He sounds like a deep-thinking high-level lawyer. He doesn't shut doors and he doesn't speak in absolutes like a political pundit might. However, when he betrays formality it's to say things like, "trying like hell," which means (to me) that he's actually fighting to keep independence against a landscape/media/academia/business administration that thinks there's no reason to keep independence.

I think he's one of us; the only difference is he actually has to be held accountable for what he says so he doesn't say stupid things like "NOTRE DAME WILL NEVER JOIN A FOOTBALL CONFERENCE!"

You and I can say crap like that because we're not in charge; he can't.

Everything I've read from Swarbrick on this issue sounds the same, "I don't want to do it and hopefully I get to make the decision in the end instead of someone else making it for me."

The things everyone "wants" him to say are impossible to say for someone who actually has control of anything.

What about Miami's and Florida State's and Pitt's? Our independence ought to be fiercely protected, but I wonder where we would be if other independents had remained so -- it wasn't our job to protect their independence, but were we somewhat responsible for the current state of affairs by kick-starting the money grab? (I might be mistaken about this, so please correct me if I'm wrong).

Also, is there any realm of possibility that one of the "doomsday scenarios" on the horizon is the division of FBS to something like a 64-team "Super D1A" (say eight eight-team divisions, 7 division games, 3 non-division games, 16 team playoff of the eight champs and eight at-large). I've always had it in my mind that such a thing would be completely implausible; but it would also be the ONLY scenario in which I thought we damn well better be a part of if it came to fruition, independence or not.

If you're going to join a conference and cast away a century plus of football independence, at least have the balls to accept responsibility for the decision. Swarbrick's comments are designed to provide cover for what proves to be a wildly unpopular decision among the fanbase.

if we would even be having a conversation about this if Notre Dame football was what it used to be. If this was the late 80's or early 90's and the team consistently played at an elite level would something like this conference expansion movement even be enough to force Swarbrick's hand?

It seems that there is this pervasive notion amongst those that guide the program that Notre Dame football is relegated to mediocrity and that, as such, it is better to bargain for the best deal. This is most often personified by the constant financially-motivated decision making that seems to drive the program.

Personally, I believe that excellence on the field and the other missions of the University aren't mutually exclusive, and think Notre Dame football is good for a lot more than money. Notre Dame football could be the strongest brand in the country and worth far more in dollars and bargaining position than any of the leadership acknowledge.

Or perhaps they just aren't willing to pay the price to succeed at an elite level or don't think it worthwhile.

...you bet your ass.

NBC coming in with a lowball offer or no offer at all would create the kind of situation Swarbrick describes.

The business of ND football depends on strong TV for both income and national exposure, lacking in either hurts the program. If the landscape requires conference affiliation to succeed, there's no reward to sticking to the virtues of independence.

As distasteful a concept it would be to me right now, ND joining the Big Ten would be an improvement over some of the turd sandwich schedules coming down the pipe.

The only alternative at that point would be, as mentioned elsewhere, the creation of some kind of national super-conference, a pipe dream at best.

Then the Big East formed and other independents joined other conferences. As the 1980s wore on, our ability to get good TV coverage waned and the Big East's power grew. Our schedule became a joke (with one or two good games). Our recruiting became a joke, because why go to play at ND when there were suddenly better options with good TV coverage right on the eastern seaboard in ND's old recruiting territory?

Over time, our program slipped from being a major player (in a 12-year span from 1976-1987, the team made 6 Sweet 16 appearances and 3 other trips to the tournament) to middling success (3 tournament trips in 1988-1990) to utter irrelevance (in an 11-year span from 1990-2000 the team made no trips to the tournament). To put it another way, in the 16 years between Digger's Sweet 16 run in 1987 and Brey's run in 2003, we made the tournament 5 times -- 3 in a row in '88-90 and 2 in a row in '01 and '02 -- and all 5 were really tied to the Sweet 16 runs. The remainder of that 16 years was a hoops wasteland.

If the choice for football is wasteland or joining a conference, I say join -- and join on our terms and in a way that is representative of our historic place at the football table. Taking a lead position in creating a superconference would echo Rockne's historic leadership of college football in the early part of the last century and would lock ND in as a leader for the future. Being forced into the Big 11, conversely, is the worst of all possible worlds. It marginalizes us as just one bit player in a geographic concern and it puts us in a position where our voice would be minimized.

If we must go, we must. Rockne wanted to, after all. But we must go on our terms.

At this point, the only question seems to be: Big Ten East or Big Ten West?

It's tragic, really. The last in a series of self-inflicted wounds, this one right between the eyes.

is that this all seems to be a move to avoid being left out of the BCS should super-conferences align and try to keep an independent ND out of the BCS picture.

But what's to say this new BCS is going to stick around very long? What if after a few short years one of the superconferences, or, more likely, ESPN, decides that the current setup isn't in their best interest and that something like a playoff would be better?

The national championship deciders have been fluid throughout college football history. But conference affiliation is pretty damn permanent.

...'The times, they are a-changin.' Ron Burgundy had never heard that song."

- No text -

He does seem to be suggesting that new alignments could shut ND out of future BCS negotiations, at which point the decision ultimately becomes does ND want to participate in the BCS or does it want to be independent? Of course, the natural progression of that query is, "Does ND want to join a conference or abandon football?"

Depending on how the conference realignments shake out, we could be entering into a most crucial point in the program's history, where Notre Dame needs to display its value to the college football world and re-establish itself as a force to be reckoned with.

I've gone from a fan of the Fighting Irish to fighting apathy.