CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

ND, Concession Stands, and Cake

by Cougarbib · 9/12/2012

Advertisement
C
Cougarbib
If you read carefully, although scheduling football was given as the driver for the ND / ACC agreement - it goes deeper.



Let me start with



Cake:



ND, USC, and UCLA are the only proud programs to have never feasted on cup cake. They have never played an FCS team and ND does not want to get squeezed into doing that as the Big Conferences continue to move towards 9-game schedules. ND also did not like being associated with the new Big East schools in basketball. They want to continue to play storied programs even though they lose more often than they used to in football. They have an ego and home and away with CFU, Houston, and the other Big East additions did not cut it.



Concessions:



ND wanted concessions. They did not join the best conference in this arrangement. They joined the best conference willing to make concessions. Back to cake. ND wanted to have their cake and eat it too. Sound familiar. SEC, Big 10, Big 12, and PAC do not make many concessions. So they had to decide which concession stand to shop at.



Independence gives total concessions but a growing scheduling issue in football. ND gave up basketball and other sports independence years ago due to scheduling. But Big East non football sports ain't what it used to be - so ND went to the only other concession stand and moved them to the ACC where their brand will not be tainted by UCF, Houston, etc.



They also wanted concessions in football. Only Beast West or ACC or MWC or C-USA, etc., offer many. They chose ACC from what was available to them at the concession stands rather than sit around for a decade hoping SEC, PAC, Big 10, or Big 12 would open a concession stand. In other words - they get it. You can only buy what is for sale. BYU could learn from that.



ND already schedules a lot of ACC football games. They had four on the docket coming up in a future season before all of this. So they now add one. No big deal. But it gives them the concessions they wanted. Five respected ACC programs every year with the flexibility to remain Independent with the other 7 or 8 games if they want to play over seas to get an 8th game and they can still schedule all of the USC, Michigan, etc., games that those schools are willing to play and get them early and take the ACC schools late. BYU could learn from that.



It may be time for BYU to play let's make a deal at one of the concession stands and get a hybrid agreement like they originally tried to do with WAC. They should make a five or six game late season agreement with BEAST WEST or MWC unil something better comes along. They simply should. Because the Big Concession stands are not making concessions like Sunday Play, ESPN and BYU TV, etc. and note that the ND TV agreement expiring in a year was also a driver for this change.
K
KingCoug
Since BYU went independent, I've wanted it to get certain "core" opponents it will play every year. But I don't want, or see a need, for BYU to do with some conference what Notre Dame has done with the ACC. Especially with the MWC or a similar conference. After all, a big reason we went independent in the first place was to get away from that.



This news about Notre Dame is largely a NON-ISSUE for BYU.



The only ones who will make a big thing out of it are the talking heads in the local media, who need something to talk about. And those BYU fans who can't sleep at night without being in a conference.
E
EM_Puma
Non issue? I wouldn't say anyone could say that with certainty. If ND opts out of any scheduled games with BYU, that would certainly affect us. The ESPN article noted that this might bring doom to the Michigan St/Michigan/Purdue games that have traditionally been played with ND. I have no idea if that is speculation or not. If that does hold true, then a BYU/ND relationship continuing is very possible. Tom Holmoe has been approaching the Puke12 with the idea that since USC and Stanford play ND annually in FB later in the season that they'd like to schedule the Puke12 team that would have a bye that week, if it is something desireable. He spoke of that concept at BYU Education Week, but with no knowledge if that idea would ever be realized. It was the right way to be thinking.



It was pretty simple to see that with all the defections in the Big East in BB that ND would do something as the BE simply wasn't as stable of a conference any more. They still had a descent BB resume, but ACC is more secure and pretty good as well. Speaking from experience, I have to believe that ND will enjoy the stability of five sure games, but what is uncertain is if ND ever had any issues with scheduling opponents like BYU has in the 2nd half of the college FB season. The Puke12 gave their teams a waver to play ND after conference season began, something they didn't do for anyone else.



Whether there would be any of the conferences out there willing to give BYU a similar concession to give BYU the opportunity to continue to be independent in FB and give them 5 games annually and allow their other sports to be in integrated is a question that no one with any bonafide information has disclosed.



