Apparently filling late season games for independents is tough:

https://brobible.com/sports/article/oregon-state-paid-sam-houston-state-football-game-cw-network/

North Dakota reminds me of the 2019 Aggies, but a better version.

They're 6-4 but their four losses are by 3 to Kansas St, by 1 at Montana, by 5 at South Dakota and by 5 at home against North Dakota St. They still have a home game against South Dakota St to end the year. It seems like it would be a shame if they lose another close game and then get left out at 7-5 with 5 close losses.

A bit off thread, but does anyone know what the basis is for the appeal filed over Rex Conners eligibility ruling?

I believe both Porter and Rex filed appeal for medical redshirt. Original application was denied due to the NCAA considering the Mercer game a "game played" against their eligibility threshold of >30% of games played. Appeal makes the claim that Mercer "does not count" statistically therefore shouldn't also count against the players' eligibility threshold. Would be interesting to hear if anyone on Mercer is in the same boat..

Here's how I understand the situation: the NCAA is NOT counting the Mercer game towards the team's record. It went down as a NO CONTEST. However, in the case of eligibility, and specifically the eligibility of the Connors Bros., the NCAA currently IS counting the game against their games played in 2025. That would be the basis of the appeal in my opinion. This is only my semi-educated guess.

What davisguy52 said!

I recall Plough saId in one of his press conferences a few weeks back that Mercer was also appealing.

This, to me, seems like a slam dunk appeal. Especially as both teams are filing. If the game doesn't count, the game doesn't count.

The fact it even required appeal is moderately concerning..

This is the NCAA we're talking about... nothing should surprise you! Logic, common sense, fairness, none of that matters