So the SEC wants ND to join a conference

[Husky25]

Who are the Ole Miss Rebels? Is that a CFL team? From what state do they come? They can't be known nationally as a nickname can they? That is so small time. I'll bet they suck.

#BleedMagenta

 

[Sea Goat]

Screwed up the transmission - my response should be above.

 

[larryredbull]

Screwed up the transmission - my response should be above.

I don't think anyone is arguing about the SEC being above everyone else. You would be hard pressed to find a CFB statistic that the SEC isn't leading over the last 10 years.
The argument was around the Big Ten being on the same level. One of the only ways to really compare this is bowl games. Last year The Big 10 was 2-5, The SEC 6-3, the Big 12 4-5, and the ACC 4-2.

 

[woomba]

The match ups differ by conference so the bowl win-loss records by itself isn't a great metric.

If you want to push bowl records, here's a fun one:


BCS Wins by Conference, ordered by total appearances

Big Ten : 12-14
SEC : 17-8
Pac : 13-7
Big 12 : 9-11
ACC : 3-13
Big East : 8-7
MWC : 3-1

It's a good thing the ACC was able to win a BCS bowl against a MAC team, otherwise they would've ranked 7th in BCS wins after the Mountain West.

 

[RS9999X]

Here's the thing that Spurrier doesn't get apparently. Notre Dame is a national brand. Florida, Texas, Alabama and all the rest just are not national brands on the same level.s.

Spurrier gets it. He doesn't like it that's all. NBC is still willing to pay ND's separate contract. That's the beef.

 

[larryredbull]

The match ups differ by conference so the bowl win-loss records by itself isn't a great metric.

If you want to push bowl records, here's a fun one:


BCS Wins by Conference, ordered by total appearances

Big Ten : 12-14
SEC : 17-8
Pac : 13-7
Big 12 : 9-11
ACC : 3-13
Big East : 8-7
MWC : 3-1

It's a good thing the ACC was able to win a BCS bowl against a MAC team, otherwise they would've ranked 7th in BCS wins after the Mountain West.

Going forward I think you will see a different set of results. For one, all of those Big East teams that won are now in other conferences (some in the ACC). Its very clear that over the past 10 years the supposed leaders of the ACC (Clemson, Fla State Miami, VA Tech) havent lived up to the hype for a variety of reasons (FSU hung on to Bobby too long, Miami bad coaching and self imposed sanctions, Clemson bad coaching). It would be unwise to bet that that will happen in the next 10 years as well.

 

[woomba]

Going forward I think you will see a different set of results. For one, all of those Big East teams that won are now in other conferences (some in the ACC). Its very clear that over the past 10 years the supposed leaders of the ACC (Clemson, Fla State Miami, VA Tech) havent lived up to the hype for a variety of reasons (FSU hung on to Bobby too long, Miami bad coaching and self imposed sanctions, Clemson bad coaching). It would be unwise to bet that that will happen in the next 10 years as well.

Perhaps - then again, you can make similar arguments about any other conference.

What I do know is that neither Syracuse nor Pitt do much to strengthen the conference in FB. Louisville is still a question mark for long term success. Those 3 schools combined have gone 9-10 in bowls this past decade, so my expectation is more of the same unless FSU & Miami suddenly start dominating again.

 

[freescooter]

Spurrier gets it. He doesn't like it that's all. NBC is still willing to pay ND's separate contract. That's the beef.

the "apparently" was meant to imply sarcasm. Obviously it did not...

 

[freescooter]

Perhaps - then again, you can make similar arguments about any other conference.

What I do know is that neither Syracuse nor Pitt do much to strengthen the conference in FB. Louisville is still a question mark for long term success. Those 3 schools combined have gone 9-10 in bowls this past decade, so my expectation is more of the same unless FSU & Miami suddenly start dominating again.

