The Optimal Notre Dame Scheduling Model

[NorthDakota]

I am leaning towards joining SEC. That solves several problems.

If ND were to join a conference, I think it has to be B1G. Built in rivalries, (mostly) Midwestern, good academics, etc.

 

[ulukinatme]

For the last ten years I've thought that clinging to half-way independence with this ACC deal is a joke. Just join the Big Ten already and give us Michigan and Michigan State matchups again. ND probably has the clout to make the B1G bring Stanford along too.

I do think if we join the B1G we would generally be protected as we'd be a cash cow that the B1G would want to protect, the same way they protect an OSU, Michigan, or Penn State. That said, got nothing against Stanford, but they can pound sand. We don't need them, even if they'd be an easy game today. They were convenient as they operated on the same model as USC, just alternating in years and giving our boys a California trip in November every season whether it was USC or Stanford. I don't think it's that big a deal though, and with USC and ND in the B1G we could potentially get scenarios where USC comes to South Bend in November.

 

[T-Boone]

If ND were to join a conference, I think it has to be B1G. Built in rivalries, (mostly) Midwestern, good academics, etc.

Don't we have it in for the Big10? ND would be very unique in the SEC and it would be a big recruiting advantage. Better variety of play. A gme in Austin every second year would be great.

 

[IrishBryan77]

Yes....join the sec so we can lose even more. Makes complete sense.

 

[NDRock]

I am leaning towards joining SEC. That solves several problems.

With the way we play defense, we should join the Big 12

 

[NDFAN2008]

I'm fine with how next year's schedule is set up we pay Wisconsin to open the season they won't be good, then Rice. We play 6 should be easy wins then get USC

 

[NorthDakota]

Don't we have it in for the Big10? ND would be very unique in the SEC and it would be a big recruiting advantage. Better variety of play. A gme in Austin every second year would be great.

No reason to think ND would be in Austin every year. Probably more like every 4th year. There are sixteen SEC teams now. If Notre Dame and one or more (Clemson/FSU/UNC) joined, it'd be 18 or 20 teams.

ND would be a cultural and geographic outlier. A Midwestern Catholic school playing in a conference with a bunch of southern public schools (plus OU, Vandy, and Missouri). I don't see the fit at all. Then again, the ACC and B1G extend from see to shining sea now so nothing matters I guess

 

[calvegas04]

I'm fine with how next year's schedule is set up we pay Wisconsin to open the season they won't be good, then Rice. We play 6 should be easy wins then get USC

I don't think usc is on the books yet and if it happens might be in Sept

 

[stlnd01]

No reason to think ND would be in Austin every year. Probably more like every 4th year. There are sixteen SEC teams now. If Notre Dame and one or more (Clemson/FSU/UNC) joined, it'd be 18 or 20 teams.

ND would be a cultural and geographic outlier. A Midwestern Catholic school playing in a conference with a bunch of southern public schools (plus OU, Vandy, and Missouri). I don't see the fit at all. Then again, the ACC and B1G extend from see to shining sea now so nothing matters I guess

I agree. Big Ten makes a lot more sense geographically/culturally and it's probably a wash football-wise. We'd also be able to play USC and Michigan and/or Sparty every year. We don't really have any natural rivals in the SEC and would be far more of an outlier.

 

[Jiggafini19Deux]

Give yourself a couple of games to ease into the season. They should both be home games.

That being said, both of these games so far have been winnable. Still, on the road at night against Miami and home against TAMU at night in just about any season is going to be difficult.

 

[NorthDakota]

I agree. Big Ten makes a lot more sense geographically/culturally and it's probably a wash football-wise. We'd also be able to play USC and Michigan and/or Sparty every year. We don't really have any natural rivals in the SEC and would be far more of an outlier.

Could bring back annual/regular games with Purdue as well.

I would prefer to not go B1G as I like independence but im not an alum and have no skin in the game.

 

[calvegas04]

Join the big 10 and have usc play ND in Dec

 

[irishjim]

I'm fine with how next year's schedule is set up we pay Wisconsin to open the season they won't be good, then Rice. We play 6 should be easy wins then get USC

USC is on the books next year for 11/28

 

[irishjim]

Looking ahead, I'd say schedules look "softer" in terms of opponents and timing of games. 2029 looks the roughest with Alabama, Texas, and Clemson. 2028 has Texas, Miami, and Clemson.

 

[irishu]

Why are we acting like Miami and Texas A&M are Ohio State and Georgia?

Our schedule doesn’t need to be softer, and I’m even fine with our first game being a big game. I do agree that having consecutive difficult games to start the year is not ideal.

 

[fightingirish26]

As an independent you're gonna have to have big name teams early in the season, before conference play is in full swing. Part of the territory.

 

[stlnd01]

As an independent you're gonna have to have big name teams early in the season, before conference play is in full swing. Part of the territory.

It wasn't always that way, though.

Big Ten, yes, b/c they insisted on most non-conference games coming before their conference slate, so we'd always play Michigan in the first few weeks. But in the 90s and 2000s we played SEC teams like Tennessee and LSU in November, in South Bend no less. USC/Stanford on the mid-October/Thanksgiving cycle of course. Occasionally others from the Pac-12 or ACC (before the ACC deal). One reason the Oklahoma game in 2012 was such a big deal was because it was in late October and the hype train had achieved full speed.

But it feels now like our schedule gets more and more front-loaded. Unless we catch Clemson late, or USC happens to be good, we're kind of up the creek with two early losses. When we then romp through service academies and ACC middleweights, no one cares.

 

[MacIrish75]

Jack, again, for all his good, is a fucking idiot.

 

[Huntr]

Reviewing future scheds...

Do not look at the 2029 if you think ND's has been less than ideal.

Bama
at USF
at Texas
at Carter-Finley
Georgia Tech
at FSU
at Cuse
Wake
Navy
at Clemson

plus USC and Furd in there somewhere.


wtf

 

[Katzenboyer]

Reviewing future scheds...

Do not look at the 2029 if you think ND's has been less than ideal.

Bama
at USF
at Texas
at Carter-Finley
Georgia Tech
at FSU
at Cuse
Wake
Navy
at Clemson

plus USC and Furd in there somewhere.


wtf

Dumb.

 

[irishu]

Fellas out here bed wetting about games four years from now

 

[zelezo vlk]

Reviewing future scheds...

Do not look at the 2029 if you think ND's has been less than ideal.

Bama
at USF
at Texas
at Carter-Finley
Georgia Tech
at FSU
at Cuse
Wake
Navy
at Clemson

plus USC and Furd in there somewhere.


wtf

Quite a few people have already said they don't expect both Bama and Texas to remain on the schedule with the upcoming 9 game SEC conference schedule.

 

[Huntr]

Quite a few people have already said they don't expect both Bama and Texas to remain on the schedule with the upcoming 9 game SEC conference schedule.

That's a good point. There was a question on the latest II pod about ND being ready at the beginning of the season and how Freeman's losses have come largely early. Both of the Tims said, yes, it's fair to question what is happening in camp. Brice agreed, but also said you don't need to start your season every year like they do, with a 'tough' team (read: P4 team) on the road, e.g, at Lambeau vs Wisconsin.

He said ND hadn't opened a season at home in like 20+ years. That led me to looking at what they have scheduled in the future and how it relates to this thread. Because they really are screwing themselves doing it this way.

 

[JD Irish]

That's a good point. There was a question on the latest II pod about ND being ready at the beginning of the season and how Freeman's losses have come largely early. Both of the Tims said, yes, it's fair to question what is happening in camp. Brice agreed, but also said you don't need to start your season every year like they do, with a 'tough' team (read: P4 team) on the road, e.g, at Lambeau vs Wisconsin.

He said ND hadn't opened a season at home in like 20+ years. That led me to looking at what they have scheduled in the future and how it relates to this thread. Because they really are screwing themselves doing it this way.

This is just false.

2008: opened at home against San Diego State
2009: opened at home against Nevada
2010: opened at home against Purdue
2011: opened at home against South Florida
2013: opened at home against Temple
2014: opened at home against Rice
2015: opened at home against Texas
2017: opened at home against Temple
2018: opened at home against Michigan
2020: opened at home against Duke

 

[Huntr]

Ahh, maybe he said "since 2020" and I mis- heard.

I thought it sounded rough, but that makes more sense.

 

[NDRock]

Fellas out here bed wetting about games four years from now

Seemed like people were discussing future schedules, in a thread about scheduling.

 

[ab2cmiller]

Seemed like people were discussing future schedules, in a thread about scheduling.

Don't mind him, he just looks for any opportunity to post his typical bed wetting comments. It's his schtick.

 

[JD Irish]

I think it's great we play in big games. It would be a shame if Alabama or Texas canceled those series.

 

[irishu]

Don't mind him, he just looks for any opportunity to post his typical bed wetting comments. It's his schtick.

I respect your defense of the bed wetters on this board

But the evidence is undeniable. There are members of this board who have conflated the notion that “we shouldn’t play our hardest few games first” to “we shouldn’t play hard games”. Great teams win great games, but you need them on the schedule to do so

 

[ab2cmiller]

I respect your defense of the bed wetters on this board

But the evidence is undeniable. There are members of this board who have conflated the notion that “we shouldn’t play our hardest few games first” to “we shouldn’t play hard games”. Great teams win great games, but you need them on the schedule to do so

Not defending the "bed wetters". Simply pointing out how tiresome your schtick has become.