Jack Swarbrick met with some big ND boosters at an alumni event known as Universal Notre Dame Night.

His comments:


"Independence is not about football at all. Rather, it is important as a means of promoting Notre Dame.

Bound up in that is our scheduling.

Playing in California every year is an imperative, and if we want to keep USC on the schedule every year, then Pac-12 scheduling makes us play two Pac-12 teams every year (“or it won’t work”), so to ensure that we have a game in Cal every year, we are sticking with Stanford as the other perennial Pac-12 opponent.

Then, when you add in Navy and the five ACC games, that leaves four. Among those four is a “buy” game (he called it that, “everybody does it” and “we need to do it to have 7 home games”) and the Shamrock Series game.

That leaves two premiere home-and-home games to schedule every year.

Those two games are viewed as “marker” games for the selection committee to consider.

Independence would be jeopardized if we lost a broadcast partner or if we ended up being penalized by the playoff selection committee."



He got some laughs when he was asked whether it was hard to end the Michigan series. “No.”

ND chose Under Armour, among other reasons, because the ND demographic skews old, and he wanted to bend the curve on that, which Under Armour is best suited to do.

He reiterated that ND will not join in with paying players, which he has publicly said before. He added, however, that there are enough like-minded schools that, if that came to pass, "our schedule wouldn't look much different."

"Being penalized by the CFP committee" seems to be a quick way to end independence. We saw what happened with the Big 12 w/no CCG...same would be for ND playing only 12 games vs 13. But I guess ND first must get to that point which probably won't happen any time soon.

No one should be surprised by any of these statements. They are the exact same things that Notre Dame (and most of its fans) have been saying for years.

(07-08-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  "Being penalized by the CFP committee" seems to be a quick way to end independence. We saw what happened with the Big 12 w/no CCG...same would be for ND playing only 12 games vs 13. But I guess ND first must get to that point which probably won't happen any time soon.

I take that to mean either a "conference champs only" model.

It may end up being a long trend of being shut out by the committee but that is way up in the air right now with very little data to consider.

(07-08-2015 08:13 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  "Being penalized by the CFP committee" seems to be a quick way to end independence. We saw what happened with the Big 12 w/no CCG...same would be for ND playing only 12 games vs 13. But I guess ND first must get to that point which probably won't happen any time soon.

I take that to mean either a "conference champs only" model.

It may end up being a long trend of being shut out by the committee but that is way up in the air right now with very little data to consider.

If ND is ranked in the top 4 in the country -- definitely achievable depending on the ACC schedule they pull -- they're in and would never be shut out. Too many eyes across the country are on Notre Dame.

The separation between ND and a G5 school is that anyone in the G5 cannot be ranked in the top 4, no matter how good they are -- undefeated gets them a #10 ranking. ND can be ranked in the top 4, even if there are 4 better teams in the country.

(07-08-2015 09:40 AM)rjglassett Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:13 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  "Being penalized by the CFP committee" seems to be a quick way to end independence. We saw what happened with the Big 12 w/no CCG...same would be for ND playing only 12 games vs 13. But I guess ND first must get to that point which probably won't happen any time soon.

I take that to mean either a "conference champs only" model.

It may end up being a long trend of being shut out by the committee but that is way up in the air right now with very little data to consider.

If ND is ranked in the top 4 in the country -- definitely achievable depending on the ACC schedule they pull -- they're in and would never be shut out. Too many eyes across the country are on Notre Dame.

The separation between ND and a G5 school is that anyone in the G5 cannot be ranked in the top 4, no matter how good they are -- undefeated gets them a #10 ranking. ND can be ranked in the top 4, even if there are 4 better teams in the country.

Unless you are Boise State. They were the only one left in G5 schools that can achieved that mark. Boise might get in ahead of ND. Lets say they let Boise in ahead of ND to try and forced to join a conference before they get into the playoffs? As I see it. ND will not get in unless they play a 13th game in a CCG.

(07-08-2015 09:59 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:40 AM)rjglassett Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:13 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  "Being penalized by the CFP committee" seems to be a quick way to end independence. We saw what happened with the Big 12 w/no CCG...same would be for ND playing only 12 games vs 13. But I guess ND first must get to that point which probably won't happen any time soon.

I take that to mean either a "conference champs only" model.

It may end up being a long trend of being shut out by the committee but that is way up in the air right now with very little data to consider.

If ND is ranked in the top 4 in the country -- definitely achievable depending on the ACC schedule they pull -- they're in and would never be shut out. Too many eyes across the country are on Notre Dame.

