T1B

Rumor is WMU will be taking one of the open slots currently on ND's schedule next season.

Just fucking great. If this is true, my faith in Jack Swarbrick making a coaching hire just took a swift kick to the grapes.

I don't know if they have played a MAC team (recently) or not. I do know that Miami (OH) was supposed to open their season in 1997 for the stadium rededication, but they got GaTech to move some things around. GaTech was the team ND opened the stadium with in the 1930's.

I wouldn't call it a low point. ND has had SDSU, Nevada, etc. on some recent schedules. It's dissapointing from a fan prespective that Swarbrick appears to have gone the path of least resistance route, rather than try to schedule a home and home with a major BCS school.

Screw_Michigan wrote:Also, is this officially a "low point" in ND scheduling history? Has ND ever played a MAC team?

Killian wrote:I don't know if they have played a MAC team (recently) or not. I do know that Miami (OH) was supposed to open their season in 1997 for the stadium rededication, but they got GaTech to move some things around. GaTech was the team ND opened the stadium with in the 1930's.

I wouldn't call it a low point. ND has had SDSU, Nevada, etc. on some recent schedules. It's dissapointing from a fan prespective that Swarbrick appears to have gone the path of least resistance route, rather than try to schedule a home and home with a major BCS school.

Fwiw, ND has played Miami of Ohio once and Western Michigan twice, although all of those games (most recently in 1920) predate the formation of the MAC.

The problem with a home-and-home with a major BCS school is ND's commitment to 7-4-1, particularly in conjunction with maintaining all of the traditional rivalries. The eight traditional rivals eat up all of the away game slots on ND's schedule. Dropping Fredo will help somewhat, but there's still very limited flexibility. Granted, Swarbrick was dealt a bad hand by his predecessor's incompetence in this regard, but dumping 7-4-1 should have been at or near the very top of his priority list when he took this job. If I were Swarbrick (and I'm not), I'd be willing to refund up to $1 million per year to NBC to get out of 7-4-1.

On the bright side, at least we haven't scheduled a FCS team yet.

Terry in Crapchester wrote: On the bright side, at least we haven't scheduled a FCS team yet.

srsly, how does notre dame manage to schedule 12 ooc games against d-1a teams every year but hardly any other school can schedule four?

also, what's FCS? the worst thing about branding and rebranding is how quickly people lap it up.

Terry, here's a novel idea: Don't insist on a 7-4-1 schedule. ND shouldn't schedule themselves such a ridiculous home field advantage. Nobody should.

M Club wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote: On the bright side, at least we haven't scheduled a FCS team yet.

srsly, how does notre dame manage to schedule 12 ooc games against d-1a teams every year but hardly any other school can schedule four?

In fairness, having eight regular opponents helps out quite a bit in that regard. And for most if not all of those regulars (Stanford being the most likely exception), ND is no worse than the second-biggest game on their schedule.

also, what's FCS? the worst thing about branding and rebranding is how quickly people lap it up.

Football Championship Subdivision. I don't like it either, but it is what it is.

Van wrote:Terry, here's a novel idea: Don't insist on a 7-4-1 schedule. ND shouldn't schedule themselves such a ridiculous home field advantage. Nobody should.

Van, maybe you missed it, but in my last post . . .

Terry in Crapchester wrote:If I were Swarbrick (and I'm not), I'd be willing to refund up to $1 million per year to NBC to get out of 7-4-1.

Sound to you like someone who wants 7-4-1? I didn't think so.

Like I said, White screwed us over by his own mismanagement, and nowhere is that more obvious than with scheduling. We have a number of issues, including . . .

Continuing all regular opponents on the schedule
All Big Ten games in September
Three games per year vs. Big East
7-4-1

Some of those ideas are liveable, at least in a vacuum. But collectively? What White did is the equivalent of going to the supermarket and trying to fit 50 lbs. of groceries into a bag that can carry 10 lbs. You might think you're saving yourself some work, but in the end you're going to end up with a broken bag and a bunch of unuseable groceries.

But in any event, 7-4-1 sucks donkey balls. There's no other way to put it.

Meanwhile, Swarbrick puzzles me. Here's a guy who was able to bring both a Super Bowl and a Final Four to Indianapolis, yet he apparently can't figure out a way to get us out of 7-4-1. WTF is that?

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

also, what's FCS? the worst thing about branding and rebranding is how quickly people lap it up.

Football Championship Subdivision. I don't like it either, but it is what it is.

eh, i know what the FCS is. it's a hollow orwellian gimmick intended to make games against d-1aa scrubs slightly more palatable. "i know we're playing north carolina a&t, but they're still division 1!!!!!!" ghey.

you can still call a spade a spade, even if the ncaa asks you not to.

Van wrote:Don't insist on a 7-4-1 schedule. ND shouldn't schedule themselves such a ridiculous home field advantage. Nobody should.

