In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 760
Online now 992 Record: 6507 (2/14/2012)
The place for Irish fans to engage in hardcore discussion about Notre Dame athletics
Talk with Irish fans from around the globe about college football's most storied program
The spot for anything on your mind outside of Notre Dame athletics
The place for Notre Dame fans to trade and exchange tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Since before man first wrote words on parchment, the goal of an
ND team each year is to win a national championship and nothing
about the BCS or a four-team playoff changes that (other than our
recent inability to be seriously considered a contender).
However, in the past,ND has produced teams that are just
outside the national championship picture, say ND at 10-2 or 9-3.
I would surmise that in a four-team playoff, ND with those records
would not be in the playoffs. However, such an ND team still would
be pretty attractive for a marquee bowl match-up.
However, under ND's current, and in my opinion, disastrous
bowl arrangement with the Big East, the likelihood of a marquee
bowl match-up (e.g. a "traditional January 1 bowl")
for a 10-2, 9-3 ND is practically non-existent.
In this era of conference re-alignment, conference jockeying for
members and TV rights, conference maneuvering to preserve their
access to the most attractive bowl scenarios, etc.is ND doing anything
pro-actively to place ourselves in an enviable position come bowl time
in those years we are shut out from the playoffs? It seems we are being
very passive--i.e measuring every change and every announcement from
the sole and very narrow perspective of whether the change
seriously jeopardizes our independence. I suggest there is
more than just reacting to the changes being made by the
conferences from the vantage point of their effect
upon our independence.
I would argue it's Swarbrick's job to see that ND is not given
the short-shrift in the post-season but rather, to put out
feelers to as many of the marquee bowls as possible to
see where ND as an independent can once again have
a meaningful choice when it comes to go bowling.
I hope and trust Jack is doing this. But, I have heard no
discussions along these lines and Jack's comment today
that the SEC-Big12 bowl arrangement "doesn't effect us short-
term" and that "we were kept informed" is hardly reassuring.
What, for example, about long-term? And, it begs the
question--what is ND doing to enhance our post-season
Disclaimer: this thread assumes that ND remains an
independent; if ND joins a conference, the conference
will already have its own arrangements.
If you mean this year or next year a 10-2 would probably merit an at large to a BCS bowl. 9-3 would probably get them to something along the lines of the Capitol One bowl or whatever bowl couldn't meet it's conference obligations. Someone somewhere will make room for a 10-2 or 9-3 ND team, and hopefully it's not the Hawaii or Champs bowl again.
5 Time POTW--Gringo Mafia Director of Guerrilla Warfare
I think we can only do champs every 4 years or something like that. It's a good question overall because we're kinda screwed on the bowl front.
Yeah. The more I think about it the more confusing it is. Surely someone would give us the nod though.
I am concerned simply because it appears that our approach has
been that of "watchful waiting" i.e. looking around the varied and
off-changing college landscape to assure ourselves that, in all
the hullabaloo, we are not "hurt." I simply would like to see us
recognize that since things are changing, we should make sure
we come out better than when it all started. It's like walking up
a down escalator--if you simply stand still, you will wind up in
a worse position than you were when you began.
And, like it or not, the post-season discussion is when things really
start to heat up and coverage of college football intensifies. If
we are relegated each year to a minor bowl unless we are in the
top four, it will psychologically be a downer.
My luck w/the Irish 20-6...GO IRISH!!!
Obviously, kmurr and simm, I agree. Here is a scenario in 2014:
The top four teams are Wisconsin, Florida State, Oregon and Alabama. Oregon and
Alabama square off in the Fiesta Bowl while Wisconsin and Florida State are in the
Orange Bowl. The Rose Bowl is bound to take Big 10 conference runner-up Michigan
and PAC-12 runner-up USC. The Sugar Bowl takes SEC runner-up LSU and Big 12
champion Oklahoma. Fifth-ranked Notre Dame, with a gaudy 11-1 record, goes where?
Well, assuming we don't act pro-actively now and have allowed the conferences to
corner the market on the most attractive bowls, fifth-ranked ND goes to a December
23rd bowl, paying out $750,000 and only shown on ESPN2.
I think this is a problem and I believe Swarbrick has to have enough faith in the
future of the program (i. e. that ND will in fact go 11-1 in our lifetime) to address the
issue. Point of fact: it was handled very poorly last time; let's not repeat the
An 11-1 ND team gets a BCS bowl over any LSU, Michigan, or other major conference runner-up. Those bowl sponsors salivate over a competitive Irish team that is BCS eligible, and they have the option to select ND over a conference 2nd place team.
With the schedule ND plays every year an 11-1 irish team might be in the hunt for the Title game
Remember that beginning in 2014, the BCS is done with the bowls. The Big-10, PAC-12 are angling to make sure that the Rose Bowl will be contractually bound to take conference runners-up in the event the champion is selected to the Final Four. Similarly, the SEC-Big 12 are angling for the same thing with respect to the host bowl for their championship game(most likely the Sugar Bowl). The issue is not about salivating but whether, in the new post-BCS era, the bowls still will have the option of taking ND over a conference runner-up. My point is--given the increased power of the conferences, ND can not afford to maintain a passive approach but must become pro-active. Maybe Jack is taking care of it--he certainly should be aware of the problem and is undoubtedly attuned to what is going on. However, our recent experience with our bowl choices as the result of our BE tie-in does not breed confidence. Secondly, while I have heard Jack talk about making sure that ND's path to the Final Four remains open, he has not discussed ND's place in the overall post-season, bowl picture and I am simply wondering if the issue is being addressed.
Not necessarily. To some extent it depends how the selections to the Final Four are made. If the coaches poll has any significant influence, ND is at a considerable disadvantage, especially if Spurrier has a vote. And, suppose ND is 11-0,
ranked third and loses the last game of the season. Voters tend to punish teams losing late. In short, an 11-1 ND team might be in the final four; it might not be and we should have some means to address it.
I agree it needs to be addressed but until they know how the final four will be selected, there's really no course of action Swarbick can pursue until the final pieces are set in place. He should absolutely be testing the waters at this point though.
Until Jack shows me otherwise ... I am beyond satisfied with his negotiating abilities. His forte is behind the door discussions. He does not give the press a whiff. And he produces results. We may think Swarbrick is not being proactive. I imagine he is getting it done out of view. To me - Jack's style is the best possible.
Keeper of the Count to Resurrection II: the Kelly Era begins - -
POTW: June 2010 & August 2011 - -
member since 2004
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports