[NU Sports] 6-6 Waivers (fwd)

[JHCCLARK at aol.com]

In a message dated 11/22/2004 11:59:17 PM Eastern Standard Time,  
nolan at romaine.tssi.com writes:

I  totally disagree.  Conference championship games shouldn't be used  to
determine bowl eligiblity except for the already existing waiver,  which
makes a team bowl-eligible by winning its conference  championship
regardless of its record to that point.

The NCAA  rules are a bit muddled as to whether a conference championship
game is a  'regular season' game or not.  In some sports, notably basketball
and  baseball, it is not considered a regular season game.  (This has  come
up a few times when schools were sanctioned for rules  violations.)
 
 
The NCAA rules recognize these championship games as regular-season games.  
See Bylaw 18.02.4: "A postseason football game is a football contest conducted  
after the regular football season and involving two teams selected because of 
 their REGULAR-SEASON performance (e.g. won-lost record, CONFERENCE  
CHAMPIONSHIP)." [emphasis added]  If they were not considered  regular-season, then 
Iowa State wouldn't NEED a waiver.
 

Further, these games have always been considered before when  making 
post-season determinations.  Otherwise, conference champs would not  automatically get 
a BCS spot.  And let's remember when #2 Kansas State lost  to Texas A&M in 
the Big XII championship game -- it lost it's spot in the  National Championship 
Game AND it's BCS bowl bid, and wound up in San  Antonio losing to Purdue.
 
And your point makes my point.  These games ARE  considered when teams are 
selected for post-season play in basketball.   Teams that lose in the first 
round of their conference tourney are often left on  the outside looking in when 
the NCAA bids come out.  Conversely, teams that  had very little shot at making 
the NCAAs sometimes do due to their conference  tourney showing.  The 19-10 
Georgia Tech team that lost in the first round  of the ACC tourney comes to 
mind -- they sat at home in March, even refusing an  NIT bid because they thought 
they were dissed.
 
 
They are real games and should carry all the good and bad of real  games.  
You can't just take the benefits without also risking the  consequences.



I think  football deserves the same consideration.  The only games that 
should  count for bowl eligibility are the ones that are definitely on 
the  schedule at the start of the season.  

The difference here is that  Northwestern players and coaches all KNEW they 
had 12 games scheduled and  needed to go 7-5 before the season started, 
Iowa State did  not.
They knew that the conference championship game was out there.  The  
conference championship game WAS on the schedule for two teams in the Big  XII.  If 
you and your conference choose to play these games, then live with  the 
consequences.  Don't try to change the rules when you feel like it or  when it suits 
your needs.  
 
And, let's face it, the Iowa State players had MORE of a say in whether  they 
played in a 12th game than Northwestern players did.  It is something  that 
they wanted and earned, whereas Hawaii was always gonna be there, whether  NU 
was 11-0 or 0-11.  The Wildcat players has zero to say in the  matter.
 
And again, if a bowl game is that important, then decline the invite to the  
Dr. Pepper Classic without forfeiting.  Then Colorado or Nebraska can  go.  
Northwestern cannot just simply decline to play -- otherwise they  forfeit and 
automatically go to 6-6.
 
Sorry, I just don't see how the Cyclones should get in and Northern  Illinois 
(again) shouldn't.