(07-19-2017 10:38 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 10:28 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 10:17 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 10:08 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-18-2017 01:53 PM)TerryD Wrote:  ND is solidly dug in on football independence and has no interest in joining the ACC in that sport, no matter what enticements there may be (short of a P4 conference champ only playoff scenario).

This is an interesting point. In the event of a Big 12 collapse and a P4 scenario in the near future, what are the odds that the CFP becomes an official playoff between the P4 conference champs? The current CFP deal expires after the 2025 season, right around the time of the potential realignment, so it would be an ideal time to change the format.

This would formally rule out G# schools from playoff eligibility, even though they have virtually no chance of qualifying under the current system anyway. The P4 would still need the G# schools for extra home games and relatively easy wins, so perhaps a portion of the CFP payout would still go the G# as compensation.

Unlikely in that conferences like the SEC and Big Ten (and ACC) will want the chance to place two schools in the playoffs.

With a 4-team playoff, I wouldn't think the selection committee would take two schools from the same conference. With an 8-team playoff, sure, but I don't know how likely that is. The proposed lengthening of the season by a week (ostensibly for student-athlete rest) could be in preparation for a CFP expansion, though I would expect a 13-game regular season to be a more likely outcome.

I think the committee under the right scenario and I'm not talking about the "every other conference champion has 3 losses" scenario.

Imagine this: Alabama and Florida each go undefeated in the SEC. They meet in Atlanta for the SEC Championship Game and Alabama wins in OT or at least the score is within 7. I would bet money that both Alabama and Florida would be in the CFP regardless of the other conferences.

Still, very slim chance.

With the article that I posted in the other thread for population growth for each state? Kansas, Iowa, West Virginia and Nebraska had a lot of depopulation. Area around Oklahoma State is not growing, and the area around Texas Tech is not growing as much as well.

If the P4 goes to P4? Many schools in the Big 12 brings no value. Even Kansas. Kansas is a basketball school, and not known for their football.

Oklahoma, Texas, TCU might be the only schools that might be worth the added value for a tv network. The others are not. That could bring the fast rising population areas in play.

Possible grabs?
Houston
SMU
Rice
UTSA
Middle Tennessee State
BYU
Boise State
Texas State
UCF
USF
Portland State
UNLV
Charlotte

Those are schools in areas where the population growth is growing.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/samanthasha...8f5d463479

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/nat...344945001/

One had to do with population growth, and another have jobs growth with the population growth. P4 needs to have larger markets to make things work out right. Could the P4 kick out the under performing schools in the population wise like Washington State and Oregon State?

(07-19-2017 10:41 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  With the article that I posted in the other thread for population growth for each state? Kansas, Iowa, West Virginia and Nebraska had a lot of depopulation. Area around Oklahoma State is not growing, and the area around Texas Tech is not growing as much as well.

If the P4 goes to P4? Many schools in the Big 12 brings no value. Even Kansas. Kansas is a basketball school, and not known for their football.

Oklahoma, Texas, TCU might be the only schools that might be worth the added value for a tv network. The others are not. That could bring the fast rising population areas in play.

Possible grabs?
Houston
SMU
Rice
UTSA
Middle Tennessee State
BYU
Boise State
Texas State
UCF
USF
Portland State
UNLV
Charlotte

Those are schools in areas where the population growth is growing.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/samanthasha...8f5d463479

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/nat...344945001/

One had to do with population growth, and another have jobs growth with the population growth. P4 needs to have larger markets to make things work out right. Could the P4 kick out the under performing schools in the population wise like Washington State and Oregon State?

Kansas certainly has value on its own, as does WVU. OSU, TT, and TCU are on shakier ground but could be saved as tagalongs for OU and/or UT.

The only one of the schools you list that would possibly be considered by a P4 conference is Houston. FCS schools like Portland State are certainly not on the table. Kicking a full member out of a conference is no mean feat, so Oregon State and Washington State are safe in the Pac. Their in-state rivals would vouch for them in any case.

(07-19-2017 10:28 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 10:17 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 10:08 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-18-2017 01:53 PM)TerryD Wrote:  ND is solidly dug in on football independence and has no interest in joining the ACC in that sport, no matter what enticements there may be (short of a P4 conference champ only playoff scenario).

This is an interesting point. In the event of a Big 12 collapse and a P4 scenario in the near future, what are the odds that the CFP becomes an official playoff between the P4 conference champs? The current CFP deal expires after the 2025 season, right around the time of the potential realignment, so it would be an ideal time to change the format.

This would formally rule out G# schools from playoff eligibility, even though they have virtually no chance of qualifying under the current system anyway. The P4 would still need the G# schools for extra home games and relatively easy wins, so perhaps a portion of the CFP payout would still go the G# as compensation.

Unlikely in that conferences like the SEC and Big Ten (and ACC) will want the chance to place two schools in the playoffs.

With a 4-team playoff, I wouldn't think the selection committee would take two schools from the same conference. With an 8-team playoff, sure, but I don't know how likely that is. The proposed lengthening of the season by a week (ostensibly for student-athlete rest) could be in preparation for a CFP expansion, though I would expect a 13-game regular season to be a more likely outcome.

That extra week could also be in preparation for conference semi finals which would be a form of expanding the playoffs which would be champs only for the P4.

As I see it the extra week could provide several options:

1. The 13th game which means a lower tier school could be scheduled for homecoming and 12 P4 games scheduled on a home & home or a neutral site basis is what the networks want and will pay for. This gives virtually all schools a 7th home game which is why they like scheduling lower tier opponents.

I give this option the higher % of likelihood but in the not too distant future.

2. The extra bye week to give players time to heal up is the reason most coaches would want it.

I give this option the highest % of likelihood but think in the not too distant future those in power at the conference office and the networks will transition it into option #1.

3. Expanded conference playoffs. I've considered this idea for at least 5 years but I think this will be an idea for the distant future. And, I think if it happens then it will be because we move past 16 schools in conference composition.

Until then they aren't needed. If 16 has any magic to it at all it's because options #1 and options #2 are far more likely if we don't move past that number. But if we do then that 13th game can be dropped and the conference semis added.

So you see that added week is the preparation that those who call the shots want. It sets up the most possibilities for increasing the money on down the road. It's easily justifiable as a bye week for player health. Easily convertible into an eventual 13th game which pleases A.D.'s everywhere and is currently the reason they don't want more P games on the schedule. And eventually a huge money maker for the conferences when the P4 expands to 16 by virtue of conference semi finals.

(07-19-2017 10:17 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Unlikely in that conferences like the SEC and Big Ten (and ACC) will want the chance to place two schools in the playoffs.

Plus the G5 confs, and Notre Dame, own six seats at the executive board of the CFP. Not saying they have equal power ... but I doubt there's any way the G5 get officially, completely shut out of a possible chance (one day) to make the playoff.

(07-19-2017 11:28 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 10:17 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Unlikely in that conferences like the SEC and Big Ten (and ACC) will want the chance to place two schools in the playoffs.

Plus the G5 confs, and Notre Dame, own six seats at the executive board of the CFP. Not saying they have equal power ... but I doubt there's any way the G5 get officially, completely shut out of a possible chance (one day) to make the playoff.

This is what people seem to forget. The P5 knows that it would be a Anti-Trust Case that is a guaranteed loser in court for them(not to mention the ultra-bad PR) and an outright breakaway will be blocked by just about every College President of those schools....

(07-19-2017 11:43 AM)lance99 Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 11:28 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 10:17 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Unlikely in that conferences like the SEC and Big Ten (and ACC) will want the chance to place two schools in the playoffs.

Plus the G5 confs, and Notre Dame, own six seats at the executive board of the CFP. Not saying they have equal power ... but I doubt there's any way the G5 get officially, completely shut out of a possible chance (one day) to make the playoff.

This is what people seem to forget. The P5 knows that it would be a Anti-Trust Case that is a guaranteed loser in court for them(not to mention the ultra-bad PR) and an outright breakaway will be blocked by just about every College President of those schools....

