I don't mind ND being in a bowl game, because there is only one bowl game that matters with the current AFU system. And they're not in it. All other bowl games are just background noise to me. Consolation games.
Notre Dame, at the very least, should be mandated to join a conference. It shouldn't be their choice. *stares* Anyways, there is no fiscal reason for Notre Dame to drop its independent status. Notre Dame is one of the very few schools where football revenues are a net positive contributor to the general fund. Most Div 1-A schools lose money on football (with the false assumption that increased alumni giving will make football programs pay for themselves.) Because ND makes money through the football team, she's able to field a full complement of varsity sports, despite having fewer than 10,000 undergraduates. I was there when the NBC contract was signed, and one could immediately see "Olympic sport" facility improvements that came about because of the influx of cash. That contract is probably the biggest reason that the men's and women's soccer and basketball programs increased their competitiveness, the hockey program went from a club sport to the CCHA, interhall sports became more robust, etc. An independent ND football team is good for ND athletics overall. This doesn't negate the fact that the current BCS system is irredeemably broken, but it does explain why ND has no reason to lobby for the system to be changed. And, as long as the other BCS conferences remain satisfied with the status quo (as evidenced by the profound silence from the Big Ten, Southeast Conference, etc.), nothing is going to change.
Anyways, there is no fiscal reason for Notre Dame to drop its independent status. There's absolutely no fiscal reason for them to drop their independent status, because their followers will blindly support them until the end of time. The fans will have to allow themselves to continue to be duped, though, because their football talent is poor, overall. They will continue beating weak teams on their schedule that they should beat, and losing to the decent teams. Maybe if Boise State would have been forunate enough to draw the Irish in a bowl game (and hammer them), it would have proven once and for all Notre Dame should never again have the opportunity to play for the national championship. Boise, yes; Notre Dame, no.
their followers will blindly support them until the end of time And, what, exactly, are a team's fans supposed to do? I have no illusions about what this year's squad was capable of, and their performance against good teams was embarrassing, but I support them because I always have and always will. Do you just decide to stop supporting the Nittany Lions because they suck once in a while, or because the Irish handed them their asses earlier this year? If you've got any loyalty at all, no, you don't. Notre Dame should never again have the opportunity to play for the national championship. Yeah, and until he can get the hell out of the way of the players, Joe Paterno should never again be allowed to coach. What do both of these statements have in common? They're both completely asinine.
Paterno can still get his team, even in years when his talent is inferior, to show up during a bowl game a beat a better team, like they did against Tennessee several days ago. And what I said regarding the fans blindly supporting them wasn't a knock against the fans. It's more a knock against Notre Dame being satisfied with the status quo, and the BCS being concerned with money, period, and not the fact they're assuming all football fans are idiots and can't see through them shoving a poor team down our throats in one of the bigger bowl games.
because their football talent is poor, overall. Definitely, at least compared to less than 10 other schools in the country. And not the same ten every year. would have proven once and for all Notre Dame should never again have the opportunity to play for the national championship The question we need to ask here is, are you blinded by your dislike or just poorly informed?
I'm not blinded by my dislike, but I'm capable of looking at it impartially. The problem is I'm now speaking to two Notre Dame fans. The longest bowl drought in NCAA history seems to be pointing at something. Losing the most prolific passer (statistically) in the school's history, their top receiver, and looking terribly slow against LSU, means aiming to be a top-10 program might wind up being a reach again.
Regardless of my allegiance, what exactly could prove a team never again belongs in a championship?
it would have proven once and for all Notre Dame should never again have the opportunity to play for the national championship Did you realize that the Michigan Wolverines didn't win a National Championship for 49 years (1948-1997), after winning 10 times the previous 48 years? So by your logic, Michigan should never have been given a chance to win the national title because they were so inept at doing so for so long.