So bottom line is I'm not sure yet what impact this will have on BYU, but about the time something out there actually turns to BYU's benefit in college athletics and I'll be shocked. I just always get this feeling we're out on the street looking in.
K
KingCoug
Let's not start wringing our hands about not playing Notre Dame unless it actually happens. Until then, I won't be losing any sleep. BYU is fine.
C
Cougarbib
KingCoug wrote:
Let's not start wringing our hands about not playing Notre Dame unless it actually happens. Until then, I won't be losing any sleep. BYU is fine.


I won't wring my hands about not playing ND even if the games are dropped. With U asking Y for 2-1 and USU now asking for parity - BYU needs to Realize that giving 2-1 to anyone makes you their little Brothet or crudely put - Beach.



What ND realized is that things are changing - even for them - and conference after conference of the four that matter keep going to 9 game schedules and creating restrictive OOC rules - written and unwritten.



They saw the squeeze coming and did something before getting hurt by it.



SEC - it is really hard to find any SEC team wanting to play tough games OOC and especially on the road. It is not a written rule. But it seems like some good ole boys in a smoke-filled room had a heart-to-heart discussion about what they all needed to do to ensure a NC almost annually and two BCS Bowls and the money that goes with all of that. There is not much opportunity for ND to demand any 2-1 deals there and probably tough to even get 1-1 and ND does not give up home field advantage to anyone - not stupid enough.



Big 10 - although it fell apart for now - the alliance that almost happened with PAC had to make ND think twice about some rivalries being forced to drop. Michigan dropped a couple of ND games. Unimaginable. And ND is fussy. And if Big 10 adopts PAC November scheduling polices - dooms day for non-conference scheduling. Especially if Big 10 continues to move towards dummied down scheduling like SEC.



PAC already slammed the door on everyone but ND. And if they do put a Big 10 partnership back together - ND could lose some games there.



Navy is going Big East. Depending on how Big East reacts - could be some issues there.



Big 12 - who knows how things will evolve there, but they too, have been dummying down OOC for the most part.



ND scheduling issues were minor compared to ours - but troubling. And ours have not gone away unless fans enjoy losing a little more than we are used to due to home field disadvantage and long-distance travel.



Note that ND locked up the most respectable,but clearly beatable, opponents available - NEARBY.
Advertisement
Y
YNot
EM_Puma wrote:
Tom Holmoe has been approaching the Puke12 with the idea that since USC and Stanford play ND annually in FB later in the season that they'd like to schedule the Puke12 team that would have a bye that week, if it is something desireable. He spoke of that concept at BYU Education Week, but with no knowledge if that idea would ever be realized. It was the right way to be thinking....



....Whether there would be any of the conferences out there willing to give BYU a similar concession to give BYU the opportunity to continue to be independent in FB and give them 5 games annually and allow their other sports to be in integrated is a question that no one with any bonafide information has disclosed.


TH could try this same approach with the ACC once the new Notre Dame deal takes effect. The 5-game Notre Game ACC schedule will likely create late season imbalances in ACC schedules. When Notre Dame is playing an ACC opponent, there will be at least one ACC team with a conference bye. There will probably be opportunities to schedule two or three games against ACC opponents in October and November.
M
mjk5
I couldn't say whether our future ND games will be cancelled or not, but I do know that BYU has recently formed a good relationship with ND by helping them out in certain ways. At least, there is a certain level of loyalty which didn't exist until recently. Whether that's enough to keep the games, I don't know.
K
KingCoug
Cougarbib wrote:
I won't wring my hands about not playing ND even if the games are dropped. With U askingcY for 2-1 and USU now asking for parity - BYU needs to Realuze that giving 2-1 to anyone makes you their little Brothet or crudely put - Beach.


Who has BYU given a 2-1 to besides Notre Dame and Texas?



Bronco has said there are only a handful of elite teams they would consider doing that with.
C
Cougarbib
KingCoug wrote:
I won't wring my hands about not playing ND even if the games are dropped. With U askingcY for 2-1 and USU now asking for parity - BYU needs to Realuze that giving 2-1 to anyone makes you their little Brothet or crudely put - Beach.


Who has BYU given a 2-1 to besides Notre Dame and Texas?



Bronco has said there are only a handful of elite teams they would consider doing that with.




If you count 1 and done and un-neutral field advantage - where have you been



TCU last year - un-neutral field

Texas - 1 and done that evolved into a 2 for 1

Notre Dame - 4-2 ie two 2-1

Oklahoma - unneutral field

Ole Miss - 1 and done

Wisconsin - 1 and done that may evolve into 2-1 or 1-1-1 or road and un-neutral field for 1



Off the top of my head - all of those are little brother moves. And now U is asking for it and USU is demanding parity - because we lowered our status by doing this.



So far we beat Oklahoma and Ole Miss in squeakers in down years for those teams. We lost to Texas in a down year for Texas and lost to TCU in a game we likely would have won if it was in Provo. So - if you like to hope teams are in a down year so we can go .500 keep doing it. And the more you say yes the harder it becomes to get someone to accept no - because that lowers them.



Imagine this discussion with Ohio State or LSU or Alabama -



Wait - you gave Ole Miss and TCU 1 and done and why are they better than us?
Advertisement
K
KingCoug
Cougarbib wrote:






If you count 1 and done and un-neutral field advantage - where have you been



TCU last year - un-neutral field

Texas - 1 and done that evolved into a 2 for 1

Notre Dame - 4-2 ie two 2-1

Oklahoma - unneutral field

Ole Miss - 1 and done

Wisconsin - 1 and done that may evolve into 2-1 or 1-1-1 or road and un-neutral field for 1



Off the top of my head - all of those are little brother moves. And now U is asking for it and USU is demanding parity - because we lowered our status by doing this.



So far we beat Oklahoma and Ole Miss in squeakers in down years for those teams. We lost to Texas in a down year for Texas and lost to TCU in a game we likely would have won if it was in Provo. So - if you like to hope teams are in a down year so we can go .500 keep doing it. And the more you say yes the harder it becomes to get someone to accept no - because that lowers them.



Imagine this discussion with Ohio State or LSU or Alabama -



Wait - you gave Ole Miss and TCU 1 and done and why are they better than us?


I don't think it's fair to include 2011 and 2012, since those were the years we had to rush to form a schedule and weren't in a strong bargaining position. So I'd take out the first Texas game, the Ole Miss game, and the TCU game. And you see to be going back further than that with the Oklahoma game. Which may go to your point about SOS but also goes to my point about exposure.



So we're bending over for Notre Dame and Texas right now.



Are we sure the Wisconsin (2013), Nebraska (2015), and West Virginia (2016) are 1 and dones?
C
Cougarbib
KingCoug wrote:






If you count 1 and done and un-neutral field advantage - where have you been



TCU last year - un-neutral field

Texas - 1 and done that evolved into a 2 for 1

Notre Dame - 4-2 ie two 2-1

Oklahoma - unneutral field

Ole Miss - 1 and done

Wisconsin - 1 and done that may evolve into 2-1 or 1-1-1 or road and un-neutral field for 1



Off the top of my head - all of those are little brother moves. And now U is asking for it and USU is demanding parity - because we lowered our status by doing this.



So far we beat Oklahoma and Ole Miss in squeakers in down years for those teams. We lost to Texas in a down year for Texas and lost to TCU in a game we likely would have won if it was in Provo. So - if you like to hope teams are in a down year so we can go .500 keep doing it. And the more you say yes the harder it becomes to get someone to accept no - because that lowers them.



Imagine this discussion with Ohio State or LSU or Alabama -



Wait - you gave Ole Miss and TCU 1 and done and why are they better than us?


I don't think it's fair to include 2011 and 2012, since those were the years we had to rush to form a schedule and weren't in a strong bargaining position. So I'd take out the first Texas game, the Ole Miss game, and the TCU game. And you see to be going back further than that with the Oklahoma game. Which may go to your point about SOS but also goes to my point about exposure.



So we're bending over for Notre Dame and Texas right now.



