[FarmBoy]

With ND's announcement of aligning with the ACC for non-football sports, there is an agreement to play 5 games against ACC opponents each year. It's hard to believe that ND will continue to play U.SC, Stanford, Navy, Michigan, MSU and Purdue. Who gets dropped. I would think that maintaining 2 West Coast opponents would be in their interests, to ensure 1 trip to CA each year. But if it's hard to see them keeping more than 3 of the 6 listed above. They need 3-4 cup cakes a year.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...hockey-acc

It would be a shame to lose that annual game. Especially now that we're finally improving the win-loss ratio.

[FarmBoy]

With ND's announcement of aligning with the ACC for non-football sports, there is an agreement to play 5 games against ACC opponents each year. It's hard to believe that ND will continue to play U.SC, Stanford, Navy, Michigan, MSU and Purdue. Who gets dropped. I would think that maintaining 2 West Coast opponents would be in their interests, to ensure 1 trip to CA each year. But if it's hard to see them keeping more than 3 of the 6 listed above. They need 3-4 cup cakes a year.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...hockey-acc

It would be a shame to lose that annual game. Especially now that we're finally improving the win-loss ratio.

[OutsiderFan]

Some thoughts...

1) It seems highly unlikely ND would be willing to give up its annual Thanksgiving weekend trip to California.

2) it seems ND needs Stanford more than Stanford needs ND.

I'm fairly certain Stanford fans would love home and homes with the likes of Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, LSU, Missouri, Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, etc.

[OutsiderFan]

Some thoughts...

1) It seems highly unlikely ND would be willing to give up its annual Thanksgiving weekend trip to California.

2) it seems ND needs Stanford more than Stanford needs ND.

I'm fairly certain Stanford fans would love home and homes with the likes of Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, LSU, Missouri, Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, etc.

[Redrum]

They got knocked off their independence stance but can't even "commit" all the way because they want the ND faithful to feel like they're still among football's anointed.  If things become more structured in football playoffs,  they've got a ticket to ride with the ACC or they can bolt back to the more natural base in the Big Ten. 

As it is, they've got the mentality of a cute girl who cozies up with a playah standing in line for an exclusive nightclub.  She'll use him to get past the doorman and in to where the action is,  but is planning to ditch him if her prospects get better inside.

Don't know what this means for the ND/Stanford series.  I don't think Stanford should bag our home game date to play ND in China as proposed, and maybe ND will use that as an opportunity to dump us and use the opportunity to pick an ACC softy to beat up in Beijing or Shanghai or wherever.    I think ND views our series with them as more disposable than the USC series so we might see them disappearing off our schedule as they jigger their schedule to fit in the ACC games.

[Redrum]

They got knocked off their independence stance but can't even "commit" all the way because they want the ND faithful to feel like they're still among football's anointed.  If things become more structured in football playoffs,  they've got a ticket to ride with the ACC or they can bolt back to the more natural base in the Big Ten. 

As it is, they've got the mentality of a cute girl who cozies up with a playah standing in line for an exclusive nightclub.  She'll use him to get past the doorman and in to where the action is,  but is planning to ditch him if her prospects get better inside.

Don't know what this means for the ND/Stanford series.  I don't think Stanford should bag our home game date to play ND in China as proposed, and maybe ND will use that as an opportunity to dump us and use the opportunity to pick an ACC softy to beat up in Beijing or Shanghai or wherever.    I think ND views our series with them as more disposable than the USC series so we might see them disappearing off our schedule as they jigger their schedule to fit in the ACC games.

[washingtonismoney]

Pete Thamel of SI says Stanford games are priorities for ND officials: http://goo.gl/v6ftH

As a fan, I'm kind of bored of playing them. ND fan schadenfreude is among the best in the nation, but we can do that without playing them (though much more fun when it's your team administering the beating). But I'd also prefer to see some different faces from time to time, and with two of our nonconference games spoken for every year, variety is not terribly high. From a business perspective, though, hard to imagine many games can top ND. So I suspect we'll keep it.

Re: Stanford leverage--I would guess ND would be just as happy playing kal or UCLA every year, maybe even UW. But for a lot of obvious reasons we're #2 on the West Coast list. (SC will be kept as a game...forever.)

[washingtonismoney]

Pete Thamel of SI says Stanford games are priorities for ND officials: http://goo.gl/v6ftH

As a fan, I'm kind of bored of playing them. ND fan schadenfreude is among the best in the nation, but we can do that without playing them (though much more fun when it's your team administering the beating). But I'd also prefer to see some different faces from time to time, and with two of our nonconference games spoken for every year, variety is not terribly high. From a business perspective, though, hard to imagine many games can top ND. So I suspect we'll keep it.

Re: Stanford leverage--I would guess ND would be just as happy playing kal or UCLA every year, maybe even UW. But for a lot of obvious reasons we're #2 on the West Coast list. (SC will be kept as a game...forever.)

[yvonne]

I'm with WiM. I like it when they lose, but I don't really consider the game with them to be a big deal. Getting them off the schedule and having home and home with someone more flexible about the schedule would make it less likely that we play Big Game in October.

It would be great to play top tier Big Ten, SEC, and Big Twelve teams.

What's interesting about this announcement is that Notre Dame had been a part of the Big East for non-football sports, but totally independent for football.

[yvonne]

I'm with WiM. I like it when they lose, but I don't really consider the game with them to be a big deal. Getting them off the schedule and having home and home with someone more flexible about the schedule would make it less likely that we play Big Game in October.

It would be great to play top tier Big Ten, SEC, and Big Twelve teams.

What's interesting about this announcement is that Notre Dame had been a part of the Big East for non-football sports, but totally independent for football.

[StannyBoy]

You guys are missing they key reason why they can't afford to not play Stanford each year. They recruit directly against us and want to beat us so they have bragging rights with recruits. If you don't think that is a big deal go read a Stanford thread on any ND message board. Their fans are obsessed with us. We're their biggest game every year.

[StannyBoy]

You guys are missing they key reason why they can't afford to not play Stanford each year. They recruit directly against us and want to beat us so they have bragging rights with recruits. If you don't think that is a big deal go read a Stanford thread on any ND message board. Their fans are obsessed with us. We're their biggest game every year.

[yvonne]

Here's the main reason they're not a full ACC football member:

"We are able to maintain our historic independence in football, join in the ACC's non-BCS bowl package, and provide a new and extremely competitive home for our other sports."

They want a bigger share of the BCS money. Rather than going full ACC and taking their turn at the Orange Bowl, they'd rather go to non-BCS bowls and get a bigger share of the revenue.

[yvonne]

Here's the main reason they're not a full ACC football member:

"We are able to maintain our historic independence in football, join in the ACC's non-BCS bowl package, and provide a new and extremely competitive home for our other sports."

They want a bigger share of the BCS money. Rather than going full ACC and taking their turn at the Orange Bowl, they'd rather go to non-BCS bowls and get a bigger share of the revenue.

[FarmBoy]

I think the whole "N.otre D.ame screws up the Pac12 scheduling" thing is a red herring. Last year we played them at the end of the year, and the Big Game was in November. This year we play them in the first half of the year, and the Big Game is in October. There's no reason you can't have both N.otre D.ame and the Big Game in the final two weeks. Larry Scott is just pissed that the CA schools banded together to force guaranteed games each year, and he wanted to make us feel some pain over that headache. He can't piss off U.SC, so he threw C.al and Stanford under the bus.

Losing the I.rish would be a mistake for us. They draw very well, both in the Stadium and on TV. They're always a national story, whether they're good or not. Playing them increases our program visibility significantly outside the Pacific time zone.

[FarmBoy]

I think the whole "N.otre D.ame screws up the Pac12 scheduling" thing is a red herring. Last year we played them at the end of the year, and the Big Game was in November. This year we play them in the first half of the year, and the Big Game is in October. There's no reason you can't have both N.otre D.ame and the Big Game in the final two weeks. Larry Scott is just pissed that the CA schools banded together to force guaranteed games each year, and he wanted to make us feel some pain over that headache. He can't piss off U.SC, so he threw C.al and Stanford under the bus.

Losing the I.rish would be a mistake for us. They draw very well, both in the Stadium and on TV. They're always a national story, whether they're good or not. Playing them increases our program visibility significantly outside the Pacific time zone.

[OutsiderFan]

Larry Scott is just pissed that the CA schools banded together to force guaranteed games each year, and he wanted to make us feel some pain over that headache. He can't piss off U.SC, so he threw kal and Stanford under the bus.

Each of the Pac-12 "partner schools" (and the shot gun marriage between Colorado and Utah) will have their traditional rivalry game displaced once every six years.  It just so happens California and Stanford were the first ones to be moved.  The Big Game will be played at the end of the season for the next five years after this one. At least that is my understanding. 

