Notre Dame to the B1G Conference?

[TNUtoNotreDame]

Do you think the longer time passes that we hear nothing from Notre Dame or the B1G, the more likely this is going to happen?

To me, if nothing was in the works, a statement would be issued by either Notre Dame, the B1G, or both. The silence leads me to believe that they are negotiating as we speak.

Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s my interpretation of the silence we are hearing right now.

The silence is odd. Jack is always quick with a statement stating we are committed to independence. We have had nothing.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Yeah, I think it's going to happen too.

Whatever transpires, I hope Oregon is left to rot. Their online fan contingent is the worst. The B1G taking ND/Stanford and leaving them to twist in the wind would be wonderful.

 

[du Lac]

Other end of the spectrum, playing USC, OSU, Michigan, Penn State. sign me up. Plus we keep our "rivalries" Purdue, MSU, ( Stanford will join the B1G most likely.

Playing Michigan, OSU, USC, Penn State, MSU in the same year seems unlikely. Nobody would sign up for that gauntlet. I wouldn’t hate that though.

 

[du Lac]

Yeah, I think it's going to happen too.

Whatever transpires, I hope Oregon is left to rot. Their online fan contingent is the worst. The B1G taking ND/Stanford and leaving them to twist in the wind would be wonderful.

Is there reason to believe that if ND is in, OR is out?

 

[ColinKSU]

amount of trolls you'll find on just about any fan board... just stay out of the politics/covid sections

Truly a godforsaken place.

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

If the BIG MUST take two more western teams (which I don’t think is necessary), I’d much rather they opt for Cal and Washington over Stanford and/or Oregon. Those two moronic programs can pound sand forever as far as I’m concerned.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Is there reason to believe that if ND is in, OR is out?

No, but there's reason to believe that a non-Oregon PAC team will join ND to keep the numbers even. Which would at least dent some Oregon egos in the short term.

 

[GATTACA!]

If the BIG MUST take two more western teams (which I don’t think is necessary), I’d much rather they opt for Cal and Washington over Stanford and/or Oregon. Those two moronic programs can pound sand forever as far as I’m concerned.

I agree. No way ND agrees to be in the western division.

 

[NorthDakota]

Yeah, I think it's going to happen too.

Whatever transpires, I hope Oregon is left to rot. Their online fan contingent is the worst. The B1G taking ND/Stanford and leaving them to twist in the wind would be wonderful.

I too would enjoy watching Oregon and Uncle Phil being left out.

 

[tussin]

I agree. No way ND agrees to be in the western division.

One would assume if all this goes down then they will move away from the division format into more of a pod arrangement that has ND / USC as an annual rivalry game outside of the pod.

 

[GATTACA!]

One would assume if all this goes down then they will move away from the division format into more of a pod arrangement that has ND / USC as an annual rivalry game outside of the pod.

Yepp I agree. ND should be in a pod with some combination of OSU, MSU, Michigan, Purdue, and Indiana.

 

[Sea Turtle]

I thought that this would happen up until today. Now I think we pass. At least for now.

 

[ACamp1900]

I think watching ND play teams like MD, Rutgers, IN, IL, NU sounds dreadful.

Do you like the idea of playing for nattys?? Because a schedule of USC, tOSU, Michigan, MSU, Clemson, Bama, Penn State, and whatever other ‘sexy game’ you want to throw in there is exactly how this program goes back to the Davie era of 6-6 seasons over and over… no program can do that,… give me 5-6 complete cupcakes a year and schedule them very strategically. That’s how you have to do it today

 

[B1G20]

Or you could put ND in the Pacific Division to preserve the USC/Stanford games as every year without needing a crossover, something like:

USC
Notre Dame
Stanford
UCLA
Washington/Oregon

The problem is then finding a second marquee football brand for the Atlantic Division if the B1G stops at 20 (and ND doesn't head East), unless you are willing to entertain Miami or North Carolina on an Island in the Atlantic Division. Miami would be on an island all by themselves though in every respect, not sure they'd want to do that, but something like:

Penn State
Miami/North Carolina
Rutgers
Maryland
Northwestern/Illinois

I don't see how you can use an ACC model w/ 20 and determine the conference champion without relying on weird tiebreakers or subjective polls - to me you have to settle the conference champion on the field, and the only way to do that is a round robin format with divisions. If someone can show me how you get legit on-the-field conference champs with a 20 school conference without divisions, then I might change my mind, but every proposal I've seen would not accomplish that?

 

[B1G20]

 

[pumpdog20]

I thought that this would happen up until today. Now I think we pass. At least for now.

