The Washington Times - December 4, 2008, 12:12PM

Did Navy “waive” its “no-rematch clause” in the EagleBank Bowl and accept a second game with Wake Forest this year?

No, for three reasons.


One, the matchup isn’t guaranteed, though it seems like the best bet at this stage.

Two, there isn’t a clause so much as an agreement.

Three, there really isn’t much choice, since whatever seven-win ACC team is left at the end of the selection process will be coming to RFK Stadium.

That said, from my conversations this week with Navy athletic director Chet Gladchuk, a consistent theme was a preference to avoid a rematch if at all possible. That hasn’t change, and it probably shouldn’t; most people in Gladchuk’s position would want their agreement fulfilled.

That said, given the situation for all of the schools involved in the ACC’s process, acceptance is setting in. For example, Maryland is more likely than not to go to the Humanitarian Bowl. Time for everyone in College Park to shrug off the disappointment of a lousy finish and embrace the blue field, since it could very well happen.

Same goes for programs who will face schools from the ACC.

I’m told my word choice for last night’s blog entry on the situation —- “Navy softens stance”  —- isn’t entirely accurate. The phrasing in today’s dead-tree edition —- “indicated a possible softening in his position”—- is less definitive and probably better.

There is an argument to made (and a valid one) that no “softening” occurred. Rather, there wasn’t all that much choice in the matter.

At the very least, however, it’s fair to say it sounds like there is a greater acceptance at this stage. That is the way reasonable people tend to handle matters when something appears likely to occur, and for the most part it is a wise avenue to travel in such situations.

And in this situation, it appears the most probable outcome is a Navy-Wake Forest rematch.

—- Patrick Stevens