[OutsiderFan]

Larry Scott is just pissed that the CA schools banded together to force guaranteed games each year, and he wanted to make us feel some pain over that headache. He can't piss off U.SC, so he threw kal and Stanford under the bus.

Each of the Pac-12 "partner schools" (and the shot gun marriage between Colorado and Utah) will have their traditional rivalry game displaced once every six years.  It just so happens California and Stanford were the first ones to be moved.  The Big Game will be played at the end of the season for the next five years after this one. At least that is my understanding. 

[Canalejas]

Is there any chance that the series could get scaled back, as opposed to dropping it altogether or maintaining the status quo?  What if we faced the domers twice every four years?  Would that introduce enough new opponents to ease our concerns?  While we're at it, can we scale back on SJSU too?

[Canalejas]

Is there any chance that the series could get scaled back, as opposed to dropping it altogether or maintaining the status quo?  What if we faced the domers twice every four years?  Would that introduce enough new opponents to ease our concerns?  While we're at it, can we scale back on SJSU too?

[FarmBoy]

For those who haven't seen it, this is a good site to track our upcoming non-conference opponents:

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/pac-10/s...rdinal.php

ND is currently booked through 2019. Upcoming series include:
Army ('13 and '14)
Northwester ('15-'16, '19-'22, why do we play them 6 times during the next 10 years?)
Rice ('16-'17, should make for some fun half time shows with two scatter bands on the field)
UVA ('17-'18)

We only have SJSU on the schedule next season, though I won't be shocked if we re-up for convenience.

OutsiderFan, I've never heard that explanation. I don't see why it would be a scheduling necessity to have one "rivarly game" have to play early in the year.

[FarmBoy]

For those who haven't seen it, this is a good site to track our upcoming non-conference opponents:

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/pac-10/s...rdinal.php

ND is currently booked through 2019. Upcoming series include:
Army ('13 and '14)
Northwester ('15-'16, '19-'22, why do we play them 6 times during the next 10 years?)
Rice ('16-'17, should make for some fun half time shows with two scatter bands on the field)
UVA ('17-'18)

We only have SJSU on the schedule next season, though I won't be shocked if we re-up for convenience.

OutsiderFan, I've never heard that explanation. I don't see why it would be a scheduling necessity to have one "rivarly game" have to play early in the year.

[Farm93]

FarmBoy,

The bumped rivalry thing is a potential reality.  It is all about available time slots.  The conference DEFINITELY does not want the rivalry games to overlap each other.  Take that as a given because the most valuable content the Pac-12 has to present the power of the conference are those rivalry games.  Non-rivalry games wil be broadcasted simultaneously on different channels, but then the conference wants to give each rivalry its own time.  Each Saturday then has three viable slots (12:30, 4, 7:30).  So with 6 rivalry games, the games SHOULD be split easily across two Saturdays.

There are caveats though.
The Saturday 9 days after Thanksgiving is no longer an option because that is the Pac-12 championship weekend.
Notre Dame vs Stanford and Notre Dame vs USC takes up one of those 6 available end of year Saturday slots each year.  So now we are down to 5 Saturday slots for 6 games.
The good news is that Arizona vs. Arizona State has been played on Fridays in the past, so 5 slots MIGHT be OK.
Finally, Stanford and UCB both kicked and screamed about playing on the Saturday after Thanksgiving.  So either they are in the first group of 3 or they are moved.  And that is the problem.

In years when Big Game is in Berkeley there is another complexity.  SC must play UCLA in the first week because they play Notre Dame in the second week.  So UCLA vs USC must occupy one of the three available first week slots.

Going forward it should be possible for the conference to get all 6 rivalry games in non-overlapping time slots in the last two weeks of the season, but it becomes critical for all of the teams to play nice to make sure the right 6 games (plus NDs games) can all fit.  With Stanford and UCB not accepting the second week option the conference had two schools that were not playing nice.  The catch though is that almost everyone wants the first weekend for their rivalry too.  If any other rivalry games demand only pre-Thanksgiving weekend for their game, then it no longer fits.  And at least one rivalry game needs to be bumped each year.

FWIW - Stanford has the most compelling post-Thanksgiving challenge in the conference, so that helps justify the stance.  But it is still a stance that does not help the conference schedule.

Thanks to ND, Big Game will be on that first weekend in Stanford years.  The challenge will remain with the Berkeley years.  If every other conference team plays nice, then Big Game will be fine in that week before Thanksgiving.  If not, then the conference needs to leave open the possibility that rivalry games get bumped into October.

