If you are a lover of college football and consider yourself a guardian of tradition, than today’s news about Notre Dame and USC talking about renewing the storied rivalry is a big win.
The slant inside the article is something else though (but we’ll get to that in a moment).
“It’s not clear yet when the rivalry series will return or what the terms will be. A person familiar with the discussions not authorized to talk about them publicly told
The Times that Notre Dame is now willing to discuss playing the game earlier in the season, which had previously been a sticking point. Given future scheduling agreements, it’s possible that the two schools still won’t meet again on a football field until the 2030 season.“
The news that the schools are talking again isn’t a surprise, but probably not because of what you think. As we are racing closer and closer to a 24 team playoff, the wiggle room with wins and losses would be greatly increased. Lincoln Riley and USC don’t have to be nearly as cowardly about playing Notre Dame as previously shown. They can afford to keep getting beat to the ground by the Irish, but can’t afford to keep hosting games inside the Coliseum with minimal fan support. A game every other year with Notre Dame still ensures one good crowd as the Irish have always travelled well to Los Angeles.
Perhaps the funniest part of the entire story (both the linked story and the overall theme) is this:
“The two schools were close to an agreement at the end of last season, with USC indicating it was willing to compromise and stick with the rivalry’s usual cadence over the next two seasons. But a source told The Times that USC officials were not aware of terms in an agreement Notre Dame negotiated with the College Football Playoff guaranteeing the Irish a playoff berth if they finished in the top 12 of the final rankings.”
“USC considered that a “material advantage” to its rival and pulled its offer to Notre Dame. USC athletic director Jennifer Cohen made one final offer to continue the series in December, but Notre Dame declined it, immediately announcing a new home-and-home series with Brigham Young to replace the Trojans.“
Because Jennifer Cohen is bad at her job, she failed to realize a MOU signed by the conference USC belongs in, included a provision for Notre Dame — and that was the straw that broke the condom apparently.
There had been a large and loud contingent of USC alumni and fans that were mortified by USC’s actions during the negotiations and the result of said negotiations. Just because USC can’t beat Notre Dame, doesn’t mean the rivalry should be canceled and they know it. Nothing HAD to change, and that was Notre Dame’s entire stance. Just keep playing the rivalry the same as always (SC in South Bend in October and ND in LA in November) and deal with it. Notre Dame shouldn’t have to help USC by changing history to help them with their conference journey.
Unfortunately, the rivalry will never be the same. Four years in hiatus means that there’s no continuation of hate and pride between the actual players on the field. If you don’t think that matters, we can agree to disagree, but I can point to a number of recent comments made by Jeremiyah Love that helps make my argument for me. Still, this could be a big win for both fanbases, and an even bigger win for college football tradition itself as we stare down a brave new world of whatever comes next for the sport.
