• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

How would you prefer the Big 10 handle a Notre Dame application?

How should the Big 10 handle a Notre Dame membership application?


  • Total voters
    69

mross34

Rock, Flag, and Eagle
The below post got me thinking:

ORD_Buckeye;1713148; said:
The Sparty President said yesterday that any school needs to "apply" for admission. Now, I'm sure those schools (like a Bush "applying to Yale) will already know they're accepted. But for technical reasons, I believe the first public move needs to be made by the invitees.

What if the Big 10 got Texas, aTm, Nebraska, Missouri, and Rutgers (or another one of the East Coast schools) to apply while informing these 5 schools they would be the 5 schools entering the Big 10. Then, the Big 10 got Notre Dame to apply on the idea that it would be them UT, aTm, Nebraska, and Missouri.

The 6 applications go public. The Big 10 then selects Rutgers over Notre Dame citing Rutgers membership in the AAU and stronger academic research.

Would you rather have Notre Dame publicly humiliated or benefit from the added money they would bring to the conference?
 
Humiliated. The BCS is going away in a few years, and I would love to see those pricks get locked out. Want to be independent? Great. Just remember that this means no more national championships, no more money, and no more relevance (not as if they've mattered for years anyway...).
 
Upvote 0
TheIronColonel;1713170; said:
Humiliated. The BCS is going away in a few years, and I would love to see those pricks get locked out. Want to be independent? Great. Just remember that this means no more national championships, no more money, and no more relevance (not as if they've mattered for years anyway...).

Interestingly, enough some domer was saying that ND would use anti-trust law to force their way into any playoff arising from the formation of the superconferences. Rejecting them would play right into this. However, were they to be offered admission and they declined it, I think their whole anti-trust suit goes straight into the toilet.

My guess is that they'll present themselves as the champion of the little guy and piggy back their self-serving b.s. onto the mid-majors anti-trust lawsuit.
 
Upvote 0
I think they have a weak argument there, namely because they're a private nonsecular institution. They don't have public funding to use as a bludgeon in an antitrust suit. Could they piggy-back on someone else's work? Sure, they've been doing it for years, and it might work here.
 
Upvote 0
TheIronColonel;1713176; said:
I think they have a weak argument there, namely because they're a private nonsecular institution. They don't have public funding to use as a bludgeon in an antitrust suit. Could they piggy-back on someone else's work? Sure, they've been doing it for years, and it might work here.

I disagree. Anti trust is a court ruling. Domers pay taxes too. As a member of the NCAA they have every right. That said, i think they will be forced to give up their independence do to the economics. Network revenue is on the decline. Cable is on the rise.
 
Upvote 0
TheIronColonel;1713176; said:
I think they have a weak argument there, namely because they're a private nonsecular institution. They don't have public funding to use as a bludgeon in an antitrust suit. Could they piggy-back on someone else's work? Sure, they've been doing it for years, and it might work here.

What does public funding have to do with an antitrust suit?
 
Upvote 0
I'm pointing out that it's easier to get Utah's congressional delegation all up in arms (which, admittedly, has little to do with an anti-trust suit other than window dressing) because they're a public institution than it is to have someone go to bat for ND. Maybe if this were 1975 and ND weren't decades removed from doing anything other than repeatedly humiliating themselves in public, I would think otherwise.
 
Upvote 0
TheIronColonel;1713261; said:
I'm pointing out that it's easier to get Utah's congressional delegation all up in arms (which, admittedly, has little to do with an anti-trust suit other than window dressing) because they're a public institution than it is to have someone go to bat for ND. Maybe if this were 1975 and ND weren't decades removed from doing anything other than repeatedly humiliating themselves in public, I would think otherwise.

OK. I understand what you're getting at.For any avenues pursued through Congress, manipulating the mid-major public schools would make the most sense. For any actual anti-trust lawsuit, it wouldn't matter.
 
Upvote 0
Apache;1713569; said:
Take Notre Dame, Nebraska, West Virginia and Texas.

Delete Northwestern, Indiana and Minnesota.

Nobody is getting deleted here. After all the serious academic p.r. that the conference has received over this expansion, do you seriously think they would replace Northwestern with frickin' WVU?
 
Upvote 0
woofermazing;1713597; said:
Who cares if they sue for playoff entry. They're going out in the first round anyways, if they make it in that is.

The principle of the thing. If ND doesn't want to join up into the superconference structure, then they have ZERO right to any of the benefits. That, however, is why I think--from a legal perspective--it's important that the decision to not join is theirs. If they stubbornly stay out, thinking college football is nothing without them, I want them to whither into irrelevance. The Ivy League, University of Chicago...hell, Fordham and the Carlisle Indian School were all college football powerhouses at one time. College football has survived just fine without them, as it will without that smug little Catholic boarding school in South Bend.
 
Upvote 0
fileit.gif


:slappy:
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top