Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 94

Thread: Rosebowl says bowl ban coming to OM

  1. #1
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,277
    vCash
    3700

    Rosebowl says bowl ban coming to OM

    Just listened to the Boneyard and Rosebowl stated that he is now convinced OM will get at least a one year bowl ban and potentially more.

    Of concern, he also said that look for OM to declare a bowl ban for 2016 if they get off to a slow start. Personally, I think that's wrong and similar to declaring scholarship reductions when you miss on some players.

    I think it's absurd that the NCAA would consider a bowl ban valid if a team declares it after the start of the season. Not sure there is justice there.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    6,376
    vCash
    2610
    So they start off 2-3 and self impose a Birmingham Bowl ban? Genius. But, hey, if I were in their shoes I may do that also. Hopefully the NCAA will say "thanks but no thanks, we will decide".
    Last edited by Leroy Jenkins; 06-27-2016 at 03:32 PM.
    Everyone wants to be a beast...until its time to do what beasts do.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    10,496
    vCash
    3200
    What about vacated W's?

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    774
    vCash
    3760
    I like Bama's strategy...receive a bowl ban and plan an opener AT HAWAII the next year. THAT is genius.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Jack Lambert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    misippi
    Posts
    13,657
    vCash
    2238605444
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    Just listened to the Boneyard and Rosebowl stated that he is now convinced OM will get at least a one year bowl ban and potentially more.

    Of concern, he also said that look for OM to declare a bowl ban for 2016 if they get off to a slow start. Personally, I think that's wrong and similar to declaring scholarship reductions when you miss on some players.

    I think it's absurd that the NCAA would consider a bowl ban valid if a team declares it after the start of the season. Not sure there is justice there.
    They will not get to count the past recruiting season but they can chose to take the bowl band this year or not. I think OSU screwed themselves by not taking it the first year after it was announced. They were 6-6 and went to a bowl game. The next year they were 12-0 and had to stay home. Bama got to go to the BCS NC that year and won.

    Miami really screwed themselves. They did not go to a bowl for two seasons waiting on the ncaa to announce punishment. But once it came it was behind them.

  6. #6
    Senior Member maroonmania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    20,317
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Lambert View Post
    They will not get to count the past recruiting season but they can chose to take the bowl band this year or not. I think OSU screwed themselves by not taking it the first year after it was announced. They were 6-6 and went to a bowl game. The next year they were 12-0 and had to stay home. Bama got to go to the BCS NC that year and won.

    Miami really screwed themselves. They did not go to a bowl for two seasons waiting on the ncaa to announce punishment. But once it came it was behind them.
    Yes, but if you can take it the first year its announced then you get by with essentially NO effect on recruiting. It really won't affect anyone other than current players that way.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    3,697
    vCash
    13463
    If the loss of scholarships come hard and heavy the bowl bans won't matter in a few years.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    239
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    Just listened to the Boneyard and Rosebowl stated that he is now convinced OM will get at least a one year bowl ban and potentially more.

    Of concern, he also said that look for OM to declare a bowl ban for 2016 if they get off to a slow start. Personally, I think that's wrong and similar to declaring scholarship reductions when you miss on some players.

    I think it's absurd that the NCAA would consider a bowl ban valid if a team declares it after the start of the season. Not sure there is justice there.
    OM has already submitted their response to the NOA, shouldn't they have already declared for a 2016 bowl ban in their initial response? Sanctions/penalties are handed down from the COI - and with the new draft night crap that hit the fan...this whole thing is still in the investigative stage and won't get to the COI for a long while. In other words, OM can declare for a '16 bowl ban if they want to but that doesn't mean the COI will accept it while things are still under investigation.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    239
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by mic View Post
    If the loss of scholarships come hard and heavy the bowl bans won't matter in a few years.
    True - by year 3 they will have a diminished roster with very little depth to get them through this conference let alone bowl eligibility.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    57
    vCash
    3100
    Vacated wins are totally meaningless. I would take our 9 and 2 season with Bruce Threadgill at quarterback all over again. All of those wins were vacated. Furthermore, we passed on claiming an SEC championship when Florida wins were vacated under Charlie Pell. Emery Bellard would have no part of winning a championship anywhere but on the field. All you get is a bunch of *'s.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,656
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by benbow View Post
    Vacated wins are totally meaningless. I would take our 9 and 2 season with Bruce Threadgill at quarterback all over again. All of those wins were vacated. Furthermore, we passed on claiming an SEC championship when Florida wins were vacated under Charlie Pell. Emery Bellard would have no part of winning a championship anywhere but on the field. All you get is a bunch of *'s.
    I agree

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    19,819
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by benbow View Post
    Vacated wins are totally meaningless. I would take our 9 and 2 season with Bruce Threadgill at quarterback all over again. All of those wins were vacated. Furthermore, we passed on claiming an SEC championship when Florida wins were vacated under Charlie Pell. Emery Bellard would have no part of winning a championship anywhere but on the field. All you get is a bunch of *'s.
    Those wins weren't vacated. The were forfeited. That is a MAJOR difference.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,904
    vCash
    3100
    Rosebowl and Coach34 have an awful lot riding on this whole probation deal. I would love nothing more than to see them proven right. Wake me up when it hits.

  14. #14
    Senior Member PassInterference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    2,910
    vCash
    3200
    Quote Originally Posted by Original48 View Post
    I like Bama's strategy...receive a bowl ban and plan an opener AT HAWAII the next year. THAT is genius.
    Texas did one better and scheduled a end-of-season extra game at Hawaii. Did it for the same season that the bowl ban was in place.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,806
    vCash
    2610
    A good time to consider believing any Ole Miss source would be when any one of them tells the truth for the first time about anything to do with this topic.

    They will be hammered. It is in our best interests that their minions not see it coming.


    After the penalties, a decade of disgrace and bad football, only one of which will matter to the Bears.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,694
    vCash
    3100
    He wasn't stepping very far out on a limb with that call. I think most people with half a brain and a zip code outside Lafayette County realize that, with 8 Level 1 infractions, a bowl ban is a foregone conclusion. The only question is if it will be one year or multiple years.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Coach34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    33,716
    vCash
    17200
    Quote Originally Posted by HSVDawg View Post
    He wasn't stepping very far out on a limb with that call. I think most people with half a brain and a zip code outside Lafayette County realize that, with 8 Level 1 infractions, a bowl ban is a foregone conclusion. The only question is if it will be one year or multiple years.
    exactly. They may get 2 years- 1 is a certainty
    Walk like the King or walk like you don't care who the King is

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    234
    vCash
    3100
    Ross and Freeze telling the sheep 14 scholarships over 4 years. If true , this will have little or no effect on the program.

  19. #19
    Senior Member Jack Lambert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    misippi
    Posts
    13,657
    vCash
    2238605444
    Quote Originally Posted by maroonmania View Post
    Yes, but if you can take it the first year its announced then you get by with essentially NO effect on recruiting. It really won't affect anyone other than current players that way.
    They are not Ohio State. Bowl ban will kill recruiting for them. The lose of scholarships and the real possibility of senior transferring due to the post season ban will kill them.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    42
    vCash
    3100
    They haven't told the truth, yet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.