Not really. We already have the separation. They just won't formalize it. If we move to a P4 I look for the AAC to be elevated in status to take the place of the Big 12. Then if AAC schools mount a challenge and from time to time gain playoff inclusion the lawsuit potential is eliminated. Most years however it will be the champion of the ACC, SEC, Big 10 and PAC. That way there is a defacto P4, but with just enough inclusion to maintain the status quo.

The networks will get a predominantly "P" schedule and AAC schools will count as a "P" game. This pleases Texas and the Florida schools where each prefers to play more in state than out of state.

The networks get the clustering of brands they want for advertising rates and market stimulation. The P conferences still rake in the cash, and the AAC helps ESPN cover the states of Florida, Texas, and the region of New England.

It also covers the movement of the current Big 12 schools which aren't as appealing to the other conferences. Baylor, Kansas State and any others that don't find another conference home slide into the AAC and by not losing P status it reduces liability.

UConn, Temple, Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati, East Carolina, Central & South Florida along with the rest all gain inclusion and get a bump in revenue and status and since they are the ones most likely to win a challenge in court, that is yet another liability killer of a move.

Once that is done time and state budget cuts increase the distancing between these 5 and the other conferences.

Furthermore, to avoid anti trust suits all that needs to be established is a permeable criteria for inclusion. I would look for this list to include Athletic Endowment size, the requisite number and kinds of sports to be offered, minimum stipends and scholarship requirements, a minimum attendance requirement, facilities requirements, and a minimum Gross Revenue requirement for the ability to enter what will be essentially a new upper division. As long as there are concrete standards for admission, and the ability to move there will be no basis for anti trust suits.

And remember, politics will be involved, but not in the capacity that so many posters tout. Not only do the longer established and larger schools control more voters in each state, but the state will not sanction lawsuits between state schools. Political fallout for attempting this will inevitably affect appropriations.

Some good points have been made. Incidentally, if the regular season eventually goes to 13 games, perhaps ND would be more inclined to join the ACC in full. As it is, they're already 62.5% (5 games out of 8) of the way there. If the ACC can also get Navy to join, then ND's schedule might look like this:

9 conference games (protected rivals = BC, Navy, Pitt)
1 vs. USC
1 vs. Stanford
1 vs. rotation of Michigan, MSU, and Purdue
1 vs. random high-profile FBS school (Texas, Ohio State, Alabama, etc.)

Not bad at all.

(07-19-2017 12:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Some good points have been made. Incidentally, if the regular season eventually goes to 13 games, perhaps ND would be more inclined to join the ACC in full. As it is, they're already 62.5% (5 games out of 8) of the way there. If the ACC can also get Navy to join, then ND's schedule might look like this:

9 conference games (protected rivals = BC, Navy, Pitt)
1 vs. USC
1 vs. Stanford
1 vs. rotation of Michigan, MSU, and Purdue
1 vs. random high-profile FBS school (Texas, Ohio State, Alabama, etc.)

Not bad at all.

Stop right there. I don't know how many times it has been posted, or will need to be posted again, but the service academies will not be joining any P5 conference. And I'll be interested to see if Navy would remain in the AAC should they ever get promoted to P status.

The academies have now even done away with waivers of military service for athletes drafted into the professional ranks. The have reasserted their mission to train "career" military officers. They don't like the health risks that P schedules produce where their linemen give away 80lbs per man on average across both the offensive and defensive lines. Their height and weight restrictions put them at a major disadvantage. While they still like to play a brand name or two a season, what they don't want is a schedule which week in and week out puts them at this risk for injury. So they have opted to stay out of the P5 and unless they reverse their views on this matter they won't be joining a P conference period. Air Force twice declined to discuss the Big 12, Army remains independent, and Navy will likely keep N.D. on the schedule but will not be joining the ACC to make sure it happens.

(07-19-2017 12:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Some good points have been made. Incidentally, if the regular season eventually goes to 13 games, perhaps ND would be more inclined to join the ACC in full. As it is, they're already 62.5% (5 games out of 8) of the way there. If the ACC can also get Navy to join, then ND's schedule might look like this:

9 conference games (protected rivals = BC, Navy, Pitt)
1 vs. USC
1 vs. Stanford
1 vs. rotation of Michigan, MSU, and Purdue
1 vs. random high-profile FBS school (Texas, Ohio State, Alabama, etc.)

