The Pete Bevacqua Thread

[jprue24]

This shit..

1. Each committee member will create a list of the 30 teams he or she believes to be the best in the country, in no particular order. Teams listed by three or more members will remain under consideration. At the conclusion of any round, other teams can be added to the group of teams under consideration by a vote of three or more members.

2. Each member will list the best six teams, in no particular order. The six teams receiving the most votes will comprise the pool for the first ranking step. This is known as the “listing step.”

3. In the first ranking step, each member will rank those six teams, one through six, with one being the best. The best team in each member’s ranking will receive one point; second-best, two points, etc. The members’ rankings will be added together and the four teams receiving the fewest points will become the top four ranked teams. The two teams that were not ranked will be held over for the next ranking step.

4. Each member will list the six best remaining teams, in no particular order. The four teams receiving the most votes will be added to the two teams held over to comprise the next ranking step.

5. Steps No. 3 and 4 will be repeated for four rounds until 16 teams have been ranked.

6. For the final three rounds of voting, the same process will take place during the listing step, but during the ranking step, only the three teams receiving the fewest points will become the next three ranked teams. In total, there will be seven rounds of voting; each round will consist of a “listing step” and a “ranking step.”

1. Any “recused” member can participate in Step No. 1 but cannot list the team for which he or she is recused. “Recused” teams (i.e., teams for whom a member has been recused) receiving at least two votes in Step No. 1 will remain under consideration.
2. A recused member can participate in Step No. 2 but cannot list the recused team. If a recused team is within one vote of advancing to the pool for the next ranking step, that team will be pooled with the team (or teams) receiving the fewest votes. If necessary, a “tie‐breaker” ranking vote will be conducted among those teams to identify the team or teams that would be added to the pool.
3. A recused member cannot participate in Step No. 3 if the recused team is in the pool.
4. Between each step, the committee members will conduct a thorough evaluation of the teams before conducting the vote.
5. After each round is completed, any group of three or more teams can be reconsidered if more than three members vote to do so. Step No. 3 would be repeated to determine if adjustments should be made.
6. After the first 16 teams are ranked, the number of teams ranked and held in Steps No. 3 and 4 will be decreased to three for the remaining three rounds.
7. After any round of voting, a team or teams may be added to the initial pool by an affirmative vote of three or more committee members.
8. All votes will be by secret ballot.
   
   
   
9. Following are the recusals for the 2025 season (full recusal unless otherwise specified):
   
   
   

   SCHOOL	SELECTION COMMITTEE MEMBER
   Appalachian State	Hunter Yurachek
   Arkansas	Hunter Yurachek Jeff Long (partial)
   Baylor	Mack Rhoades
   Miami (OH)	David Sayler
   Michigan State	Mark Dantonio
   Middle Tennessee State	Chris Massaro
   Nebraska	Troy Dannen
   Nevada	Chris Ault
   Notre Dame	Ivan Maisel (partial)
   Ole Miss	Wesley Walls (partial)
   Oregon State	Mike Riley (partial)
   SMU	Hunter Yurachek (partial)
   Stanford	Ivan Maisel (partial)
   UCLA	Chris Ault (partial)
   Virginia	Carla Williams

CFP Selection Committee Protocol

CFP Selection Committee Protocol

collegefootballplayoff.com

CFP Selection Committee Voting Process

CFP Selection Committee Voting Process

collegefootballplayoff.com

 

[Bane]

I'm not some big time Pete B. defender as up until this week I hadn't really ever thought much about him. But, all of the people who just know he sucks and isn't doing enough, I mean honestly what would you have him do? We're not talking about running the local pop warner team, this is huge enterprise in which ND has to exist as an outsider in a complex web of massive TV networks and superconferences without a lot of allies. I want ND to leave the ACC and as emotionally gratifying as it would be to see him shit on Phillips and ESPN, etc. we can't leave the ACC until we have a plan in place.

Again, I'm not saying Pete is absolutely going to kill it in his response, I just don't ever see any actual alternatives offered that A) are realistic or B) we don't know he isn't already working on. We're not going to be privy to every machination that happens behind the scenes.