Are we sure the Wisconsin (2013), Nebraska (2015), and West Virginia (2016) are 1 and dones?


Wisconsin - after a bunch of noise about future games is 1 and done for now. It is kind of like Texas. Give me 1 and done now and maybe we can go 1-1 or un-neutral later.



IDK on Nebraska and W. Va.



I would throw out the 2009, 2010, and 2011 stuff if we had stopped doing it. But it started a trend, the trend continues, and it categorizes us clearly as a mid-major.



If they will not play us straight up - we should say fine - play someone that will go straight up - and then see one of the big boys in a BCS Bowl just like U, BSU, TCU, and UH did on multiple occasions.



The road to a BCS Bowl is not paved with a tougher schedule - it is paved by undefeated seasons. Our schedules have been too tough for us to ever do that - except 1984.



So get a 1984 schedule or a 1996 schedule with 1 or 2 less games.



That might work.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
E
EM_Puma
scott715 wrote:
http://deepshadesofblue.com/what-notre-dames-move-may-mean-for-byu/



This is a positive for the Y.


A band I followed in high school wrote a song, "Once bitten, twice shy [babe!]" (Mott the Hoople) Deepshadesofblue said the B12 was a done deal and we were merely waiting for the presser. You can't go out on the line like that and be that far off and anyone care as to what your opinion is. I don't know if the people there are the same as last year, but that faux pas blew any credibility in my mind for any opinion they might offer.
E
EM_Puma
Cougarbib wrote:
Imagine this discussion with Ohio State or LSU or Alabama -



Wait - you gave Ole Miss and TCU 1 and done and why are they better than us?


Yea, ask USU about that. They have been slutting around all over the nation playing 1 and dones and then all of a sudden they act like because they have one descent year where they finally make a bowl game (which they lost to Ohio U) and everyone is supposed to forget where they have been sleeping.



The moment BYU agreed to any 1 and done and 2-fers, they got in bed with someone who other teams can't act like they can forget. You do a home/home with BYU (thank goodness for teams like OSU/GA Tech) then you put your school in a position that's hard to live down because you are admitting you're not at the level of Alabama, Ohio State, or LSU. If scheduling pressures weren't high enough.
B
BerliNY
KingCoug wrote:
Since BYU went independent, I've wanted it to get certain "core" opponents it will play every year. But I don't want, or see a need, for BYU to do with some conference what Notre Dame has done with the ACC. Especially with the MWC or a similar conference. After all, a big reason we went independent in the first place was to get away from that.



This news about Notre Dame is largely a NON-ISSUE for BYU.



The only ones who will make a big thing out of it are the talking heads in the local media, who need something to talk about. And those BYU fans who can't sleep at night without being in a conference.


Word. I still don't understand what ND motivation is on this. Clearly the ACC gave them a sweet deal but it can't be any sweeter than the B10 would have given them, plus the timing is all wrong. We just found out that the playoff thing is happening, that you don't have to be in conference to get to the BCS, and even if you did, you still don't because you're F'ing ND. So why ACC and why now? To protect BBall and a bunch of sports ND doesn't care about from having to play the inferior new teams in the BE? Doesn't add up.
Advertisement
M
Mars
BerliNY wrote:
Word. I still don't understand what ND motivation is on this.

1- Increased Academic Respect by association.

2- Increased Football National Championship/BCS Bowl Game respect (ACC > Big east).

3- Desire to not associate with SMU, Houston, etc.
C
Cougarbib
Mars wrote:
Word. I still don't understand what ND motivation is on this.

1- Increased Academic Respect by association.

2- Increased Football National Championship/BCS Bowl Game respect (ACC > Big east).

3- Desire to not associate with SMU, Houston, etc.


This plus money plus concession to guarantee ND 5 games - probably late season, and still let ND remain Indy for it's other seven games and continue to have it's own TV deal.



In other words - ND asked for and got special treatment - like BYU asked Big 12 for and did not get.



SEC, Big 10, Big XII, and PAC are not big on special treatment. ACC, Big East, and MWC apparently will for certain teams.



BYU MWC experience should teach that resentment from conference partners will ensue. As if ND is not already hated enough.
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.