[Farm93]

FarmBoy,

The bumped rivalry thing is a potential reality.  It is all about available time slots.  The conference DEFINITELY does not want the rivalry games to overlap each other.  Take that as a given because the most valuable content the Pac-12 has to present the power of the conference are those rivalry games.  Non-rivalry games wil be broadcasted simultaneously on different channels, but then the conference wants to give each rivalry its own time.  Each Saturday then has three viable slots (12:30, 4, 7:30).  So with 6 rivalry games, the games SHOULD be split easily across two Saturdays.

There are caveats though.
The Saturday 9 days after Thanksgiving is no longer an option because that is the Pac-12 championship weekend.
Notre Dame vs Stanford and Notre Dame vs USC takes up one of those 6 available end of year Saturday slots each year.  So now we are down to 5 Saturday slots for 6 games.
The good news is that Arizona vs. Arizona State has been played on Fridays in the past, so 5 slots MIGHT be OK.
Finally, Stanford and UCB both kicked and screamed about playing on the Saturday after Thanksgiving.  So either they are in the first group of 3 or they are moved.  And that is the problem.

In years when Big Game is in Berkeley there is another complexity.  SC must play UCLA in the first week because they play Notre Dame in the second week.  So UCLA vs USC must occupy one of the three available first week slots.

Going forward it should be possible for the conference to get all 6 rivalry games in non-overlapping time slots in the last two weeks of the season, but it becomes critical for all of the teams to play nice to make sure the right 6 games (plus NDs games) can all fit.  With Stanford and UCB not accepting the second week option the conference had two schools that were not playing nice.  The catch though is that almost everyone wants the first weekend for their rivalry too.  If any other rivalry games demand only pre-Thanksgiving weekend for their game, then it no longer fits.  And at least one rivalry game needs to be bumped each year.

FWIW - Stanford has the most compelling post-Thanksgiving challenge in the conference, so that helps justify the stance.  But it is still a stance that does not help the conference schedule.

Thanks to ND, Big Game will be on that first weekend in Stanford years.  The challenge will remain with the Berkeley years.  If every other conference team plays nice, then Big Game will be fine in that week before Thanksgiving.  If not, then the conference needs to leave open the possibility that rivalry games get bumped into October.

[FarmBoy]

Farm93 - why would it matter to have the rivalry games not overlap? While those games have added meaning for their respective fan bases, they don't necessarily take on added meaning for other potential views. I wouldn't go out of my way to watch UCLA vs. U.SC or UW vs. WSU, unless those games had some impact on Stanford's post season. I don't see that requiring no overlaps during those games significantly impacts viewership. Some of those games will not be on Pac12 network, based on ESPN or Fox picking them up, so every game will likely still be able to be broadcast on the national Pac12 channel.

But thanks for the info and perspective. I'd never heard it explained why the Stanford/U.SC schedule forced Big Game into October.

If Stanford and C.al are so upset about an October Big Game, maybe they should have compromised on the no-Thanksgiving week rule.

[FarmBoy]

Farm93 - why would it matter to have the rivalry games not overlap? While those games have added meaning for their respective fan bases, they don't necessarily take on added meaning for other potential views. I wouldn't go out of my way to watch UCLA vs. U.SC or UW vs. WSU, unless those games had some impact on Stanford's post season. I don't see that requiring no overlaps during those games significantly impacts viewership. Some of those games will not be on Pac12 network, based on ESPN or Fox picking them up, so every game will likely still be able to be broadcast on the national Pac12 channel.

But thanks for the info and perspective. I'd never heard it explained why the Stanford/U.SC schedule forced Big Game into October.

If Stanford and C.al are so upset about an October Big Game, maybe they should have compromised on the no-Thanksgiving week rule.

[Extra Point]

"We only have SJSU on the schedule next season, though I won't be shocked if we re-up for convenience."

The reason why SJSU is not on the schedule in 2014 and 2015 has to do with a last minute change in their schedule. SJSU dropped a scheduled game with Stanford for a a big payday body bag game (Alabama?). The replacement was "you see" Davis. SJSU also pulled this on kal and ASU. ASU had to schedule two non FBS schools as a result and this prevented them from going to a bowl game. I wouldn't be surprised if SJSU is dropped from the schedule permanently.

[Extra Point]

"We only have SJSU on the schedule next season, though I won't be shocked if we re-up for convenience."

