NO! A thousand times no, quo. That option is NEVER to be explored...

(02-03-2011 04:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-03-2011 03:20 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Ironically, the two Big East coaches that were the most vocal proponents of an "in or out" ultimatum to ND (Rich Rod and Edsall) and now "out".

Yes, IIRC, in the late 1990s, when John Cooper was the HC at Ohio State, he advocated that Big 10 schools boycott playing Notre Dame since they wouldn't join the conference.

Cooper was gone shortly thereafter, while Michigan, Purdue, etc. continue to play Notre Dame ...

the boycott of ND FB by some B10 members goes back alot further then the 1990's

(02-03-2011 06:12 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(02-03-2011 04:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-03-2011 03:20 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Ironically, the two Big East coaches that were the most vocal proponents of an "in or out" ultimatum to ND (Rich Rod and Edsall) and now "out".

Yes, IIRC, in the late 1990s, when John Cooper was the HC at Ohio State, he advocated that Big 10 schools boycott playing Notre Dame since they wouldn't join the conference.

Cooper was gone shortly thereafter, while Michigan, Purdue, etc. continue to play Notre Dame ...

the boycott of ND FB by some B10 members goes back alot further then the 1990's

I'm trying to think of a Big10 school that refused to schedule Notre Dame in the 1990s ... ?

(02-03-2011 05:20 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  NO! A thousand times no, quo. That option is NEVER to be explored...

I think that with Texas what we're seeing is the logic of AQ/non-AQ being overtly extended to within the AQ camp. The idea behind AQ and non-AQ is that due to differences in fan support and media interest, some conferences generate the big bucks and therefore deserve to be AQ and have a guaranteed slice of the big money, while others do not so don't.

That logic is now being extended to within the AQ conferences. Texas is just saying "look, fact is, not all AQ schools are equal contributors to revenue. There's a lot more interest in Texas football than Iowa State football, so why should we share equally with Iowa State"?

It's possible we'll see more of that thinking by other super-powers, once the realize the implications of all the dough Texas is now making.

ND is a non FB participant like the rest of the BB onlys. That was the agreement when they joined and can't be forced to play FB in the conference. They won't be kicked out either. First all they can't be kicked out and second if the topic were ever brought up the other 7 Catholic schools would vote to keep them along with Pitt, Syracuse, and UConn so they wouldn't be voted out anyway.

As far as they BE bowl situation they are only currently included in the Champs and Pinstripe agreements. They can't take the Pinstripe BE slot and are there only to fill in for the B-12 slot should they not have enough bowl eligible teams at the end of the season. The only bowl they can currently replace a BE team in is the Champs and the new commish did that on his own as the Champs claim they didn't ask for ND in the agreement. They probably did though behind closed doors. ND should have to kick part or the Champs payment back to the BE but don't have to. If ND fails to honor a 3-4 game committement during this contracted bowl round and refuses to kick 10-20% of the top bowl slot money back in the next round I would just let them out of the next round of bowl neotiations and take what we can get. Fair is fair and I would leave it at that. If you are independent negotiate your own bowl contracts.

(02-06-2011 10:17 AM)panite Wrote:  The only bowl they can currently replace a BE team in is the Champs and the new commish did that on his own as the Champs claim they didn't ask for ND in the agreement. They probably did though behind closed doors.

Yes, it beggars belief that our commissioner would be so stupid as to include Notre Dame if the bowl would have taken us without Notre Dame, so it's a pretty sure thing that despite the rhetoric issued in public to save face for the Big East, Champs did in fact ask for Notre Dame to be included in the deal.

Quote: ND should have to kick part or the Champs payment back to the BE but don't have to. If ND fails to honor a 3-4 game committement during this contracted bowl round and refuses to kick 10-20% of the top bowl slot money back in the next round I would just let them out of the next round of bowl neotiations and take what we can get. Fair is fair and I would leave it at that. If you are independent negotiate your own bowl contracts.

To me, it just comes down to what makes us better off overall. If including Notre Dame brings in more money for the Big East overall when compared to excluding them, even after Notre Dame takes their cut, then it makes sense to include Notre Dame.

I know there's an emotional aspect - it would feel good to tell ND to take a hike, and it's irksome to sit back and watch them take a bowl slot from us, but where money is concerned it's best to not let emotions get in the way.

