Hey after my 2 months at Loyola Law School back in the late 60s---I offer this---If the contract is silent on 6-6 teams and the Bowl's having to select a SBC 6-6---ergo it is the Bowl's preference of whom they want to invite--seems that one could argue that the spirit and intent was for the 7-5 rule to filter down to the 6-6ers if in fact no 7-5ers were available. Glad I didn't stay in school!!!!!
If you are an attorney, you would be horrified at what passes for contracts in the athletic world. The typical contract is a letter that says something like this.
"Dear Bubba:
This is to confirm our telephone conversation that we will play on Sept. 8, 2009 at our stadium and we will pay XYZ State $700,000 for the game. Please sign and return."
If you ever poke around the NCAA web site (they've started closing some of the directories and its not nearly as interesting as it used to be) you can sometimes stumble upon "official interpretations". That's where the NCAA answers questions about rules (not game rules, the NCAA rules). You read the question. The rule. The decision. You scratch your head, read it all again and then have to shrug your shoulders and move on because it makes absolutely no sense.
That's one reason I dont give much weight the the fact that Troy must go to the New Orleans Bowl if they are the only 8-4 team. The NCAA by-laws state they must, but weirder things have happened in the past. What it all boils down to is the fact that the NCAA has plenty of rules and by-laws, BUT they can change them whenever and however they want.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)