Blog Entry

NCAA approves UCLA's bowl waiver petition

Posted on: November 30, 2011 5:17 pm
Edited on: November 30, 2011 5:28 pm
 
Posted by Tom Fornelli

So it turns out that no matter what happens in Friday night's inaugural Pac-12 Championship Game, it will not be the final time UCLA plays this season. The NCAA announced on Wednesday that it had approved UCLA's bowl waiver petition.

“As a program, we appreciate the NCAA approving our petition for a bowl waiver,” said UCLA Director of Athletics Dan Guerrero in a release. “We will be able to give our 18 seniors one more chance to represent their university and end their collegiate careers on a high note, regardless of the outcome of this Friday’s Pac-12 Championship Game. We’d like to thank the NCAA for considering the unique situation in which we find ourselves this year and rewarding us with this opportunity.” 

The reason this was in question was because UCLA finished the regular season at 6-6, in second place in the Pac-12's South Division, but due to USC's postseason ban, the Bruins were the team to move on to the championship game. Well, if UCLA loses that game against heavily-favored Oregon, the Bruins would be 6-7 on the season, and teams with losing records aren't normally allowed to play in bowl games.

That is, not without a waiver from the NCAA.

As for where UCLA would play in a bowl game, CBSSports.com's Jerry Palm currently has the Bruins projected to face Illinois in the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl
Comments

Since: Feb 23, 2010
Posted on: December 1, 2011 4:55 pm
 

NCAA approves UCLA's bowl waiver petition

I would rather watch LSU play UCLA than to see LSU in a rematch.

Tongue out




Since: Jan 15, 2008
Posted on: December 1, 2011 4:46 pm
 

NCAA approves UCLA's bowl waiver petition

LMAO...

Whatever game they end up in should be nicknamed the inaugural Just Show Up Bowl.

I can already see 2-10 teams getting bowl bids a decade from now. 



Since: Dec 10, 2007
Posted on: December 1, 2011 3:57 pm
 

NCAA approves UCLA's bowl waiver petition

I have to agree with some of the comments here. Going to a bowl game used to mean something. It was a mark of honor to go to a bowl game. Now, it's reason to fire the coach if you don't go to a bowl game.  With so many bowl games, going to a bowl game has completely lost its allure.

The NCAA should require a minimum of 7 wins to be bowl elligible. With a 12-game schedule, this shouldn't be too much to ask. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing an 8-game minimum, with games against I-AA teams not counting towards that total. 



Since: Aug 11, 2008
Posted on: December 1, 2011 3:34 pm
 

NCAA approves UCLA's bowl waiver petition

This shows 2 things...how screwed up the system is and how screwed up the NCAA is. Bowl games used to mean something. Now they're nothing more than an extra game. In theory a 6-7 could advance in a true playoff system but the chances are very slim. UCLA is not close to being a bowl team. They're not even the best team in their own division. USC and Utah are better teams. The Ducks will cover the 30 point spread anyway and the 6-7 Bruins will go to a bowl game simply because they can draw a crowd and a TV audience. Illinois is no better. Bowl eligibilty should probably be 7 or 8 wins now that most programs play 12 or 13 games a season. Soon a team could be 1-11 and if they're in the right market they still go to a bowl game.Money mouth



Since: Oct 14, 2010
Posted on: December 1, 2011 2:13 pm
 

NCAA approves UCLA's bowl waiver petition

Not true Picket Fence. As unlikely as it seems, if UCLA beats Oregon, then they will be in the Rose Bowl. Always a goal for any Pac 12 team. Also, to send the coach off with a win would most certainly be another incentive.



Since: Mar 15, 2008
Posted on: December 1, 2011 1:57 pm
 

NCAA approves UCLA's bowl waiver petition

#2) Have a winning nonconference record = above .500


and games against 1-AA teams should not count, unless you lose...then you should be automatically disqualified.

Get rid of about 10-12 bowl games

better yet.....get rid of all the bowl games. They are all just corrupt bribe machines for college administrators and government hacks  



Since: Oct 14, 2010
Posted on: December 1, 2011 1:37 pm
 

NCAA approves UCLA's bowl waiver petition

Not ashamed. I am embarrassed. I have to listen to my USC friends talk about 50-0. Arizona embarrassed us, even after 10 days to prepare for them. However, all teams that finish .500 shouldn't be bowling - but there are enough bowls and I can see the benefit of added practices, especially for a young team like UCLA. And when QB Prince is playing well, we can compete. Hopefully, in the next couple of years, UCLA can get back to respectivity and I wouldn't have to worry about these lower tier bowl invitations.



Since: Oct 8, 2009
Posted on: December 1, 2011 1:11 pm
 

NCAA approves UCLA's bowl waiver petition

Didn't UCLA turn a bowl bid down a few years back when their record was 6-6???  I thought their reasoning then was that the University would lose money on the bowl game and its festivities.  Why would you want to go to a bowl game with a losing record???

This is a classic example of why the current bowl system is a mockery!!!

Get rid of about 10-12 bowl games.  Bowl eligible teams should meet 2 criteria:

#1) Have a winning conference record = above .500
#2) Have a winning nonconference record = above .500

A committee compiles the list of bowl eligible teams and seeds (ranks) each team accordingly.  Then each team is assigned a bowl game. 

Mediocrity should not be rewarded with another chance to lose a game while wearing your university's colors.



Since: Jun 11, 2010
Posted on: December 1, 2011 1:08 pm
 

NCAA approves UCLA's bowl waiver petition

I would rather watch a college football game with these kids playing from the heart, than some overpaid lard ass, that won't make a tackle, or go over the middle to catch a pass, so to answer your question, I care! 


SeanAvery4
Since: Mar 22, 2008
Posted on: December 1, 2011 12:58 pm
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator



The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com