T1B

While all of CFB steps into the most exciting portion of the season, the Big 10 conference settles in for a wee little dirt nap. One is tempted to conclude that the conference regards OSU/UM as the de facto conference championship, and thus is worried that The Game be upstaged.

Yes - usually it IS the CCG. Nonetheless, isn't it a bit arrogant to set things up this way? The conference teams play 12 game seasons, and because no game can follow The Game (which Those Schools don't care to play on Thanksgiving Weekend - again, too fearful that they'll be upstaged), there is no bye week - setting up a pretty brutal stretch of games.

You know, I think it's time they changed all of that. There's no need to prop up The Game. The Game will always be one of the biggest games of the year.

I think its gonna take an off year for both schools for that to be addressed. Maybe Zook's Illini and another program can finish in the top two and then The Game will be somewhat of an afterthought. Also, with the success of Mizzou in the Big XII North, it will be hard for the Big Ten to lure them in to joining the conferen and get to that even number so they can split the conference.

Hopefully, Chisnick (sp?) and ISU make some serious strides in the North and maybe attract some Big Ten wigs to invite them over. Who knows.

I say jettison one team and go full round robin. These CCG's are flawed, particularly when the best 2 or 3 teams reside in the same division of these conferences. Dump a team, have 10 teams in the Big10 (brilliant) play a round robin, and the true Conference champion emerges. This year thing worked out as the should've, but years when a team wins the title without playing psu, UM, osu, or wisky, would suck.

What about the inevitable OSU loses to Michigan, and Michigan loses to Wisconsin and Wisconsin loses to OSU scenario?

Before PSU joined there were tiebreaker scenarios.

Head to head, works in most scenarios.
Overall record
Who went to the Rose Bowl more recently

IndyFrisco wrote:What about the inevitable OSU loses to Michigan, and Michigan loses to Wisconsin and Wisconsin loses to OSU scenario?

Heh, Wisconsin is 3-3 vs OSU since 2000 and 2-4 versus Michigan.

Who is the conference champ though? PLease don't say there is a "Co-Champ".

88 wrote: they go to who hasn't been to the Rose Bowl in the longest amount of time.

That is a fundamental flaw in the system. Albeit, it probably won't happen for the next 40 years, but when it does, changes will have to be made.

They did do co-champs, but the tie breakers decided who repped the conference in the Bowl Game.

I just remember the year A&M was on probation and went undefeated, there were 5 teams in the SWC that were co-champs I believe.

Yeah, looked it up. 1994. A&M goes 6-0-1 and Baylor, Rice, t.u., TCU and tceh all split the conference with 4-3 records. L-A-M-E. I like having a conf. championship game.

IndyFrisco wrote:I just remember the year A&M was on probation and went undefeated, there were 5 teams in the SWC that were co-champs I believe.

Yeah, looked it up. 1994. A&M goes 6-0-1 and Baylor, Rice, t.u., TCU and tceh all split the conference with 4-3 records. L-A-M-E. I like having a conf. championship game.

*shakes*

I went to the game against the Coogs in the Dome. Rodney Thomas to the left, Rodney Thomas to the right, Rodney Thomas up the middle. Touchdown

What a brutal game

RumpleForeskin wrote:*shakes*

I went to the game against the Coogs in the Dome. Rodney Thomas to the left, Rodney Thomas to the right, Rodney Thomas up the middle. Touchdown. Rodney Thomas to the shed to get paid for not working.

What a brutal game

ftfy

WolverineSteve wrote:I say jettison one team and go full round robin. These CCG's are flawed, particularly when the best 2 or 3 teams reside in the same division of these conferences. Dump a team, have 10 teams in the Big10 (brilliant) play a round robin, and the true Conference champion emerges. This year thing worked out as the should've, but years when a team wins the title without playing psu, UM, osu, or wisky, would suck.

I like that idea, but who do you get rid of?

I also think adding a 12th is the only solution because, in case you didn't notice, all the Big10 cares about is $$$$$. Thus, a CCG would be another money maker and thus an option we could pursue. This would also remove the often defacto CCG of UM vs OSU. Of course I don't know who we would add or how to break the conference up but I do agree the no games on thanksgiving rule is stupid. A bye would help everyone out and there is no reason to end the season so early.

