Jack Swarbrick foresees a division coming in college football due to multiple factors, but best summed up as a division over philosophies.
“'Forget the economics, the cultural divide in college athletics is getting too big,' Swarbrick said. 'Any business association requires commonality of interests to hold together. The Oregon and Stanford economic models are similar. Their approach to sports couldn't be more different.'”
Oregon is a public land-grant university with a mission to provide a practical education accessible to all. Stanford is a private research institution with a mission is to offer an elite broad-based education. " (from link above) and
"'There would be schools banding together because they adhere to a traditional collegiate model. For example, the Ivy League doesn't offer athletic scholarships or participate in the FCS playoff. Still, it is in Division I.
'It's a decision the Ivy League made a long time ago,' Swarbrick said. 'Other schools will say, ‘Hey, we're comfortable with sort of semi-pro model.' That's a perfectly valid choice. But for some of us that's not a choice we're prepared to make and we won't.'”
We've been able to tell where Swarbrick and Notre Dame stand for a while - choosing to affiliate with the ACC rather than the Big Ten and scheduling home-and-homes with Northwestern, Wake, Temple, Rice, Army, and BYU (while continuing to selectively schedule such public university programs like Oklahoma, Texas, Michigan State, Georgia and Texas A&M).
It's one thing to stand in front of Congress or a court of law as Notre Dame defending your reputation, your philosophy and actions with respect to the student-athlete and another if you are an Alabama. Swarbrick is making it clear that Notre Dame's interests and philosophy would be best served in a governing body with schools with a "commonality of interests."
And, perhaps, the best interests of the land-grant institutions would be served in their own governing body. Certainly at this time, in future decision-making by the Power 5 conference members, private institutions will be in the minority.
“'Forget the economics, the cultural divide in college athletics is getting too big,' Swarbrick said. 'Any business association requires commonality of interests to hold together. The Oregon and Stanford economic models are similar. Their approach to sports couldn't be more different.'”
Oregon is a public land-grant university with a mission to provide a practical education accessible to all. Stanford is a private research institution with a mission is to offer an elite broad-based education. " (from link above) and
"'There would be schools banding together because they adhere to a traditional collegiate model. For example, the Ivy League doesn't offer athletic scholarships or participate in the FCS playoff. Still, it is in Division I.
'It's a decision the Ivy League made a long time ago,' Swarbrick said. 'Other schools will say, ‘Hey, we're comfortable with sort of semi-pro model.' That's a perfectly valid choice. But for some of us that's not a choice we're prepared to make and we won't.'”
We've been able to tell where Swarbrick and Notre Dame stand for a while - choosing to affiliate with the ACC rather than the Big Ten and scheduling home-and-homes with Northwestern, Wake, Temple, Rice, Army, and BYU (while continuing to selectively schedule such public university programs like Oklahoma, Texas, Michigan State, Georgia and Texas A&M).
It's one thing to stand in front of Congress or a court of law as Notre Dame defending your reputation, your philosophy and actions with respect to the student-athlete and another if you are an Alabama. Swarbrick is making it clear that Notre Dame's interests and philosophy would be best served in a governing body with schools with a "commonality of interests."
And, perhaps, the best interests of the land-grant institutions would be served in their own governing body. Certainly at this time, in future decision-making by the Power 5 conference members, private institutions will be in the minority.
Last edited: