Superconferences & Realignment

stlnd01

Was away. Now returned.
Messages
13,386
Reaction score
10,247
I thought it was understood that the ACC was and is the basketball powerhouse after conference realignment? I know they made some mention that the ACC was first and foremost a basketball first league and football second during the last merger. Of course, theres 4 ACC teams that are improving their stock on the field in recent years: Miami, UNC, Louisville, and us.

Yeah. ACC pirated some of the better Big East basketball schools in Syracuse, Pitt and us. Plus adding Louisville, which is on par with any Big Ten program except maybe Indiana. Also they're still more likely to wind up with UConn than the B1G is.
I guess Maryland is a pretty big basketball coup for the B1G, especially coming directly from the ACC, but other new additions like Rutgers and Nebraska don't bring much. It's really not close.

But as for football, I'll give you Louisville. But hold off on anointing Miami. UNC is improving its lot? And please don't call us an ACC school. That'll take some getting used to.
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,544
Reaction score
28,990
Keep in mind these mergers include other sports. The B1G has replaced the ACC as king when it comes to basketball.

Duke, UNC, Syracuse, and Louisiville are superior overall basketball schools to every team in the Big Ten except Indiana. Those are true blue bloods besides Louisville.
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
CBS' Dennis Dodd just published an article titled "Notre Dame AD has a vision of two college athletic associations":

Jack Swarbrick has this vision. In it, schools that want to pay their athletes and those that want to adhere to a strict educational mission have a decision to make.

In his vision, a players union may not be the worst thing in the world. In it, Congress may have a hand in governing college sports.

The Notre Dame athletic director says there is currently a “cultural divide” in college athletics, one that may make the traditional version of conference realignment look like a game of jacks.

Swarbrick isn't necessarily advocating upheaval, just defining the future. The legal, moral and collegiate pressures may make it inevitable for a semi-pro division of college athletics to emerge.

“There's going to be Congressional intervention [in college athletics] or there's going to be more than one intercollegiate athletic association ….” he said.

“You don't like these set of rules? Go play in that association.”

A financial windfall in television rights caused the last round of realignment. That eventually pushed Notre Dame to the ACC in everything but football. Swarbrick speaks freely because he still represents one school, one philosophy -- not a conference of merging interests.

Notre Dame has called its shots through the history of major-college athletics.

The Fighting Irish basically jump-started modern conference realignment when they bolted the College Football Association for NBC in 1990.

In Swarbrick's vision, be assured the Notre Dame's voice will be heard.

Meanwhile, the NCAA is trying to maintain its relevance under an avalanche of legal challenges and reform. One insider said the amount of legal scrutiny has turned the NCAA into “the new tobacco industry.”

Congressional intervention has been mentioned as a way to turn down the heat. It would provide the NCAA with, say, an anti-trust exemption that could protect the association against some of those legal challenges.

Lately, though, any federal intervention has trended toward reining in NCAA power rather than expanding it.

“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.

They both play in the Pac-12. In Swarbrick's future vision, they would be affiliated with different governing bodies.

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.”

Swarbrick knows his stuff. If all this seems to be a trend toward an Olympic model, there's a reason. There was a time when the USOC held on to a pure amateur model. Now, no one cares if that dainty figure skater has a six-figure endorsement contract with a major airline.

As a member of the Indiana Sports Commission, Swarbrick -- an attorney by trade -- worked closely with the NFL and USOC in landing events for Indianapolis.

“Most athletic budgets are somewhere around the 3-8 percent range” of the total university budget, according to Swarbrick. “The Stanfords of the world are not going to allow that 4 percent business unit [to] take them places they don't want to be.”

Think, then, of two college sports associations. One that includes the likes of Notre Dame, Duke, Stanford, Wake Forest, Cal, Northwestern and TCU. And another that includes most of the major-college land-grant schools.

Recruiting issues? Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany has already laid down a challenge. Similar to 1990, any division that includes Notre Dame is going to get a hefty TV contract.

The current conference media rights deals, worth billions, generally lock in the 10 FBS conferences to the middle of the next decade. The current external pressures could impact those deals way before that time.

Two associations would reflect differing academic approaches. Schools could conceivably still play each other -- as long as the public can digest a $20,000-a-year Isaiah Taylor from Texas bringing it up against Duke's Tyus Jones.

That vision portends a future when schools won't necessarily be defined by their conferences but by their core beliefs. College leaders are already being forced to consider outright compensation, a concept that would have been unthinkable a few years ago.

