Post Reply to Rock's House

This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

Message:

HTTP Link (optional):

Poster's Email (optional):

 


Post being replied to

The language seems to be based on current relationship by Father Nieuwland

rather than an past relationship. I was surprised too, but after consideration I can see a practical problem of too many recusals as so many coaches and administrators have past experience at so many different schools.

Text from the article:

The selection committee recusal policy remains consistent with the first seven years of the CFP, stating that:

"If a committee member or an immediate family member, e.g., spouse, sibling or child, (a) is compensated by a school, (b) provides professional services for a school, or (c) is on the coaching staff or administrative staff at a school or is a football student-athlete at a school, that member will be recused. Such compensation shall include not only direct employment, but also current paid consulting arrangements, deferred compensation (e.g., contract payments continuing after employment has ended, or other benefits. The committee will have the option to add other recusals if special circumstances arise.

"A recused member shall not participate in any votes involving the team from which the individual is recused. A recused member is permitted to answer only factual questions about the institution from which the member is recused but shall not be present during any deliberations regarding that team's selection or ranking. Recused members shall not participate in discussions regarding the placement of the recused team into a bowl game."