 

[thekid33]

This shit..

1. Each committee member will create a list of the 30 teams he or she believes to be the best in the country, in no particular order. Teams listed by three or more members will remain under consideration. At the conclusion of any round, other teams can be added to the group of teams under consideration by a vote of three or more members.

2. Each member will list the best six teams, in no particular order. The six teams receiving the most votes will comprise the pool for the first ranking step. This is known as the “listing step.”

3. In the first ranking step, each member will rank those six teams, one through six, with one being the best. The best team in each member’s ranking will receive one point; second-best, two points, etc. The members’ rankings will be added together and the four teams receiving the fewest points will become the top four ranked teams. The two teams that were not ranked will be held over for the next ranking step.

4. Each member will list the six best remaining teams, in no particular order. The four teams receiving the most votes will be added to the two teams held over to comprise the next ranking step.

5. Steps No. 3 and 4 will be repeated for four rounds until 16 teams have been ranked.

6. For the final three rounds of voting, the same process will take place during the listing step, but during the ranking step, only the three teams receiving the fewest points will become the next three ranked teams. In total, there will be seven rounds of voting; each round will consist of a “listing step” and a “ranking step.”

1. Any “recused” member can participate in Step No. 1 but cannot list the team for which he or she is recused. “Recused” teams (i.e., teams for whom a member has been recused) receiving at least two votes in Step No. 1 will remain under consideration.
2. A recused member can participate in Step No. 2 but cannot list the recused team. If a recused team is within one vote of advancing to the pool for the next ranking step, that team will be pooled with the team (or teams) receiving the fewest votes. If necessary, a “tie‐breaker” ranking vote will be conducted among those teams to identify the team or teams that would be added to the pool.
3. A recused member cannot participate in Step No. 3 if the recused team is in the pool.
4. Between each step, the committee members will conduct a thorough evaluation of the teams before conducting the vote.
5. After each round is completed, any group of three or more teams can be reconsidered if more than three members vote to do so. Step No. 3 would be repeated to determine if adjustments should be made.
6. After the first 16 teams are ranked, the number of teams ranked and held in Steps No. 3 and 4 will be decreased to three for the remaining three rounds.
7. After any round of voting, a team or teams may be added to the initial pool by an affirmative vote of three or more committee members.
8. All votes will be by secret ballot.
   
   
   
9. Following are the recusals for the 2025 season (full recusal unless otherwise specified):
   
   
   

   SCHOOL	SELECTION COMMITTEE MEMBER
   Appalachian State	Hunter Yurachek
   Arkansas	Hunter Yurachek Jeff Long (partial)
   Baylor	Mack Rhoades
   Miami (OH)	David Sayler
   Michigan State	Mark Dantonio
   Middle Tennessee State	Chris Massaro
   Nebraska	Troy Dannen
   Nevada	Chris Ault
   Notre Dame	Ivan Maisel (partial)
   Ole Miss	Wesley Walls (partial)
   Oregon State	Mike Riley (partial)
   SMU	Hunter Yurachek (partial)
   Stanford	Ivan Maisel (partial)
   UCLA	Chris Ault (partial)
   Virginia	Carla Williams

CFP Selection Committee Protocol

CFP Selection Committee Protocol

collegefootballplayoff.com

CFP Selection Committee Voting Process

CFP Selection Committee Voting Process

collegefootballplayoff.com

Should have to recuse yourself from any team in the conference you are connected to.

Well should just use computers. But, short of that...

 

[Huntr]

Arkansas AD literally stands to make millions of dollars for every SEC team that gets in. Ivan took of a tour of ND's campus. Guess which one recused themselves?

The UVA AD was on the committee, too

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

This shit..

1. Each committee member will create a list of the 30 teams he or she believes to be the best in the country, in no particular order. Teams listed by three or more members will remain under consideration. At the conclusion of any round, other teams can be added to the group of teams under consideration by a vote of three or more members.

2. Each member will list the best six teams, in no particular order. The six teams receiving the most votes will comprise the pool for the first ranking step. This is known as the “listing step.”

3. In the first ranking step, each member will rank those six teams, one through six, with one being the best. The best team in each member’s ranking will receive one point; second-best, two points, etc. The members’ rankings will be added together and the four teams receiving the fewest points will become the top four ranked teams. The two teams that were not ranked will be held over for the next ranking step.

4. Each member will list the six best remaining teams, in no particular order. The four teams receiving the most votes will be added to the two teams held over to comprise the next ranking step.

5. Steps No. 3 and 4 will be repeated for four rounds until 16 teams have been ranked.

6. For the final three rounds of voting, the same process will take place during the listing step, but during the ranking step, only the three teams receiving the fewest points will become the next three ranked teams. In total, there will be seven rounds of voting; each round will consist of a “listing step” and a “ranking step.”

1. Any “recused” member can participate in Step No. 1 but cannot list the team for which he or she is recused. “Recused” teams (i.e., teams for whom a member has been recused) receiving at least two votes in Step No. 1 will remain under consideration.
2. A recused member can participate in Step No. 2 but cannot list the recused team. If a recused team is within one vote of advancing to the pool for the next ranking step, that team will be pooled with the team (or teams) receiving the fewest votes. If necessary, a “tie‐breaker” ranking vote will be conducted among those teams to identify the team or teams that would be added to the pool.
3. A recused member cannot participate in Step No. 3 if the recused team is in the pool.
4. Between each step, the committee members will conduct a thorough evaluation of the teams before conducting the vote.
5. After each round is completed, any group of three or more teams can be reconsidered if more than three members vote to do so. Step No. 3 would be repeated to determine if adjustments should be made.
6. After the first 16 teams are ranked, the number of teams ranked and held in Steps No. 3 and 4 will be decreased to three for the remaining three rounds.
7. After any round of voting, a team or teams may be added to the initial pool by an affirmative vote of three or more committee members.
8. All votes will be by secret ballot.
   
   
   
9. Following are the recusals for the 2025 season (full recusal unless otherwise specified):
   
   
   

   SCHOOL	SELECTION COMMITTEE MEMBER
   Appalachian State	Hunter Yurachek
   Arkansas	Hunter Yurachek Jeff Long (partial)
   Baylor	Mack Rhoades
   Miami (OH)	David Sayler
   Michigan State	Mark Dantonio
   Middle Tennessee State	Chris Massaro
   Nebraska	Troy Dannen
   Nevada	Chris Ault
   Notre Dame	Ivan Maisel (partial)
   Ole Miss	Wesley Walls (partial)
   Oregon State	Mike Riley (partial)
   SMU	Hunter Yurachek (partial)
   Stanford	Ivan Maisel (partial)
   UCLA	Chris Ault (partial)
   Virginia	Carla Williams

CFP Selection Committee Protocol

CFP Selection Committee Protocol

collegefootballplayoff.com

CFP Selection Committee Voting Process

CFP Selection Committee Voting Process

collegefootballplayoff.com

Oh yes, this is MUCH better than just going by Sagarin…. 🙄

 

[TNUtoNotreDame]

There is a war ongoing

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/25323447-cfb-ads-reportedly-threatening-stop-scheduling-notre-dame-amid-cfp-rule-change

Not that I trust br.

I think ND IS over the target

 

[BleedBlueGold]

We all deserve this. Anyone who sat back and allowed the committee to be formed with massive conflicts of interest, assuming they’d all remain neutral, has just been bent over. Thank you sir may I have another.

The hell are we even doing here? Computers only! No more fucking ADs or affiliated human ranking systems. Seriously.

 

[jprue24]

We all deserve this. Anyone who sat back and allowed the committee to be formed with massive conflicts of interest, assuming they’d all remain neutral, has just been bent over. Thank you sir may I have another.

The hell are we even doing here? Computers only! No more fucking ADs or affiliated human ranking systems. Seriously.

Here, check out the committee member's bios

2025-26 Selection Committee Roster - College Football Playoff

The official 2025-26 Selection Committee Roster for the College Football Playoff

collegefootballplayoff.com

 

[stlnd01]

This shit..

1. Each committee member will create a list of the 30 teams he or she believes to be the best in the country, in no particular order. Teams listed by three or more members will remain under consideration. At the conclusion of any round, other teams can be added to the group of teams under consideration by a vote of three or more members.

2. Each member will list the best six teams, in no particular order. The six teams receiving the most votes will comprise the pool for the first ranking step. This is known as the “listing step.”

3. In the first ranking step, each member will rank those six teams, one through six, with one being the best. The best team in each member’s ranking will receive one point; second-best, two points, etc. The members’ rankings will be added together and the four teams receiving the fewest points will become the top four ranked teams. The two teams that were not ranked will be held over for the next ranking step.

4. Each member will list the six best remaining teams, in no particular order. The four teams receiving the most votes will be added to the two teams held over to comprise the next ranking step.

5. Steps No. 3 and 4 will be repeated for four rounds until 16 teams have been ranked.

6. For the final three rounds of voting, the same process will take place during the listing step, but during the ranking step, only the three teams receiving the fewest points will become the next three ranked teams. In total, there will be seven rounds of voting; each round will consist of a “listing step” and a “ranking step.”

1. Any “recused” member can participate in Step No. 1 but cannot list the team for which he or she is recused. “Recused” teams (i.e., teams for whom a member has been recused) receiving at least two votes in Step No. 1 will remain under consideration.
2. A recused member can participate in Step No. 2 but cannot list the recused team. If a recused team is within one vote of advancing to the pool for the next ranking step, that team will be pooled with the team (or teams) receiving the fewest votes. If necessary, a “tie‐breaker” ranking vote will be conducted among those teams to identify the team or teams that would be added to the pool.
3. A recused member cannot participate in Step No. 3 if the recused team is in the pool.
4. Between each step, the committee members will conduct a thorough evaluation of the teams before conducting the vote.
5. After each round is completed, any group of three or more teams can be reconsidered if more than three members vote to do so. Step No. 3 would be repeated to determine if adjustments should be made.
6. After the first 16 teams are ranked, the number of teams ranked and held in Steps No. 3 and 4 will be decreased to three for the remaining three rounds.
7. After any round of voting, a team or teams may be added to the initial pool by an affirmative vote of three or more committee members.
8. All votes will be by secret ballot.
   
   
   
9. Following are the recusals for the 2025 season (full recusal unless otherwise specified):
   
   
   

   SCHOOL	SELECTION COMMITTEE MEMBER
   Appalachian State	Hunter Yurachek
   Arkansas	Hunter Yurachek Jeff Long (partial)
   Baylor	Mack Rhoades
   Miami (OH)	David Sayler
   Michigan State	Mark Dantonio
   Middle Tennessee State	Chris Massaro
   Nebraska	Troy Dannen
   Nevada	Chris Ault
   Notre Dame	Ivan Maisel (partial)
   Ole Miss	Wesley Walls (partial)
   Oregon State	Mike Riley (partial)
   SMU	Hunter Yurachek (partial)
   Stanford	Ivan Maisel (partial)
   UCLA	Chris Ault (partial)
   Virginia	Carla Williams

CFP Selection Committee Protocol

CFP Selection Committee Protocol

collegefootballplayoff.com

CFP Selection Committee Voting Process

CFP Selection Committee Voting Process

collegefootballplayoff.com

This is bonkers. The only relevant recusals here are:

The AD of UVA, but only for UVA not other ACC teams that UVA would share playoff revenue with.
An Ole Miss alum, but only for Ole Miss, not for other SEC teams that Ole Miss would share playoff revenue with.
The Arkansas athletic director and CFP chair who has to recuse for his program, also SMU where apparently his son works in the athletic department, and Appalachian State for some reason, but not for any of the other SEC teams with which his weak-ass team would share big money if they make the CFP.
And a former ESPN reporter who wrote a book about a Notre Dame coach from like 80 years ago.
Makes sense.