The separation between ND and a G5 school is that anyone in the G5 cannot be ranked in the top 4, no matter how good they are -- undefeated gets them a #10 ranking. ND can be ranked in the top 4, even if there are 4 better teams in the country.

Unless you are Boise State. They were the only one left in G5 schools that can achieved that mark. Boise might get in ahead of ND. Lets say they let Boise in ahead of ND to try and forced to join a conference before they get into the playoffs? As I see it. ND will not get in unless they play a 13th game in a CCG.

LOL, no... Boise ahead of ND? Not happening if all things are equal(records).

(07-08-2015 07:40 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Jack Swarbrick met with some big ND boosters at an alumni event known as Universal Notre Dame Night.

His comments:


"Independence is not about football at all. Rather, it is important as a means of promoting Notre Dame.

Bound up in that is our scheduling.

Playing in California every year is an imperative, and if we want to keep USC on the schedule every year, then Pac-12 scheduling makes us play two Pac-12 teams every year (“or it won’t work”), so to ensure that we have a game in Cal every year, we are sticking with Stanford as the other perennial Pac-12 opponent.

Then, when you add in Navy and the five ACC games, that leaves four. Among those four is a “buy” game (he called it that, “everybody does it” and “we need to do it to have 7 home games”) and the Shamrock Series game.

That leaves two premiere home-and-home games to schedule every year.

Those two games are viewed as “marker” games for the selection committee to consider.

Independence would be jeopardized if we lost a broadcast partner or if we ended up being penalized by the playoff selection committee."



He got some laughs when he was asked whether it was hard to end the Michigan series. “No.”

ND chose Under Armour, among other reasons, because the ND demographic skews old, and he wanted to bend the curve on that, which Under Armour is best suited to do.

He reiterated that ND will not join in with paying players, which he has publicly said before. He added, however, that there are enough like-minded schools that, if that came to pass, "our schedule wouldn't look much different."

When he says, "they will not pay players", is he talking about the COA?

Another interesting statement regarding paying players. Seems there are quite a few schools that would not be part of that per the comments regarding ND schedule not changing much by playing schools who don't pay player. Seems like that some or all of the PAC/B1G schools would follow on the comments they would go with a different model if athletes are considered employees.

(07-08-2015 10:07 AM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 07:40 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Jack Swarbrick met with some big ND boosters at an alumni event known as Universal Notre Dame Night.

His comments:


"Independence is not about football at all. Rather, it is important as a means of promoting Notre Dame.

Bound up in that is our scheduling.

Playing in California every year is an imperative, and if we want to keep USC on the schedule every year, then Pac-12 scheduling makes us play two Pac-12 teams every year (“or it won’t work”), so to ensure that we have a game in Cal every year, we are sticking with Stanford as the other perennial Pac-12 opponent.

Then, when you add in Navy and the five ACC games, that leaves four. Among those four is a “buy” game (he called it that, “everybody does it” and “we need to do it to have 7 home games”) and the Shamrock Series game.

That leaves two premiere home-and-home games to schedule every year.

Those two games are viewed as “marker” games for the selection committee to consider.

Independence would be jeopardized if we lost a broadcast partner or if we ended up being penalized by the playoff selection committee."



He got some laughs when he was asked whether it was hard to end the Michigan series. “No.”

ND chose Under Armour, among other reasons, because the ND demographic skews old, and he wanted to bend the curve on that, which Under Armour is best suited to do.

He reiterated that ND will not join in with paying players, which he has publicly said before. He added, however, that there are enough like-minded schools that, if that came to pass, "our schedule wouldn't look much different."

When he say, "they will not pay players", is he talking about the COA?

No, stipends are fine. If they become employees then we're done.

(07-08-2015 10:07 AM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 07:40 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Jack Swarbrick met with some big ND boosters at an alumni event known as Universal Notre Dame Night.

His comments:


"Independence is not about football at all. Rather, it is important as a means of promoting Notre Dame.

Bound up in that is our scheduling.

Playing in California every year is an imperative, and if we want to keep USC on the schedule every year, then Pac-12 scheduling makes us play two Pac-12 teams every year (“or it won’t work”), so to ensure that we have a game in Cal every year, we are sticking with Stanford as the other perennial Pac-12 opponent.

Then, when you add in Navy and the five ACC games, that leaves four. Among those four is a “buy” game (he called it that, “everybody does it” and “we need to do it to have 7 home games”) and the Shamrock Series game.

That leaves two premiere home-and-home games to schedule every year.

Those two games are viewed as “marker” games for the selection committee to consider.

Independence would be jeopardized if we lost a broadcast partner or if we ended up being penalized by the playoff selection committee."



He got some laughs when he was asked whether it was hard to end the Michigan series. “No.”