Athletes are already being compensated with the new cost of attendance. If the NCAA loses the O'Bannon case, players could make up to $20,000 in a trust fund payable after they leave school. Several lawsuits against the NCAA and Power Five conferences are calling for the full-on payment of athletes.

Northwestern is still waiting on a National Labor Relations Board ruling that would allow private-school athletes to unionize.

“The irony of all this is, maybe the only way we can get resolution is to ask our athletes to unionize,” Swarbrick said.

That, at least, would bring some sort of cost certainty instead of spending endless hours in court.

“You could have an enforceable collective bargaining,” Swarbrick said.

That's quite a vision.

First impressions:
  • This is the only way that ND can remain competitive long-term without selling out its core values.
  • Jack Swarbrick is a BOSS. We are so lucky to have him. No one is more important to the future of NDFB than he.
 
Last edited:

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Can I get a tl;dr?

From the article:

“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.

...

Think, then, of two college sports associations. One that includes the likes of Notre Dame, Duke, Stanford, Wake Forest, Cal, Northwestern and TCU. And another that includes most of the major-college land-grant schools.

If you have time to click through, Dodd lists which schools he'd assign to these two new athletic associations. He put USC in the "semi-pro" side (lol).
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,544
Reaction score
28,990
From the article:



If you have time to click through, Dodd lists which schools he'd assign to these two new athletic associations. He put USC in the "semi-pro" side (lol).

50% graduation rate says "sup"
 

greyhammer90

the drunk piano player
Messages
16,820
Reaction score
16,080
From the article:



If you have time to click through, Dodd lists which schools he'd assign to these two new athletic associations. He put USC in the "semi-pro" side (lol).

So how is this a good thing. At first glance this seems like our AD is saying we should be in a lower tiered division (football skill-wise) because we can't compete within the current model.
 

ulukinatme

Carr for QB 2025!
Messages
31,509
Reaction score
17,369
From the article:



If you have time to click through, Dodd lists which schools he'd assign to these two new athletic associations. He put USC in the "semi-pro" side (lol).

Wow, our division would suck from a competition standpoint. We would be one of the top dogs by a long shot, along with Stanford, Northwestern I guess, and maybe....Cal or BC? Navy would probably be a powerhouse in that league too. Interesting concept, but I think the Irish would lose appeal from a fan standpoint because the money would follow the semi-pro league and not the academic based one.
 

Cali_domer

Banned
Messages
3,569
Reaction score
296
So how is this a good thing. At first glance this seems like our AD is saying we should be in a lower tiered division (football skill-wise) because we can't compete within the current model.
I took it as him as waving the white flag and us moving to Ivy type model. Not exactly a boss move, more of taking my toys and going home. ND will not get a huge contract if it goes to that model because interest will erode.

It will free up my Saturdays because I won't watch a bunch of 4.0 students trip over each other on the field(Doubt it would be a national broadcast anyway). Semi Pro model will fail also imo because at that point it's just minor leagues.
 
Last edited:

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,544
Reaction score
28,990
So how is this a good thing. At first glance this seems like our AD is saying we should be in a lower tiered division (football skill-wise) because we can't compete within the current model.

Right, this is basically a huge flaw that is unresolved. People are always going to want to watch what they consider to be the "best" product. If one division is paying players and another isn't, then the one that isn't will be considered Tier 2. Not "Tier 1 - Semi-pros at Large Schools" and "Tier 1 - Actual student athletes." Both divisions would suffer, because people in places with a pro sports teams are simply going to be more invested in those teams than they are their "minor league" team. It's pretty much Alabama's dream and USC's nightmare (once a pro team moves to LA) in terms of financials.

Then the academic schools will all suffer because, outside of their alumni, no one is going to give a shit about watching second tier football. 90%+ of elite recruits are going to head to the "semi-pro conference."

Best case scenario, IMO, is a situation where athletes can get paid AND scholarship cap is eliminated AND the NCAA sticks a half-dozen academic auditors on each campus reviewing assignments turned in by student athletes + grades given out. That would level the playing field over night.
 

greyhammer90

the drunk piano player
Messages
16,820
Reaction score
16,080
Right, this is basically a huge flaw that is unresolved. People are always going to want to watch what they consider to be the "best" product. If one division is paying players and another isn't, then the one that isn't will be considered Tier 2. Not "Tier 1 - Semi-pros at Large Schools" and "Tier 1 - Actual student athletes." Both divisions would suffer, because people in places with a pro sports teams are simply going to be more invested in those teams than they are their "minor league" team. It's pretty much Alabama's dream and USC's nightmare (once a pro team moves to LA) in terms of financials.

