(05-12-2021 08:31 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-11-2021 12:03 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 10:57 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 07:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  I imagine there are many college football fans who view Notre Dame's preference for independence as evidence of selfishness, and not in the best interests of the sport. But Michigan's motives for being in a conference - the Big Ten - or Alabama's for being in the SEC shouldn't be considered altruistic. They made their decision initially, and continue to affirm it today, because it serves their selfish interests. And their success over the years validates that theirs were good decisions.

I'm not at all sure that either of those schools would have had as much success until now had they chosen independence, and I doubt they would continue to have that success if they tried to operate as a football independent in the future. By the same token, Notre Dame might not have enjoyed the success it has if it had joined a conference a century ago, and might not maintain their success if they were to join a conference today.

We may never know. But I don't question their right, and their leaders' obligation, to act in the best interest of Notre Dame, both as a football program and a Catholic university. If their decision is inconvenient for other schools' ambitions, so be it.

Most of my posts on this site and others for years are an attempt to counter misconceptions and just plain wrong statements and beliefs about ND as illustrated by your first line.

ND, like every other school, acts in its own best self interest.

The only difference is for most other schools, that self interest is seen as best advanced by football conference membership.

ND, on the other hand, thinks differently, that its self interests are best served by football independence.

If Alabama or Ohio State thought it in their best interests to leave their conferences and be independent, they would do so.

Think not? There is a groundswell recently about the top draw schools making more money than others in their conference, a more "eat what you kill" attitude.

That idea was seen as heresy by most fans ten or fifteen years ago. Now, with money tight....not so much.

There are valid historical reasons why ND is a football independent, reasons unique to ND.

This is a fact that many fans of other schools tend to not know or ignore in favor of "arrogance" or "greedy" (although that idea has largely died in recent years since every P5 school now makes more TV money than ND).

I don't fault Notre Dame for their choice of independence in football. That said, their existence as a football independent at an elite level is not without external enabling. It is fair to say Notre Dame has commanded that by history, tradition, popularity, skillful negotiating, and savvy decision-making.
The old Big East, The Big Ten, Southern Cal, Stanford, NBC, the ACC, the former BCS and current P5 governance structures including all the major commissioners, etc., have all enabled Notre Dame's independence in football. When Notre Dame sits at the table with the commissioners of the BIG, SEC, ACC, B12, and PAC 12, with an equivalent vote and being an equal decider, that's quite accommodating. Notre Dame is not representing independents beyond themselves.

All true.

ND would hot be where it is and wield the power it does if all of the power brokers did not want it to be so.

That is real power, is it not, to have all others with power want you to have power?

ND has never claimed to represent any other football independents.

That is their job.

Except that their power is derived from network desires, not those of their peers.