Ding, ding, ding!!!! Terry wasn't implying ND should keep it, but this is the biggest point. If ND wants to have that stupid, bullshit "barnstorming" game on a neutral field, do it at the expense of a home game, not road. But they won't do that because they are revenue whores. The catholic in Notre Dame is really starting to show.

If this is just reactionary measurs on Swarbricks part in dealing with the cock sandwich that White left him, there are a few things he can do:

First, call the Big 10 and let them know that he, and Notre Dame, respect the traditional and geographical rivalries that have been enjoyed over the past 100 years and would like to continue to them, so long that there is a comprimise. Notre Dame would like to move the Purdue and MSU game into October, but they will keep the UofM game in September, where it always has been. If the Big 10 says no, Swarbrick must be ready to tell them to go piss up a rope and possibly lose the MSU and Purdue series. If that then costs them the UofM game, that is unfortunate fallout. Teams that measure up historically to Purdue and MSU can be found in the Pac-10, ACC, SEC, Big 12 and even Big East.

Second, call up the BCS and get rid of the grab your ankles agreement that White put in place. If ND goes to the BCS, they get to keep every penny. If they don't, they don't see a dime.

Third, call Addidas and ask them to renegotiate the deal w/r/t Michigan's "most favored program" clause. At the same time, start negotiations with Under Armor to possibly outfit the Notre Dame athetics. Come to a tentative agreement and take it to Addidas. If Addidas holds firm, leave right then and there, even if it means less sponsorship money from Under Armor at the start.

Fourth, call NBC and basically tell them to sniff his balls. The commercials are too long, and their insistance in 7+ home games are causing the product of Notre Dame to diminish, and in turn, cost NBC money. No one will tune in to watch ND vs. WMU/Tulsa/etc., but they will tune in to watch ND vs. LSU/OU/etc. The 7-4-1 (8-4) model is costing them the later, and resulting in the former. If NBC gives some push back, call up Fox and see if they would like rights to college football games at ND. Even if their price is drastically reduced, it will benefit ND in the long run.

But none of this will happen. As one NDNation poster so aptly put it, Swarbrick is not a war time consigliere. He would take the Barzini deal.
If this is the outcome, ND should just join the Big 10. Not because they need it, but that is where their administration is heading anyway.

Kilian wrote:But none of this will happen. As one NDNation poster so aptly put it, Swarbrick is not a war time consigliere. He would take the Barzini deal.

That is awesome.

Killian wrote:If ND wants to have that stupid, bullshit "barnstorming" game on a neutral field, do it at the expense of a home game, not road. But they won't do that because they are revenue whores. The catholic in Notre Dame is really starting to show.

If ND were doing the barnstorming game in the manner I first had envisioned it, 6-5-1 would be an acceptable model. In most years, the barnstorming game would have been a de facto road game anyway.

If this is just reactionary measurs on Swarbricks part in dealing with the cock sandwich that White left him, there are a few things he can do:

First, call the Big 10 and let them know that he, and Notre Dame, respect the traditional and geographical rivalries that have been enjoyed over the past 100 years and would like to continue to them, so long that there is a comprimise. Notre Dame would like to move the Purdue and MSU game into October, but they will keep the UofM game in September, where it always has been. If the Big 10 says no, Swarbrick must be ready to tell them to go piss up a rope and possibly lose the MSU and Purdue series. If that then costs them the UofM game, that is unfortunate fallout. Teams that measure up historically to Purdue and MSU can be found in the Pac-10, ACC, SEC, Big 12 and even Big East.

I've been screaming about this for years, although I'd take just one of the Big 10 games after the month of September. The issue isn't finding comparable opponents to Sparty and Purdue, it's more about the tradition and proximity to campus (I think ND should play at least one road game per year relatively close to campus for the benefit of the students; if the Big Ten balks at our demands, then I think we need to strongly consider either Cincinnati, Louisville or both). Losing Michigan would be bigger fallout, of course, but I doubt that will happen for two reasons: (1) Michigan is more likely to act in its own best interests than show solidarity with a couple of lesser partners in the Big Ten; and (2) Michigan knows that ND is a guaranteed national TV appearance every year, and there's a relatively small pool of OOC teams about which the same can be said.

In any event, asking for just one game to move out of September isn't much to ask, I think. At a minimum, the Big Ten ought to be willing to extend the same courtesy to ND that they already extend to the MAC.

Second, call up the BCS and get rid of the grab your ankles agreement that White put in place. If ND goes to the BCS, they get to keep every penny. If they don't, they don't see a dime.

Agree here, but this one, I think, is easier said than done. The BCS has been angling toward this agreement since at least 2003.

Third, call Addidas and ask them to renegotiate the deal w/r/t Michigan's "most favored program" clause. At the same time, start negotiations with Under Armor to possibly outfit the Notre Dame athetics. Come to a tentative agreement and take it to Addidas. If Addidas holds firm, leave right then and there, even if it means less sponsorship money from Under Armor at the start.

I'll defer to you on this point, I'm not as up on licensing agreements.

