- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Notre Dame to the ACC as a full member.. but NOT in Football
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:27 pm to VerlanderBEAST
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:27 pm to VerlanderBEAST
quote:
This is an absolutely terrible move ND IMO.
quote:
VerlanderBEAST
Well if you say its bad, then we all know its good. dumbass.
1
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:32 pm to jcole4lsu
What I have yet to see is how or why this is bad for the ACC or ND. Really just a lot of angry big 10/12 fans bc ND didnt join there conference.
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:39 pm to hiltacular
quote:
What I have yet to see is how or why this is bad for the ACC or ND. Really just a lot of angry big 10/12 fans bc ND didnt join there conference.
yup.
Great move for both entities. Only criticism so far is either jumping the gun on scheduling issues and blind hatred that ND can get away with it.
and i hate ND
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:40 pm to hiltacular
quote:
What I have yet to see is how or why this is bad for the ACC or ND. Really just a lot of angry big 10/12 fans bc ND didnt join there conference.
They will either have no schedule flexibility or be forced to break off 60 year rivalries that are the trademark of ND football
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:43 pm to hiltacular
quote:
What I have yet to see is how or why this is bad for the ACC or ND. Really just a lot of angry big 10/12 fans bc ND didnt join there conference.
Didn't the big 10 say that they did not want ND in their conference unless their football team was willing to join their conference?
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:43 pm to VerlanderBEAST
USC, Navy, Stanford + 5 rotating ACC games is 8. Still leaves 3 to 4 games to be scheduled.
ND and Mich were already going to quit playing each other for a while shortly.
ND and Mich were already going to quit playing each other for a while shortly.
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:49 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:
USC, Navy, Stanford + 5 rotating ACC games is 8. Still leaves 3 to 4 games to be scheduled.
+ Purdue, + Mich. Do they play MSU every year?
I dont see what traditional games they are forced to give up.
ETA or Verlander are you saying that pitt and BC are the traditional teams?
This post was edited on 9/12/12 at 3:50 pm
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:50 pm to c on z
quote:
Didn't the big 10 say that they did not want ND in their conference unless their football team was willing to join their conference?
Every conference wants ND. What people spew on internet message boards is a different story.
ETA You know the hot girl thinks you are ugly and doesnt want to be with you so you come out and say shes ugly and you dont like her. It's all a bunch of BS.
This post was edited on 9/12/12 at 3:52 pm
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:52 pm to hiltacular
Purdue. MSU. Michigan are the teams he is talking about.
ND will probably still play each, but it will not on a yearly basis (it will likely be a rotation.)
And honestly, I am glad. Playing the same frickin teams every season is mundane.
ND will probably still play each, but it will not on a yearly basis (it will likely be a rotation.)
And honestly, I am glad. Playing the same frickin teams every season is mundane.
This post was edited on 9/12/12 at 3:53 pm
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:53 pm to hiltacular
USC
Navy
MSU
Purdue
Are all 60+ year rivals I just can't imagine them breaking any of those. Assuming they are willing to break it off with Michigan and Stanford, thats still 9 games set in stone they have no schedule flexibility.
Navy
MSU
Purdue
Are all 60+ year rivals I just can't imagine them breaking any of those. Assuming they are willing to break it off with Michigan and Stanford, thats still 9 games set in stone they have no schedule flexibility.
This post was edited on 9/12/12 at 3:55 pm
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:53 pm to rocket31
quote:
And honestly, I am glad. Playing the same frickin teams every season is mundane.
On/off years will only make the excitement of playing them stronger on those years when they do play.
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:53 pm to VerlanderBEAST
quote:
They will either have no schedule flexibility or be forced to break off 60 year rivalries that are the trademark of ND football
I think that was the point. They wanted the stability of a conference w/o being in a conference.
As the AD said...this year is the last of our ridiculous schedules...and they said it was getting more difficult to find games with everyone else in the country tied into their conferences with 8-9 games filled on those schedules...and the rest wanting to be filled by rent-a-wins.
