Question: If Texas joined the ACC, would you be in favor of ND joining for football?

I haven't tallied up the votes but "No" seems to be winning big.


http://www.ndnation.com/boards/showpost....920;d=this

(12-09-2014 02:44 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Question: If Texas joined the ACC, would you be in favor of ND joining for football?

I haven't tallied up the votes but "No" seems to be winning big.


http://www.ndnation.com/boards/showpost....920;d=this

Terry on that board of course... But if you did that exact same question on other boards the results would be a lot closer then that one is.

I voted no in that poll myself but I know by going to other boards they're more open to it then nd nation is.

Even ndnationers know they're outside the mainstream of the fan-base(They pride themselves on it). I'm not saying most fans don't want independence, I'm saying it's a closer then that vote.

No surprise there. At any rate, if Texas ever did talk to the ACC, instead of joining as a full member, they'd probably say, "We want the same deal that Notre Dame has."

It is not a scientific or all inclusive vote. It does show that significant opposition to a football membership exists among ND fans.

Most of those who voted on that site are alumni and donors to the university. Sure, that site is more "hardcore" about independence than others might be, but those sentiments are not limited to that board.

They understand the potential implications of the playoff committee's actions. They just don't consider those implications worth giving up independence, even if Texas joined the ACC.

I think people are overreacting to this year. I also don't think Baylor or TCU were snubbed. I think they were simply the fifth and sixth most qualified teams in a four team playoff system.

Further, I don't agree with those who say that the XII was penalized for not playing a conference championship game. I think that is looking at it backwards. To me, it was more a matter of the conference championship games providing teams in those leagues an additional opportunity to play a ranked opponent – which obviously positively impacted those teams' respective strength of schedule numbers. I mean seriously, how could the committee not reward those teams for playing an additional game against a ranked opponent and beating them (often decisively)? Had they done it any other way that would've been ridiculous.

I can understand how that could be seen as semantics but it's actually a very significant difference if you really break it down. The more wins you have over quality opponents the better you will look to the committee. The conference championship games simply provide teams with another opportunity to boost their resume. This year, all of those teams benefited from that opportunity. In other years, teams will lose their conference championship games because of the extra risk they are assuming.

It's a pretty common sense position to be honest and I can't bring myself to argue with it.

As such, I don't think Notre Dame is going to join the ACC or any other conference any time soon. However, I do believe that the powers that be will quickly realize that a four team playoff is insufficient. In fact, from the day they announced it I predicted it would be more controversial and less popular than the BCS system it replaced. Nothing I have seen in the interim has given me a seconds pause in that position.

You just can't have five power conferences plus Notre Dame and only four spots available for a playoffs. That is a very obviously flawed setup and it will almost always lead to controversy, as we saw this year. Well what happens next year when the SEC gets two teams in the four team playoff, leaving out at least two of the power five leagues plus Notre Dame? Does anyone really think everyone's going to be fine with that? Hell no they are not! At some point the wrong team is going to get left out and they're going to storm the Bastille.

I believe that within the next few years the four team playoff will be expanded to eight teams and with each of the power five leagues being guaranteed at least one bid. That simple and seemingly obvious adjustment will solve a lot of the issues plaguing college football and the various leagues/schools within it.

Also, once the playoff structure is changed, it will eliminate the need for the XII to expand and for Notre Dame to seek conference affiliation for football. To me, that incentivizes those entities to vote for playoff expansion.

I don't think Notre Dame gets the same treatment that Baylor and TCU got. First off, I think Baylor and TCU not getting in was just as much about the actions of the Big 12. They should have declared Baylor the champion.

If Notre Dame went 11-1 this year, they probably would have made it in. In fact it is very likely they would because the chances are that in achieving an 11-1 season they would have had to have beaten FSU. That loss pretty much seemed to cause a landslide for the Notre Dame players' mentalities. That means FSU wouldn't have been up there.

There is no reason for Notre Dame to think that this year's result means that Notre Dame might get pushed out in similar fashion.

(12-10-2014 12:25 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I don't think Notre Dame gets the same treatment that Baylor and TCU got. First off, I think Baylor and TCU not getting in was just as much about the actions of the Big 12. They should have declared Baylor the champion.

