Notre Dame Joe

The best thing no one mentions is that you have 20 teams happy at the end of the season because they won their bowl game. More winners makes more happy fans -> continued interest in the sport. INstitute the playoff and sure you'll have a bit more confident champions, but everyone else's season will end sour.

1990 Canes in the 1991 Cotton Bowl. Lou had already carved them up in South Bend.

I agree. I rewatched that fight the other day. I had Marquez winning by one round. I don't watch much boxing because it's mostly PPV. That's why its in decline. No relevant sport has its championship on PPV.

That's the rub I was talking about. THe SEC has more teams above .500, but if they scheduled 3 North Texas type teams than that isn't saying much. The methods I hear the most often are % chance of going undefeated and average total wins. I think in most years a team would have fewer wins in the SEC but harder to run the table in the PAC. That's because the PAC had perennial 11-1 USC, the twist is of course that USC never had to play itself. Now I don't know where it is. If you were an SEC East team that dodged Bama or LSU then the # is way higher than it should be. The SEC is still #1 but not by as much as it appeared. The big12 only once had its champ shut out last year. The Big12 actually overachieved last year, I forget where they ranked. a 1 or 2 loss USC was always shunned so they had the most to whine about.

Google says that no one has ever written that clause before.

Whats your point Joe. They play the same number of conference games and the same number of OOC games as basically every conference. They play the same number of BCS teams OOC as basically every other team. There is no "extra highschool team" and that game doesnt replace any conference games. They just dont play all the OCC games in the first weeks. When they play them has nothing to do with who has better records. What your trying to say doesnt even make sense. Your basically saying that 1 big10 team that plays 8 conf games, 1 other bcs team and 3 puffs doesnt have as good of a record as an SEC team that plays 8 conf games, 1 other bcs team and 3 puffs because that SEC team plays a puff on NOV 17 and not Sept 17 like the big10 team. Timing of wins and the effect it can have on voters, okay that is something i will listen too. But then you have to acknowledge that everyone else has an advangtage upfront because they pad their records with patsies in the first weeks while the SEC has premier conference games. And Joe I know your not in a conference. And ND is the exception to the rule when it comes to building a schedule, but then again thats their own choice. I was actually borrowing a Pac whine about playing 9 conference games while the SEC plays 8. The extra conference game vs one fewer HS team distorts the strength of the conference in most of the metrics. I'd add that's quite pronounced in the ones that rate you highly for losing to a great team, paging Jeff Sagarin. ND is in on this because now that UW wussed out, there are only 3 teams left that have never played a Div 1-aa-whatever school; ND, USC, and UCLA. And it was pretty recent that we were appalled to hear that we scheduled a MAC team.

has it really only been one year? How long until the state of Nebraska hangs banners tallying Rose Bowl appearances?

Your implying that this is a trick to make they look better? Thats kinda what it sounds like. Here is a little heads up for you Joe, EVERY team/conference does this. There that been plenty of years where the big10/big12/Pac12 power teams played a bunch of puffs and never left the home state. Every coach or conference commish is out to do whatever it takes to better their team/group. Secondly, yes, 12 of the SEC teams play 9 BSC opps this year. 2 play 10. But I guess what I am confused about is your point here. Nearly every team in the big10 plays 9 BCS level teams, about another 7 or 8 teams out of the pac12&big12 only play 9, only half of the ACC plays more than 9.... I guess I just dont get what your saying? Do you feel the same about the big10, big12 or pac12? What about the ACC? Or is it because you have a bias against the SEC? And an FYI, you cant blame a setup schedule, or favortism, or a design to cheat the system when their conference has done what they have done in BCS games. They have clear and away the best winning percentage and total wins of the major conferences and have won 8 of the 14 BCS championships (big12 is second best with 2). I am no SEC homer, but I am also not a hater. . The fact is that every little dig or reason that anyone of you have said is either false or applies to everyone else if college football. ANd they all fail to see that regardless of all those excuses, they then still kick everyones butt on the field. AF yes florida never leaves. I think thats pretty punk of them, But they also play Miami and FL ST in their non con. What they do is not that different from a number of other teams. But yes I am sure there are a number of fans that would like to see them leave the state, and I am one of them. But 1 team does not make a conference. And FYI Vandy and MIss St are not crappy teams. They are actually decent teams that are on the rise. Vandy really has a great coach so they could be getting pretty good. And frankly Mizzou is about as crappy as Ne is.....so i'm cool with it as long as you are . No the extra highschool team in place of a conference matchup gives the entire conference a better W-L record. In the 9th game, the PAC goes 6-6 against itself while the SEC goes 12-0 against schools that I had never heard of until I saw them on the ticker. Now the top of the SEC is clearly the best in the country. The middle is often the best. But the entire SEC isn't as tough to get through as their W-L record makes them appear to be. not in my conference