This is win-win for ND. They have a yearly base of 5 games...plus Navy, USC, Stanford...and then have the flexibility to fill the remainder...a LOT easier to fill 3-4 spots than 9 spots.
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:55 pm to VerlanderBEAST
quote:
Are all 60+ year rivals I just can't imagine them breaking any of those
UT and A&M quit playing after a gagillion years, everything is possible.
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:55 pm to hiltacular
quote:
On/off years will only make the excitement of playing them stronger on those years when they do play.
Indeed, I get to watch only 12 games a year...and one of those is always Purdue; no offense to Purdue fans, but lets change it up a tad.
This post was edited on 9/12/12 at 3:56 pm
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:55 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
This is win-win for ND. They have a yearly base of 5 games...plus Navy, USC, Stanford...and then have the flexibility to fill the remainder...a LOT easier to fill 3-4 spots than 9 spots.
agree 100%
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:56 pm to VerlanderBEAST
I thought there were a few years in there when ND was off the schedule when ND played OSU and Washington. I could be wrong. As a Mich. fan, it would suck because Brandon has unabashedly said he is loading up on home cupcakes in the nonconference for cash and because the conference got tougher with Nebraska and the championship game.
This post was edited on 9/12/12 at 4:00 pm
Posted on 9/12/12 at 3:56 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
As the AD said...this year is the last of our ridiculous schedules...and they said it was getting more difficult to find games with everyone else in the country tied into their conferences with 8-9 games filled on those schedules...and the rest wanting to be filled by rent-a-wins.
Exactly. ND realized that with expansion, teams from the Pac/SEC frankly were not going to play 8 or 9 in-conference games and then play notre dame on top of it.
Posted on 9/12/12 at 4:02 pm to hiltacular
A very good summary posted on another message board:
I think it is a great deal for the ACC:
What do ACC schools give up:
- Some scheduling flexibility OOC 2 out of every 6 years, but in return are guaranteed a marque match-up
- Schools can get jumped in non-BCS Bowls by ND. This rule applies to all teams all ready anyway. In return the ACC has a chance to land better bowl-ties.
- A higher buy-out that applies to all ACC schools and ND.
What do they get in return:
- 2-3 games a year to leverage for more money from TV Contract
- A marquee brand that will bring exposure to the league
- Strong Basketball and Olympic Sports that will bolster the league in those areas
- The ability to be the leader to land ND if ND does decide to join a conference in the future
- It further weakens the Big East who competes directly with the ACC in some markets
What is unaffected by the deal:
- The Orange Bowl tie-in
I think it is a great deal for the ACC:
What do ACC schools give up:
- Some scheduling flexibility OOC 2 out of every 6 years, but in return are guaranteed a marque match-up
- Schools can get jumped in non-BCS Bowls by ND. This rule applies to all teams all ready anyway. In return the ACC has a chance to land better bowl-ties.
- A higher buy-out that applies to all ACC schools and ND.
What do they get in return:
- 2-3 games a year to leverage for more money from TV Contract
- A marquee brand that will bring exposure to the league
- Strong Basketball and Olympic Sports that will bolster the league in those areas
- The ability to be the leader to land ND if ND does decide to join a conference in the future
- It further weakens the Big East who competes directly with the ACC in some markets
What is unaffected by the deal:
- The Orange Bowl tie-in
Posted on 9/12/12 at 4:02 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:
UT and A&M quit playing after a gagillion years, everything is possible.
OU Nebraska, Syracuse Georgetown, Pitt WVU, etc etc conference realignment is killing tradition.
Posted on 9/12/12 at 4:03 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
As a Mich. fan, it would suck because Brandon has unabashedly said he is loading up on home cupcakes in the nonconference for cash and because the conference got tougher with Nebraska and the championship game
Do you like that? Never really understood the appeal of a 9 conference game schedule. Wouldnt you rather play a ACC or a Pac12 team than the same damn team every year?
Of course, keep your traditional rivals (MSU, OSU) but Indiana? Purdue? NW? Geez.
Page 9 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News