App asking for NCAA Waiver

[proasu89]

Word on the SBC board is that GS has been denied.

[oldfart]

We have been denied but are appealing. It's like disability, you always get turned down on the first pass, then you appeal. Maybe now we can get a committee to listen

[Appersrule]

I'm sure the Belk Bowl would rather have us than say Boston College .

Only problem is the Belk Bowl projections say they are getting either UNC or Notre Dame from the ACC and either Tennessee, LSU or Florida from the SEC. Pretty sure they wouldn't care about App if those major players are on the table.

[bcoach]

1) I hope we get the waiver just to say we were officially bowl-eligible even not going to a bowl--but, I won't be disappointed either as them's the rules.

2) I agree that I would be against taking a spot from an established SBC bowl-eligible team.

3) I just don't understand the "there are too many bowls" crowd. I used to think that way, but then I remember how I feel in July when there's nothing but baseball on. There are not too many college football games. I watch most of the bowl games and play in the bowl-pick'ems with buddies. Plus, who wouldn't want another opportunity to watch App play? I may be in the minority, but I like watching as much football as possible. Of course, this is just my opinion.

I totally agree with more football but still think there are too many bowls. First I think it is embarrassing playing for a trophy when you have had a .500 season. Second they are just damn expensive for the schools. The money spent on all this bowl stuff could be spent on facilities or salaries. I would much prefer extending the season by a game as like you more football is a good thing. So I am with you 100% on more football but bowls sure are an expensive way to do it.

[McLeansvilleAppFan]

1) I hope we get the waiver just to say we were officially bowl-eligible even not going to a bowl--but, I won't be disappointed either as them's the rules.

2) I agree that I would be against taking a spot from an established SBC bowl-eligible team.

3) I just don't understand the "there are too many bowls" crowd. I used to think that way, but then I remember how I feel in July when there's nothing but baseball on. There are not too many college football games. I watch most of the bowl games and play in the bowl-pick'ems with buddies. Plus, who wouldn't want another opportunity to watch App play? I may be in the minority, but I like watching as much football as possible. Of course, this is just my opinion.

Second they are just damn expensive for the schools. The money spent on all this bowl stuff could be spent on facilities or salaries.

Or save on student fees.

[bcoach]

1) I hope we get the waiver just to say we were officially bowl-eligible even not going to a bowl--but, I won't be disappointed either as them's the rules.

2) I agree that I would be against taking a spot from an established SBC bowl-eligible team.

3) I just don't understand the "there are too many bowls" crowd. I used to think that way, but then I remember how I feel in July when there's nothing but baseball on. There are not too many college football games. I watch most of the bowl games and play in the bowl-pick'ems with buddies. Plus, who wouldn't want another opportunity to watch App play? I may be in the minority, but I like watching as much football as possible. Of course, this is just my opinion.

Second they are just damn expensive for the schools. The money spent on all this bowl stuff could be spent on facilities or salaries.

Or save on student fees.

Actually you are 100% correct.

[Rekdiver]

The money we would spend on a bowl would not dent salaries. We may need it to pay a stipend to athletes. So unless we get a bowl where we will break even in revenue verses expenses Im not in favor of the expense...although it may be about the same as a FCS playoff run.

[bcoach]

The money we would spend on a bowl would not dent salaries. We may need it to pay a stipend to athletes. So unless we get a bowl where we will break even in revenue verses expenses Im not in favor of the expense...although it may be about the same as a FCS playoff run.

Actually I have to disagree with the salary part. Most any amount would be welcomed by some assistants. I do agree that any loss for the sake of a bowl is not money well spent.

[MJ1988]

I would be more for extending the season with a conference championship game. I would like to see the game played at the home venue of the top ranked of the two participants. I understand that to make this happen our conference would need to add a team.

[JTApps1]

I'm sure the Belk Bowl would rather have us than say Boston College .

Only problem is the Belk Bowl projections say they are getting either UNC or Notre Dame from the ACC and either Tennessee, LSU or Florida from the SEC. Pretty sure they wouldn't care about App if those major players are on the table.

I was saying that hypothetically. There will be years they won't have a major school coming to town.

[EastHallApp]

I'm sure the Belk Bowl would rather have us than say Boston College .

Only problem is the Belk Bowl projections say they are getting either UNC or Notre Dame from the ACC and either Tennessee, LSU or Florida from the SEC. Pretty sure they wouldn't care about App if those major players are on the table.

I was saying that hypothetically. There will be years they won't have a major school coming to town.

Still wouldn't matter - as long as there's an eligible ACC and SEC team available, the Belk Bowl is contractually obligated to take them. And there always will be, because the Belk Bowl is nowhere near the bottom of the pecking order for ACC bowl tie-ins.

[Rekdiver]

The money we would spend on a bowl would not dent salaries. We may need it to pay a stipend to athletes. So unless we get a bowl where we will break even in revenue verses expenses Im not in favor of the expense...although it may be about the same as a FCS playoff run.

Actually I have to disagree with the salary part. Most any amount would be welcomed by some assistants. I do agree that any loss for the sake of a bowl is not money well spent.

I thought salaries referred to were school personnel in general. I misunderstood if it was just athletic personnel.

[JTApps1]

I'm sure the Belk Bowl would rather have us than say Boston College .

Only problem is the Belk Bowl projections say they are getting either UNC or Notre Dame from the ACC and either Tennessee, LSU or Florida from the SEC. Pretty sure they wouldn't care about App if those major players are on the table.

I was saying that hypothetically. There will be years they won't have a major school coming to town.

Still wouldn't matter - as long as there's an eligible ACC and SEC team available, the Belk Bowl is contractually obligated to take them. And there always will be, because the Belk Bowl is nowhere near the bottom of the pecking order for ACC bowl tie-ins.

Did you read my original post? I said I wish bowl tie ins for all but the top 2 teams in each conference would go away, and I used the Boston College vs App scenario as a hypothetical choice.

[bcoach]

The money we would spend on a bowl would not dent salaries. We may need it to pay a stipend to athletes. So unless we get a bowl where we will break even in revenue verses expenses Im not in favor of the expense...although it may be about the same as a FCS playoff run.

Actually I have to disagree with the salary part. Most any amount would be welcomed by some assistants. I do agree that any loss for the sake of a bowl is not money well spent.

I thought salaries referred to were school personnel in general. I misunderstood if it was just athletic personnel.

Sorry, I wasn't clear on that actually.

[fjblair]

I guess it doesn't hurt to ask, but we shouldn't be upset if the waiver isn't granted since those are the rules. Even if it is a dumb rule it is still the rule as of now.We can think Marshall for this rule even being in place.

As far as having too many bowls goes, the number of wins needed should go from 6 to 7 to be eligible. That would get rid of some bowls and insure many average teams don't make it in. Of course the big boys will never let this happen.

I don't think a team with 6 wins should be in any bowl, whether it is ASU or not. I have always felt that way and always will. I do appreciate the move by the administration and I agree with those that say we should not be granted a waiver at the expense of an eligible SBC member. Too friggin many stupid bowls that are poorly attended and cost the schools money, make it 7 or 8 wins and maybe they will mean something.

[fjblair]

I wouldn't mind taking a bowl spot from a SBC with a worst record or one we beat. The GaSo thing is an impossibility, although I do like the "IneligaBowl". I'm not that witty and that is funny! But, I see the point that those were the rules to which we agreed and so be it. Does the SBC have an at-large tie in or is that for 2015?

The SBC has three bowl tie-ins this year and will add the fourth Cure Bowl in Orlando next year. After reading the Sun Belt Forum, I've been surprised how much voodoo and magic go into the bowl selections. Teams get passed up for bowls because their conference mates, who they beat, might be closer to the bowl location and therefore the bowl projects better revenues by selecting the team with the worse record.

Which is exactly why it ain't about rewarding winning teams and good football, it's about money. Absurd.

[MAD Doctor]

Round up the pig and grab the lipstick, I want to go bowling somewhere in 2015-16, even if it's freaking Lumberton. Got a feeling we may be representing in Nawlins though.
GO APP!!!!

[Gonzo]

I'm sure our Waiver will be denied, but I hope they don't let us know until next week. I think we'll play better with a "pending decision" than after being told no.

[AppState89]

Round up the pig and grab the lipstick, I want to go bowling somewhere in 2015-16, even if it's freaking Lumberton. Got a feeling we may be representing in Nawlins though.
GO APP!!!!

That would be nice, but if ULL can go bowling, they will pick them over us. They did bring 40,000+ to Nawlins last year for their bowl game. We would lucky to bring 4,000.

[EastHallApp]

I'm sure the Belk Bowl would rather have us than say Boston College .

Only problem is the Belk Bowl projections say they are getting either UNC or Notre Dame from the ACC and either Tennessee, LSU or Florida from the SEC. Pretty sure they wouldn't care about App if those major players are on the table.

I was saying that hypothetically. There will be years they won't have a major school coming to town.

Still wouldn't matter - as long as there's an eligible ACC and SEC team available, the Belk Bowl is contractually obligated to take them. And there always will be, because the Belk Bowl is nowhere near the bottom of the pecking order for ACC bowl tie-ins.

Did you read my original post? I said I wish bowl tie ins for all but the top 2 teams in each conference would go away, and I used the Boston College vs App scenario as a hypothetical choice.

No, my bad, just saw the quoted portion.