(04-01-2013 12:23 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I don't think that ND and Michigan are going to play each other all that much in the future, perhaps once in a while.

Yes, that competition as a regular game is a casualty of the ND increase from a 3-game to a 5-game scheduling agreement to guarantee Late October / November home games, and the coming Big Ten increase from 8 back to 9 conference games.

I've seen the same "take BC to lure Notre Dame" arguments, and am equally puzzled by how that's supposed to work. A bit like trying to lure my cat away from bothering somebody's cereal bowl using a cup of coffee.

If there is any lure in BC, its to the marketers in the Notre Dame athletic department, for the Northeastern Exposure.

But no independent football team would want to pack its schedule with 12 exciting, thrilling contests when the Buckeyes get to play Indiana, Florida State gets to play Wake Forest, and Oklahoma gets to play Iowa State. And you need to play some teams that are occasional contenders but not year-in, year-out powerhouses.

There's a reason those games are scheduled in September: 2013, Temple, @Wolverines, @Purdue, MSU, OU; 2014 Rice, Wolverines, Purdue, TBA-likely-ACC, @Syracuse (tentative, they'll have to buy out of two already scheduled 2014 games).

Even if the Big Ten would be willing to schedule Purdue/ND in October or November, Notre Dame is not jumping at the bit to get them scheduled later. They are good, competitive early season contests and even when they are away they are an easy trip.

(04-01-2013 12:48 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(04-01-2013 12:23 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I don't think that ND and Michigan are going to play each other all that much in the future, perhaps once in a while.

Yes, that competition as a regular game is a casualty of the ND increase from a 3-game to a 5-game scheduling agreement to guarantee Late October / November home games, and the coming Big Ten increase from 8 back to 9 conference games.

I've seen the same "take BC to lure Notre Dame" arguments, and am equally puzzled by how that's supposed to work. A bit like trying to lure my cat away from bothering somebody's cereal bowl using a cup of coffee.

If there is any lure in BC, its to the marketers in the Notre Dame athletic department, for the Northeastern Exposure.

But no independent football team would want to pack its schedule with 12 exciting, thrilling contests when the Buckeyes get to play Indiana, Florida State gets to play Wake Forest, and Oklahoma gets to play Iowa State. And you need to play some teams that are occasional contenders but not year-in, year-out powerhouses.

There's a reason those games are scheduled in September: 2013, Temple, @Wolverines, @Purdue, MSU, OU; 2014 Rice, Wolverines, Purdue, TBA-likely-ACC, @Syracuse (tentative, they'll have to buy out of two already scheduled 2014 games).

Even if the Big Ten would be willing to schedule Purdue/ND in October or November, Notre Dame is not jumping at the bit to get them scheduled later. They are good, competitive early season contests and even when they are away they are an easy trip.

The Big Ten historically has insisted that those games be played in September, just like Southern Cal insists that its games in South Bend have to be in October before the weather turns cold (ND games in Los Angeles are always the last game of the season).

I want ND to play a tough schedule. But, yes, they cannot play Texas and Southern Cal every week.

I just don't think that the early season "winnable" game has to be Purdue, that is all.

(04-01-2013 01:09 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I just don't think that the early season "winnable" game has to be Purdue, that is all.

Games ~ there's almost always two in September, the first hit-out against your Temples and Rices of the world, and Purdue.

And it makes sense for that to be Purdue, because Notre Dame won't be penalized in the coach's poll for playing Purdue when Purdue is weak, because "they always play Purdue", and they won't be heavily penalized in the coach's poll for struggling to beat Purdue, because "rivalry games are often surprisingly tough".