PDA

View Full Version : Is Notre Dame REALLY a Big Ten school?



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7

Hockeybuckeye
03-27-2018, 09:31 PM
It's good on one hand to get an extra school added to our diminutive ranks but I have mixed feelings on schools who are in the conference for ONE sport only.
When we were both CCHA members that was an entirely different situation.
Logic would seem to dictate that if you aren't in for ALL sports you shouldn't be considered a conference member.

Tater
03-27-2018, 09:46 PM
It's good on one hand to get an extra school added to our diminutive ranks but I have mixed feelings on schools who are in the conference for ONE sport only.
When we were both CCHA members that was an entirely different situation.
Logic would seem to dictate that if you aren't in for ALL sports you shouldn't be considered a conference member.

Better fit in the Big 10 than Hockey East.

Happy
03-27-2018, 10:33 PM
Why not?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johns_Hopkins_University

The Zlax45
03-27-2018, 11:24 PM
Why not?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johns_Hopkins_University

I was coming here to say the same thing

dxmnkd316
03-27-2018, 11:27 PM
Notre Dame is the one that got away for the Big Ten.

Theyíre a quintessential big ten school. Miswesr, good academics, rife with cash, and name recognition. Notre Dame isnít a research powerhouse like the rest of the big ten schools though.

mookie1995
03-27-2018, 11:57 PM
Why not?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johns_Hopkins_University

"sport"

pgb-ohio
03-28-2018, 12:22 AM
It's good on one hand to get an extra school added to our diminutive ranks but I have mixed feelings on schools who are in the conference for ONE sport only.Certainly everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I'm sure you're not alone. But for my part, I'm very pleased that Notre Dame is a member of our hockey conference. No mixed feelings at all.


When we were both CCHA members that was an entirely different situation.How so? Granted, it's not an identical situation. But since we're talking feelings: I thought it was great that Notre Dame was a CCHA member. Losing the hockey partnership with the Fighting Irish was one of the downsides of forming the B1G Hockey Conference. Then, when the deal was reached for Notre Dame to rejoin us in hockey, my honest reaction was "Welcome Home."


Logic would seem to dictate that if you aren't in for ALL sports you shouldn't be considered a conference member.So you're prepared to kick out Wisconsin for not having a baseball team?

How about the five schools where Men's Soccer isn't a Varsity sport. Bye-Bye?

By the time we get done with all of the expulsions, we might be competing as an independent!

dxmnkd316
03-28-2018, 12:26 AM
Bad argument. Those sports donít exist at those schools.

The original point is that those sports DO exist at Notre Dame and we donít force them in for all.

UMICH
03-28-2018, 01:41 AM
It's good on one hand to get an extra school added to our diminutive ranks but I have mixed feelings on schools who are in the conference for ONE sport only.
When we were both CCHA members that was an entirely different situation.
Logic would seem to dictate that if you aren't in for ALL sports you shouldn't be considered a conference member.

I can't say that I'm thrilled about it but the B1G TEN needed some help in Hockey. Same with Lacrosse and John Hopkins as Happy pointed out. Notre Dame will never join the B1G in football, if they did that would be stupid financially for them. As I said I'm not thrilled but I don't complain about it much. I can see the reasoning.

pgb-ohio
03-28-2018, 02:08 AM
Bad argument. Those sports donít exist at those schools.

The original point is that those sports DO exist at Notre Dame and we donít force them in for all.Well, I don't have ESP. On further review, maybe HockeyBuckeye's first sentence (Post #1) can be read your way. Maybe. But I don't think the third sentence can. When all becomes "ALL," I don't see a lot of wriggle room.

Setting aside the question of who's been "bad," let's deal with the disagreement. If I understand it correctly, your position is that as long as a member school participates in most Big Ten sports, but has no program at all in the rest, that's OK. Apparently I'm also to assume that Club Sports "don't exist." But letting a school participate in B1G Varsity sports is unacceptable -- if they offer one or more Varsity sports in another league.

Whatever the merits, that's not the current rule. As others have pointed out, the inclusion of Johns Hopkins in the Lacrosse league set a precedent that one sport membership is OK. Still want to outlaw the practice? Go for it. Work through the system. Try to get a new rule passed. State your case!

Beyond "mixed feelings," what specific problems do you see with single sport membership? I look at the two deals that have been struck, and see a win-win situation for all concerned. Maybe I'm wrong to support those deals. But those wanting a ban need to tell me why. My feeling is that such a ban is a solution in search of a problem.

hobeydog
03-28-2018, 06:00 AM
Interesting subject and we all know that ND always does what's best for ND and that's fine.

Notre Dame's primary sports affiliation is with the ACC where they are a full member for all sports except football. In football, they are required to schedule 5 ACC teams each year and every ACC team every five year interval.

As we all know, no hockey in the ACC except BC.

mookie1995
03-28-2018, 06:40 AM
ACC should claim national titles in hockey :p

yuber
03-28-2018, 06:41 AM
The way I see it Notre Dame is as good as they are due to having spent their formative years in Hockey East. Without that, theyíd be like Michigan State. Stuck in the BIG cellar.

Hockeybuckeye
03-28-2018, 06:42 AM
Perhaps my perspective on this is simply the traditional view. Colleges & Universities were one of two things, either an independent or a conference school. We didn't used to have we'll be in this conference for this sport and another conference for these sports and this one we'll still be independent. The latter is how I perceive Notre Dame.
Now don't get me wrong, I don't have any real problem with their hockey team being in but as another stated they're a quintessential big ten school and I don't think it's good for college sports and conferences overall to allow such a patchwork of competition to exist.
Their desire to keep what control they have keeps them from being a full fledged member of the B1G which I think should have happened a LONG time ago.

chickod
03-28-2018, 07:11 AM
Perhaps my perspective on this is simply the traditional view. Colleges & Universities were one of two things, either an independent or a conference school. We didn't used to have we'll be in this conference for this sport and another conference for these sports and this one we'll still be independent. The latter is how I perceive Notre Dame.
Now don't get me wrong, I don't have any real problem with their hockey team being in but as another stated they're a quintessential big ten school and I don't think it's good for college sports and conferences overall to allow such a patchwork of competition to exist.
Their desire to keep what control they have keeps them from being a full fledged member of the B1G which I think should have happened a LONG time ago.

We don't live in "used to be's anymore..." Seriously. If you change this, it will turn the entire conference structure upside down. It's not that I don't agree, but we're not going back to the way it was. I didn't want to see the Big East (one of the greatest basketball conferences ever) break up either, but stuff happens...

JohnsonsJerseys
03-28-2018, 07:25 AM
Notre Dame's primary sports affiliation is with NBC.
I fixed the typo in your quote above...

Truth be told, Notre Dame is actually a member of the WCHA and we've had them participating in a trial "loan-a-team" program since 1981. (This special program is current scheduled to end following the 2030-2031 season.) Once the Title IX crowd gets their way in North Dakota, and the men's team folds as well, we'll be moving Notre Dame into the NCHC for a two-year stint, 2021-2023.

After that is completed, they will become one of the charter teams of the PAC10 hockey conference along with ASU. There will be 20 conference games scheduled per season with Notre Dame and ASU each listed as the home team for 10 games. However since ASU still won't have a rink by then, all games will actually be played at Notre Dame. The teams will simply swap jersey colors home/road for each game. The 20 game conference schedule of the PAC10 hockey conference also allows for ample non-conference games to be scheduled.

Following the 2030-31 season, Notre Dame will be released from the WCHA to play as an independent, but in an ironic twist will only play intra-squad games going forward. All games will be covered lived in prime time on NBC in 3D ultra-vision with NBCSN simulcast proving additional camera angles, color commentary and running "Rudy" via picture-in-picture during all games.

Ryan

hobeydog
03-28-2018, 07:27 AM
ACC should claim national titles in hockey :p

Yes! How about some BC hockey players in those ACC ads that run every 5 minutes during national telecasts.

As an aside, has Syracuse or Pitt ever considered D-1 hockey? Any Terry Pegula types out there?

Split-N
03-28-2018, 07:32 AM
We don't live in "used to be's anymore..." Seriously. If you change this, it will turn the entire conference structure upside down. It's not that I don't agree, but we're not going back to the way it was. I didn't want to see the Big East (one of the greatest basketball conferences ever) break up either, but stuff happens...

In the end, it's all about the Benjamins.

dxmnkd316
03-28-2018, 07:36 AM
Well, I don't have ESP. On further review, maybe HockeyBuckeye's first sentence (Post #1) can be read your way. Maybe. But I don't think the third sentence can. When all becomes "ALL," I don't see a lot of wriggle room.

Setting aside the question of who's been "bad," let's deal with the disagreement. If I understand it correctly, your position is that as long as a member school participates in most Big Ten sports, but has no program at all in the rest, that's OK. Apparently I'm also to assume that Club Sports "don't exist." But letting a school participate in B1G Varsity sports is unacceptable -- if they offer one or more Varsity sports in another league.

Whatever the merits, that's not the current rule. As others have pointed out, the inclusion of Johns Hopkins in the Lacrosse league set a precedent that one sport membership is OK. Still want to outlaw the practice? Go for it. Work through the system. Try to get a new rule passed. State your case!

Beyond "mixed feelings," what specific problems do you see with single sport membership? I look at the two deals that have been struck, and see a win-win situation for all concerned. Maybe I'm wrong to support those deals. But those wanting a ban need to tell me why. My feeling is that such a ban is a solution in search of a problem.

Youíre still misunderstanding. A full-time Big Ten member, of which ND and JHU are not, must participate in the Big Ten conference for a sport, if the school participates in that sport, and a big ten conference exists for that sport.

TovarishchLisa
03-28-2018, 07:40 AM
Yes! How about some BC hockey players in those ACC ads that run every 5 minutes during national telecasts.

As an aside, has Syracuse or Pitt ever considered D-1 hockey? Any Terry Pegula types out there?

Syracuse has D1 women's hockey.