Interesting that both sides seem to have benefited from dropping the traditional UM/ND and MSU/ND rivalries. For years, two of those strong programs would deal the others a loss early in the season...somewhat dampening excitement for the losers.

Well, this year, ND scheduled some easier substitutes...and is only a 1-loss team right now. MSU is still undefeated...and UM has 2 losses but is considered a rising program. A 5-3 Michigan team (if they had lost to ND) wouldn't be as appealing even with St. Jim.

I hate to see rivalries end in CFB...but this is one that unfortunately helped the Big Ten (two top 15 teams who might not be that high if they had played ND) and ND (a top 10 team that might not be that high if they had kept UM/MSU).

ND scheduled Texas as the first game this season.

That was supposed to be a substitute for Michigan and a much tougher game when it was scheduled.

Clemson sure wasn't a "easier substitute" than Michigan State, was it?

(10-31-2015 11:20 PM)TerryD Wrote:  ND scheduled Texas as the first game this season.

That was supposed to be a substitute for Michigan and a much tougher game when it was scheduled.

Clemson sure wasn't a "easier substitute" than Michigan State, was it?

Notre Dame by their very nature would not try to dumb down their schedule unlike what the B1G has done for years with their own brand of OOC scheduling.
I can see where it would be very easy for some to dislike Notre Dame, but you can't hate them for adopting a cupcake schedule, because they haven't.

I don't hate Notre Dame. As a Hoosier by birth, I often root for the Irish. As for The Big Ten, do they still play football? ( I try to avoid watching out of the fear of dying of boredom. Thank God Urban has moved to Columbus. He's made The Big Ten almost viewable. Not by me but those willing to take a chance)

BTW Basketball in The Big Ten has sucked since Bobby Knight left Bloomington.

Utah was clearly tougher than ND.

For Northwestern, TCU/Stanford >= ND.

For Sparty, Oregon >= ND.

Nice try, OP.

At the very least, Michigan/ND should be mandated by law.

(11-01-2015 07:48 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I don't hate Notre Dame. As a Hoosier by birth, I often root for the Irish. As for The Big Ten, do they still play football? ( I try to avoid watching out of the fear of dying of boredom. Thank God Urban has moved to Columbus. He's made The Big Ten almost viewable. Not by me but those willing to take a chance)

BTW Basketball in The Big Ten has sucked since Bobby Knight left Bloomington.

It doesn't suck nearly as much as what is going on behind closed doors in Louisville in terms of basketball and suckage.

Let me guess, you think Big Ten programs should try to be more like Louisville?

(11-01-2015 09:42 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  At the very least, Michigan/ND should be mandated by law.

Why? No one outside The Big Ten cares anymore

If Notre Dame wanted to continue to play the game they would. They're just not that in to you Big Ten.

By agreeing to play 5 ACC games a season, The Irish simply confirmed what everyone else in the country already knew. The Frost Belt (PC for Rust Belt) is dying.

The future is in The South. Even Delaney and Big Ten leaders know it. Why else do they pine to for southern markets?

ND does play Michigan state next year for a 2 year series.

ND's road trip to Philadelphia was a success. It’s helped to give Northeastern ND fans and college football fans in general the opportunity to see ND play in prime time, national TV.

This is ND's first year not having a Big Ten team on the schedule since 1915.

Playing Temple at Lincoln Financial was much better than going to West Lafayette to play Purdue for the 87th time, in my opinion.

Notre Dame traveling to Clemson, South Carolina reminded many southerners how big a Notre Dame matchup is. Clemson people called it their biggest game.

Coupled with the FSU game last year, ND showed how big a stage the Irish can Irish command. Next year's game at Austin, TX will be another high profile event in a football hotbed.

Playing Syracuse at the MetLife is huge for the NY fan base. Getting Navy to agree to playing 'home games' in Jacksonville next year and in San Diego in 2018 are good moves by Jack Swarbrick.

So was getting Navy to move its home game to Dublin, Ireland a couple of years ago.

A "home game" versus BC this year at Fenway Park is also a great move by Swarbrick.

Not everyone likes the Shamrock Series, but playing Army in the Alamodome next year enables ND to break up the schedule with an easier game but build the Texas following.

Every team needs to play a certain amount of non-Power 5 Conference opponents. But playing them in NFL stadiums (and similar sized venues) is a smart way to do so, I think.