If Notre Dame is willing to honor their commitment to play 3 BEast teams every year, I have no problem with them. However, they've not honored their promise, and have shown no sign that this attitude is going to change...

The Irish only want to play certain BEast teams (e.g. NOT WVU), and the only school they will play at their home stadium is Pittsburgh. The rest of The BEast's teams have been told that Notre Dame will play them, but only at a neutral site that's sure to bring a pro-Irish crowd, essentially making it a Notre Dame home game. Screw that, and until the Irish change this stance, screw them too...

(02-06-2011 11:57 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  If Notre Dame is willing to honor their commitment to play 3 BEast teams every year, I have no problem with them. However, they've not honored their promise, and have shown no sign that this attitude is going to change...

I don't recall this promise. If it was in writing, we should enforce it. Did ND get something in return for it? Was participation in our bowl arrangement contingent on it?

Edited: Ok, now i remember. The deal was made in 2005, with 2009 as the start date. I guess it wasn't in writing?

(02-06-2011 11:57 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  The Irish only want to play certain BEast teams (e.g. NOT WVU), and the only school they will play at their home stadium is Pittsburgh. The rest of The BEast's teams have been told that Notre Dame will play them, but only at a neutral site that's sure to bring a pro-Irish crowd, essentially making it a Notre Dame home game. Screw that, and until the Irish change this stance, screw them too...

Just a minor correction. Pitt is the only team that Notre Dame feels is worthy enough of scheduling to a home-and-home. I believe this is how everyone else's offers have shaken out thus far:

- Syracuse was offered three neutral site games at the Meadowlands.

- UConn was offered a deal with five games in South Bend, and five neutral site "home games" at Gillette stadium (might have been Giant's stadium as well).

- Rutgers was offered games at South Bend and neutral site games at Giant's stadium.

- UofL, UC, USF, and WVU were all offered an "open invitation to play whenever we want at South Bend". Essentially, those four teams were only offer one-and-done schedules. Only USF have taken the Irish up on the offer.

And Notre Dame fans wonder why so many Big East football fans hate the Domers. Maybe if your school didn't treat our teams like sunbelt level programs, then we wouldn't be viewing the Irish as arrogant p****s that leech off the conference.

I couldn't remember the exact details of the Irish plan for BEast games. But I did remember that Pitt was the only school they felt worthy a home and home contract. However, no matter the exact details. The fact is that Notre Dame had no desire to follow through, which is why BEast schools were given such sh!tty options...

(02-06-2011 12:48 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I couldn't remember the exact details of the Irish plan for BEast games. But I did remember that Pitt was the only school they felt worthy a home and home contract. However, no matter the exact details. The fact is that Notre Dame had no desire to follow through, which is why BEast schools were given such sh!tty options...

Well, i don't think Pitt being "deemed worthy" had anything to do with it. Notre Dame and Pitt have a longstanding relationship, they've played 65 times over the last century, so that predates any Big East issues.

As for ND never having had any desire to follow through, it's possible that ND had every intention of doing so when the deal was struck in 2005, but by 2009 things had changed, like ND having a new AD.

Though in the final analysis, of course ND should have stood by the deal.

(02-06-2011 12:33 PM)UofL07 Wrote:  And Notre Dame fans wonder why so many Big East football fans hate the Domers. Maybe if your school didn't treat our teams like sunbelt level programs, then we wouldn't be viewing the Irish as arrogant p****s that leech off the conference.

Can't speak for fans of other Big East schools, of course, but i was thrilled when i found out we'd be traveling to South Bend for a game. That marked how far our program has come in the short period of its existence.

If we can afford it, i'd like us to go back there within the next few years as well with no promises of any return games at Tampa. Can't beat the exposure.

I hope USF kicks their @ss too...

I agree that ND gets more than it gives to the BE.

We make their BB important and I don't know if they would be as successful in another conference. ND certainly needs a presence on the East coast. They would be on my list of the first college to let go if we have to let someone go.

As bad as our FB was last season, we'll be fine without ND . They did nothing for us anyway. TCU has done more for BE FB already than ND has. They also don't help our TV contract talks because ND fans are FB fans and ND FB won't be part of our package. (though ND BB may have value to our TV talks)

Not in a rush to get rid of them but don't think it will kill us if we show them de door.

(02-06-2011 02:14 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I hope USF kicks their @ss too...

Ditto!

(02-06-2011 02:14 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I hope USF kicks their @ss too...