Not bad at all.

The above schedule will prevent ND from getting future championship.

This is what ND wants for the schedule:

1 vs. USC or Stanford
1 vs rotation of Michigan, MSU, Purdue and high profile schools.
1 vs. fruit cake like Rutgers or Army
1 vs. FCS or low G5 school that guaranteed a win

(07-19-2017 01:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Stop right there. I don't know how many times it has been posted, or will need to be posted again, but the service academies will not be joining any P5 conference. And I'll be interested to see if Navy would remain in the AAC should they ever get promoted to P status.

The academies have now even done away with waivers of military service for athletes drafted into the professional ranks. The have reasserted their mission to train "career" military officers. They don't like the health risks that P schedules produce where their linemen give away 80lbs per man on average across both the offensive and defensive lines. Their height and weight restrictions put them at a major disadvantage. While they still like to play a brand name or two a season, what they don't want is a schedule which week in and week out puts them at this risk for injury. So they have opted to stay out of the P5 and unless they reverse their views on this matter they won't be joining a P conference period. Air Force twice declined to discuss the Big 12, Army remains independent, and Navy will likely keep N.D. on the schedule but will not be joining the ACC to make sure it happens.

OK, good to know. I was skeptical myself, but someone floated the idea in another thread recently and it seemed like a good way to get ND to join as full. But I can see why it wouldn't fly.

(07-19-2017 01:20 PM)ArQ Wrote:  The above schedule will prevent ND from getting future championship.

This is what ND wants for the schedule:

1 vs. USC or Stanford
1 vs rotation of Michigan, MSU, Purdue and high profile schools.
1 vs. fruit cake like Rutgers or Army
1 vs. FCS or low G5 school that guaranteed a win

Bear in mind that if they were in the ACC, they'd be (more) regularly playing several schools that are considered pushovers in football (e.g., BC, Syracuse, Duke, WF, etc.). So they'd have "fruit cake" games already built into their schedule. Interestingly enough, Notre Dame has not played a I-AA/FCS school since at least as far back as 1998, possibly farther.

I suppose they could drop their annual game against Stanford in favor of a lower-end FBS school. The primary reason ND manufactured that rivalry was to ensure they'd play in California every season. So:

9 conference games (protected rivals = BC, Pitt, Miami?) -- a protected game vs. Miami would help substitute Florida exposure/recruiting for reduced California exposure/recruiting
1 vs. USC
1 vs. Navy (this becomes a "fruit cake" game whenever Navy isn't doing well)
1 vs. Michigan, MSU, Purdue, Stanford, or other high-profile school
1 vs. lower-end FBS school

(07-19-2017 12:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Some good points have been made. Incidentally, if the regular season eventually goes to 13 games, perhaps ND would be more inclined to join the ACC in full. As it is, they're already 62.5% (5 games out of 8) of the way there. If the ACC can also get Navy to join, then ND's schedule might look like this:

9 conference games (protected rivals = BC, Navy, Pitt)
1 vs. USC
1 vs. Stanford
1 vs. rotation of Michigan, MSU, and Purdue
1 vs. random high-profile FBS school (Texas, Ohio State, Alabama, etc.)

Not bad at all.

As an institution, ND completely rejects the idea of putting its football program in a conference.

Jack Swarbrick has conceded that this may change, but ONLY if ND could not attract a TV deal on its own or if P4 champs only playoff legislation were passed.

So...no. A possible 13th game is irrelevant to ND's position on this issue.

(07-19-2017 01:20 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 12:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Some good points have been made. Incidentally, if the regular season eventually goes to 13 games, perhaps ND would be more inclined to join the ACC in full. As it is, they're already 62.5% (5 games out of 8) of the way there. If the ACC can also get Navy to join, then ND's schedule might look like this:

9 conference games (protected rivals = BC, Navy, Pitt)
1 vs. USC
1 vs. Stanford
1 vs. rotation of Michigan, MSU, and Purdue
1 vs. random high-profile FBS school (Texas, Ohio State, Alabama, etc.)

Not bad at all.

The above schedule will prevent ND from getting future championship.

This is what ND wants for the schedule:

1 vs. USC or Stanford
1 vs rotation of Michigan, MSU, Purdue and high profile schools.
1 vs. fruit cake like Rutgers or Army
1 vs. FCS or low G5 school that guaranteed a win

ND has never played an FCS school in football.

ND is currently upgrading its schedules according to Jack Swarbrick and wants to play teams from every conference for playoff committee consideration.

Recent schools added to the schedule the last few years include Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia, Arkansas, Ohio State and Texas A&M.

ND is not looking for more "fruit cake" games. It is looking to further beef up its schedules to impress the committee, "our twelve are better than most other's thirteen"...... according to Swarbrick.

(07-19-2017 02:59 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 01:20 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 12:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Some good points have been made. Incidentally, if the regular season eventually goes to 13 games, perhaps ND would be more inclined to join the ACC in full. As it is, they're already 62.5% (5 games out of 8) of the way there. If the ACC can also get Navy to join, then ND's schedule might look like this:

9 conference games (protected rivals = BC, Navy, Pitt)
1 vs. USC
1 vs. Stanford
1 vs. rotation of Michigan, MSU, and Purdue
1 vs. random high-profile FBS school (Texas, Ohio State, Alabama, etc.)

Not bad at all.

The above schedule will prevent ND from getting future championship.

This is what ND wants for the schedule:

1 vs. USC or Stanford
1 vs rotation of Michigan, MSU, Purdue and high profile schools.
1 vs. fruit cake like Rutgers or Army
1 vs. FCS or low G5 school that guaranteed a win

ND has never played an FCS school in football.

Presuming Notre Dame joins the ACC full-time, Navy doesn't join the ACC, the ACC goes to 9 conference games, and the ACC goes to 13 regular season games:

9 conference games
1 vs. Navy
1 vs. USC
1 vs. Stanford
1 vs. other power school, Army, or BYU

(07-19-2017 03:05 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 02:59 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 01:20 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 12:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Some good points have been made. Incidentally, if the regular season eventually goes to 13 games, perhaps ND would be more inclined to join the ACC in full. As it is, they're already 62.5% (5 games out of 8) of the way there. If the ACC can also get Navy to join, then ND's schedule might look like this:

9 conference games (protected rivals = BC, Navy, Pitt)
1 vs. USC
1 vs. Stanford
1 vs. rotation of Michigan, MSU, and Purdue
1 vs. random high-profile FBS school (Texas, Ohio State, Alabama, etc.)

Not bad at all.

The above schedule will prevent ND from getting future championship.

This is what ND wants for the schedule:

1 vs. USC or Stanford
1 vs rotation of Michigan, MSU, Purdue and high profile schools.
1 vs. fruit cake like Rutgers or Army
1 vs. FCS or low G5 school that guaranteed a win

ND has never played an FCS school in football.

Presuming Notre Dame joins the ACC full-time, Navy doesn't join the ACC, the ACC goes to 9 conference games, and the ACC goes to 13 regular season games:

9 conference games
1 vs. Navy
1 vs. USC
1 vs. Stanford
1 vs. other power school, Army, or BYU

That goes against ND's whole philosophy and stance on this issue.

ND wants a national schedule and the flexibility to schedule schools from every P5 conference.

What you propose would not allow that.

ND does not want to be "regionalized" by an eight or nine game conference schedule unless forced to at gunpoint.

I know that people want to find new and interesting ways for ND to join a football conference but ND won't unless it is forced to by its program becoming so degraded that no broadcast partner will offer them an individual contract or if a champs only playoff is established.

It will only join a football conference against its will and if forced by outside events, never by its desire to do so.

It has zero desire to do so. Everything ND has done since it joined the Big East as a partial member in 1995 has been designed to keep its football program out of the clutches of any conference.