Maybe that was a bit of a strong statement, but regardless of how much cash the program generates, on the field they're not an elite program anymore (on the field). The only thing that really bothers me about Irish football is their being independent, and being their own little island in the entire BCS only adds to the joke the system has become. I think the other teams the schools field being aligned with the Big East is wrong, and the Irish should be part of the Big Ten. If they continually dominate a particular division, year in year out, I think that gives them a legitimacy they've sort of lacked the past several years. As for Michigan, if they can't get through the Big 10 (as well as their non-conference schedule), then of course they shouldn't compete for the championship. I can't comment on that, though, because I honesty can't stand Michigan.
they're not an elite program anymore (on the field). What's an "elite" program by your standards then?
Winning a bowl game since 1993 would be one of the initial criteria.
Argue with smart man, can't win. Argue with stupid man, can't stop. I leave it to the reader to decide which one dyams is.
I suggest the NCAA or the BCS have Notre Dame and Michigan play each other in the Losers Bowl so that one of them is assured a bowl victory. It would end in a tie.
Winning a bowl game since 1993 would be one of the initial criteria. So no team without a bowl victory since 1993 should ever again be eligible for a title? And are we accepting any bowl victory or just BCS ones? It seems a shame that Notre Dame could have avoided your Death Penalty by just signing up for the Weed Eater Bowl one of those years.
I admitted above the "Never be eligible for a national championship" comment was too harsh. Whether it's the Gator Bowl, the Independence Bowl, the Insight Bowl, or one of the bigger ones, they've found a way to lose them, often by a large margin. With a recent history of coaching changes (and failures), padding their winning percentage against mediocre teams (and yes, Penn State this year was mediocre, at best), and losing bowl games so many straight seasons, the evidence seems to be mainly on the side of what I'm saying. For a team that brings in money in a Brinks truck, and has NBC in it's pocket, I just expected more. As for avogadro's comment, I guess I can pretty much decide which part of his post he aligns himself with. He's apparently another Golden Domer. I appreciate the Notre Dame fans' loyalty. Also, "Rudy" is honestly one of my all-time favorite movies. Their tradition is unmatched, so it would be good to see them enjoy future success (in the Big Ten, if I had my way). It wasn't too long ago when I posted that Charley Weis should be Sportsman of the Year for going from helping the Pats win another championship, to experiencing some initial success with the Irish. It's not a personal attack on the program, just my own higher expectations for them. I don't have to be a die-hard Domer to feel that way.
I suggest the NCAA or the BCS have Notre Dame and Michigan play each other in the Losers Bowl so that one of them is assured a bowl victory. It would end in a tie. You obviously missed this game back in September. padding their winning percentage against mediocre teams (and yes, Penn State this year was mediocre, at best) All of the top programs in college football pad their winning percentage against mediocre teams. Michigan played Ball State and Florida played Western Carolina. Scheduling three or four top tier teams doesn't make sense if a team wishes to make the championship game.
All of the top programs in college football pad their winning percentage against mediocre teams. Absolutely. But you expect the top teams to be able to beat at least one (or more) of the really good teams on the schedule, too.
Of course. They aren't a top team if they can't.
dyams, I'm not at all "blinded" by my own affiliation. If you paid any attention to what I said in this thread and in the past, you would see that I am in favor of a playoff system and for the abolishment of the BCS system as we know it. Also, you would understand why any college in ND's position would be absolutely negligent if they passed up opportunities to bring additional funding to their athletics programs. I doubt that if Penn State were in ND's position that you would support passing up on the lucrative contracts. My frustration with you is that all of your arguments are either based in fictions (Notre Dame plays such an easy schedule compared to other teams) or are contradictory to your own assertions, namely that teams like Boise State should have a greater chance to play in prestigious bowl games than Notre Dame and... uh... Notre Dame. If the BCS partners followed your recommendations, namely that teams that have recently lost numerous bowl games, play inferior schedules, and have a record of losing to top-ranked teams , then we would end up with... the exact same system we had before mid-major conferences could compete in BCS bowls.