Then the academic schools will all suffer because, outside of their alumni, no one is going to give a shit about watching second tier football. 90%+ of elite recruits are going to head to the "semi-pro conference."

Best case scenario, IMO, is a situation where athletes can get paid AND scholarship cap is eliminated AND the NCAA sticks a half-dozen academic auditors on each campus reviewing assignments turned in by student athletes + grades given out. That would level the playing field over night.

So it's not a boss move?
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
So how is this a good thing. At first glance this seems like our AD is saying we should be in a lower tiered division (football skill-wise) because we can't compete within the current model.

Not so much "cant', as "wont":

“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.”

“Most athletic budgets are somewhere around the 3-8 percent range” of the total university budget, according to Swarbrick. “The Stanfords of the world are not going to allow that 4 percent business unit [to] take them places they don't want to be.”

That "place [we] don't want to be" is a largely deregulated environment where we're expected to compete with huge land grant public institutions willing to dedicate absurd portions of their budget to football. ND will never do that. To the extent that prevents us from becoming "consensus" national champions again, perhaps there's cause for some sadness.

I'm more concerned with ND maintaining its integrity. In the system Swarbrick describes, we could do that.
 

Woneone

New member
Messages
1,445
Reaction score
125
Right, this is basically a huge flaw that is unresolved. People are always going to want to watch what they consider to be the "best" product. If one division is paying players and another isn't, then the one that isn't will be considered Tier 2. Not "Tier 1 - Semi-pros at Large Schools" and "Tier 1 - Actual student athletes." Both divisions would suffer, because people in places with a pro sports teams are simply going to be more invested in those teams than they are their "minor league" team. It's pretty much Alabama's dream and USC's nightmare (once a pro team moves to LA) in terms of financials.

Then the academic schools will all suffer because, outside of their alumni, no one is going to give a shit about watching second tier football. 90%+ of elite recruits are going to head to the "semi-pro conference."

Best case scenario, IMO, is a situation where athletes can get paid AND scholarship cap is eliminated AND the NCAA sticks a half-dozen academic auditors on each campus reviewing assignments turned in by student athletes + grades given out. That would level the playing field over night.

Agree with everything you said.

I've stated this previously, but if I'm the NCAA, and I want to truly clean up amateur athletics, I...

1.) Get with EA to renew their gaming deals
2.) State that all proceeds from said licensing will go solely towards the enforcement of amateur rules and guidelines at member schools.
3.) Try to guilt the NFL into removing it's "3 years removed from High School" rule and making it 1 and done.
4.) If they can't get the NFL to budge (or more specifically, the players union), then try like hell to find a sponsor for a new Minor League/Pay for Pay Football league. I would think a network without current NFL ties would jump on the idea to align themselves with this. Maybe not.

The greatest threat to College Football isn't the idea of paying players, it's the ramifications, specifically the tier'ing of the have's and have not's, that would accompany it. As long as a fan feels their team is playing by the same rules, they'll tune in. As soon as that's gone, so is the fan.
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Best case scenario, IMO, is a situation where athletes can get paid AND scholarship cap is eliminated AND the NCAA sticks a half-dozen academic auditors on each campus reviewing assignments turned in by student athletes + grades given out. That would level the playing field over night.

That's clearly not the direction things are trending. It would be totally incoherent to deregulate, but still force football factories to pretend they're fielding real student athletes. That's like wizards suggesting we ditch all regulation on American business, but insisting we maintain a small Anti-Trust Division to make sure the corporations don't get too powerful. Regulators have to be roughly equal in power with the institutions they're overseeing; the NCAA is currently on the ropes, and the odds of it coming out of all these lawsuits not only intact, but strong enough to do what you're proposing is negligible. And who would vote for it? The NCAA is its member institutions. We're thoroughly outnumbered by the "win-at-all-cost" football factories.

We're one of the very few FBS schools who actually cares about educating our athletes. Virtually no one else-- schools, fans or the athletes-- gives a sh!t about education. It's all one big economic argument about how to fairly compensate the athletes. That's all.

The ideal future where ND fields a team of true student athletes and competes with the likes of Alabama and Ohio State for championships on a regular basis is a fantasy. CFB is currently in the grips of a funding arms race that will only get worse as the NCAA deregulates further. ND simply isn't going to pervert its institutional mission to play that game.
 
Last edited:

Cali_domer

Banned
Messages
3,569
Reaction score
296
Not so much "cant', as "wont":



That "place [we] don't want to be" is a largely deregulated environment where we're expected to compete with huge land grant public institutions willing to dedicate absurd portions of their budget to football. ND will never do that. To the extent that prevents us from becoming "consensus" national champions again, perhaps there's cause for some sadness.

I'm more concerned with ND maintaining its integrity. In the system Swarbrick describes, we could do that.
If they choose to not play with the Big boys it's over. Not to say if that's right or wrong but ND will be waving the flag and giving up on competing at the highest level. Which maybe the best thing but it's a move that will forever affect ND and the fan base will become very, very small.

He maybe bluffing, he is a lawyer after all. Jim Delaney said something similar not to long ago.
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,127
Reaction score
11,073
Riddle me this:

Why not just allow schools to institute an "Athletics" major?

Teach them how to manage themselves, their money, their image/likeness; make them take an area of concentration or a minor that they can expand upon for life after their sport. They would still have the core classes that all other students have to take.

Keep the system the same, just be up front and let the athletes major in athletics if they so choose. Prepare them for the future while they're working for the university as an athlete. Be sure that they are completely aware of all aspects of life as an athlete, if that's what they're pursuing.

Suddenly, having a prestigious athletics major can appeal to kids that wouldn't have given a second thought to their education before, because they know "_________ School of Athletics" will 100% offer a fallback plan if they don't make it through the pros; meanwhile, schools like ND, Duke, Stanford, etc., that actually uphold their educational responsibilities, might get a leg up if the athletics major shows potential for a ROI like the rest of the school's programs.
 

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
That's like wizards suggesting we ditch all regulation on American business but we'll maintain a small Anti-Trust Division to make sure they don't get too powerful.
I wasn't even in this!

But seriously, this idea is awesome. Except when those bastards at ESPN decide that they only want to cover the "semi-pro" association and the association that actually "plays school" becomes the NIT of college football.

^No italics.
 

greyhammer90

the drunk piano player
Messages
16,820
Reaction score
16,080
Not so much "cant', as "wont":



That "place [we] don't want to be" is a largely deregulated environment where we're expected to compete with huge land grant public institutions willing to dedicate absurd portions of their budget to football. ND will never do that. To the extent that prevents us from becoming "consensus" national champions again, perhaps there's cause for some sadness.

I'm more concerned with ND maintaining its integrity. In the system Swarbrick describes, we could do that.

I understand that we want to do things the right way, but I'm not going to pretend that if ND loses the ability to win a true national championship that my interest in the program won't erode.

That's not to say I would think any less of ND, or wouldn't want my kids to go there, etc. but Notre Dame as a brand would die.
 
Last edited:

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
I understand that we want to do things the right way, but I'm not going to pretend that if ND loses the ability to win a true national championship that my interest in the program won't erode.

That's not to say I would think any less of ND, or wouldn't want my kids to go there, etc. but Notre Dame as a brand would die.

I don't disagree. And my previous post probably gave the impression that I was happy with this state of affairs, which is not true. I've long worried that ND will be unable to remain competitive in the current CFB landscape without selling out; which means we'll either have to: (1) turn into a football factory; (2) quit football; or (3) go "minor league" with other like-minded schools. So it was encouraging to see that Swarbrick feels similarly, and that his preferred solution is the same as mine.

But none of the solutions will be good for ND.
 

MNIrishman

Well-known member
Messages
2,532
Reaction score
481
I understand that we want to do things the right way, but I'm not going to pretend that if ND loses the ability to win a true national championship that my interest in the program won't erode.

That's not to say I would think any less of ND, or wouldn't want my kids to go there, etc. but Notre Dame as a brand would die.

Depends on your definition of 'true national championship.' I'd be way more into college sports if there were more true amateurism. Alabama may be the best in the land but I don't like watching them. I strongly suspect that the economic incentives to not pay athletes will make the 'academic' side larger than you'd think. If the majority of schools stay 'academic' , you can still make a good case for winning a national championship---- especially since in my mind winning a semi-pro league is very different from winning a true collegiate league.
 

greyhammer90

the drunk piano player
Messages
16,820
Reaction score
16,080
I don't disagree. And my previous post probably gave the impression that I was happy with this state of affairs, which is not true. I've long worried that ND will be unable to remain competitive in the current CFB landscape without selling out; which means we'll either have to: (1) turn into a football factory; (2) quit football; or (3) go "minor league" with other like-minded schools. So it was encouraging to see that Swarbrick feels similarly, and that his preferred solution is the same as mine.

But none of the solutions will be good for ND.

Also could you go into what "selling out" is and how ND is going to be more affected by their refusal to do so than they already are? You made a comment about "absurd amount of their budget" earlier and I don't really understand how a certain dollar amount indicates selling out. I understand spending it ethically versus not, but we deal with that now and compete in the top tier of the sport.
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Also could you go into what "selling out" is and how ND is going to be more affected by their refusal to do so than they already are? You made a comment about "absurd amount of their budget" earlier and I don't really understand how a certain dollar amount indicates selling out. I understand spending it ethically versus not, but we deal with that now and compete in the top tier of the sport.

"Selling out" would entail really taking the gloves off and matching our competitors blow for blow: splashing out millions on assistant coaches (despite the fact that no professor at ND makes anything near that) and facility upgrades, insulating football players from the rest of the student body to protect ND's "investment" in them, paying recruits, etc. It would be a total sea change in how ND views the program.

Right now, NDFB is important to the school's identity, but it's clearly secondary to the school's mission. "Selling out" would involve spinning the football program off in certain ways and treating it like a business; which, from a moral point of view, is a totally different arrangement-- the classic slippery slope. We'd end up as just another football factory. And you can be sure there'd be corruption and scandals a-plenty, because this is big business.

We're still competing in the top tier because the NCAA regulations still have some teeth to them. But the trend is clearly toward deregulation and a market-driven semi-pro model. We can't maintain the integrity of our athletic programs in such an environment.
 
Last edited:

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,544
Reaction score
28,990
You could allow payment of players and ND could still compete without paying them as long as the scholarship limit was lifted. There's a strategy of "going wide" that many people apply to pro-sports drafts that you could easily apply to Notre Dame. If you recruit 140ish 2 and 3 star players, you will be able to find 50 in any given year that are capable of playing very high level football. On top of that, some boosters would choose to pay players regardless of ND's stance and you'd be able to supplement this horde of student athletes with some 4-star guys taking benefits from Mr. Mendoza, Mr. Fertitta, Papa Lax, etc.

Truth be told, the current status quo is about as bad as it gets for ND. Pretty much any change would make us stronger.
 

greyhammer90

the drunk piano player
Messages
16,820
Reaction score
16,080
"Selling out" would entail really taking the gloves off and matching our competitors blow for blow: splashing out millions on assistant coaches (despite the fact that no professor at ND makes anything near that) and facility upgrades, insulating football players from the rest of the student body to protect ND's "investment" in them, paying recruits, etc. It would be a total sea change in how ND views the program.

Right now, NDFB is important to the school's identity, but it's clearly secondary to the school's mission. "Selling out" would involve spinning the football program off in certain ways and treating it like a business; which, from a moral point of view, is a totally different arrangement-- the classic slippery slope. We'd end up as just another football factory. And you can be sure there'd be corruption and scandals a-plenty, because this is big business.

We're still competing in the top tier because the NCAA regulations still have some teeth to them. But the trend is clearly toward deregulation and a market-driven semi-pro model. We can't maintain the integrity of our athletic programs in such an environment.

Nebulous potential future moral issues aside, what exactly is wrong with spending large amounts on assistants and spending top dollar on facilities? So long as ND football is bringing in more than its spending, how is this a bad thing? I honestly don't know if I believe that ND hasn't already crossed the "big business" line anyway, considering our massive interests in Under Armour/NBC/ACC/we move the entire home game experience one time a year to build our brand.

As for the other issues, P5 schools already pay recruits/cheat/insulate their players. We played 13 of them in 2013 and went 12-1. I don't think this creates an inability to compete. We're still consistent a top 25 team.
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Nebulous potential future moral issues aside, what exactly is wrong with spending large amounts on assistants and spending top dollar on facilities?

There's nothing strictly immoral about it, but "keeping up with the Joneses" would require spending on a level that spins the football program off from the university's larger mission.

So long as ND football is bringing in more than its spending, how is this a bad thing?

It's not just about staying in the black. It's about the balance of power between the school and the football program. Right now, the program is clearly subservient to the school (as it should be). But would that remain the case if the program grew to 10, 15 or 20% of the total budget? That sort of arrangement almost guarantees corruption.

I honestly don't know if I believe that ND hasn't already crossed the "big business" line anyway, considering our massive interests in Under Armour/NBC/ACC/we move the entire home game experience one time a year to build our brand.

As for the other issues, P5 schools already pay recruits/cheat/insulate their players. We played 13 of them in 2013 and went 12-1. I don't think this creates an inability to compete. We're still consistent a top 25 team.

Again, I don't disagree. It could be argued that ND has been compromising its Catholic educational mission with regards to the football team for a long time. But ND has become guilty about the "worldliness" of its football program, self-sanctioned, and fallen out of prominence many times in the past. It seems like Swarbrick and Jenkins are genuinely trying to balance ND's moral imperatives against the competitive requirements of modern CFB (see all the recent back-office hires), but they also see the writing on the wall with deregulation coming. And they aren't willing to completely commodotize the program, so they're preparing for an inevitable split between the collegiate programs and the semi-pro programs.
 
Last edited:

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
I guess, as a fan, you would have to determine for yourself what your motivations for cheering for ND are. If they are idealistic and academic based, then you will probably still cheer hard, and be a rabid fan, even if they are in "the minor leagues". I mean, those of us who are here all of the time obviously don't need a roster full of stud blue chip athletes, because ND hasn't been consistently attracting the best of the best since the Holtz years. If you follow ND just because you jumped on the "best of the best" bandwagon, then this would probably mean the end of your Notre Dame fandom. Maybe that just leaves more tickets for the rest of us?
 

IrishFaninTX

New member
Messages
1,038
Reaction score
46
I guess, as a fan, you would have to determine for yourself what your motivations for cheering for ND are. If they are idealistic and academic based, then you will probably still cheer hard, and be a rabid fan, even if they are in "the minor leagues". I mean, those of us who are here all of the time obviously don't need a roster full of stud blue chip athletes, because ND hasn't been consistently attracting the best of the best since the Holtz years. If you follow ND just because you jumped on the "best of the best" bandwagon, then this would probably mean the end of your Notre Dame fandom. Maybe that just leaves more tickets for the rest of us?

I fall somewhere in the middle. I didn't grow up in South Bend, didn't attend the university, and really didn't know much about the school at all until my late teens. I met my wife who lived in South Bend until she moved to Texas when she was 11. But her family still lives there, has relatives who usher, and she will always be a fan. I began watching the games when I was 16 and that was towards the end of Holtz' dominant years (1993). I got to see ND play in the Cotton Bowl in 94 when they beat A&M. I have been a die hard fan ever since. I wouldn't say I was a band wagon fan because I didn't start watching them because they won a NC in 88 or should have won another in 93. It just happened that they were really good when I started watching but I never fell off the wagon when they went through their slump with Davies/Willingham/Weis. I don't know if I will be as much of a football fan if they play more of a Ivy League type of schedule but I don't think I would be as interested in the games. I hate to say that but it is what it is. I don't want them to become like the Bama's or USC's of the world, either, but playing a schedule where their toughest opponent is Navy and no chance of winning a true national championship? Well I don't think I would be into the games or even recruiting quite as much. I really hope the university can find some balance without selling out or having to reduce the football program to a program similar to Harvard or Princeton. I mean who cares if or when Harvard or Princeton is playing except alumni? ND has a lot more fans than just alumni. That would likely change if they go to an Ivy League model.
 

ACamp1900

Counting my ‘bet against ND’ winnings
Messages
48,944
Reaction score
11,225
The saddest part for me was hearing ND wont' play ball and just win straight from the horses mouth...

I called this a while ago though, I stated if they arent' gonna win at all costs then they should move towards their own academic league...
 

greyhammer90

the drunk piano player
Messages
16,820
Reaction score
16,080
I guess, as a fan, you would have to determine for yourself what your motivations for cheering for ND are. If they are idealistic and academic based, then you will probably still cheer hard, and be a rabid fan, even if they are in "the minor leagues". I mean, those of us who are here all of the time obviously don't need a roster full of stud blue chip athletes, because ND hasn't been consistently attracting the best of the best since the Holtz years. If you follow ND just because you jumped on the "best of the best" bandwagon, then this would probably mean the end of your Notre Dame fandom. Maybe that just leaves more tickets for the rest of us?

I disagree that losing interest in a team that willingly drops to a lower division means that they are a "bandwagoner". I love Notre Dame, and I became a fan of ND because of their focus on doing things the right way. But the "idealistic" notion you speak of is competing at the highest level without making moral sacrifices. If Notre Dame determined that they were no longer going to compete at that level, my interest in the entire sport would like disappear. I'd still love the university, would probably casually cheer for them within that division, and likely wouldn't ever really have another "team" I'd cheer for. But I'm not going to spend my Saturday's watching an inferior product play for a prize I don't really care about.
 
Top