(which Those Schools don't care to play on Thanksgiving Weekend - again, too fearful that they'll be upstaged)

i don't know how this would play into the decision whether or not to play the game on thanksgiving weekend, but osu students go home to ohio while michigan students fly back to new york or new jersey or whatever other east coast hovel is so much better than ann arbor. the last time michigan hosted the game on thanksgiving weekend was 2001, and i remember half the student section wearing scarlet and gray.

Sky wrote:

WolverineSteve wrote:I say jettison one team and go full round robin. These CCG's are flawed, particularly when the best 2 or 3 teams reside in the same division of these conferences. Dump a team, have 10 teams in the Big10 (brilliant) play a round robin, and the true Conference champion emerges. This year thing worked out as the should've, but years when a team wins the title without playing psu, UM, osu, or wisky, would suck.

I like that idea, but who do you get rid of?

I also think adding a 12th is the only solution because, in case you didn't notice, all the Big10 cares about is $$$$$. Thus, a CCG would be another money maker and thus an option we could pursue. This would also remove the often defacto CCG of UM vs OSU. Of course I don't know who we would add or how to break the conference up but I do agree the no games on thanksgiving rule is stupid. A bye would help everyone out and there is no reason to end the season so early.

PENN STATE

(sorry Dave)

Blind,

hell Id be willing to bet Dave would be the first to admit PSU joining the B10 didnt turn out the way they wanted it. almost all the PSU fans I know are not happy playing 3 or 4th fiddle to OSU and UM

Penn State? I'd say Iowa. They're the only program strong enough to go it alone, a la Notre Dame.

BlindRef wrote: PENN STATE

(sorry Dave)

I agree.

PSU, FSU, and Miami need to go back Independent.

I miss the good old days of college football when all the good games were on Jan 1.

There are a lot of PSU fans that think our woes started when we joined the Big 10. Fromk a football perspective, I find Big 10 games to be much more compelling than the teams we used to play, top to bottom. From every other University perspective, the match was made in heaven.

88 wrote:

peter dragon wrote:Blind,

hell Id be willing to bet Dave would be the first to admit PSU joining the B10 didnt turn out the way they wanted it. almost all the PSU fans I know are not happy playing 3 or 4th fiddle to OSU and UM

You guys are smoking crack. Penn State has been an excellent addition to the Big10. Its not like they haven't won championships in football. They have 2. And their other sports are very good, especially the womens programs. Once JoePa retires and Schiano gets things tuned up, they will be an absolute force.

plus a half of a national championship.

You can't whack NW (worst athletic program) because they raise the academic curve.

Minnie makes some sense, but I think they're a charter member.

IU has carried the hoop torch many a year.

Wisky has a solid all around athletic program.

Illinois, old school. Chitown market is a rich recruiting area.

If I say MSU, the Sparty guys will accuse me of God knows what. But they're the second most recent addition to the conf. to PSU. They're hoops rich which is a huge benefit to the conf....so they aren't going anywhere.

I agree with the guys above, PSU is the most logical choice to go. They can join the Big East and dominate in Football (eventually). Their hoops is a joke, I know nothing of their other sports. As thge most recent addition to the conference they have the least tradition. C-ya...bye-bye.

This will never happen. A 12th school is far more attractive to the conference, but a guy can dream cant he.

WolverineSteve wrote:I agree with the guys above, PSU is the most logical choice to go. They can join the Big East and dominate in Football (eventually). Their hoops is a joke, I know nothing of their other sports. As thge most recent addition to the conference they have the least tradition. C-ya...bye-bye.

alright PSU, its been decided. you are the weakest link.


:P

Believe the Heupel wrote:Tell you what-you can have Iowa State and we'll take either TCU or Tulsa.

No, you can have Iowa and we will take Missouri.

Losing Penn St would be a big blow to the competitiveness and general appeal of the Big Ten (football) conference. I'd like to see 10 teams again, including a round-robin format, but not at the expense of losing a heavy hitter like PSU. The program also keeps the door open for other Big Ten schools to expose their programs to the state of Pennsylvania, which is key recruiting ground.

so we say bye to minnesota. i know they were a charter member, but so was the u of chicago. [they left their mark, so to say: hail! to the victors valiant...] the only sport dominated by minnesota when tutors aren't writing papers for their baskeball teams is hockey, and it's not like the conference system applies there anyhow.

I know it will never happen but ND is a PERFECT fit for the Big 10 and its amazing they can't see the benefits. If the Big Ten added another team, would they still use the name "Big Ten"?

If not, what would the new conference name be?

Sincerely,

War Stoops wrote:I know it will never happen but ND is a PERFECT fit for the Big 10 and its amazing they can't see the benefits. If the Big Ten added another team, would they still use the name "Big Ten"?

If not, what would the new conference name be?

The MEATGRINDER.

The TYAACOD Conference

Three Yards And A Cloud Of Dust

War Stoops wrote:I know it will never happen but ND is a PERFECT fit for the Big 10 and its amazing they can't see the benefits.

Once you get beyond geography and football tradition, ND is hardly a perfect fit for the Big Ten. And what benefits would Big Ten membership confer on ND, besides access to the CIC grant money?

Mr T wrote:

BlindRef wrote: PENN STATE

(sorry Dave)

I agree.

PSU, FSU, and Miami need to go back Independent.

I miss the good old days of college football when all the good games were on Jan 1.

Rack. And while we're at it . . .

Add BC and Virginia Tech to your list.

Also, the Big East and C-USA should drop football as conference sports, and their members should resume independent status.

Hell, Georgia Tech should go back to being an independent as well. I'm old enough to remember the day when Georgia Tech was an independent, although I realize most on here are not.

It'll never happen, of course. But college football would be better off if it did.

M Club wrote:

(which Those Schools don't care to play on Thanksgiving Weekend - again, too fearful that they'll be upstaged)

i don't know how this would play into the decision whether or not to play the game on thanksgiving weekend, but osu students go home to ohio while michigan students fly back to new york or new jersey or whatever other east coast hovel is so much better than ann arbor. the last time michigan hosted the game on thanksgiving weekend was 2001, and i remember half the student section wearing scarlet and gray.

Real simple solution here: move tOSU-Michigan to the first week in December. The Big East and Pac-10 don't have conference championship games, so they've compensated by moving a significant portion of the conference schedule to that weekend.

Of course, the Big Ten is so tradition-bound that I doubt that will happen.

The University of Chicago should be let back into the Big 10

Terry wrote:Once you get beyond geography and football tradition, ND is hardly a perfect fit for the Big Ten. And what benefits would Big Ten membership confer on ND, besides access to the CIC grant money?

Clearly, you're infinitely closer to the situation than me and have more knowledgable on the specific, tangible benefits. However, as an outsider, I can list the following:

- Easier Football Schedule
- Better Bowl Tie-ins
- Revenue sharing on Bowls during down years for ND (do they share with the Big East now?)
- Prominent role in arguably the most powerful political force in CFB, the Big Ten Conference
- Eaiser basketball conference
- Better academic conference
- Geographic fit and possible enhanced recruting position in Big Ten land
- Less jealousy and ire from rest of CFB (you may not care about this one)

Just my $0.02.

War Stoops wrote:

Terry wrote:Once you get beyond geography and football tradition, ND is hardly a perfect fit for the Big Ten. And what benefits would Big Ten membership confer on ND, besides access to the CIC grant money?

Clearly, you're infinitely closer to the situation than me and have more knowledgable on the specific, tangible benefits. However, as an outsider, I can list the following:

- Easier Football Schedule

Debatable point. My take: we'd have an easier schedule in some years, and a more difficult schedule in other years.

What is not open for debate, however, is that it would be a less exciting schedule, at least from the perspective of most of ND's fanbase. ND's fanbase is spread out throughout the country, not merely close to campus, and that's a big part of the reason why ND plays teams from around the country. A lot of traditional rivals would have to be eliminated if we joined the Big Ten. And assuming that we'd keep Navy and USC (not that the Rose Bowl won't have something to say about that) on the schedule, that leaves only two open dates a year. Not to mention the fact that tOSU and Michigan would want a geographic alignment which would require ND to play Wisconsin and Minnesota annually, while missing annual dates with Penn State or Purdue, or both.

- Better Bowl Tie-ins

Not a huge concern, from ND's point of view. Remember, ND had a no bowl games policy until 1970. And nothing against the Alamo Bowl, but I can't see ND's fanbase ever embracing the mindset of being excited over wrapping up that fourth-place Big Ten finish and Alamo Bowl bid.

- Revenue sharing on Bowls during down years for ND (do they share with the Big East now?)

No revenue sharing with the Big East, but we do get a check from the BCS in years we don't qualify for a BCS bid. Comparing the current situation to membership in the Big Ten, we'd lose money in the Big Ten in years we qualify for the BCS; it would be essentially a wash if we make a non-BCS bid (we probably come out slightly ahead as an independent); and we'd get more money (although not dramatically more) in the Big Ten in years where we didn't qualify for any bowl bid.

- Prominent role in arguably the most powerful political force in CFB, the Big Ten Conference

True, but this would be more than offset by the fact that we'd be in third place (at best) behind tOSU and Michigan in the Big Ten power struggle.

- Eaiser basketball conference

Same answer as for football schedule. Yes in some years, no in others, and probably a wash overall with our current situation.

- Better academic conference

Since we're an independent in football, from that perspective this concern isn't relevant. From the standpoint of other sports, you're correct, but a few points even there. First, there are plenty of fine academic institutions in the Big East as well. Second, our academic focus differs from that of most Big Ten schools other than Northwestern. ND's academic emphasis is on undergraduate education within a Catholic environment. Most of the Big Ten schools, by contrast, are huge land-grant public universities who focus on graduate-level research.

- Geographic fit and possible enhanced recruting position in Big Ten land

As I stated previously, ND's fanbase is national, not regional, and therefore, a geographic tie-in to a particular conference is less important. As for recruiting in Big Ten country, ND already can recruit, or perhaps I should say, is already capable of recruiting, well there anyway. So I'm not sure there's any real advantage to membership in the Big Ten in this regard.

- Less jealousy and ire from rest of CFB (you may not care about this one)

Right on both counts. But let's examine this a step further.

While there's always been plenty of jealousy and ire directed at ND from certain circles in college football, ND's status as an independent has been the target of this only fairly recently. As Mr T and I both noted, as recently as the early 90's there were still a substantial number of independents in college football. And in that regard, it's been the rest of college football that changed, not ND. So why should ND be concerned about this?

Terry in Crapchester wrote: Rack. And while we're at it . . .

Add BC and Virginia Tech to your list.

Also, the Big East and C-USA should drop football as conference sports, and their members should resume independent status.

Hell, Georgia Tech should go back to being an independent as well. I'm old enough to remember the day when Georgia Tech was an independent, although I realize most on here are not.

It'll never happen, of course. But college football would be better off if it did.

If we get rid of the BCS and add a playoff, Indy would be the way to go. But right now, no way in hell would anyone leave the BCS conferences.

BTW, GT is also a 5 time SEC champion

I'm out of my league here but what the hell...

Terry wrote:What is not open for debate, however, is that it would be a less exciting schedule, at least from the perspective of most of ND's fanbase. ND's fanbase is spread out throughout the country, not merely close to campus, and that's a big part of the reason why ND plays teams from around the country. A lot of traditional rivals would have to be eliminated if we joined the Big Ten. And assuming that we'd keep Navy and USC (not that the Rose Bowl won't have something to say about that) on the schedule, that leaves only two open dates a year. Not to mention the fact that tOSU and Michigan would want a geographic alignment which would require ND to play Wisconsin and Minnesota annually, while missing annual dates with Penn State or Purdue, or both.

I would think the Big 10 would want Notre Dame to be in the same division as Penn State creating a OSU-Michigan rivalry in one division and a Penn State-ND rivalry in the other. I understand the spread-out nature of ND's fanbase, but I think you could keep USC on the schedule and add one other intersectional game per year and the "out of market" ND fans would still get sufficient love.

Terry wrote:No revenue sharing with the Big East, but we do get a check from the BCS in years we don't qualify for a BCS bid. Comparing the current situation to membership in the Big Ten, we'd lose money in the Big Ten in years we qualify for the BCS; it would be essentially a wash if we make a non-BCS bid (we probably come out slightly ahead as an independent); and we'd get more money (although not dramatically more) in the Big Ten in years where we didn't qualify for any bowl bid.

I still see some value here. Maybe in total dollar terms it's a wash, but revenue would be more predicatble and smooth as part of the conference.

Terry wrote:Not a huge concern, from ND's point of view. Remember, ND had a no bowl games policy until 1970. And nothing against the Alamo Bowl, but I can't see ND's fanbase ever embracing the mindset of being excited over wrapping up that fourth-place Big Ten finish and Alamo Bowl bid.

San Antonio's a pretty good bowl destination. Rose, Capital One, and Outback are pretty good as well.

Terry wrote:True, but this would be more than offset by the fact that we'd be in third place (at best) behind tOSU and Michigan in the Big Ten power struggle.

I don't agree here. I think ND would immediately wield influence on par with Michigan and Ohio State. Much like Texas did when it joined the Big 12.

Terry wrote:Same answer as for football schedule. Yes in some years, no in others, and probably a wash overall with our current situation.

I think in the long run, the Big East will be a better basketball conference than the Big 10. The talent pool there is just so much better than the rest of the country - much like the south and west in football. Plus, wouldn't you love to see a ND-Indiana rivalry in hoops?

Terry wrote:Since we're an independent in football, from that perspective this concern isn't relevant. From the standpoint of other sports, you're correct, but a few points even there. First, there are plenty of fine academic institutions in the Big East as well. Second, our academic focus differs from that of most Big Ten schools other than Northwestern. ND's academic emphasis is on undergraduate education within a Catholic environment. Most of the Big Ten schools, by contrast, are huge land-grant public universities who focus on graduate-level research.

Sounds like a complimentary relationship to me.

Terry wrote:As I stated previously, ND's fanbase is national, not regional, and therefore, a geographic tie-in to a particular conference is less important. As for recruiting in Big Ten country, ND already can recruit, or perhaps I should say, is already capable of recruiting, well there anyway. So I'm not sure there's any real advantage to membership in the Big Ten in this regard.

My comment here wasn't directed at the fan base but at the recruiting pool. The fact is, even at ND, the lion's share of any team's roster is going to be from relatively near the campus. In this BCS era, I can't help but think that some of the kids in the midwest are intrigued by the chance to play in a BCS conference and/or have grown up bombarded by the Big 10 media. Certainly, Notre Dame can get recruits from anywhere but I think it could do better head-to-head with the likes of Michigan and Ohio State if it was in the same conference.

Terry wrote:Right on both counts. But let's examine this a step further.

While there's always been plenty of jealousy and ire directed at ND from certain circles in college football, ND's status as an independent has been the target of this only fairly recently. As Mr T and I both noted, as recently as the early 90's there were still a substantial number of independents in college football. And in that regard, it's been the rest of college football that changed, not ND. So why should ND be concerned about this?

You definitely shouldn't care what people think about you. But not changing for the sake of not changing is as bad as changing for the sake of changing. I think Notre Dame risks becoming irrelevant over the long term if it continues to participate in CFB under its own terms and conditions. Of course, quality football could solve this problem.

quote="War Stoops"]I'm out of my league here but what the hell...

Terry wrote:What is not open for debate, however, is that it would be a less exciting schedule, at least from the perspective of most of ND's fanbase. ND's fanbase is spread out throughout the country, not merely close to campus, and that's a big part of the reason why ND plays teams from around the country. A lot of traditional rivals would have to be eliminated if we joined the Big Ten. And assuming that we'd keep Navy and USC (not that the Rose Bowl won't have something to say about that) on the schedule, that leaves only two open dates a year. Not to mention the fact that tOSU and Michigan would want a geographic alignment which would require ND to play Wisconsin and Minnesota annually, while missing annual dates with Penn State or Purdue, or both.

I would think the Big 10 would want Notre Dame to be in the same division as Penn State creating a OSU-Michigan rivalry in one division and a Penn State-ND rivalry in the other. I understand the spread-out nature of ND's fanbase, but I think you could keep USC on the schedule and add one other intersectional game per year and the "out of market" ND fans would still get sufficient love.[/quote]

With respect to conference alignment, the word I had been hearing, when the Big Ten was courting Notre Dame, was that Ohio State and Michigan wanted a north/south alignment which placed them in different divisions:

North: Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Wisconsin
South: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue

Suffice it to say that would be a disaster waiting to happen for ND. We get annual matchups with Wisconsin (last played in 1964) and Minnesota (last played in 1938), while we lose annual matchups with either Purdue (continuous series since 1946) or Penn State (only northeastern team in the Big Ten), if not both.