If Notre Dame went 11-1 this year, they probably would have made it in. In fact it is very likely they would because the chances are that in achieving an 11-1 season they would have had to have beaten FSU. That loss pretty much seemed to cause a landslide for the Notre Dame players' mentalities. That means FSU wouldn't have been up there.

There is no reason for Notre Dame to think that this year's result means that Notre Dame might get pushed out in similar fashion.

I think TCU might have gotten in had Baylor lost to K-State. Once Baylor beat K-State, the head-to-head factored in and knocked TCU out of contention.

But I think Baylor's OOC schedule always rankled the committee and they weren't going to reward them if they had a viable alternative, which Ohio State provided them with when they drubbed Wisconsin.

Cheers,
Neil

Just of out curiosity, had the Big Ten offered Notre Dame the same deal Notre Dame got from the ACC, would Notre Dame have accepted the offer?

11-1 ND is in. Also if ND were to join the ACC by chance We would welcome You Guys with Pride and Joy. But We also like You the way You are. Great Program !

(12-10-2014 12:36 AM)omniorange Wrote:  

(12-10-2014 12:25 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I don't think Notre Dame gets the same treatment that Baylor and TCU got. First off, I think Baylor and TCU not getting in was just as much about the actions of the Big 12. They should have declared Baylor the champion.

If Notre Dame went 11-1 this year, they probably would have made it in. In fact it is very likely they would because the chances are that in achieving an 11-1 season they would have had to have beaten FSU. That loss pretty much seemed to cause a landslide for the Notre Dame players' mentalities. That means FSU wouldn't have been up there.

There is no reason for Notre Dame to think that this year's result means that Notre Dame might get pushed out in similar fashion.

I think TCU might have gotten in had Baylor lost to K-State. Once Baylor beat K-State, the head-to-head factored in and knocked TCU out of contention.

But I think Baylor's OOC schedule always rankled the committee and they weren't going to reward them if they had a viable alternative, which Ohio State provided them with when they drubbed Wisconsin.

Cheers,
Neil

I think the TCU #3 was to setup an Alabama/ FSU Sugar Bowl and an Oregon/ TCU Rose Bowl match ups But OSU spoiled the party.

(12-09-2014 02:49 PM)Wedge Wrote:  No surprise there. At any rate, if Texas ever did talk to the ACC, instead of joining as a full member, they'd probably say, "We want the same deal that Notre Dame has."

I agree with this. The only difference I see would be that Notre Dame and Texas would have to agree to a long term deal to play each other late in the season.

(12-10-2014 12:41 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  Just of out curiosity, had the Big Ten offered Notre Dame the same deal Notre Dame got from the ACC, would Notre Dame have accepted the offer?

Opinion only here, but I strongly don't think so.

ND wants a presence up and down the East Coast and wants to play football games in the Southeast for recruiting exposure.

Plus, the ND people really, really do dislike the Big Ten very much, especially Michigan.

The Big Ten "regionalizes" ND too much in the Midwest as well. I think that the ACC deal is the one that ND wanted.

(12-10-2014 06:56 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 02:49 PM)Wedge Wrote:  No surprise there. At any rate, if Texas ever did talk to the ACC, instead of joining as a full member, they'd probably say, "We want the same deal that Notre Dame has."

I agree with this. The only difference I see would be that Notre Dame and Texas would have to agree to a long term deal to play each other late in the season.

I don't think the ACC wants Texas, partial or otherwise.

(12-10-2014 07:43 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-10-2014 12:41 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  Just of out curiosity, had the Big Ten offered Notre Dame the same deal Notre Dame got from the ACC, would Notre Dame have accepted the offer?

Opinion only here, but I strongly don't think so.

ND wants a presence up and down the East Coast and wants to play football games in the Southeast for recruiting exposure.

Plus, the ND people really, really do dislike the Big Ten very much, especially Michigan.

The Big Ten "regionalizes" ND too much in the Midwest as well. I think that the ACC deal is the one that ND wanted.

Yeah, just look at how many Big Ten games that Notre Dame is shedding. Notre Dame fits the mold in the ACC, it doesn't with the Big Ten.