 

[IrishinSyria]

I'm not some big time Pete B. defender as up until this week I hadn't really ever thought much about him. But, all of the people who just know he sucks and isn't doing enough, I mean honestly what would you have him do? We're not talking about running the local pop warner team, this is huge enterprise in which ND has to exist as an outsider in a complex web of massive TV networks and superconferences without a lot of allies. I want ND to leave the ACC and as emotionally gratifying as it would be to see him shit on Phillips and ESPN, etc. we can't leave the ACC until we have a plan in place.

Again, I'm not saying Pete is absolutely going to kill it in his response, I just don't ever see any actual alternatives offered that A) are realistic or B) we don't know he isn't already working on. We're not going to be privy to every machination that happens behind the scenes.

I don’t think he sucks or anything, but I no longer understand the point of his media appearances.

His points about the process are fair but since he’s expressly disclaiming any anger about the substantive outcome of that process they do come across as kind of whiney. He has to be pushing for changes that help ND make the playoffs in the future, and not just changes that help us feel better when we get screwed by the SEC again because we saw it coming this time. I assume he’s doing that behind closed doors but to the public he’s saying that maybe the problem with these playoffs is that there weren’t enough SEC teams.

 

[RDU Irish]

How hard did the person laugh while they typed out a recusal for Arkansas?

 

[Huntr]

There is a war ongoing

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/25323447-cfb-ads-reportedly-threatening-stop-scheduling-notre-dame-amid-cfp-rule-change

Not that I trust br.

I think ND IS over the target

That is a gross mischaracterization of Wolken's speculation.

Stupid on stupid

 

[Irish8248]

There is a war ongoing

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/25323447-cfb-ads-reportedly-threatening-stop-scheduling-notre-dame-amid-cfp-rule-change

Not that I trust br.

I think ND IS over the target

Lol that would be a dumb idea ... Controlling a conference is hard let alone coordinating efforts of 119 +/- teams.

Even if you get the top teams, burying the SOS and matchups, it would be so obvious and blatant that I believe it would be devastating to CFB.

CFB is becoming too big too fast and something that drastic would likely implode the industry. This is more than just the CFB Playoffs. At some point the NCAA would likely step in and correct the situation or their institution would be in jeopardy of being destroyed.

To pony off that point, the NCAA would certainly have an interest in this as it would ripple to every sport, not just football, and that is where ND could have leverage. Not only if they have ppl of influence but competitive EQUAL college sports relies on self funding. I would imagine ND being part of that equation is not an insignificant point.

 

[jprue24]

This is bonkers. The only relevant recusals here are:

The AD of UVA, but only for UVA not other ACC teams that UVA would share playoff revenue with.
An Ole Miss alum, but only for Ole Miss, not for other SEC teams that Ole Miss would share playoff revenue with.
The Arkansas athletic director and CFP chair who has to recuse for his program, also SMU where apparently his son works in the athletic department, and Appalachian State for some reason, but not for any of the other SEC teams that his weak-ass team would bring in big money if they make the CFP.
And a former ESPN reporter who wrote a book about a Notre Dame coach from like 80 years ago.
Makes sense.

Honestly, I imagine it would be impossible to vote if every member recused from every conference they have a connection with. Jeff Long has worked for all 4 power conferences and was on the committee from 2014-2018, he would be leaving the room with every team.

That said, I'm still going to dump information,

The point persons will communicate with conference staff members on three information-gathering video conferences during the regular season: one before the first ranking, one before the fourth ranking and one the week before Selection Day. Outside of these video conferences, there will be no contact between the point persons and any conference staff member, or vice-versa, but the conference may relay information to the committee through the CFP staff.

Following are the point persons for the 2025 season:

CONFERENCE	COMMITTEE MEMBERS
American:	Mike Riley Ivan Maisel
Atlantic Coast:	Chris Ault Troy Dannen
Big 12:	Hunter Yurachek Mark Dantonio
Big Ten:	David Sayler Wesley Walls
Conference USA:	Wesley Walls Chris Ault
Mid-American:	Ivan Maisel Hunter Yurachek
Mountain West:	Chris Massaro
Pac-12:	Jeff Long Carla Williams
Southeastern:	Carla Williams Mike Riley
Sun Belt:	Troy Dannen
Independents:	Chris Massaro Jeff Long

 

[jprue24]

There is a war ongoing

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/25323447-cfb-ads-reportedly-threatening-stop-scheduling-notre-dame-amid-cfp-rule-change

Not that I trust br.

I think ND IS over the target

That's an aggregator, here is the article.

After Notre Dame's numerous tantrums, what's the school's endgame? A divorce from the ACC?

Long-simmering complaints on both sides of the Notre Dame-ACC relationship have started spill into the public discourse. Is this Irish meltdown tied to its future in the conference?

sports.yahoo.com

 

[IrishTusker]

The MOU is meaningless anyway, for reasons that have been discussed. The critical problem is the committee itself. A committee made up of people who have a financial interest in keeping ND out will always under-rank ND. I don't know if it is possible to switch to a BCS-style ranking system, or not. Joel Klatt said something on his podcast about how the conferences want a committee because they can lobby it. (Oh, great.) As a second-best option, expansion to 16 would help protect ND, I think. Because of the bias, a 16-team playoff is a 12-team playoff for ND.

 

[bumpdaddy]

That's an aggregator, here is the article.

After Notre Dame's numerous tantrums, what's the school's endgame? A divorce from the ACC?

Long-simmering complaints on both sides of the Notre Dame-ACC relationship have started spill into the public discourse. Is this Irish meltdown tied to its future in the conference?

sports.yahoo.com

This article should be saved just in case people forget what a total ass Wolken is and how much he absolutely hates ND.

 

[stlnd01]

That's an aggregator, here is the article.

After Notre Dame's numerous tantrums, what's the school's endgame? A divorce from the ACC?

Long-simmering complaints on both sides of the Notre Dame-ACC relationship have started spill into the public discourse. Is this Irish meltdown tied to its future in the conference?

sports.yahoo.com

The article itself is pretty reasonable. And Wolken has long been a writer who is smart and pretty sympathetic to Notre Dame. He's not a hater.*
I assume Bevacqua isn't just throwing a fit, has some larger strategy that involves establishing a legal grounds to dump the ACC deal, using that for leverage with the ACC, and if it doesn't create the desired result, going in in some form with one of the other conferences, probably the Big Ten.
Otherwise this is just burning a lot of bridges for something that most of the sport will have moved on from in a week. Which would be stupid, and I don't think our athletic director is stupid.

* OK I see he was the one who said things got a little spicy in the locker room after the championship game last year. That's a him problem. He has also in the past written lots of complimentary things about the way Notre Dame approaches the sport.

 

[bumpdaddy]

The article itself is pretty reasonable. And Wolken has long been a writer who is smart and pretty sympathetic to Notre Dame. He's not a hater.
I assume Bevacqua isn't just throwing a fit, has some larger strategy that involves establishing a legal grounds to dump the ACC deal, using that for leverage with the ACC, and if it doesn't create the desired result, going in in some form with one of the other conferences, probably the Big Ten.
Otherwise this is just burning a lot of bridges for something that most of the sport will have moved on from in a week. Which would be stupid, and I don't think our athletic director is stupid.

Do you think that a writer who wrote, " First, he [Bevaqua] has reinforced every negative Notre Dame stereotype for so many administrators across college athletics who had largely forgotten how little use they have for the Irish’s addiction to special treatment," is at all sympathetic to ND?

 

[jprue24]

* OK I see he was the one who said things got a little spicy in the locker room after the championship game last year. That's a him problem. He has also in the past written lots of complimentary things about the way Notre Dame approaches the sport.

Tweets are gone, but here is a refresher.

Reporter Rips Notre Dame’s Postgame Locker Room Behavior After Loss to Ohio State

He called it 'amateur hour.'

www.si.com

 

[FDNYIrish1]

On top of the 4 million per team, the host gets cash from the CFP for the home game and gets to keep all the cash made from the event. Nice hit for the host.