While I apprieciate the effort, your approach is all wrong. Because unlike every other conference the SEC plays conference games in the first weeks of the year. Meaning they have to spread out OOC games. While the big10 and everyone playing warmups the SEC is playing full on games. So frankly that little dig your trying to make is flawed and 100% incorrect. In comparison, while ne plays 2 high school teams, 1 decent mid and an avg BSC school in their first four games, Missouri would have played 1 HS team, 1 avg BSC school and 2 top 10 conference opponents. so.......i guess that "powerhouse week" comment looks just a little different now? huh?! And frankly calling out SEC schools for their noncon is kinda silly. Because they play decent teams out of conference. As good or better than any other collective conference. Then when you consider the quality of conference opponent it just adds to it. The SEC's schedule is designed to help them in the BCS. they play one fewer conference game and one extra high school team. That gives the middle of their conference better records than the ones that play 9 games. Add this to the fact that they never seem to travel to cold weather and only recently started adding marqui non conference, and you have one built for pumping up their own SOS.

The old ND-Michigan contract stipulated it would be the only rivalry to have the home team use her own conferences refs. Made no sense until they destroyed their credibility in 2009. Wolverines remain in denial, but the other fans just laughed at both of us.

Very little IMO. In the B1G we'd have to give up Navy/SoCal, since now there are regular Bug--Pac games expected. 1 open spot is too little and we'd wind up with the usual toughest schedule. You are right, it was an alumni riot that stopped our admin in 1998. I want to repeat that I don't think the problem is this or that conference, it's ALL conferences and that conference thinking is creating the chaos. But at least it fills up the empty off-season.

I just saw it on CFB Live now. They also said that ND's 2012 schedule is so hard that "The 95 Huskers would have trouble getting through it." We can't afford to take the chance and be regionalized. Apparently we don't even dominate Northwest Indiana, Southern Cal just got a commitment from the top RB. The midwest is just losing people. I really think the jury is still out on your life in the B1g. The solidarity and the money are good. But recruiting wise, going against Urban Meyer and the Michigan machine is not going to easy. And can you still pull in Texans? Also you have the entire state of Nebraska to yourself (we share Indiana with 2 schools that are technically in the BCS) NU can at least get linemen locally and go abroad vs everyone for speed.

I hope this doesn't make Jumbo Fisher the Archduke Ferdinand... BYU has a Mormon problem--this is why they won't get a Pac-12 invite unless hell freezes over. Unless something changed when the Pac-10 went to 12, it has to be a unanimous decision to add. The California schools would object and have done so (vehemently) when this was brought up in the past. It's a non-starter. And BYU's refusal to travel or play on Sundays was why the talks between the Big XII and BYU failed as well. Frankly, they're at risk of being left behind if the requirement for a conference title is in place. --- As for teams that the Pac-12 could pick up, Nevada and Boise State would be good additions--the former gives them the Las Vegas market and the later is a hot national brand/team. And if the Pac-12/14 is desperate enough, there are a number of California schools (Fresno State, San Diego State) they could go after. I don't think Larry Scott will make the mistake of going after Oklahoma or Texas again--not if the price of admission is onboarding Okie Like, Texas Tech, and/or Baylor. --- Notre Dame Joe--I didn't see you answer this before, but if you did, I apologize--where do you think Notre Dame will go if they're forced into a conference? If I had to predict I'd bet on the Big12 because the chatter says that they'd offer us a deal. The deal is that we'd join for non-football sports and keep the NBC contract in exchange for playing a few Big12 teams a year. They are making a major power play so we'd get swept in. I'm pretty sure Texas would envision that we would have to become full members after a period of time. NBC is the wildcard that isn't mentioned much. They are negotiating an extension with us now and they seem to want a bigger share of CFB very badly. Our money is pretty close to a Big10 share depending on how you count the numbers and whether or not we make a BCS bowl. The fact that are only "pretty close" to the BIG right now tells me you are in trouble already. You have your own national network that broadcasts your home games exclusively, you should be well above what schools like Northwestern are getting paid, but you aren't. The formation of super conferences are only going to make you less relevant and a weaker marketing tool by yourself. Just wait until the next time the BIG negotiates with the major networks. Every other conference is trying to negotiate to get to what the BIG has now. Problem is by the time the do, the BIG will have upped theirs even more. Another question is if they are going to stay independent in football and leave the Big East in others, why the Big 12? That does nothing for hockey, basketball would be a lateral move at best plus you are leaving all the fellow catholic schools, baseball you would be at a weather disadvantage to the southern schools. It doesn't seem like it would help the other sports at all. I would hope to God that the BIG would be smart enough to never let ND in as a everything but football school too. I read "if the bigeast implodes" into his question. In my mind it became a dead man walking conference once WVU left and they refused to raise the exit fee. Yes it's a given that the big12 would be poor for all the olympic sport; I prefered the ACC if they kept FSU and our hand was forced. In my post earlier in this thread I opined on it, . IMO that won't be the case though. There are too many rival factions that Savvy Jack can play off. Ironically I think the Big10 is helping us because since 1998 they've let it be known that we can enter whenever we want. It's a lot of leverage.

I hope this doesn't make Jumbo Fisher the Archduke Ferdinand... BYU has a Mormon problem--this is why they won't get a Pac-12 invite unless hell freezes over. Unless something changed when the Pac-10 went to 12, it has to be a unanimous decision to add. The California schools would object and have done so (vehemently) when this was brought up in the past. It's a non-starter. And BYU's refusal to travel or play on Sundays was why the talks between the Big XII and BYU failed as well. Frankly, they're at risk of being left behind if the requirement for a conference title is in place. --- As for teams that the Pac-12 could pick up, Nevada and Boise State would be good additions--the former gives them the Las Vegas market and the later is a hot national brand/team. And if the Pac-12/14 is desperate enough, there are a number of California schools (Fresno State, San Diego State) they could go after. I don't think Larry Scott will make the mistake of going after Oklahoma or Texas again--not if the price of admission is onboarding Okie Like, Texas Tech, and/or Baylor. --- Notre Dame Joe--I didn't see you answer this before, but if you did, I apologize--where do you think Notre Dame will go if they're forced into a conference? If I had to predict I'd bet on the Big12 because the chatter says that they'd offer us a deal. The deal is that we'd join for non-football sports and keep the NBC contract in exchange for playing a few Big12 teams a year. They are making a major power play so we'd get swept in. I'm pretty sure Texas would envision that we would have to become full members after a period of time. NBC is the wildcard that isn't mentioned much. They are negotiating an extension with us now and they seem to want a bigger share of CFB very badly. Our money is pretty close to a Big10 share depending on how you count the numbers and whether or not we make a BCS bowl.

Nope, you're right. I was telling another poster here in PMs, the ACC commish should be fired for incompetence IMO. The ACC footprint has a substantially better media market overall than the Big XII and a better league from top to bottom (whereas the current Big XII is rather top-heavy). The only reason the ACC got less is because they settled for less and were rather myopic about the big picture, especially for their upper-echelon programs. Florida State and Clemson are gone. To where, I don't know--but at this point, since we're talking anywhere from a $5-10 million/year difference between the ACC and the Big XII, B1G, Pac-12, or SEC, that adds up fast if you're a Florida State or Clemson having to recruit against *all* of the SEC schools that are making more than you annually. I do wonder if Miami will be able to land somewhere--they are staring down the barrel of some pretty serious sanctions when all is said and done, and they'll likely be a liability in the short term to any conference that picks them up. Long term, they could pay dividends, but if you're in any of the power 4 conferences, would you want your conference to float them for 5-7 years until sanctions are over and they can get back on their feet again? Would recruiting in Florida be worth all of that heartburn in the short term from picking up Miami? Personally, I wouldn't think so, but I'd like to hear what you folks think. --- And Jayhawk, last I knew, Kansas was still keeping their options open in case they needed to land somewhere. I frankly think they're on the short list of available teams if the B1G wants to go to 14. As for media rights, I know in the Big XII they now all belong to the conference (save for 3rd tier), but in those discussions, there was a structured buyout or penalty put in place. Remember that Missouri already signed away media rights, and they had a buyout similar to what Nebraska paid. aTm didn't sign on with that deal, IIRC, and they still paid about the same as Missouri. I believe that had aTm signed on, they would have had a more expensive penalty, and had Missouri *not* signed over rights to the Big XII, their penalty would had likely been more along the lines of what Colorado paid. --- As for Maryland, Syracuse, V. Tech, and the like, I could see Maryland or V. Tech to grab the Baltimore and DC area, but I don't think V. Tech will leave unless the ACC begins to collapse. Plus, I don't honestly see V. Tech as a cultural fit--something important to the B1G. Personally, I wouldn't be shocked in seeing is Delaney and the B1G offering Florida State and another school (Notre Dame, Pitt, Kansas) to go to 14. The B1G can offer more money and exposure than the Big XII will ever posses, Florida has three significant media markets that the Big Ten Network would love to add to their home footprint, and FSU and the B1G both have a common enemy in the SEC. FSU has a built-in historical rival in Nebraska. Plus, the Big Ten Network can deploy right away, compared to the year or more of setup to get a FSU Big XII 3rd tier network on the air in Florida, not to mention the costs involved. And remember that Delaney did make some statements about wanting a more southern presence for the B1G...I can't think of a better, more available, and willing southern presence for the B1G than Florida State. This is starting to sound like the beginnings of WWI.