In my view, ND's independence allows them (with seven games at their disposal) to get creative and schedule these types of games.

ND does an excellent job at making each game an event.

While Temple’s season has a lot to do with attracting Gameday, would it happen with many other opponents?

Staying Independent today is not easy. But games like last night’s strengthens Notre Dame’s hand. ND has to get creative and do a bit of "barnstorming" like it did in the Twenties.

It’s one thing to take the show on the road to Tallahassee, Clemson and Austin.

But when road trips to Temple command sellouts, ESPN game day and a prime-time national television audience your brand is strong and gives you clout at the negotiation table. In that sense this was a good week for Notre Dame.

I don't miss playing Purdue or Michigan, at all.

(11-01-2015 10:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(11-01-2015 09:42 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  At the very least, Michigan/ND should be mandated by law.

Why? No one outside The Big Ten cares anymore

If Notre Dame wanted to continue to play the game they would. They're just not that in to you Big Ten.

By agreeing to play 5 ACC games a season, The Irish simply confirmed what everyone else in the country already knew. The Frost Belt (PC for Rust Belt) is dying.

The future is in The South. Even Delaney and Big Ten leaders know it. Why else do they pine to for southern markets?

Most Big Ten folks don't care about it either. Notre Dame used to be great for scheduling in order to get on TV. Now? No longer necessary, no big deal.

It's amusing how outsiders love to try and project this mentality in the Big Ten of needing and desiring Notre Dame. That is a fallacy.

I think that it has worked out for both the Big Ten and Notre Dame.

(11-01-2015 10:53 AM)TerryD Wrote:  I think that it has worked out for both the Big Ten and Notre Dame.

It's outsiders trying to stir up more than there is. Folks just showing their Big Ten hate by trying to project upon The Big Ten certain mentalities that just aren't there.

Their propaganda just shows that they truly look up to The Big Ten because they are trying to drag it down to their level, they are failing, but they are trying.

I don't like the Big Ten (is my secret out?) but am not projecting anything.

My wish for the ND/Big Ten relationship is apathy and indifference on both sides.

I wasn't talking about you Terry. Just clarifying.

Who would have guessed Temple would have buttressed the strength of schedule this year?

Few random thoughts:

1. Notre Dame is remaining an independent (neccesary first point in any Notre Dame thread :) ).

2. I do tend to root for Notre Dame when not playing Big Ten teams, but that said, I miss the early season games. While having all 3 each year is no longer possible, I'd still like to see at least one a year going forward (and would gladly cancel OSU's upcoming series to make it happen).

3. Big Ten basketball has sucked?! The conference rarely has the national champion, but in the last 15 years, you've had Michigan State, Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin, and Illinios make the national title game (right off the top of my head, maybe missing someone), a great number of Final Fours, and highly ranked teams. The ACC also has been unable to take back the Big Ten/ACC Challenge Trophy is several years (granted ties now make that more difficult). The conference is always deep and has made leaps up the past decade. There is no one dominent team to the extent Indiana would have once been able to claim, but that's a far cry from sucking.

4 Big Ten scheduling is similar to every other conference. Most teams schedule a team that looks tougher when they schedule and sometimes two. A few won't schedule any. The only conference I can say is considerably better is the PAC-12 and there are structural reasons for that.

(11-01-2015 10:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(11-01-2015 09:42 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  At the very least, Michigan/ND should be mandated by law.

Why? No one outside The Big Ten cares anymore

If Notre Dame wanted to continue to play the game they would. They're just not that in to you Big Ten.

By agreeing to play 5 ACC games a season, The Irish simply confirmed what everyone else in the country already knew. The Frost Belt (PC for Rust Belt) is dying.

The future is in The South. Even Delaney and Big Ten leaders know it. Why else do they pine to for southern markets?

While true that the midwest/great lakes/north isn't "growing" as fast ad the south, we have the money, the technology and the company head quarter.

We'll use the "high growth" south for cheap factory workers, since they can't read anyway.

Yep, Delaney definitely pining for southern markets. That's why he added New Jersey and Maryland.


(I say "growth" in quotations, because the much lauded growth that southerners crow about is nothing more than Hispanic immigration)

As for the why, easy: tradition.

The only true backbone of college football. Far too easily cast aside, these days, by upstarts.

Love or hate Notre Dame, but the Irish always play tough schedules. Props to them.