The marginal "enticements" of getting to play BC and Pitt every year or a some more TV money are irrelevant to ND's position on this issue.

Here again are Jack Swarbrick's recent comments:



Indy Star interview with Jack Swarbrick (7/14/17):


Q: Switching gears, what would it take for Notre Dame to join the ACC full time in football?

A: You can always weigh some circumstance that would do it, but we don’t think that way and we are very comfortable with and focused on our independence because of the things it does for the university, not for us. If we didn’t have a broadcast partner, that would be one thing. But we have a great relationship with NBC and look forward to that continuing. I don’t foresee any change in philosophy which would ever cause us to do it.

[On the first day of ACC media days Thursday, conference Commissioner John Swofford was asked this same question. He said Notre Dame joining the ACC as a full member is “not a point of discussion” between the university and the league. "There wasn’t an expectation that at some point in time Notre Dame would ask for full membership in football,” Swofford said. “That is not a point of discussion at this given point in time. Obviously, if Notre Dame reached the point where they wanted to have that discussion, we would readily sit down and speak with them about that."]

Q:Have you found that not having a 13th game or winning a conference is hurting Notre Dame as it pertains to the College Football Playoff?

A: There will be years where not having a conference championship works against us. We understand that, we factor it into our calculus. But, given the schedules we’re building, I’ll be very comfortable arguing most years that our 12 games compare favorably with everybody else’s 13. When you say a 13-game schedule is superior to our 12-game schedule, you have to compare all the games. We’re building schedules that I think will stand up to that comparison well. They’ll be very tough to navigate. No one will ever accuse us of backing in with the schedules we’ve built for the future.

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/col...467734001/


As you can see, this is not even a sports issue for ND, but rather an institutional one.

(07-19-2017 03:06 PM)TerryD Wrote:  That goes against ND's whole philosophy and stance on this issue.

ND wants a national schedule and the flexibility to schedule schools from every P5 conference.

What you propose would not allow that.

ND does not want to be "regionalized" by an eight or nine game conference schedule unless forced to at gunpoint.

I know that people want to find new and interesting ways for ND to join a football conference but ND won't unless it is forced to by its program becoming so degraded that no broadcast partner will offer them an individual contract or if a champs only playoff is established.

It will only join a football conference against its will and if forced by outside events, never by its desire to do so.

It has zero desire to do so. Everything ND has done since it joined the Big East as a partial member in 1995 has been designed to keep its football program out of the clutches of any conference.

The marginal "enticements" of getting to play BC and Pitt every year or a some more TV money are irrelevant to ND's position on this issue.

Here again are Jack Swarbrick's recent comments:



Indy Star interview with Jack Swarbrick (7/14/17):


Q: Switching gears, what would it take for Notre Dame to join the ACC full time in football?

A: You can always weigh some circumstance that would do it, but we don’t think that way and we are very comfortable with and focused on our independence because of the things it does for the university, not for us. If we didn’t have a broadcast partner, that would be one thing. But we have a great relationship with NBC and look forward to that continuing. I don’t foresee any change in philosophy which would ever cause us to do it.

[On the first day of ACC media days Thursday, conference Commissioner John Swofford was asked this same question. He said Notre Dame joining the ACC as a full member is “not a point of discussion” between the university and the league. "There wasn’t an expectation that at some point in time Notre Dame would ask for full membership in football,” Swofford said. “That is not a point of discussion at this given point in time. Obviously, if Notre Dame reached the point where they wanted to have that discussion, we would readily sit down and speak with them about that."]

Q:Have you found that not having a 13th game or winning a conference is hurting Notre Dame as it pertains to the College Football Playoff?

A: There will be years where not having a conference championship works against us. We understand that, we factor it into our calculus. But, given the schedules we’re building, I’ll be very comfortable arguing most years that our 12 games compare favorably with everybody else’s 13. When you say a 13-game schedule is superior to our 12-game schedule, you have to compare all the games. We’re building schedules that I think will stand up to that comparison well. They’ll be very tough to navigate. No one will ever accuse us of backing in with the schedules we’ve built for the future.

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/col...467734001/


As you can see, this is not even a sports issue for ND, but rather an institutional one.