I actually have a bit of a different view. I suspect that Louisville, Pitt and Syracuse will likely dominate the ACC, at least initially. After a few years they will probably fall to the level of their opponents, but in the early going they will do what BC, Virginia Tech and Miami, and for that matter Florida State all did when they came into the league. Because quite honestly, the ACC is just not that good a football league. As they would say of it in Texas, it's all hat no cattle. even their best team, Florida state regularly gets whooped up on by average programs. Virginia Tech was selected for a BCS bowl because the organizers wanted to insure that they had a team a very average Michigan team would beat. So I could very easily see even a shulb program like Pitt move into the ACC and be pretty successful, maybe even challenge for a conference title, at least a division title in the next year or so. If you look at the ACC experience of the earlier Big East teams, in 2004 Va Tech finished 1st, Miami 2nd. 2005 FSU beat Va Tech. 2006 Wake and GT played. 2007 Va Tech over BC. 2008 Va Tech over BC, 2009 GT title vacated. 2010 VaTech, 2011 Clemson beat VaTech, 2012 FSU over GT. so since the former big East teams joined they have had a team win or make the championship game almost every year. Only 3 years without a former big East team in the game. and in 2004 there was no title game but they finished 1-2. In their early years I even expect Syracuse and Pitt, the definitions of ordinary to challenge. Louisville will be the next VaTech in that league. A serious contender every year in the league, ordinary as can be out of it.

 

[TerryD]

TerryD - No one said that ND was scared of the B1G. ND could have joined if they wanted. I am glad they didn't. They don't fit in the B1G. While they are a very good school they have a different mission than the B1G schools.

The point some of us are making is the conferences are starting to line up against ND's independent status. ND has continually given up something to stay at the table. Once there is nothing left to give up, they will need to make a tough decision. They have 12 years on the CFP before they will have to give up something else.

Husky 25 did up thread. That is what I was responding to.

Seagoat, you are completely wrong on why ND is an independent. It has everything to do with tradition, history, its self view as the national, Catholic university, its alumni being spread out all over the country, not wanting to be "regionalized" for recruiting and exposure, etc...

Its alumni will revolt (just like they did in 1999) if ND considers full football conference affiliation, for the above reasons. The athletic department is not worried about some "conference grind".

But, you will believe whatever you believe. We just disagree.

 

[Pudge]

Two things ...

Temple is one of Pennsylvania's state-related universities, institutions that receive state funds but are independently operated. It is NOT Private. Perhaps people get confused when the University doesn't have STATE or a State in its name. It is a big (26th largest) STATE university with 38,000 enrolled. I don't know how we spin CR board notions ... but Conferences choose other schools, rather than UConn, because of Football tradition (SU, BC, Pitt ... and I see no guarantee of future production there, particularly after how easy we proved we can get to their level & that we can surpass (see Syracuse long term) or Market (Rutgers ... and I seee that as pyrrhic as well. They sold a good soap). I don't know where we are going ... but I think a solid Football path gets us to a P5.

Notre Dame guy Terry D? I just don't think spouting the ND record over the past 15 gets you much in predicting the next 15. I simply think the Power base has changed all around. ND? Still a very powerful brand and asset for TV. But ... so was Tiger. Things have changed. I believe we are going to a more fair 8 team Playoff. I believe that a P5 Playoff game will factor ... and some way for the unwashed non-P5 to get in. This, to me, leads to one thing ... ND has access only if they play in a ACC Championship setup. Sniff Sniff

 

[Husky25]

Husky 25 did up thread. That is what I was responding to.

Seagoat, you are completely wrong on why ND is an independent. It has everything to do with tradition, history, its self view as the national, Catholic university, its alumni being spread out all over the country, not wanting to be "regionalized" for recruiting and exposure, etc...

Its alumni will revolt (just like they did in 1999) if ND considers full football conference affiliation, for the above reasons. The athletic department is not worried about some "conference grind".

But, you will believe whatever you believe. We just disagree.

No I didn't. I said, "...the Big Ten provides, more and stiffer competition than the ACC. MSU (4-3), UM (2-5), OSU, PSU (1-1), and WISC. can all beat ND on a regular basis." Am I wrong? The only Big Ten team that ND has dominated is Purdue and they haven't played OSU or Wisconsin lately.

Being affiliated with the ACC instead of the Big Ten is a win-grabbing move, pure and simple. Notre Dame is 13-10 since 2006 vs. the Big Ten, which is not how Jesus wants it. A Big Ten affiliation makes more sense both geographically (Indiana, Purdue, and Illinois are all figurative stone throws away) and with current football Rivals (ND has played Purdue, UM, and MSU every year in the recent history with PSU garnering a couple games), especially for the non-revenue generating sports. But instead of continuing the quasi-affiliation with the Big Ten in football when the Big East disintegrated, ND jumped on to the next lowest host, the ACC.

Just like in 2014-16, Notre Dame will never play any 2 of Va Tech, Clemson, or FSU in a given season, and the other 4 games will be skewed toward the sub-par more than the halfway decent. They also get to play both "road" games vs. 'Cuse in East Rutherford, NJ. At the end of the day, Notre Dame is a very valuable parasite...If only because of the NBC exclusivity.

