indication of where the NCAA will come down on this issue.

So, bottom line, we cannot assume that the NCAA will demand teams have a winning record in a 12-game season. My speculation is that the NCAA is going to see how this year's bowl scenario plays out and which bowls are left standing at the end of the run.

If there's enough money to maintain the current number of bowls - or even expand the number of bowls (I know this could start a "but there are too many bowls already" tirade) - then look for the NCAA to view 6-6 as bowl-eligible. If finances show a need to pare back on the number of bowls, it wouldn't surprise me for the NCAA to claim its restoring prestige to the bowl system by reducing the number of teams eligible by mandating a 7-5 record.

Anyway, the key point is that the NCAA has not made a decision on what it will take to be bowl-eligible in 2006. And I think that decision will have a big impact on the MAC.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think they did approve of a I-AA win counting towards a "winning record" to be bowl eligible. Currently, only games against I-A opponents count in the "bowl-eligible" record. In the future, teams will be able to include a win over a I-AA team in order to make them bowl eligible. But I don't think they can do this every year, maybe once every other year or something.

Warthog wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but I think they did approve of a I-AA win counting towards a "winning record" to be bowl eligible. Currently, only games against I-A opponents count in the "bowl-eligible" record. In the future, teams will be able to include a win over a I-AA team in order to make them bowl eligible. But I don't think they can do this every year, maybe once every other year or something.

Warthog:

Made a follow up call just for you.

Here's what she told me ... beginning in 2005 (this year), I-A teams can use a single win against a I-AA team to count toward bowl eligibility. They can do that EVERY YEAR. Previously, it was every other year.

So, if the NCAA does what I think it will do - allow 6-6 teams to play in bowls, a team could be 5-6 against I-A opponents, lose their bowl game and not only finish the season 6-7 overall, but 5-7 against I-A opponents. Nice.

wouldnt that screw the MAC teams over?

the powerhouses are just going to schedule weaker teams for OOC games as warmups to the big games leaving the MAC teams to find their own 1-AA oponents on schedules cos the big schools have no incentive to schedule us. it sounds to me like the ncaa is helping the powerhouses escape losses from teams like BG or NIU or whomever. they can count 1-AA from now on why would they schedule us?

WE need those big games to help with our rankings when we win, help gain respect, and to validate the type of team we can put on the field.

The board discussed, but did not take action on, the subject when they were approving the 12-game schedule. They said they supported the idea of teams needing a winning record to gain bowl eligibility, but (here's the key point) did not define what "winning record" meant.
-----------

Sweet, a winning record now means .500 or better. Time to revise the record books.

tekekini wrote:wouldnt that screw the MAC teams over?

Perish the thought. Of course it does...college football is run by the powerful conferences, and they make the rules to help themselves and "screw' the MAC.
They have to view last year's bowl situation as an abomination. Some of us noted at the time that they would take steps to make sure it didn't happen again, and I believe they are and it won't.

An additional thought on I-AA wins counting toward bowl eligibility.

Wins over I-AA teams will only count if the opponent has been using close to the NCAA limit on scholarships over the previous four years.

In other words, a win over the likes of Youngstown State, Eastern Kentucky or Montana would count.

A win over Dayton, Butler or Colgate would not.