"To hell with Notre Dame"...what say you
While not the best forum title ever, bear with me.
First, I am 100% on board with Brian and the notion of the Michigan - Notre Dame rivalry being good for college sports. I also agree with his level of 'tired' over Bo's famous phrase, but the point of this is to pose a different POV on Bo's point.
I never knew Bo and have no idea what he really meant, but what I believe is that the comment centered on the value he placed on history.
As legend has it, when he came to A2, and his staff derided the quality of the facilities, his response was that the nails and hooks were the same ones used by Fielding Yost, and that made them special. Notre Dame backing away from regular contests with Michigan was a slap in the face to the history of college football. And that is what I believe Bo disliked most. If they didn't want to be a part of what made college football, well, you know what he said.
Full disclosure: born and raised in South Bend, Wolverine by choice. Notre Dame - Michigan is great for college sports. I'm glad to see them join the B1G in hockey, and actually hope they join for the rest of their sports. They fit. How else will we grow our all-time win lead over them in football, basketball and hockey if we don't play them regularly?
So, where do you stand on ND as a perennial rival in all/most sports?
Side note: when the game went to OT at 2-2, my first thought was poor WD's head exploding at the thought of another 3-2 hockey game.
Go Blue!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Um, wasn't their schedule harder being independent than it was with a conference? (They played Stanford, USC, Michigan, MSU etc)
Or is it easier now with their semi-ACC schedule since the ACC sucks (outside of FSU, Clemson and maybe GaTech)?
ND cherry-picked the Big Ten for years. Now they are cherry-picking the ACC. If they decided to join the Big Ten or even the ACC for everything, I would say great. But as long as they want to stay indie and try to cherry-pick themselves into the playoff: fuck 'em.
March 26th, 2016 at 10:30 AM ^
ND always plays a reasonable schedule. However, being independent, they can manipulate the schedule. Never play 2 difficult games in a row. Have a bye before a tough game whenever possible. Play one and done whenever possible and play them at home. Even their ACC schedule is manipulated to not play more than one top ACC team in the same season.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
March 26th, 2016 at 10:49 AM ^
This is false. ND would earn far more money in the B1G with the B1G's TV deal than it would as an independent with its NBC deal. Right now ND gets $15M a year from NBC. Right now, each B1G school (minus Nebraska, Rutgers and Maryland who won't get full shares until later) get $30M+ a year. This figure will go up to at least $40M+ when they new deals are negotiated. Swarbrick himself said that if it was about money, ND would be in the B1G. It's about maintaining their tradition of independence, which I respect.
March 26th, 2016 at 10:47 AM ^
See I disagree with the fact that we shouldn't play Notre Dame.
I love the rivalry and it's undoubtebly good for both schools and fanbases.
However, I definitely still say "To hell with Notre Dame", mostly because of the humorous irony of the pious shit they try to feign.
think of the little SEC children, huddled in their blankets on the sidelines, snow coming sideways into the ear holes of their helmets.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
ND attempted to joing the then Big X on 3 differenct occasions and each time were voted down and each time, UM cast one of the NO votes. After their television contract, with no one to split the revenue with, their decision to remain an independent was the wise move. If they had not been forced to play a sime-conference schedule to heighten their chances for the playoffs, they would not have done so. Results of the Big refusing their bid was that many years their schedule would be considerably tougher than many BIG schools and just as often, pretty much on par with the BIG, scheules would be much easier.
The one conference school that intentionally scheduled with as many guaranteed wins as possible was PSU and that was historically the case. Often times, it was also the reason, despite as many victories over Temple, MASS and the other eastern powers as they could muster, their undefeated seasons simply were not impressive enough for consideration as the mythical NC.
March 26th, 2016 at 10:02 AM ^
And to comment on the post that you commented to, its delusional to think that Notre Dame needs Michigan or anyone else. And if they want to keep their independent status for football and join conferences in other sports, and can actually do it, fine.
Yeah, I'd rather they join the Big Ten but I don't understand why people are getting their panties in a bunch over it.
March 26th, 2016 at 10:11 AM ^
Actually ND is technically ineligible to join B1G. In order to join a school must be a member of the AAU, Association of American Universities, and ND is not. The B1G is actually an academic conference, which is why the University of Chicago is still a B1G member. AAU schools are all research institutions and ND is not. Nebraska is not an AAU member now, but they were when they joined the B1G. They were eliminated on a technicality because the university hospital is not on the Lincoln campus.