 

[Fairfield 1st]

its too hot for this

 

[Sea Goat]

Husky 25 did up thread. That is what I was responding to.

Seagoat, you are completely wrong on why ND is an independent. It has everything to do with tradition, history, its self view as the national, Catholic university, its alumni being spread out all over the country, not wanting to be "regionalized" for recruiting and exposure, etc...

Its alumni will revolt (just like they did in 1999) if ND considers full football conference affiliation, for the above reasons. The athletic department is not worried about some "conference grind".

But, you will believe whatever you believe. We just disagree.

TerryD

ND is a fine school. One of many fine schools, public and private. This thread sprung from a comment by Spurrier re: conference affiliation. The truth is ND will ebb and flow as a national brand depending on its football success. As an academic institution, it is not in any elite category. For instance, I would rate your part-time conference partner, Duke, as a significant notch ahead of ND. (No hissy fits - just IMO) There is no national rep by virtue of any of your Olympic sports. So that leaves football. Your national reputation, such as it is, must be football based. While I respect your feelings about ND, we can always disagree about its relative national prominence. Whatever its perceived importance, academically and athletically, football drives the bus. While football drives the bus, the SEC is now in the front row.

As I noted earlier, I don't think Spurrier went off the reservation by making his comments. He and many others in the SEC believe ND should no longer have "favored nations" status.
I believe this sentiment will grow among the football elite. Now the ND model works, not because of strident alumni, but because the numbers work for NBC. Will they continue to work? They will, if ND stays "football relevant" and it stays included in the national playoff picture. When either of these things change, ND is at risk of being diminished.

Good discussion, though - I hope you agree.

 

[woomba]

I actually have a bit of a different view. I suspect that Louisville, Pitt and Syracuse will likely dominate the ACC, at least initially. After a few years they will probably fall to the level of their opponents, but in the early going they will do what BC, Virginia Tech and Miami, and for that matter Florida State all did when they came into the league. Because quite honestly, the ACC is just not that good a football league. As they would say of it in Texas, it's all hat no cattle. even their best team, Florida state regularly gets whooped up on by average programs. Virginia Tech was selected for a BCS bowl because the organizers wanted to insure that they had a team a very average Michigan team would beat. So I could very easily see even a shulb program like Pitt move into the ACC and be pretty successful, maybe even challenge for a conference title, at least a division title in the next year or so. If you look at the ACC experience of the earlier Big East teams, in 2004 Va Tech finished 1st, Miami 2nd. 2005 FSU beat Va Tech. 2006 Wake and GT played. 2007 Va Tech over BC. 2008 Va Tech over BC, 2009 GT title vacated. 2010 VaTech, 2011 Clemson beat VaTech, 2012 FSU over GT. so since the former big East teams joined they have had a team win or make the championship game almost every year. Only 3 years without a former big East team in the game. and in 2004 there was no title game but they finished 1-2. In their early years I even expect Syracuse and Pitt, the definitions of ordinary to challenge. Louisville will be the next VaTech in that league. A serious contender every year in the league, ordinary as can be out of it.

Wow - I guess you're very bullish on the strength of those teams. No question in my mind that VT and Miami are very strong programs but I'm not convinced that Pitt/Syracuse are near that level to dominate in the ACC. I plug them in around the middle of the ACC going around 4-4 most years.

I fully expect the former BE teams + FSU to dominate over the remaining 6 charter teams (+GT) though.

 

[pj]

Louisville I can see. Pitt will be competitive. Syracuse? no way.

 

[BCINGYA]

Granted, this is only my opinion, but the Big Ten has quantity as well as quality over the ACC, especially at the top.

Elites (Ceiling = National Champs, Floor = Upper Middle Tier):
Michigan
Michigan State
Ohio State

Upper Middle Tier (Ceiling: Rose Bowl/NC, but to a much lesser chance than those above; Floor Lower Middle Tier)
Nebraska
Penn State
Wisconsin

Lower Middle Tier (Ceiling: Non-BCS NYD Bowl, Floor: Dregs)
Illinois
Iowa
Maryland
Minnesota
Northwestern
Rutgers

Dregs (Ceiling, pre Christmas bowl game Floor:_____)
Purdue
Indiana

The ACC looks like this to me:
Elites (Ceiling = National Champs, Floor = Upper Middle Tier):
Clemson
Florida State
Va. Tech