If FSU leaves and BCS money is not flowing into the ACC it will be scramble mode for everyone to get out. I think FSU and Clemson are gone. That dosen't mean the 4 conferences will all start trying to get to 16, that makes no sense to me. Why would the B1G for example start snatching up the likes of Pitt and Syracuse when they don't add more money to the pot than the average B1G school? I could see both the SEC and B1G having interest in a pairing of NC and VATech. Georgia Tech could be a Big12 target. Maryland, NC State, Virginia, BC, and/or Miami could have a fit somewhere I just can't see it now. ND is still the big chip that needs to fall, and if this playoff forces them into a conference my guess is B1G. One thing that seems pretty obivious is we have 4 big boy conferences and 4 conference champs. There is your playoff, PAC vs B1G and SEC vs Big12. You even have 4 CCG's so now you have an 8 team playoff. Everybody else can go out in the fall and run a team out onto the field in front of a half full 50,000 seat stadium and wait until basketball season starts. Not sure if it's a good thing, but that's how I see it. Ugh, I think you are right even if it looks lillegal. How is the Pac getting to 16 then?

lol, awesome. They really should restore the Cotton Bowl and then do a +1 game.

Successful transfer QBs, off the top of my head, include Wilson, Scott Frost, Troy Aikman, Zac Taylor, and Jevan Snead (mixed success). A little bit of digging (http://blogs.houston...football_qb.php) reminds me of Ryan Mallett, Colt Brennan, Jeff Hostetler, and Nick Foles. Of course there have been many flops too. Mitch Mustain is the biggest one I can recall in recent history. The article above lists Snead and Keller among the biggest busts. I disagree, at least both started, even if we discovered that Keller should not have over Ganz. Really, these guys are just looking for a shot, and most wouldn't have gotten it where they are at. I don't know where Harrison Beck is now, but at least he finally got on the field at North Alabama or wherever he finished playing. The fact that he could only find success in Div 2 says that we were better off freeing up the scholarship or even the locker room space Then there are the anti-transfers, the ones who stay even though chances of seeing the field look bleak, and they pull success out of it anyway. Bruce Mathieson is a classic, he held the clipboard a number of years in the pros even though he rarely saw game action at Nebraska. Brook Berringer only saw meaningful action after Frazier got hurt and was clearly going to get a shot in the NFL. Matt Cassell stayed on the bench at USC and became an NFL starter. Vinnie Testaverde waited for Kosar to leave (but only because Kosar hinted he'd leave early), and Leinart waited for Palmer to go. This shows that transferring isn't necessarily the right answer. I'd guess that transfers who have already graduated outperform the ones that just couldn't win the job. One time Dayne Crist please.

That's his brother. Who is still at Washington. Nick Montana is transferring out of UW. Our ex-QBs really travel a lot. We sent Lovechio to somewhere. Jones to Cinci and somewhere. a Frazier to UCONN. And Crist to Kansas.

The Midwest starts in western Pennsylvania. The proof is in the pop.

Ideally I'd want a union of the independents from the 1980s where the teams agree to patch the holes in the schedule with each other but mostly keep their own revenue. But in reality, I think the ACC is the 'best fit' as the expression goes. They have great academics who are our "aspirational peers" to use another buzzword. We've got rivalries. If you believe conference membership helps recruiting inside it, then we could get more help from Florida to Virginia, which has a lot of talent and population growth. We have no local recruiting base sorry Northwest Indiana so if we're to be regionalized it had better be where we can get talent. The basketball and olympic sports would not suffer at all in the ACC. As much as I loathe the serial fraud by their referees, 2nd place goes to the hodgepodge Big East. With Navy joining we keep our one enemy, one friend, one rival [Michigan, Navy, Southern Cal) and still play a 9 game conference schedule. Since the conference scatters itself across the US we could soon be recruiting in Guam. As the lone power, we retain our new tradition of playing down to the level of the competition. The Big12 I didn't know much about until I started reading this board. It sounds like an institutional marriage from Hell. The criteria above explain why we should stay out of the Big10. But I wish you all the best of luck here.

To paraphrase a former President, Conferences are not the answer to our problems, Conferences are the problem. All of the stupidity in bowl games can be traced to conference self-interest. That's why we have 'Savvy Jack' striking deals all over to keep Delaney out. The tv networks won't strike a deal that isn't clear about what happens to Notre Dame, it would just be leaving money on the table. But in the nightmare scenario, BigEast dissolves, conference membership mandatory, antitrust suit tied up in courts, the fanbase currently favors the ACC or the Big12 over the big10. The ACC is actually a pretty good football fit because we have more developed rivalries [Miami, FSU, BC and Pitt] than the Purdue, UM, Sparty.

His Dad hinted that something was not right with thatOSU recruiting. I think he means that the people they met didn't just happen to be there during an unofficial. Stay tuned.

If your kid was interacting with one of them you'd become an Apache Helicopter Dad.