As expected this wasn't all that well received by many ND fans, mainly over the football restrictions. I don't see it that way though, what's good for the ACC is good for ND. That it binds us longer to the ACC and limits our options is what some think is not good. There are certainly some who think that we never should have agreed to the 5 games with ACC teams in football in the first place. That we should have done something different and maybe gone with the Big East since they don't have football and we could have maintained complete independence.
Terry, I guess I don't understand. Why is conference affiliation ok for all sports but football. What does ND get out of it? What do they give up? I get that ND loses some independence in football but is that the sticking point?
belonging to a conference helps a lot with travel costs, especially in the non-revenue sports. It also helps in filling out the schedule. There's a revenue increase, especially in the non-revenue sports for conference membership. Really, the only perk to conference membership for ND in football is the championship autobid.
kp, ND for many years has played a geographically diverse schedule and has tried to maintain traditional rivalries while keeping its schedule as competitive as possible. To play a full conference schedule (8-9 games) would restrict our ability to maintain geographic diversity and possibly (no disrespect intended to ACC lower tier teams) to keep the schedule as competitive as possible. By agreeing to 5 games per season vs. ACC teams, we contribute to the conference FB revenue stream but we retain our independence re: scheduling and geographic diversity. We don't expect fans of any conference to understand it, but we are who we are. It could change in the future, but I doubt it.
Corey, From what I can glean from the conversations, it just seems that ND would like all of the benefits that conference membership brings to its other sports without contributing to the money sport. I'm sure that UVA or NC State will appreciate the revenue that a home game with ND will generate. ND already plays Pitt and BC anyway, don't they? :?:
kp to add to what Sid said, it's history and tradition. At one time ND wanted to join the Big10 but were black balled for years by Michigan and Fielding Yost. So we went our own way and developed as an independent, most ND fans grew up with this and don't want to see us become limited to conference membership. So why is it ok in other sports? Well bottom line is you just have such a hard time to make up a schedule as an independent in the non-football sports. Back before the Big East there were a lot of basketball independents and it was easy to put together a schedule and the Irish and Digger Phelps were very successful after the Big East and a few other new conferences it became impossible to put together a good schedule. So we joined the Big East. The Big East was great for non-football sports and football remained independent. The demise of the Big East left us with fewer opportunities and the ACC partial membership was our best option. More than a few fans are not very happy with the concessions to the ACC, but it is what it is. Will we join full time sometime in the future? If the situation changes and we are essentially faced with being locked out of the Playoffs then I would think that would force our hand.
As a Miami fan I kinda understand where Notre Dame is coming from, even though Miami is not Notre Dame we were an independent forever but the burden of scheduling non-football sports was tough. We never had the finances, fan loyalty or media draw that Notre Dame had so ended up joining a conference earlier to help the non-football sports. In our case most hard core Miami fans miss being an independent in football but financially had no choice but to align ourselves first with the Big East and now the ACC. The television packages by itself in this era almost demand joining a conference unless of course you are Notre Dame which is probably the one school that can make it work by just its name and fan loyalty across the country. The most surprising thing to me was I remember arguing with SEC fans who said conference play is tougher, I just could not believe this as we had the motto we will play anyone anywhere and pretty much did with big names on the schedule year in and year out. Well with us joining the ACC conference we have done nothing, I realize it has coincided with us being a dumpster team the past ten years but there is something to playing teams on a regular basis. Notre Dame has fits playing Boston College even though they always have more talent on the field than BC. There is something to be said for familiarity of who you are playing and knowing the coaching tendencies of the opposing team.
Re: independence There used to be quite a few independents in football, Penn State, Miami, Syracuse, Boston College, Fla State were the big ones I can think of in addition to the Irish. I think all of them gave up independence not for their football programs but for their non-football programs. BYU of course recently went Independent in football after years of being in the WAC and Mtn West conferences. I don't really remember why they left the Mtn West for independent status, their non-football sports are in the WCC with Gonzaga currently. Edit: As far as Ralphs comment about schedules and familiarity. The Irish Schedule for a long time had a fairly consistent group of teams. Purdue, Mich State, Navy, Stanford, Boston College, USC, Michigan. Leaving us some slots for rotating teams on and off the schedule much like conference teams do with their non-conference foes.
Yeah your right Terry, I missed that didn't I....I forgot how those teams are pretty much on your schedule on a yearly basis...I guess the tough thing is trying to keep them scheduled as they have their own conference requirements.
Bill would have to verify this for me but I think I remember the SEC either asking Miami to join the league or were in talks with us during our heyday as a powerhouse. Either way it never worked out, I think at that time it made no sense to go to the SEC from Miami's viewpoint. I've always wondered what if that had happened....Especially during that time frame in college football...
BYU and Utah felt they were the WAC, and were being bogged down by all the rest of the riff raff. They were able to leave and start the MWC to try to get a seat at the table, a la the Big East. There was a valid argument to be made that the MWC should have had as much say as the BEast (or in reverse, that the BEast should have had as little say the MWC) but it didn't work. So, Utah finally did get a seat at the big table by realigning, but there are quite a few tables that don't want BYU, including the P12. BYU thought it was too good for any of the smaller conferences, which was the only option at the time. It amuses me no end that the B12 is going to end up with BYU, after being rejected by all the other big boys, as well as being left in the dust by the Utes.
Good insight Kes. I actually think BYU is a pretty good fit for the B12. They do have a National following and have produced some great teams. Sure whupped Texas the last couple of times we played.
Things have definitely changed, for instance Purdue. That series had a very long history. But like many teams Purdue wanted/needed a certain number of home games esp with the changes in the B10 going to more conference games so a home/home series with ND wasn't in their best financial interest going forward. I think the same issue came up with Mich State another long time staple of the Irish schedule. Also the other consideration was the bowl schedule, the bowls trended towards locking up all their slots with conferences and only if the conference couldn't provide a team would they look at other teams. So in years where we are just another team (too often true post Lou Holtz) we frequently had very few options and none of them especially attractive. We did have some agreements where a bowl could take us 1 time in 4 years instead of a conference team (We had that with the Gator Bowl) but those have faded and the ACC deal got us back in the game with regards to non New Years 6 bowls.
I think BYU would be an excellent fit for the Big 12. Most years, they would be an upper division team in the Pac12 or close to it. They have a huge national following, and they're almost contiguous to the B12 footprint. IMO they should be in a "power" conference for football.
KP, I think we have to play something like 5 ACC opponents a year. It might not seem like a huge concession, but it's almost half our schedule. I think the other guys covered the talking points pretty well. I know a few groups of ND fans weren't happy with the ACC deal, but stepping away and taking a critical analysis of the deal, I think it's a more fair deal for all parties concerned than the deal we had with the Big East. They get a good chunk of our football schedule, we get conference membership in the other sports. At this point, if we were ever given the gun to the head treatment, I'd just as soon see ND join the ACC if they really had to join somewhere.
sidenote, and I am sure Kes is thinking this, I know BYU doesn't seem too bad know for Texas but just you wait...
:idea: BYU should be in the 12Pac, but the No-Cal schools (Cal-Berkeley/Stanford) keep them out because of their Mormon religion...