ND chose Under Armour, among other reasons, because the ND demographic skews old, and he wanted to bend the curve on that, which Under Armour is best suited to do.

He reiterated that ND will not join in with paying players, which he has publicly said before. He added, however, that there are enough like-minded schools that, if that came to pass, "our schedule wouldn't look much different."

When he say, "they will not pay players", is he talking about the COA?

COA is different. Paying players is regarding athletes as employees.

(07-08-2015 10:12 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 10:07 AM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 07:40 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Jack Swarbrick met with some big ND boosters at an alumni event known as Universal Notre Dame Night.

His comments:


"Independence is not about football at all. Rather, it is important as a means of promoting Notre Dame.

Bound up in that is our scheduling.

Playing in California every year is an imperative, and if we want to keep USC on the schedule every year, then Pac-12 scheduling makes us play two Pac-12 teams every year (“or it won’t work”), so to ensure that we have a game in Cal every year, we are sticking with Stanford as the other perennial Pac-12 opponent.

Then, when you add in Navy and the five ACC games, that leaves four. Among those four is a “buy” game (he called it that, “everybody does it” and “we need to do it to have 7 home games”) and the Shamrock Series game.

That leaves two premiere home-and-home games to schedule every year.

Those two games are viewed as “marker” games for the selection committee to consider.

Independence would be jeopardized if we lost a broadcast partner or if we ended up being penalized by the playoff selection committee."



He got some laughs when he was asked whether it was hard to end the Michigan series. “No.”

ND chose Under Armour, among other reasons, because the ND demographic skews old, and he wanted to bend the curve on that, which Under Armour is best suited to do.

He reiterated that ND will not join in with paying players, which he has publicly said before. He added, however, that there are enough like-minded schools that, if that came to pass, "our schedule wouldn't look much different."

When he say, "they will not pay players", is he talking about the COA?

COA is different. Paying players is regarding athletes as employees.

COA is just putting them into the same status as regular students who get financial aid and scholarships based on COA.

(07-08-2015 09:59 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:40 AM)rjglassett Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:13 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  "Being penalized by the CFP committee" seems to be a quick way to end independence. We saw what happened with the Big 12 w/no CCG...same would be for ND playing only 12 games vs 13. But I guess ND first must get to that point which probably won't happen any time soon.

I take that to mean either a "conference champs only" model.

It may end up being a long trend of being shut out by the committee but that is way up in the air right now with very little data to consider.

If ND is ranked in the top 4 in the country -- definitely achievable depending on the ACC schedule they pull -- they're in and would never be shut out. Too many eyes across the country are on Notre Dame.

The separation between ND and a G5 school is that anyone in the G5 cannot be ranked in the top 4, no matter how good they are -- undefeated gets them a #10 ranking. ND can be ranked in the top 4, even if there are 4 better teams in the country.

Unless you are Boise State. They were the only one left in G5 schools that can achieved that mark. Boise might get in ahead of ND. Lets say they let Boise in ahead of ND to try and forced to join a conference before they get into the playoffs? As I see it. ND will not get in unless they play a 13th game in a CCG.

That small window of risk is not worth shitcanning football independence, in my opinion (and hopefully in Jack Swarbrick's as well).

(07-08-2015 10:11 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Another interesting statement regarding paying players. Seems there are quite a few schools that would not be part of that per the comments regarding ND schedule not changing much by playing schools who don't pay player. Seems like that some or all of the PAC/B1G schools would follow on the comments they would go with a different model if athletes are considered employees.

That is the third time Jack Swarbrick has brought the subject up and said that ND will not do it.

(07-08-2015 10:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:59 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:40 AM)rjglassett Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:13 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  "Being penalized by the CFP committee" seems to be a quick way to end independence. We saw what happened with the Big 12 w/no CCG...same would be for ND playing only 12 games vs 13. But I guess ND first must get to that point which probably won't happen any time soon.

I take that to mean either a "conference champs only" model.

It may end up being a long trend of being shut out by the committee but that is way up in the air right now with very little data to consider.

If ND is ranked in the top 4 in the country -- definitely achievable depending on the ACC schedule they pull -- they're in and would never be shut out. Too many eyes across the country are on Notre Dame.

The separation between ND and a G5 school is that anyone in the G5 cannot be ranked in the top 4, no matter how good they are -- undefeated gets them a #10 ranking. ND can be ranked in the top 4, even if there are 4 better teams in the country.

Unless you are Boise State. They were the only one left in G5 schools that can achieved that mark. Boise might get in ahead of ND. Lets say they let Boise in ahead of ND to try and forced to join a conference before they get into the playoffs? As I see it. ND will not get in unless they play a 13th game in a CCG.

That small window of risk is not worth shitcanning football independence, in my opinion (and hopefully in Jack Swarbrick's as well).

I bet people will be glue to the tv to see if Boise State winning it all which could bring huge money into for the schools.

(07-08-2015 10:31 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 10:11 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Another interesting statement regarding paying players. Seems there are quite a few schools that would not be part of that per the comments regarding ND schedule not changing much by playing schools who don't pay player. Seems like that some or all of the PAC/B1G schools would follow on the comments they would go with a different model if athletes are considered employees.

That is the third time Jack Swarbrick has brought the subject up and said that ND will not do it.

I suspect it will come down to how many other schools are willing to say no. If Stanford, Northwestern, Duke and the rest of the Big 10 and Pac 12 say yes, ND will say yes as well.

Even if they get a good mass of schools, it will cost a lot. It will be hard to say no.

(07-08-2015 10:33 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 10:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:59 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:40 AM)rjglassett Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:13 AM)TerryD Wrote:  I take that to mean either a "conference champs only" model.

It may end up being a long trend of being shut out by the committee but that is way up in the air right now with very little data to consider.

If ND is ranked in the top 4 in the country -- definitely achievable depending on the ACC schedule they pull -- they're in and would never be shut out. Too many eyes across the country are on Notre Dame.

The separation between ND and a G5 school is that anyone in the G5 cannot be ranked in the top 4, no matter how good they are -- undefeated gets them a #10 ranking. ND can be ranked in the top 4, even if there are 4 better teams in the country.

Unless you are Boise State. They were the only one left in G5 schools that can achieved that mark. Boise might get in ahead of ND. Lets say they let Boise in ahead of ND to try and forced to join a conference before they get into the playoffs? As I see it. ND will not get in unless they play a 13th game in a CCG.

That small window of risk is not worth shitcanning football independence, in my opinion (and hopefully in Jack Swarbrick's as well).

I bet people will be glue to the tv to see if Boise State winning it all which could bring huge money into for the schools.

What would Boise's schedule be if they are undefeated and in the top 4? How many top 25 teams could the MWC generate?

Notre Dame will be playing 5 ACC schools and their odds of playing, and beating, ranked teams is generally better than BSU's. The bottom of the MWC isn't good even though the Mountain division is right now stronger than the West division. Even if ND draws the bottom 5 out of the ACC it's likely to be a stronger schedule than BSU. That will count for quite a bit when selecting playoff teams.

ND has proven time and time again they are going to do whatever they want, and I used to hate it but I've realized it's just that I'm jealous ECU can't do the same. I grew up during ECU's independent football days and I have to say I wish it were still feasible.

(07-08-2015 10:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:59 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 09:40 AM)rjglassett Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:13 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-08-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  "Being penalized by the CFP committee" seems to be a quick way to end independence. We saw what happened with the Big 12 w/no CCG...same would be for ND playing only 12 games vs 13. But I guess ND first must get to that point which probably won't happen any time soon.

I take that to mean either a "conference champs only" model.

It may end up being a long trend of being shut out by the committee but that is way up in the air right now with very little data to consider.

If ND is ranked in the top 4 in the country -- definitely achievable depending on the ACC schedule they pull -- they're in and would never be shut out. Too many eyes across the country are on Notre Dame.

The separation between ND and a G5 school is that anyone in the G5 cannot be ranked in the top 4, no matter how good they are -- undefeated gets them a #10 ranking. ND can be ranked in the top 4, even if there are 4 better teams in the country.

Unless you are Boise State. They were the only one left in G5 schools that can achieved that mark. Boise might get in ahead of ND. Lets say they let Boise in ahead of ND to try and forced to join a conference before they get into the playoffs? As I see it. ND will not get in unless they play a 13th game in a CCG.

That small window of risk is not worth shitcanning football independence, in my opinion (and hopefully in Jack Swarbrick's as well).

The possibility that you will win the lottery is greater than the possibility of Notre Dame and Boise State both going undefeated in the same football season.

(07-08-2015 07:40 AM)TerryD Wrote:  He got some laughs when he was asked whether it was hard to end the Michigan series. “No.”

Hubris at its finest. College administrators and select others win when others lose.

It's not just there in South Bend. Ann Arbor could/should have worked harder. This happened at College Station, Columbia, State College, Lincoln, Boulder, SLC, College Park, and many other places; any conference who moved beyond round-robin formats severing annual meetings.

It's made college athletics less enjoyable. Fans/homers/loyalists will defend what they will. Viewership stats, season ticket data, donations, and gaps in the stands will speak more objectively.