I say keep ND out of the conference. I am tired of ND always getting special treatment and being granted exceptions to the rules that every other conference member must obey.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
March 26th, 2016 at 10:33 AM ^
The B1G was down the past 10 years because Michigan was down. OSU won a national title in 2015. Michigan is now rising. MSU has become a player on the national scene winning a Rose Bowl and a Cotton Bowl in back to back seasons and making the playoff last year. That's three top 10-15 (worst case) programs right there. You can count on Wisconsin being a a top 25 team. Penn State and Nebraska are historic powers, if they can get their Harbaugh they will also rise. The B1G is growing stronger and Michigan does not need ND on the schedule. I'd like to point out that ND hasn't won a NC since 1988 and hasn't won a major bowl game since 1993. They appear to be on the rise with Kelly, but let's not act like they are a national powerhouse. OSU beat them by 16 last year.
If Michigan wins the B1G with no more than 1 loss, Michigan will be in the playoff. To alleviate any concerns you may have with Michigan's SOS, moving forward Michigan will play the following non conference opponents over the next 12 years: Colorado, Florida, Arkansas, Washington, Virginia Tech, UCLA, Texas and Oklahoma. Their SOS will be just fine without ND.
I think it's more about the meaningfulness of the michigan-ND game (on both sides) as opposed to that we can't find a replacement. What really separates the elite football programs from the up and comers? It's the historic rivalries. You can't fake history, and that is strong on both sides. I was interviewing for a job yesterday and I quickly noted one of the important guys was an older ND alumn and I started out joking with him that we can't be friends because I went to Michigan and there was an instant connection. He had good memories of going to Michigan for a game and hanging out with the Michigan fans and having a great time. Random home at home series are cool too, but in the larger scheme they don't mean as much.
Not unless it's limited to 1 out of every 3 seasons. With a 9-game B1G schedule, anything more than every third season means NOT playing other schools we'd love to see on our schedule---and Iove that we have gone back to scheduling traditional powers such as Oklahoma in the coming seasons.
http://mgoblog.com/content/2015-schedule-plus-future-ones
(an aside to "jmarch4.19": I'd be leary of scheduling the Baylors and TCUs of the football world in the long-term. Odds are that once their current head Coaches retire or move on, those programs revert to their historical mean. )
It's hard to imagine the rivalry continuing to be relevant in football if we don't play ND. That said, I can understand why the Domers were sick of having an early season loss on their record from playing Michigan and wanted to schedule someone else. With Harbaugh setting the college football world on fire with some regular frequency, ND has to be kicking themselves now because this would have helped them have one more high profile must watch matchup in the early season (moreso than a game vs a random ACC opponent). But, IMO, to hell with Notre Dame.
March 26th, 2016 at 10:17 AM ^
I actually remember Michigan losing to mediocre Notre Dame teams quite frequently during the Carr era. Just so you know, since the rivalry renewed in 2002, Michigan was 7-6 against ND. Michigan was not exactly handing ND a loss every year.
March 26th, 2016 at 11:31 AM ^
What would happen if the Big 10 colluded against ND and didn't schedule them in any regular season game for any sport? Would it harm their stature? Would it harm the Big 10 teams more (lost gate revenue/tv revenue)?
Notre Dame isn't going anywhere. We need to co-exist.
March 26th, 2016 at 10:17 AM ^
Notre Dame became a national team because nobody in the Big 10 (or BIG 9 at the time) would play them. Yost began the boycott because ND had a habit of playing 6th and 7th year players
There's no way they'd put them in the same division as UM & OSU, which would give them a competitive advantage to the win the conference. How would you align the conference to be fair?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
20 years ago, the east was the better division. It seems to be cyclical. Florida has been somewhat down since the loss of Meyer. Tennessee has been down for a while, but they are a blue blood program with a lot of resources. It's only a matter of time before they are good again. Georgia is another blue blood program and South Carolina was much better under Suprrier. So in general the blue blood programs are in the East Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee and in the West Bama, LSU, and Auburn. Adding A&M definately helped that division.
unless/until the NBC contract ends...way too much money to walk away from, and I don't blame them. All colleges are chasing the mighty buck...have to in order to stay fiscally strong. But all that has no bearing on whether we schedule them for football or not.
I'd prefer we bring the yearly rivalry back. Other than OSU (and maybe MSU as of late), no game on our schedule draws more national attention nor more excitement over a win from the fan base than ND. That's a good thing.
Even with the 9-game B1G schedule and the home & homes with other big-name schools, there's room in the schedule to add ND every year starting in 2019. I'd much prefer to see that game (and risk the loss) over a MAC team designed to get us an easy W.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
March 26th, 2016 at 10:07 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
The author is missing Bo's point. Bo thought that the domers belonged in the Big Ten, and it was their complete arrogance for the conference that he disdained. Sure, there was history, but it was the arrogance that drove Bo to that comment.
i DISAGREE WITH bRIAN ON THIS ONE!! I am not a fan of their being in the B1G for hockey, field hockey, lacrosse, or any other sport, for that matter. I woould rather they remain independent in all sports and eventually ROT ON THE DAMN VINE as they should. Let them find their own way and then come crawling back, and then we can tell them to pound sand.
I'm with you BO - "tO HELL WITH NOTRE DAME!"
It was the Big Ten that didn't want ND, not the other way around. I'm okay with ND being the "main" NC rival (say, 1 game every three years), but I actually agree with the ND athletic department that they needed to drop Michigan as an every-year game. It was the one game that didn't fit their new, ACC-affiliated game plan. They have to look to their own interests first. And Michigan should look beyond the (relatively recently-revived) rivalry and create better schedules with interesting big-name teams in home-and-home series.
You know, I actually found myself a little upset when they abandoned the football rivalry only because it was something of an event growing up and one of those games that you wanted every year. Traditionally, I think most of us wanted that one more than MSU, which at the time was mired in "meh".
That being said, life didn't seem to change much when they left that rivalry, but if they wanted to rekindle it, that's fine. Tighter OOC scheduling makes it virtually impossible to play that game more than once in a while (probably 1-2 times every four years at best, I imagine), and that's fine too, in my opinion.
I guess I express my "to hell with ND" in the form of utter indifference as to whether they choose to join sports reality or not.
They should joing the Big Ten, because geographically it actually makes fucking sense, and then we would play them every year and not even have to think about it. They would legitimize the west division, give the conference 5 of the 10 teams with the most wins all time (inlcuding the top two), and they would never have to worry about getting left out of the CFP for not playing a conference championship game.
I know many would say that "oh it's Notre Dame, if they go undefeated they'll never be left out of anything". Well I looked at schedules this year and there is a very good chance that the winner of every major conference goes undefeated, along with Notre Dame. Then you look at Notre Dame's schedule: it's not that tough. I think 5 teams go undefeated this fall and Notre Dame gets left out of the playoff, somewhat as a middle finger to tell them to join a conference.
Obviously, TV deals are going to be a problem here, with Fox owning B1G Network and NBC owning Notre Dame games, but I'm sure a deal could be made. ND should join the Big Ten for all sports, no doubt about it. Then, if we have to add a school to balance the divisions, add Pitt or West Virginia (I'm sure Pitt is the better academic choice, but I've wanted the conference to add both of these teams for a long time).
My father in law is one of those insufferable ND fans. I sit in joyous yet quiet satisfaction knowing that his only children to actively root for a college team, root for Michigan.
I miss the regular football games with ND. There are so many reasons.
- Academically, ND is a close fit. Hard to get into both schools.
- Athletically, ND has had significant success. programs in Football, basketball, hockey, along with the olympic sports.
- Physical campus is beautiful. (This is always subjective, but I think it is).
- Geographic proximity. Other than MSU, ND and then OSU are the closest to Michigan.
- Fanbases are large.
- Their fight song is well known.
- Their colors, while different, are close to UofM.
- Even though Michigan started in 1817, they didn't move to Ann Arbor until 1837. ND was established in 1842, putting us approximately in the same era.
While a few of the west coast school are close, I think the confluence of sports success, academic cachet, geographic proximity, and history make ND a closer fit to Michigan than any other school.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
March 26th, 2016 at 10:16 AM ^
Then fine. Otherwise, I do not think we (the B1G) should enable them by helping fill out their made to order independent schedule, even in other sports. I like playing them, but. . .
March 26th, 2016 at 10:41 AM ^
If you're the B1G and you don't want ND in your conference, fine, don't have them in your conference. But if you do want them—if your long-term goal is to someday get ND to come around—how does conducting a cold war and further embittering them get you there?
People have this dream that ND will eventually be brought to its knees and forced to join, but when has that sort of dynamic ever resulted in a school joining a conference? Schools want to feel good about where they're going, like Nebraska did. To that end, the hockey affiliation could be helpful, as it could begin to demonstrate that we all can get along.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad