Re: ND to the ACC and Catholics in the SE

[tipphill]

Notre Dame has always been controlled mainly by its Chicago alumni boosters who consider themselves the traditional core of ND. Many in the ranks of their national alumni derogatively call them the Chicago mafia or mob. There has been a longtime power struggle within their ranks - Chicago with their numbers and big $ has usually won but not without hard feelings and working towards a more decentralized and national power base. Those Chicago alumni would fight tooth and nail against an ACC affiliation but their power has being challenged.

ND and BC have a long relationship and is really their only Catholic institutional "friend" in the BCS football world. It wasn't enough though to lure them into the Big East for football when BC was in it. The Catholic ties can't be ignored, it's why the Big East was an attractive destination for their non-football membership. If they go to a conference for football they would have to relinquish some power and control of their own destiny - not an attractive solution for them unless absolutely forced. They have always considered themselves a unique institution so they look for unique resolutions.

bring in the only one that has experience with deaing with chicago mob----elliot ness

 

[Townie72]

Let's look at some history.

We know that the Big 10 had an open invitation to ND for many years, and that the marriage was nearly consummated in the late '90's. But remember that more recently, in 2003 exactly, there were serious discussions between the ACC and ND, before the ACC cut them off, declaring that they would accept only full members (ND wanted the same deal with the ACC that they have with the BE).

The point being that ND has looked into more options than just the Big 10.

And, as to conference compatibility--the Big 10 is more compatible football-wise. But culturally there is little difference between the Big 10 and ACC--Miami, Duke and BC recruit from the same applicant pools as ND (as do SU and Pitt for that matter). And academically, the ACC is a better fit. In fact, when the move to the Big 10 nearly happened, one of the constituencies most opposed was the ND faculty, who didn't want to be lumped in with the huge, land-grant, graduate-and-research-oriented Big 10 schools.

Some more history:


The ACC needed a 7-2 super-majority to expand to include the schools that were originally selected (Miami, Syracuse and BC)
Duke and UNC were against expansion... period.

The other 7 schools were for it. Until, the Gov. of VA, Warner, got pressure from VaTech. He then forced UVA to block ANY expansion (including just Miami) unless it included VT. They conference acquiesced and agreed to include VT in place of Syracuse. That was brought to a vote (again with Duke and UNC against).

Then in a totally unexpected move, Mary Ann Fox, the Pres of NCSU, switched NCSU's vote to “no”. She would only agree to Miami and VT and demanded that the ACC explore more options than just BC for the 12th spot.

Maryanne Fox was on the Board of Notre Dame. Based on Fox’s input the ACC immediately reached out to ND. They quickly realized that ND only was willing to do an “affiliation” in FB (4 games a year) and not Conference membership. They then came back to BC and brought BC in.

Mary Ann Fox thereafter did her best Rosanne Rosannadanna "Never mind" and hasn't been heard of since in the Conference expansion discussion.

 

[Townie72]

Also uniquely despised.

Notre Dame has actually "dollarized" all that despising. That large number of people who are dialed in to the NBC games to see them lose and hopefully to be humiliated watch just as many ads as the ND lovers.

If ND and NBC couldn't count on the ND haters, their viewing audience would be quite a bit smaller. Love or hate them, you watch them.

It's the college sports equivalent of pro wrestling. Without the villans, no one would watch.

I hate Georgetown. I watch a lot of Georgetown games just on the off chance they will lose. The worse the opponent, the more likely I am to watch because the more ignominious the defeat would be..

 

[omniorange]

Some more history:


The ACC needed a 7-2 super-majority to expand to include the schools that were originally selected (Miami, Syracuse and BC)
Duke and UNC were against expansion... period.

The other 7 schools were for it. Until, the Gov. of VA, Warner, got pressure from VaTech. He then forced UVA to block ANY expansion (including just Miami) unless it included VT. They conference acquiesced and agreed to include VT in place of Syracuse. That was brought to a vote (again with Duke and UNC against).

Then in a totally unexpected move, Mary Ann Fox, the Pres of NCSU, switched NCSU's vote to “no”. She would only agree to Miami and VT and demanded that the ACC explore more options than just BC for the 12th spot.

Maryanne Fox was on the Board of Notre Dame. Based on Fox’s input the ACC immediately reached out to ND. They quickly realized that ND only was willing to do an “affiliation” in FB (4 games a year) and not Conference membership. They then came back to BC and brought BC in.

Mary Ann Fox thereafter did her best Rosanne Rosannadanna "Never mind" and hasn't been heard of since in the Conference expansion discussion.