Fourth, call NBC and basically tell them to sniff his balls. The commercials are too long, and their insistance in 7+ home games are causing the product of Notre Dame to diminish, and in turn, cost NBC money. No one will tune in to watch ND vs. WMU/Tulsa/etc., but they will tune in to watch ND vs. LSU/OU/etc. The 7-4-1 (8-4) model is costing them the later, and resulting in the former. If NBC gives some push back, call up Fox and see if they would like rights to college football games at ND. Even if their price is drastically reduced, it will benefit ND in the long run.

I've had a few misgivings about Fox all along. For starters, I think the Fox option may assume some facts not in evidence. I don't see much effort from Fox to get into college football telecasts as it is. So far, their only telecasts of college football have come either on the FSN side of the house, and a short-term deal to televise BCS bowls (which they didn't fight very hard to keep). So far, the efforts they've made to telecast college football haven't been even remotely comparable to their efforts in that regard to televise the NFL and MLB, or even the NHL and NASCAR, for that matter. And even if they are interested in televising college football, I don't see anything to suggest that ND would be their preferred vehicle in that regard as opposed to, say, the SEC. Fox also projects a certain in-your-face type of attitude, and I'm not certain that their image and ND's image would be compatible with one another. There are also certain production issues presented by Fox, basically the opposite side of the coin from NBC (NBC is too staid and old-school, Fox is too gimmicky). And last, but certainly not least, I still don't want Jimmy Johnson anywhere near a ND telecast, even if it's going on 25 years since 58-7.

All of that having been said, if we're looking for a wedge, Fox, regrettably, may be our best option. ABC and ESPN aren't viable options in that regard, given the share they already have. CBS might be an option, but given their existing deal with the SEC, we might be forced to move the time on our home games for them.

But none of this will happen. As one NDNation poster so aptly put it, Swarbrick is not a war time consigliere. He would take the Barzini deal.

Unfortunate, but I fear you're right.

If this is the outcome, ND should just join the Big 10. Not because they need it, but that is where their administration is heading anyway.

I have little doubt that White's objective was to become the athletic director who steered ND into a conference. He didn't accomplish that, but he certainly set the wheels in motion for it, potentially at least. Swarbrick says all the right things about independence, but I fear that when push comes to shove, he doesn't have the stomach to do the things necessary to preserve our independence.

But if a conference is ND's ultimate destination (and I realize ahead of time this'll piss Van off mightily), I think the Big Ten would be a mistake. The fact that we're having such a hard time getting a relatively simple scheduling concession -- a concession the Big Ten already gives the MAC -- is, I think, a harbinger of the manner in which we'll be treated if we ever join the Big Ten.

Screw_Michigan wrote:Also, is this officially a "low point" in ND scheduling history?

After having had some opportunity to think about this question, let's be clear about one thing: Western Michigan on the schedule is not THE problem. Rather, Western Michigan on the schedule is a symptom of the problem.

One look at ND's 2010 schedule says it all:



By my count, that's 5 non-BCS opponents on the schedule. That's at least 2 or 3 more than we should have. So props are due to Swarbrick. I didn't think we could possibly come up with a weaker schedule next year than we had this year, but damn if he didn't make me into a liar.

The culprit, of course, is 7-4-1. But even if we are hamstrung by 7-4-1, we can do better than that. Imho, if we're stuck with 7-4-1 for the long haul, these are the teams Swarbrick needs to contact about a possible one-off:

ACC
Duke
Maryland (maybe)
Virginia (maybe)
Wake Forest

Big East
Cincinnati (maybe)
UConn
Louisville
Rutgers
USF
Syracuse (maybe)

Big Ten
Illinois (maybe)
Indiana
Minnesota (maybe)
Northwestern

Big XII
Baylor
Iowa State
Kansas (maybe)
Kansas State (maybe)
Oklahoma State
Texas Tech

Pac-10
Oregon State
Washington State

SEC
Arkansas (maybe)
Kentucky
Mississippi State
South Carolina (maybe)
Vanderbilt

These are the BCS teams that I believe would take a one-off with ND. Teams with a maybe after their names are teams I have some doubt about, but even in that case I believe most of them would at least take a 2-for-1 deal with ND, so you might be able to slot them in to replace Fredo. Not all of these teams are terrible, of course. Some are even pretty good in their own right. But they're all teams that could benefit from the sort of publicity a national TV appearance would entail, enough even to consider forgoing a home game vs. ND. And with the exception of Utah, most if not all of the teams on this list are better than the one-offs Swarbrick got for next season, from a visibility standpoint if nothing else.

No matter what else, given where we are right now, getting in touch with at least a few of these programs is a no-brainer. If Swarbrick is committed to 7-4-1 (note that I'm in disagreement with him if that's the case), the only way to make it work long-term is to have at least 2-3 teams from this grouping on the schedule every year. If he wants to get rid of 7-4-1, getting a few of these teams on the schedule right now at least will allow him to get through the mess he was left without inflicting further damage on the program in the short term.