Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

I'm repeating a post on made on MACbbs, since we've discussed it several times here...

OK, just got off the phone with the good folks at the NCAA. Here is the official stance on bowl eligibility...

This year in the MAC: A 6-5 team that plays in a conference championship game and loses that game falls to 6-6 and will not be eligible to play in a postseason bowl. So if BG loses and gets to the MACC game or Akron wins and gets to the MACC game, either team would have to win to even be eligible for a bowl, let alone get an invitation.

Here's the official word on the 2006 season
Remember that all schools may play 12 games next year.

Teams that finish 6-6 WILL NOT be eligible for postseason bowls. Chew on that for a minute while considering that there was almost a shortage of bowl teams last year (only three more than bowl slots).

http://www.ay-ziggy-zoomba.com/phpBB2/v ... 7&start=23

Now now, don't gloat.

Schadenfreude wrote:http://www.ay-ziggy-zoomba.com/phpBB2/v ... 7&start=23

Sorry to burst your bubble Search Function Boy, but according to the folks at the NCAA, they were not sure if the by-laws you quote would be applicable in this situation. Hence, they "officially" clarified that only today.

Oh, and before you go off and gloat about how this applies to next year ... they said that 6-6 teams would not be eligible, but that they also had not decided on what would happen if there is a shortage of bowl-eligible teams at the end of the season. So the door is definitely open in that regard.

So there.

Ummm....are you two guys the kind that had "spirited conversation" about what the right answers were to the finals questions when the rest of us made pilgrimmage to UpTown?

Stuff the run, intercept the pass, Sanders and Sharon go long!
24 hours tick tock

So the NCAA gave no word on preference points for next year and bowl wins, per the changes in the BCS scam system? I had figured with the 12 game sch that 500 was not going to get you eligable, yet I figured that final determination was done at the confrence level and not under the unknowing guidance of the NCAA, but the BCS.

JohnnySwoop '85 wrote:Ummm....are you two guys the kind that had "spirited conversation" about what the right answers were to the finals questions when the rest of us made pilgrimmage to UpTown?

Ummm, gee, would that make us geeky?

1987alum wrote:

JohnnySwoop '85 wrote:Ummm....are you two guys the kind that had "spirited conversation" about what the right answers were to the finals questions when the rest of us made pilgrimmage to UpTown?

Ummm, gee, would that make us geeky?

You have to ask?