The whole expansion back in 2003 was meant to be a "first" step toward an eventual expansion to 14 down the road (5-7 years after stabilizing with Miami, BC, and SU) with ND and PSU or ND and Pitt. Two ACC officials said back then - one I believe was Debbie Yow then AD at Maryland and the other was either the president of Clemson or the president of Georgia Tech that there would be further expansion down the road.

At the time, the ACC didn't believe ND was ready to give up independence and the conference's whole approach was to emphasize it would be an entire East Coast conference from Boston to Miami thereby making ND "unique" (when they were ready to join a conference) since they would be a midwestern institution in terms of geography in an Atlantic Coast conference.

But what surprised the ACC officials was that ND approached the ACC (after initially rebuffing them in March of 2003) about the possibility of partial membership for seven years with a commitment for full membership afterward. The ACC presidents got too cocky and thought they could force the issue of full membership then and there which is why there was no vote on either BC or SU back in late June. The negotiations between ND and the ACC continued through the summer but hit a major roadblock in early September which then resulted in their termination and eventual turning to BC for #12.

As for ND, who knows what they will do. Things are drastically different now then they were back in 1999 when they almost joined the Big Ten. Assuming no loss of members, the ACC has done everything it can do make themselves a viable alternative to the BiG.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[longtimefan]

The ND faculty voted to accept the Big Ten invitation. The vote was 24 to 5 in favor. Just Google "Notre Dame Big 10 Invitation Faculty Vote". You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own set of facts.

In 2003, Maryanne Fox was the new President of NCSU. She had just come from ND. She was the one that interceded with Swofford to stop the process and try to interest ND. ND had no interest. Any contact between the two entities was initiated by the ACC/Fox.

The people on here that are so convinced that ND will join the ACC --- in the highly unlikely event they eschew independence --- are starting from what they would like to happen and then trying to sell themselves and others on the logic.

Thanks so much for the Pat Moynihan quote. I've read a lot of his stuff.

Question: ND has only 29 faculty members? I stand by my assertion that there was a sizable number of ND faculty (maybe not a majority) who felt that the Big 10 was not a good academic fit.

As to the move by Maryanne Fox to try to finesse ND into the ACC--see omnicarrier above.

 

[shantydaze]

Thanks so much for the Pat Moynihan quote. I've read a lot of his stuff.

Question: ND has only 29 faculty members? I stand by my assertion that there was a sizable number of ND faculty (maybe not a majority) who felt that the Big 10 was not a good academic fit.

As to the move by Maryanne Fox to try to finesse ND into the ACC--see omnicarrier above.

Notre Dame is not a good academic fit for B1G. Notre Dame focuses on undergraduate education, while B1G schools focus on research. This is good and bad for ND. Research garners more money for B1G schools than academics. The CIC (the academic consortium of the B1G schools and original B1G member, the University of Chicago) is a big part of the academic allure to the conference. As an aside, I have never understood why other conferences have looked at this type of arrangement.

Interestingly, what was once one of the great benefits of B1G membership, may now tip the hand to the ACC. The ND alums are very proud of their Catholic heritage. The University of Wisconsin had one of the original fetal stem cell lines and many other B1G schools are also doing similar research frowned on by the Vatican. There is a concern among some of the alumni that being part of the CIC will strip away part of its Catholic tradition.

Ultimately, I believe academics and academic reputation will be very important if and when ND decides to join a conference. IMO, this leaves only three conferences in play - ACC, B1G, and Pac-12. The Pac is out, which leaves the ACC and B1G. What may be the deciding factor is (1) who will join the conference with ND and (2) whether the ND/USC game be the annual B1G/Pac football game.

 

[omniorange]

Notre Dame is not a good academic fit for B1G. Notre Dame focuses on undergraduate education, while B1G schools focus on research. This is good and bad for ND. Research garners more money for B1G schools than academics. The CIC (the academic consortium of the B1G schools and original B1G member, the University of Chicago) is a big part of the academic allure to the conference. As an aside, I have never understood why other conferences have looked at this type of arrangement.

Interestingly, what was once one of the great benefits of B1G membership, may now tip the hand to the ACC. The ND alums are very proud of their Catholic heritage. The University of Wisconsin had one of the original fetal stem cell lines and many other B1G schools are also doing similar research frowned on by the Vatican. There is a concern among some of the alumni that being part of the CIC will strip away part of its Catholic tradition.

Ultimately, I believe academics and academic reputation will be very important if and when ND decides to join a conference. IMO, this leaves only three conferences in play - ACC, B1G, and Pac-12. The Pac is out, which leaves the ACC and B1G. What may be the deciding factor is (1) who will join the conference with ND and (2) whether the ND/USC game be the annual B1G/Pac football game.

The problem with ND is their reluctance to change. So other factors could very well limit them to only the BiG IF they wait too long.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Townie72]

Thanks so much for the Pat Moynihan quote. I've read a lot of his stuff.

Question: ND has only 29 faculty members? I stand by my assertion that there was a sizable number of ND faculty (maybe not a majority) who felt that the Big 10 was not a good academic fit.

As to the move by Maryanne Fox to try to finesse ND into the ACC--see omnicarrier above.

And it's your "feeling" that leads you to believe that a "sizable number" of ND faculty were against ND joining the Big Ten?

I gave you what was widely reported. You respond with what you "feel" or you argue that 5 who voted against it are a "sizable number"? 83% to 17% is a landside in just about everything.

I think the 29 faculty members who voted were probably some sort of faculty senate or group appointed to represent the broader faculty.

Seems to me that you just don't want to admit you were way wrong.

 

[Townie72]

The problem with ND is their reluctance to change. So other factors could very well limit them to only the BiG IF they wait too long.

Cheers,
Neil

The problem with trying to understand what ND will or will not do for us outsiders is that we really don't know at least two critical pieces of information.

The first is WHO gets a vote on the ND side. I believe that the administration of ND had every intention of joining the Big Ten or they wouldn't have gone all the way through the application process. The Big Ten wouldn't have allowed them go through the application process only to (embarrasingly) decline in public without a lot of "agreement in principle along the way. Stuff like that is always agreed to in private first and the public part of it is "Kubuki Theater" for the benefit of the public. What ND didn't do in 1999 was get the buy in of the powerful fans (The Chicago Mafia?) who give the school a lot of money. They now know that e-v-e-r-y-b-o-d-y has to buy in. (My experience is with the U. of Maryland where they have to bring the powerful Terrapin Club along with them on e very decision or pay the consequences. Just ask their ex-AD and ex-Chancellor about the Bob Wade as basketball coach debacle.)

Because SU doesn't have this large group of outside interests, the SU administration doesn't have to check with anyone or build any kind of consensus.

The second missing piece is WHAT they will consider in making a decision. We tend to think that schools are really just businesses and that they will seek their own purely economic interests. I have seen enough of academia and universities to know that isn't always true. And in this case, its a bunch of priests involved. They have a view of the world and what important that not many others have.

 

[longtimefan]

And it's your "feeling" that leads you to believe that a "sizable number" of ND faculty were against ND joining the Big Ten?

I gave you what was widely reported. You respond with what you "feel" or you argue that 5 who voted against it are a "sizable number"? 83% to 17% is a landside in just about everything.

I think the 29 faculty members who voted were probably some sort of faculty senate or group appointed to represent the broader faculty.

Seems to me that you just don't want to admit you were way wrong.

I did not say I had a "feeling". I said that I believed there was a sizable pct. of faculty that did not want to go to the Big Ten. My opinion, based upon reading that I did at the time (2003), was that there were many around the university who were opposed to joining the Big Ten, and that there were faculty members in that group.

Based upon what you have reported, we do not know if the 29-5 breakdown was indicative of the positions of the faculty as a whole.

However, I will accept chastisment about the ND faculty position, if you will do so about the ND-ACC tango, as reported above by omnicarrier.

 

[Townie72]

I did not say I had a "feeling". I said that I believed there was a sizable pct. of faculty that did not want to go to the Big Ten. My opinion, based upon reading that I did at the time (2003), was that there were many around the university who were opposed to joining the Big Ten, and that there were faculty members in that group.

Based upon what you have reported, we do not know if the 29-5 breakdown was indicative of the positions of the faculty as a whole.

However, I will accept chastisment about the ND faculty position, if you will be so about the ND-ACC tango, as reported above by omnicarrier.

I believe that the ACC would dearly like to have ND. I believe that the ACC approached ND through Mary Ann Fox in 2003. I believe that there are currently ongoing back channel discussions.

I believe there's a 90% chance that ND will still be an independent in football 5 years from now barring some very unlikely cataclysmic shift.

If the If ND were to ever join a conference, I strongly believe that it would be the Big Ten for a host of concrete reasons (90% chance). I believe the ACC would be a distant 2nd choice (10% choice).So, in my mind using the available facts and some actual logic, ND joining the ACC is a 1% probability. (10% of 10%)