Right, but we're just talking hypothetically. And after all, things can change.

(07-19-2017 04:00 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 03:06 PM)TerryD Wrote:  That goes against ND's whole philosophy and stance on this issue.

ND wants a national schedule and the flexibility to schedule schools from every P5 conference.

What you propose would not allow that.

ND does not want to be "regionalized" by an eight or nine game conference schedule unless forced to at gunpoint.

I know that people want to find new and interesting ways for ND to join a football conference but ND won't unless it is forced to by its program becoming so degraded that no broadcast partner will offer them an individual contract or if a champs only playoff is established.

It will only join a football conference against its will and if forced by outside events, never by its desire to do so.

It has zero desire to do so. Everything ND has done since it joined the Big East as a partial member in 1995 has been designed to keep its football program out of the clutches of any conference.

The marginal "enticements" of getting to play BC and Pitt every year or a some more TV money are irrelevant to ND's position on this issue.

Here again are Jack Swarbrick's recent comments:



Indy Star interview with Jack Swarbrick (7/14/17):


Q: Switching gears, what would it take for Notre Dame to join the ACC full time in football?

A: You can always weigh some circumstance that would do it, but we don’t think that way and we are very comfortable with and focused on our independence because of the things it does for the university, not for us. If we didn’t have a broadcast partner, that would be one thing. But we have a great relationship with NBC and look forward to that continuing. I don’t foresee any change in philosophy which would ever cause us to do it.

[On the first day of ACC media days Thursday, conference Commissioner John Swofford was asked this same question. He said Notre Dame joining the ACC as a full member is “not a point of discussion” between the university and the league. "There wasn’t an expectation that at some point in time Notre Dame would ask for full membership in football,” Swofford said. “That is not a point of discussion at this given point in time. Obviously, if Notre Dame reached the point where they wanted to have that discussion, we would readily sit down and speak with them about that."]

Q:Have you found that not having a 13th game or winning a conference is hurting Notre Dame as it pertains to the College Football Playoff?

A: There will be years where not having a conference championship works against us. We understand that, we factor it into our calculus. But, given the schedules we’re building, I’ll be very comfortable arguing most years that our 12 games compare favorably with everybody else’s 13. When you say a 13-game schedule is superior to our 12-game schedule, you have to compare all the games. We’re building schedules that I think will stand up to that comparison well. They’ll be very tough to navigate. No one will ever accuse us of backing in with the schedules we’ve built for the future.

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/col...467734001/


As you can see, this is not even a sports issue for ND, but rather an institutional one.

Right, but we're just talking hypothetically. And after all, things can change.

Right, I gotcha.

We could also all spontaneously turn into amphibious flying kangaroos with pontoon-like lower appendages....hypothetically. :)

(07-19-2017 05:09 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Right, I gotcha.

We could also all spontaneously turn into amphibious flying kangaroos with pontoon-like lower appendages....hypothetically.

Yes, Notre Dame adding 3-4 more games against the ACC beyond their current 5 would be on that level of improbability, I'm sure.

(07-19-2017 05:12 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 05:09 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Right, I gotcha.

We could also all spontaneously turn into amphibious flying kangaroos with pontoon-like lower appendages....hypothetically.

Yes, Notre Dame adding 3-4 more games against the ACC beyond their current 5 would be on that level of improbability, I'm sure.

Not quite as improbable, but along those lines, yes.

Absent one of these two things, it is kinda close:

1) NBC pulling the plug, nobody picking ND up, or

2) A P4x16 with a mandated conference champ only playoff.

Without that, it is along the lines of flying kangaroo-like, academic only mental gymnastic exercises to keep bringing up various ways that ND football might join a conference.

"Enticements" ain't gonna do it.

If the P4 do break away with AAC elevated? I could see MWC and some central time and Big Sky Conference schools being added. The academies will be included as well. As it is, it is the lack of schools in the CST, MST and PST zones that do have a lack of schools at the higher levels. If you throw in AAC? You be giving the east coast an unfair advantage in voting block over the schools west of the Mississippi.