Agreed, seems like maybe they are going to continue to play the long game.
Hope I'm wrong, because I've been an advocate for joining the Big Ten since I've been on here.

 

[Jiggafini19Deux]

I want to see another National Championship. I don't care the means by which this happens. If you have to play SC in September in Tupelo, MS then do that. Just make sure Jarious Jackson is there for the coin toss.

 

[House16]

Yepp I agree. ND should be in a pod with some combination of OSU, MSU, Michigan, Purdue, and Indiana.

We can have USC, MSU, and Purdue as permanent rivals. I'm not sure why the term "pod" caught on when no one is planning on doing division-style, everyone-play-everyone pods. In actuality everyone will have a few permanent rivals (see the ACC 3-5-5 schedule), but if ND is permanent rivals with USC and Purdue, that doesn't mean USC and Purdue need to be permanent rivals too. Similarly, being permanent rivals with USC doesn't mean we have to be "in a pod" with UCLA.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Here's a good article from Bill Connolly on all things realignment.

 

[Dale]

We can have USC, MSU, and Purdue as permanent rivals. I'm not sure why the term "pod" caught on when no one is planning on doing division-style, everyone-play-everyone pods. In actuality everyone will have a few permanent rivals (see the ACC 3-5-5 schedule), but if ND is permanent rivals with USC and Purdue, that doesn't mean USC and Purdue need to be permanent rivals too. Similarly, being permanent rivals with USC doesn't mean we have to be "in a pod" with UCLA.

House another no-pod supporter. Welcome.

 

[ACamp1900]

Yeah, if we keep our traditional yearly rivals but add yearly games against tOSU and Michigan, along with the yearly big game against a random Bama or Clemson which we have coming up,… that’s pretty daunting for anyone guys,… screw that. I’m fine playing all these teams but not all one after another in the course of like two months. Every big time contender avoids that mess as best they can,… as should we.

 

[Irish#1]

Yeah, if we keep our traditional yearly rivals but add yearly games against tOSU and Michigan, along with the yearly big game against a random Bama or Clemson which we have coming up,… that’s pretty daunting for anyone guys,… screw that. I’m fine playing all these teams but not all one after another in the course of like two months. Every big time contender avoids that mess as best they can,… as should we.

Most of these schedules are made so far in advance that they provide an out clause, so I could see those games getting canceled or shuffled around to accommodate being in the B1G.

 

[Sea Turtle]

Here's a good article from Bill Connolly on all things realignment.

I don't see it.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I don't see it.

It's paywalled so I didn't share the text directly. Requires ESPN+ to read (or you can just copy and paste the link into archive.ph)

 

[irish o'phile]

There needs to be more Eastern and Southern teams in the conference. Make it coast to coast.

 

[B1G20]

We can have USC, MSU, and Purdue as permanent rivals. I'm not sure why the term "pod" caught on when no one is planning on doing division-style, everyone-play-everyone pods. In actuality everyone will have a few permanent rivals (see the ACC 3-5-5 schedule), but if ND is permanent rivals with USC and Purdue, that doesn't mean USC and Purdue need to be permanent rivals too. Similarly, being permanent rivals with USC doesn't mean we have to be "in a pod" with UCLA.

How do you determine who the conference champion is in that format without some weird tiebreakers being used or some subjective poll? That's my objection to doing this method, maybe I don't understand it well enough to figure that out?

 

[B1G20]

Unless you're just willing to say determining a conference champion doesn't matter, in which case, why even have conferences? Just get down to two leagues, then combine the two for TV purposes (SEC + B1G) and make that one TV agreement and the members can just schedule independently with no conference champs being determined and 8-12 schools getting into the playoff based on a subjective poll?

Seems like that's the best option if you're going to scrap divisions - I mean, the NFL has divisions for a reason - it's so playoff entrants have to earn it on the field. It might not be perfect (i.e. some divisions suck some years), but at least the regular season games matter because they effect division standings.

 

[ACamp1900]

Most of these schedules are made so far in advance that they provide an out clause, so I could see those games getting canceled or shuffled around to accommodate being in the B1G.

I wouldn’t believe til I see it in terms of a manageable schedule

 

[TNUtoNotreDame]

I assume a opinion piece. The paywall blocked me.

 

[House16]

How do you determine who the conference champion is in that format without some weird tiebreakers being used or some subjective poll? That's my objection to doing this method, maybe I don't understand it well enough to figure that out?

Top two teams via winning percentage. In case of tie, default to H2H and then winning percentage against mutual opponents. It's not perfect, but it's an improvement over right now because A) strength of schedule variance is about as good, if not better and B) you get rid of the "best two teams in one division" problem.