“For self-importance on the grandest of delusional scales, there is no entity in sports quite like Notre Dame football, winner of three games last season, routinely whacked like a piñata in recent bowl games and not a national championship to its name in 20 years, or since the Gipper was about to hand off the presidency of the United States to George H.W. Bush.”
I don’t really care that much, but this was just such a great lede. Luckily, I have no college football team allegiance to prevent me from just stirring the pot. Go Violets!
6 Comments until now
I assume everyone is waiting for my response.
Honestly, I don’t blame Rutgers for this. They have a much bigger syadium than BC or UConn and much more recent success, so they can afford to flex their muscles a bit.
That being said, if the Big East wants ND to commit to playing 3 BE teams each year, somebody is going to have to cave. Nd will not, nor should they. Despite their recent and prolonged struggles, they are still the brightest star in the sky of college football; they are what Tony Kornheiser calls, “The University of College Football in America.”
If Rutgers (or UConn or BC) won’t move their games to bigger venues, ND will just find another Tier III program who will.
Another perspective from NDNation, AFTER the author basically agreed that ND is wussing out here:
Having said that, the attitude Araton takes in the article is just as moronic as the 7-4-1 philosophy. It boils down to him criticizing Notre Dame for trying to leverage its prestige in order to gain terms more favorable to it. To try and brand ND as the only sinner in that congregation is a foolish enterprise. There’s a reason the New York Times charges $330 to deliver in my neighborhood while I get my village’s paper for free. I guess if Araton were running the organization, I’d have the Times on my doorstep every morning gratis, because, after all, it’s not fair for the big bully NYT to force people to pay more for its content. I’m sure the folks who write for the Idaho Statesman or the Bangor Daily News would queue up to get Araton’s salary — why should he use his degree or his skill to demand a higher rate? I realize borderline Communism coming from the New York Times is hardly man-bites-dog, but they should keep it out of the sports pages.
First of all, try to get your facts straight. You wrote: “They have a much bigger syadium [sic] than BC or UConn and much more recent success”. Rutgers Stadium seats 41,500 spectators. Alumni Stadium holds 45,000. Rutgers has an expansion plan on the drawing boards but it is projected, not reality. As for “much more recent success” um, really? Did the pain of watching Notre Dame sink to new depths cause you to psychologically block out last season? Rutgers had a cinderella season the year before last. That was very nice, but the first time in memory and hardly much more success than BC has had in the past decade. Is Rutgers in the year end top ten? Did Rutgers have any first round picks?
Regarding the situation with the ND-Rutgers series, note that this was not a situation where negotiations broke down. Notre Dame pulled out of their deal with Rutgers, which was already a done deal, when Rutgers refused to let them change the terms of the contract. This isn’t new, as BC learned that a contract with Notre Dame isn’t worth the paper it is printed on when the Irish abrogated the last two years of their current deal with the Eagles and ended discussions when BC made it clear they were not playing home games anywhere but home.
On to political theory, an area where I expect a lawyer and a guy in uniform to have more depth. You have the concepts of sportsmanship and fair play confused with communism.
In Good Sportsmanship two teams that compete annually alternate between each team’s home location. In Communism the government owns the means of production. Arguing in favor of sportsmanship is not communist, it is simply acknowledging that in sports there are sometimes other principles at play than profit motive.
When the ACC expanded, you argued for the higher principle and claimed it was a money grab that unfairly targeted the Big East. But now that Notre Dame is canceling agreements in a blatantly unsportsmanlike quest for cash, they are simply being capitalist?
The degree to which many Notre Dame fans can hold contradictory hypocritical views simultaneously is almost schizophrenic.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. You are the one who needs to get their facts straight.
First, by the time any games would be played, Rutgers stadium would be over 55,000 which is 10,000 more than Alumni. Alumni, by the way, is the smallest venue ND ever plays in and is probably part of the reason ND wanted to play a 2-1 series against Fredo.
Second, no contracts have been signed, therefore there were no agreements in principle or otherwise. The only agreement (which is non-binding and vague) is for ND to play 3 BE schools per year. It doesn’t specifify who and it doesn’t specify where.
Third, it IS quite akin to communism for an extremely left-leaning rag like the NYT to suggest that ND should HAVE to agree to play Rutgers on campus. Like ND owes any of their national prestige (read money) to Rutgers or anybody else. Last time I checked, notions like “from each according to their ability (or bankbook), to each according to their need” sounds an awful lot like Marx.
Fourth, ND and Rutgers agreed to not pursue the series. That is the essence of the free market. WHILE I HAPPEN TO PERSONALLY DISAGREE W/ ND’s DESIRE TO PLAY OFF CAMPUS, it is certainly their right to do so. Telling them they HAVE to do anything is as socialist as telling Wal-Mart and Microsoft what they HAVE to do.
Fifth, no matter how often you spin your propoganda machine, the truth remains that Miami and BC looked their confrence brethren in the eye and vowed their commitment to the Big East. Then when the ACC came calling, they stabbed the league they built (or in BC’s case, built them) in the back. At no time did ND promise to play Rutgers or agree to play in Piscataway.
The two sides had terms, they could not come to an agreement, and each walked away. What is the problem here?
That’s right Bobby, I forgot how loosely you treat “facts.”
http://www.snakesinmypants.com/2008/04/15/irish-the-wal-mart-of-college-football/
The series with Rutgers was announced and appeared in future schedules. If there was fast-and-loose playing with contract details, perhaps I missed something. I do know that ND had a firm contract with BC and bailed on the last two years. It was my understanding that they had a “contract” with Rutgers because of announcements that Rutgers wasw one of the Big East programs they would be playing. ESPN and the AP described the situation as ND “cancelling” the series. Perhaps there was no ink on paper. There was ink on paper with BC and they bailed.
I really don’t much care because these days pretty much everyone who isn’t a Notre Dame fan, thinks they are fast becoming a joke, resting on laurels from 50 years ago.
I re-read the discussion you cited. If you think I mis-cited facts, please be specific. Where I erred I admitted it. Not sure what you are talking about. This is getting tiresome.
Add your Comment!