 

[hungryhippo]

Do you think that a writer who wrote, " First, he [Bevaqua] has reinforced every negative Notre Dame stereotype for so many administrators across college athletics who had largely forgotten how little use they have for the Irish’s addiction to special treatment," is at all sympathetic to ND?

Just read it too. I thought the shots were petty pile-on points, but the overall tenor came back to “ND has options and moves here, let’s assume Pete wasn’t being petulant and whiny for it’s own sake, curious to see how this plays out.”

Also, I was unaware of the ACC grant of rights, that if we join a conference now, it has to be the ACC. Did I read that correctly?

 

[jprue24]

Just read it too. I thought the shots were petty pile-on points, but the overall tenor came back to “ND has options and moves here, let’s assume Pete wasn’t being petulant and whiny for it’s own sake, curious to see how this plays out.”

Also, I was unaware of the ACC grant of rights, that if we join a conference now, it has to be the ACC. Did I read that correctly?

Yes, that is why ND has to pay to get out.

 

[IrishLax]

Just read it too. I thought the shots were petty pile-on points, but the overall tenor came back to “ND has options and moves here, let’s assume Pete wasn’t being petulant and whiny for it’s own sake, curious to see how this plays out.”

Also, I was unaware of the ACC grant of rights, that if we join a conference now, it has to be the ACC. Did I read that correctly?

Yup, that has always been the case since the original agreement was signed many years ago.

 

[stlnd01]

Just read it too. I thought the shots were petty pile-on points, but the overall tenor came back to “ND has options and moves here, let’s assume Pete wasn’t being petulant and whiny for it’s own sake, curious to see how this plays out.”

Also, I was unaware of the ACC grant of rights, that if we join a conference now, it has to be the ACC. Did I read that correctly?

That’s how I read it, and this whole situation, too.

We have moves, and Bevacqua is simply laying the groundwork to break our grant of rights deal, or extract concessions not to.

I think Wetzel gets that better than some who just think we’re throwing a fit. I assume Bevacqua is smarter than that.

 

[greyhammer90]

I think Wetzel gets that better than some who just think we’re throwing a fit. I assume Bevacqua is smarter than that.

He could say that without being a cunt

 

[IrishLax]

That’s how I read it, and this whole situation, too.

We have moves, and Bevacqua is simply laying the groundwork to break our grant of rights deal, or extract concessions not to.

I think Wetzel gets that better than some who just think we’re throwing a fit. I assume Bevacqua is smarter than that.

Yes, I think people miss the fact that if he didn't come out and contemporaneously say:
1) we think we were disparaged and "permanent" harm was done
2) our problem is with the conference's treatment not with being excluded [we think Miami was deserving]

We would have a much weaker case in the future claiming damages and using that as leverage to exit.

It's the same logic on why Jim Phillips released the statement he did the day after and why he is refusing to comment further. This is all lawyer-directed posturing. Also applies to why Phillips had the Big 12 AD get up there and call out Bev. Exhibit A for the defense is going to be "no actually you attacked us! See this quote from the Big 12 athletic director?"

 

[IrelandIrish]

This article should be saved just in case people forget what a total ass Wolken is and how much he absolutely hates ND.

why cant these people under stand that its Alabama that should have been snubbed. We got toasted and fried for to long. I dont like blackened fish it stinks

 

[IRISHDODGER]

This is bonkers. The only relevant recusals here are:

The AD of UVA, but only for UVA not other ACC teams that UVA would share playoff revenue with.
An Ole Miss alum, but only for Ole Miss, not for other SEC teams that Ole Miss would share playoff revenue with.
The Arkansas athletic director and CFP chair who has to recuse for his program, also SMU where apparently his son works in the athletic department, and Appalachian State for some reason, but not for any of the other SEC teams with which his weak-ass team would share big money if they make the CFP.
And a former ESPN reporter who wrote a book about a Notre Dame coach from like 80 years ago.
Makes sense.

Did they completely overlook that before Mike Riley was HC at Oregon State & Nebraska that he played at Alabama? Why no recusal for his alma mater?

 

[IrelandIrish]

Ivan was on the committee. I agrre with Pete here