Upper Middle Tier (Ceiling: BCS, but to a much lesser chance than those above; Floor Lower Middle Tier)
Georgia Tech
Louisville

Lower Middle Tier (Ceiling: Non-BCS NYD Bowl, Floor: Dregs)
Miami
North Carolina
NC State
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
Virginia

Dregs (Ceiling: The No one gives a Bowl. Floor: No one cares either)
BC
Duke
Wake Forest

5 time national champ Miami placed so low....LOL ...they are ready to re emerge THIS YEAR, Duke Johnson RB is a special talent, the speed is there, last years team was full of freshman and sophomores. Talented young QB, excellent coaching and the recruiting by AL Golden has been top 10. THE U IS BACK. Placing B.C. in the basement is just being a hater, but I think you know that.

Seven years in the ACC 5 winning seasons 2 championship game appearances. list how many teams have MORE than two CG appearances....we all know V.T. has FSU has......so?........two losing seasons under a lame ass coach lol- really? ARe you going on current performance, if so how far back, or history/body of work over decades as a program? It might surprise you but B.C. ranks in the upper half of major college football programs for all time winning percentage. Google it. Those are the facts jack.

 

[BCINGYA]

5 time national champ Miami placed so low....LOL ...they are ready to re emerge THIS YEAR, Duke Johnson RB is a special talent, the speed is there, last years team was full of freshman and sophomores. Talented young QB, excellent coaching and the recruiting by AL Golden has been top 10. THE U IS BACK. Placing B.C. in the basement is just being a hater, but I think you know that.

Seven years in the ACC 5 winning seasons 2 championship game appearances. list how many teams have MORE than two CG appearances....we all know V.T. has FSU has......so?........two losing seasons under a lame ass coach lol- really? ARe you going on current performance, if so how far back, or history/body of work over decades as a program? It might surprise you but B.C. ranks in the upper half of major college football programs for all time winning percentage. Google it. Those are the facts jack.

Your entitled to your opinion but its def skewed and taken with a grain of salt. Strange how peoples perception sometimes gets clouded based more on emotional responses.

 

[NEforceUConn]

All this talk about ND and its perceived fb strength........ask any BYer and they will say one thing about ND, "ND can suck my b@lls!"

 

[Husky25]

Did you just tell yourself that you are entitled to your own opinion? Thanks. That saves me a lot of time and aggrevation.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[uconnell]

Your entitled to your opinion but its def skewed and taken with a grain of salt. Strange how peoples perception sometimes gets clouded based more on emotional responses.

BC a poster replying to himself, now that is original.

 

[NickyNewark]

Husky 25 did up thread. That is what I was responding to.

Seagoat, you are completely wrong on why ND is an independent. It has everything to do with tradition, history, its self view as the national, Catholic university, its alumni being spread out all over the country, not wanting to be "regionalized" for recruiting and exposure, etc...

Its alumni will revolt (just like they did in 1999) if ND considers full football conference affiliation, for the above reasons. The athletic department is not worried about some "conference grind".

But, you will believe whatever you believe. We just disagree.

@Terry,no one outside ND understands the "stubborn pride" or will ever believe it until they see it first hand!I know I was naive to the ND booster's power in comparison to what is generally experienced by the average fan and I'll be 62 this year!Beyond the common experience!!

 

[TerryD]

TerryD

ND is a fine school. One of many fine schools, public and private. This thread sprung from a comment by Spurrier re: conference affiliation. The truth is ND will ebb and flow as a national brand depending on its football success. As an academic institution, it is not in any elite category. For instance, I would rate your part-time conference partner, Duke, as a significant notch ahead of ND. (No hissy fits - just IMO) There is no national rep by virtue of any of your Olympic sports. So that leaves football. Your national reputation, such as it is, must be football based. While I respect your feelings about ND, we can always disagree about its relative national prominence. Whatever its perceived importance, academically and athletically, football drives the bus. While football drives the bus, the SEC is now in the front row.

As I noted earlier, I don't think Spurrier went off the reservation by making his comments. He and many others in the SEC believe ND should no longer have "favored nations" status.
I believe this sentiment will grow among the football elite. Now the ND model works, not because of strident alumni, but because the numbers work for NBC. Will they continue to work? They will, if ND stays "football relevant" and it stays included in the national playoff picture. When either of these things change, ND is at risk of being diminished.

Good discussion, though - I hope you agree.