As for the OOC scheduling, as things stand, we play at least one road game per year in the northeast and one road game per year on the west coast. If we were to join the Big Ten, that annual west coast roadie would go away.

War Stoops wrote:

Terry wrote:No revenue sharing with the Big East, but we do get a check from the BCS in years we don't qualify for a BCS bid. Comparing the current situation to membership in the Big Ten, we'd lose money in the Big Ten in years we qualify for the BCS; it would be essentially a wash if we make a non-BCS bid (we probably come out slightly ahead as an independent); and we'd get more money (although not dramatically more) in the Big Ten in years where we didn't qualify for any bowl bid.

I still see some value here. Maybe in total dollar terms it's a wash, but revenue would be more predicatble and smooth as part of the conference.

The problem is that pales in comparison to the revenue from the TV deal. And the Big Ten has stated, in no uncertain terms, that we'd be required to part with the TV deal to join the Big Ten. At best, they'd make an accommodation for any time existing on the deal so that we weren't required to breach the contract, but that would be it.

War Stoops wrote:

Terry wrote:Not a huge concern, from ND's point of view. Remember, ND had a no bowl games policy until 1970. And nothing against the Alamo Bowl, but I can't see ND's fanbase ever embracing the mindset of being excited over wrapping up that fourth-place Big Ten finish and Alamo Bowl bid.

San Antonio's a pretty good bowl destination. Rose, Capital One, and Outback are pretty good as well.

Like I said, no knock on the Alamo Bowl in general. It's just that ND's fanbase has a different perspective on bowls, perhaps stemming from the fact that we refused to play in any of them for so long.

Essentially, if ND isn't playing for the national championship, the majority of ND's fanbase doesn't really care where, or even if, they're going bowling. In '96, ND went 8-3 and turned down two bowl bids. Granted, the financial realities of the BCS have altered that perception slightly, but not to the point where it's also altered the perception as to non-BCS bowls.

War Stoops wrote:

Terry wrote:True, but this would be more than offset by the fact that we'd be in third place (at best) behind tOSU and Michigan in the Big Ten power struggle.

I don't agree here. I think ND would immediately wield influence on par with Michigan and Ohio State. Much like Texas did when it joined the Big 12.

I've said that if ND must join a conference, the Big East makes more sense than the Big Ten on a number of levels. This is one of them.

Every conference has 1 or 2 teams that pretty much gets its way no matter what. In the Big East, ND would be that team. In the Big Ten, ND would be constantly butting heads with Michigan and Ohio State to be that team. See the proposed divisional alignment above for just one example.

War Stoops wrote:

Terry wrote:Same answer as for football schedule. Yes in some years, no in others, and probably a wash overall with our current situation.

I think in the long run, the Big East will be a better basketball conference than the Big 10. The talent pool there is just so much better than the rest of the country - much like the south and west in football. Plus, wouldn't you love to see a ND-Indiana rivalry in hoops?

Until relatively recently, ND-Indiana was an annual matchup in basketball. There's no reason that rivalry can't continue on an annual basis as an OOC matchup.

Many of ND's most important rivals in basketball, at least from an historical perspective, have never played in the same conference with ND. In addition to Indiana, certainly UCLA and Kentucky both fit that bill. DePaul and Marquette also are important historical basketball rivals for ND, and until two years ago they never played in the same basketball conference with ND, either.

War Stoops wrote:

Terry wrote:As I stated previously, ND's fanbase is national, not regional, and therefore, a geographic tie-in to a particular conference is less important. As for recruiting in Big Ten country, ND already can recruit, or perhaps I should say, is already capable of recruiting, well there anyway. So I'm not sure there's any real advantage to membership in the Big Ten in this regard.

My comment here wasn't directed at the fan base but at the recruiting pool. The fact is, even at ND, the lion's share of any team's roster is going to be from relatively near the campus. In this BCS era, I can't help but think that some of the kids in the midwest are intrigued by the chance to play in a BCS conference and/or have grown up bombarded by the Big 10 media. Certainly, Notre Dame can get recruits from anywhere but I think it could do better head-to-head with the likes of Michigan and Ohio State if it was in the same conference.

ND's current roster.

By my count, there are 28 players from the Big Ten's traditional footprint. If you include Pennsylvania in the mix, the number jumps to 36. A lot of those players are from the Chicago area, where ND traditionally has a strong base even without Big Ten membership. I just don't see Big Ten membership having any benefits when it comes to recruiting, at least not for ND.

War Stoops wrote:

Terry wrote:Right on both counts. But let's examine this a step further.

While there's always been plenty of jealousy and ire directed at ND from certain circles in college football, ND's status as an independent has been the target of this only fairly recently. As Mr T and I both noted, as recently as the early 90's there were still a substantial number of independents in college football. And in that regard, it's been the rest of college football that changed, not ND. So why should ND be concerned about this?

You definitely shouldn't care what people think about you. But not changing for the sake of not changing is as bad as changing for the sake of changing. I think Notre Dame risks becoming irrelevant over the long term if it continues to participate in CFB under its own terms and conditions. Of course, quality football could solve this problem.

In the mid-90's, ND underwent a very thorough self-examination when it came to whether the basketball program should join a conference. This may come as a surprise to some, but when the issue was basketball I was very much in favor of ND joining a conference. And the Big East has helped ND's basketball program somewhat, even though we're not yet back to where I think we should be.

I reach a different conclusion when it comes to football. In football, my conclusion has pretty much been, "Never say never, but . . ." In both cases, though, my point of reference has been, what is best for ND? As you said, improving the quality of the football program makes conference membership relatively unimportant.

Mr T wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote: Rack. And while we're at it . . .

Add BC and Virginia Tech to your list.

Also, the Big East and C-USA should drop football as conference sports, and their members should resume independent status.

Hell, Georgia Tech should go back to being an independent as well. I'm old enough to remember the day when Georgia Tech was an independent, although I realize most on here are not.

It'll never happen, of course. But college football would be better off if it did.

If we get rid of the BCS and add a playoff, Indy would be the way to go. But right now, no way in hell would anyone leave the BCS conferences.

Good point, I hadn't thought about that before. And that might be the reason why we won't see a playoff anytime soon.

If we get one, many of the existing conferences could implode. And the ones that survive could very well be stripped of their kingmaker status.

BTW, GT is also a 5 time SEC champion

This comes back to what I said earlier about one's perspective.

In the interests of full disclosure, while I am aware of Georgia Tech's earlier affiliation with the SEC, I'm not old enough to remember it personally. I am old enough to remember Georgia Tech as an independent, though.

In fact, Georgia Tech once was more or less an annual rival of ND. The series was a casualty of Georgia Tech's decision to join the ACC.

PSUFAN wrote:There are a lot of PSU fans that think our woes started when we joined the Big 10. Fromk a football perspective, I find Big 10 games to be much more compelling than the teams we used to play, top to bottom. From every other University perspective, the match was made in heaven.

Joining the Big Ten doesn't seem to have done you many favors in basketball. And maybe it's just me, but the land-grant "rivalry" with Michigan State seems just a tad contrived.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

PSUFAN wrote:There are a lot of PSU fans that think our woes started when we joined the Big 10. Fromk a football perspective, I find Big 10 games to be much more compelling than the teams we used to play, top to bottom. From every other University perspective, the match was made in heaven.

Joining the Big Ten doesn't seem to have done you many favors in basketball. And maybe it's just me, but the land-grant "rivalry" with Michigan State seems just a tad contrived.

Right, PSU's status as a basketball power went out the window when they joined the B10.

Since they joined the league, they've made a Sweet 16 and have made the tourney in one or two other years. That's still a step up from the abyss pre-'93 when most people didn't know they had a team.

I'm not expecting that joining a conference should accord a program any particular favors or status per se, those things have to be earned by the AD and the staff. PSU has struggled to build their hoops program. The focus here has been football. Nonetheless, I don't witness that and look askance at the Big 10. It is on PSU to build that up, not the fault of the conference if we have failed.

Yes, PSU's natural rivalries have been severed, but I am glad to see them replaced with new rivalries with Big 10 teams. I do miss the Pitt rivalry, but the conference is not out there saying, "don't play Pitt".

Back to the thread topic, I wish that this weekend involved Big 10 teams. For everyone else, this is a huge weekend.

Who made up the old PSU schedule? I remember:

Boston College
Syracuse
West Virginia in some years (most?)
Notre Dame
Maryland (poor Terps never could beat the Lions)
Pitt at the end of the season