Good discussion. I disagree with the undervaluing of the ND men and women's basketball programs.

I think that the men's basketball and baseball programs will struggle at first a bit in the ACC, but that the recruiting bonus of ACC affiliation will help improve those programs. We shall see about ND men's basketball in the ACC starting next year.

Nobody in America really cares about women's basketball, but as a UConn fan I would hope that you would acknowledge that ND's women's program is a bit more than "marginal" (which is how some poster in this thread characterized it.).

ND academics are pretty good. People disagree over the metrics used, but U.S. News has ND around #18 in the country. Its Mendoza School of Business is rated #1 in the country.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-20/notre-dames-mendoza-takes-no-dot-1-ranking-again

But, to your main point (football).

ND football was clearly down/mediocre from 1996-2010 when it hired two guys without previous college coaching experience (Davie, Weis) and a guy who didn't really coach or recruit and who nearly destroyed ND's and Washington's football programs (Willingham).

Brian Kelly had ND football go 12-1 last year. They have gone 24-6 in their last 30 games against pretty good competition (no FCS schools and games against teams like USC, Michigan, Michigan State, Oklahoma, Stanford, etc..).

I think that Kelly has ND heading back to where ND was under Ara Parseghian, Dan Devine and Lou Holtz.

If Kelly leaves, ND has learned finally that its next hire has to have extensive previous college head coaching experience. I don't think you will find guys like Gerry Faust or Charlie Weis roaming the ND sideline in the future.

Looking at ND's record under Davie, Willingham and Weis is simply not relevant towards predicting future ND results any more than looking at Alabama under Mike Shula, LSU under Gerry Dinardo or Oklahoma under John Blake.

That 24-6 record catches my eye. It is not a small sample size. Brian Kelly has taken two different schools (Cincy, ND) to 12-0 regular season records the past four years. He was 34-6 with the Bearcats. He is 28-11 (after a 4-5 start) at ND.

He took two schools (Grand Valley State, ND) to their national championship games. He has won big everywhere he has coached.

My point? ND has decided to be ND again. It has decided to swing the pendulum back. It happens regularly with ND, they de-emphasize and re-emphasize football in cycles. They fear at times that athletics overshadows academics and make "corrections" by forcing guys like Frank Leahy and Lou Holtz out.

Old timers will recall the "ND is dead" talk from 1954-64 until Ara was hired.

Bottom line: ND is entering another good/great era and will remain relevant in the playoff races despite what blowhards like Steve Spurrier think or like.

NBC just re-signed ND until 2025. ND's status will remain the same (football independent, NBC contracts for football and hockey, ACC member in 24 sports, hockey in the Hockey East, ACC scheduling/bowl alliance) for the foreseeable future.

I know that few, if any, agree with me here. That is ok.

 

[frankthetank]

We're getting somewhere now - the only entities that can force ND to join a conference are the true power conferences. The ACC is not in that group. I say if the SEC, the B1G and the PAC-12 all delivered the message to ND that it is put-up or shut-up conference-wise then they would join the ACC. The ACC probably needs ND more than the other way around at this point. Heck, ND could have joined the new BE for its Olympic sports and have a clean slate of football scheduling each year. Until the likes of the SEC say "no mas" to ND on participating in the playoff system w/o power conference affiliation, ND will play the ACC like a fiddle.

Here's where I agree with TerryD: the point is that the Big Ten (and Pac-12 and SEC) DO NOT want Notre Dame to join the ACC.

It's a college football version of Mutually Assured Destruction: everyone wants Notre Dame to join their own conference, but NOT someone else's conference. As a result, they'd all rather have Notre Dame stay independent than to take their national brand name and TV power to elevate a competing conference. Trust me: the Big Ten wants absolutely nothing to do with Notre Dame joining the ACC as a full-member and would greatly prefer the independence status quo in that regard if the Irish don't want to join the B1G.

That's why all of these power conference commissioners continue to let ND have full access to the adult table. They can't afford ND to join any conference that isn't their own conference. Coaches (who are irrelevant in college football business matters) can complain all they want, but Notre Dame is a money maker for the power system, so the people that actually matter (the money people) are more than willing to provide them concessions (whereas the ones that they truly despise are who they perceive to be the money takers AKA the Group of Five conferences).

 

[Sea Goat]

Good discussion. I disagree with the undervaluing of the ND men and women's basketball programs.

I think that the men's basketball and baseball programs will struggle at first a bit in the ACC, but that the recruiting bonus of ACC affiliation will help improve those programs. We shall see about ND men's basketball in the ACC starting next year.

Nobody in America really cares about women's basketball, but as a UConn fan I would hope that you would acknowledge that ND's women's program is a bit more than "marginal" (which is how some poster in this thread characterized it.).

ND academics are pretty good. People disagree over the metrics used, but U.S. News has ND around #18 in the country. Its Mendoza School of Business is rated #1 in the country.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-20/notre-dames-mendoza-takes-no-dot-1-ranking-again

But, to your main point (football).

ND football was clearly down/mediocre from 1996-2010 when it hired two guys without previous college coaching experience (Davie, Weis) and a guy who didn't really coach or recruit and who nearly destroyed ND's and Washington's football programs (Willingham).

Brian Kelly had ND football go 12-1 last year. They have gone 24-6 in their last 30 games against pretty good competition (no FCS schools and games against teams like USC, Michigan, Michigan State, Oklahoma, Stanford, etc..).

I think that Kelly has ND heading back to where ND was under Ara Parseghian, Dan Devine and Lou Holtz.

If Kelly leaves, ND has learned finally that its next hire has to have extensive previous college head coaching experience. I don't think you will find guys like Gerry Faust or Charlie Weis roaming the ND sideline in the future.

Looking at ND's record under Davie, Willingham and Weis is simply not relevant towards predicting future ND results any more than looking at Alabama under Mike Shula, LSU under Gerry Dinardo or Oklahoma under John Blake.

That 24-6 record catches my eye. It is not a small sample size. Brian Kelly has taken two different schools (Cincy, ND) to 12-0 regular season records the past four years. He was 34-6 with the Bearcats. He is 28-11 (after a 4-5 start) at ND.

He took two schools (Grand Valley State, ND) to their national championship games. He has won big everywhere he has coached.

My point? ND has decided to be ND again. It has decided to swing the pendulum back. It happens regularly with ND, they de-emphasize and re-emphasize football in cycles. They fear at times that athletics overshadows academics and make "corrections" by forcing guys like Frank Leahy and Lou Holtz out.

Old timers will recall the "ND is dead" talk from 1954-64 until Ara was hired.

Bottom line: ND is entering another good/great era and will remain relevant in the playoff races despite what blowhards like Steve Spurrier think or like.

NBC just re-signed ND until 2025. ND's status will remain the same (football independent, NBC contracts for football and hockey, ACC member in 24 sports, hockey in the Hockey East, ACC scheduling/bowl alliance) for the foreseeable future.

I know that few, if any, agree with me here. That is ok.

Back at you continuing the "good discussion" - I appreciate your point of view. BTW, Mendoza is probably your best grad school and it is very good, but I don't think a kid is passing up a Harvard MBA to go there. (IMO) (Speaking of Harvard, it must be nice to be in a conference [or league as they put it] where conference expansion or realignment is really off the table.)

Regarding your Olympic sports, your women's BB team is great and McGraw is Geno's equal in many respects. The problem for both programs is generating interest about them outside of Storrs or South Bend. BTW, I don't think women's BB makes money at UConn let alone any other D-1 school. I think Geno is great for the game and the University, but I don't get the $2mm/yr contract. That is pure heresy to many UConn faithful, but let's be real here. All recent CR has been driven by money. We're talking about football because football drives the money bus - period, end of story.

Re: ND, my major point is that the football elite - i.e. the SEC - doesn't want ND to have "favored nations" status in any conference. Now in reality, it only works in a conference like the ACC because I don't think any other conference would allow it. As I said, I always thought that the ACC needed ND more than ND needed it and Swofford knew it. Now let's get back to the reason why Spurrier said what he said. The SEC figures that it is not fair in a playoff system for a few stacked conferences to beat each others' brains in all fall, stagger to a 10-2 record and then be excluded from the playoffs by a team that doesn't endure the week to week rigors of a really tough schedule. I think that is it in a nutshell. Even within the ACC, I imagine there were rumblings about ND. I am sure that FSU, Clemson, VT, Miami, GT etc. all had misgivings about ND's special treatment, but Swofford convinced them it was necessary. It is odd; you have to admit. The ACC has become the first major conference to allow a team to opt out of an established conference sport. (Remember the old BE didn't have football for years and then never required members to field a team once it started.)

For Spurrier and the SEC, we'll see if they have the sway to compel a change in the way ND is treated. Ironically, many of ND part-time conference members in the ACC would like to see that also.