The reason why SJSU is not on the schedule in 2014 and 2015 has to do with a last minute change in their schedule. SJSU dropped a scheduled game with Stanford for a a big payday body bag game (Alabama?). The replacement was "you see" Davis. SJSU also pulled this on kal and ASU. ASU had to schedule two non FBS schools as a result and this prevented them from going to a bowl game. I wouldn't be surprised if SJSU is dropped from the schedule permanently.

[Farm93]

Farm93 - why would it matter to have the rivalry games not overlap? While those games have added meaning for their respective fan bases, they don't necessarily take on added meaning for other potential views. I wouldn't go out of my way to watch UCLA vs. U.SC or UW vs. WSU, unless those games had some impact on Stanford's post season. I don't see that requiring no overlaps during those games significantly impacts viewership. Some of those games will not be on Pac12 network, based on ESPN or Fox picking them up, so every game will likely still be able to be broadcast on the national Pac12 channel.

But thanks for the info and perspective. I'd never heard it explained why the Stanford/U.SC schedule forced Big Game into October.

If Stanford and kal are so upset about an October Big Game, maybe they should have compromised on the no-Thanksgiving week rule.

It is similar to the conference's old quest that the teams not play in bowl games that overlap.

The rivalry games are far and away the conference's most valuable assets.  To play them at the same time means reducing the advertising revenue for ESPN, Fox and/or the Pac-12 nets.  Therefore, overlap of the rivalry games reduces the value of the conference to content providers.  Take it as a given that the conference will not voluntarily do things that reduce the value of the conference to content providers.  So each rivalry game will have its own unique "rivalry conflict free" time slot.  Even if the schools don't want it, they will be forced to take it because it is best for the conference's TV deal.  And if the schools don't like their assigned Thanksgiving Saturday time slot, then the conference will just schedule the game in October.  This is why Big Game is in October.

It is not as if either Big Game school wanted an October contest.  The October date was given to the teams by the conference because the schools did not want Thanksgiving Saturday.  Remember this is a conference obsessed with maximizing the value of its product for the content providers.  Thursday games, Friday games, Rivalry games in October, it is all about TV revenue.  By the way, no team in the conference needs this TV money more than UCB so I am sure Barbour is fine with the maximization model.

As a Stanford alum, I know Stanford should play Big Game in October (like Texas vs Oklahoma) rather than agree to play the game post-Thanksgiving.  I was not wealthy enough to fly home back in the day, and didn't really want to fly across the country for 3 days anwyay.  So I know from 4 experiences that dorms are very, very empty with most students literally thousands of miles away from campus.  I have strolled around campus before the Notre Dame games even when a BCS bid was on the line and there is literally no one around once you get about 400 feet away from the stadium.

A Big Game on Thanksgiving Saturday would have very few students from Stanford.  That probably is OK for Berkeley types, but it would essentially kill Big Game in a generation as more and more young Stanford alums would have never seen a Berkeley Big Game.  So while I am not in love with October, I definitely see the strategic value of October over Thanksgiving Saturday.

[Farm93]

Farm93 - why would it matter to have the rivalry games not overlap? While those games have added meaning for their respective fan bases, they don't necessarily take on added meaning for other potential views. I wouldn't go out of my way to watch UCLA vs. U.SC or UW vs. WSU, unless those games had some impact on Stanford's post season. I don't see that requiring no overlaps during those games significantly impacts viewership. Some of those games will not be on Pac12 network, based on ESPN or Fox picking them up, so every game will likely still be able to be broadcast on the national Pac12 channel.

But thanks for the info and perspective. I'd never heard it explained why the Stanford/U.SC schedule forced Big Game into October.

If Stanford and kal are so upset about an October Big Game, maybe they should have compromised on the no-Thanksgiving week rule.

It is similar to the conference's old quest that the teams not play in bowl games that overlap.

The rivalry games are far and away the conference's most valuable assets.  To play them at the same time means reducing the advertising revenue for ESPN, Fox and/or the Pac-12 nets.  Therefore, overlap of the rivalry games reduces the value of the conference to content providers.  Take it as a given that the conference will not voluntarily do things that reduce the value of the conference to content providers.  So each rivalry game will have its own unique "rivalry conflict free" time slot.  Even if the schools don't want it, they will be forced to take it because it is best for the conference's TV deal.  And if the schools don't like their assigned Thanksgiving Saturday time slot, then the conference will just schedule the game in October.  This is why Big Game is in October.

It is not as if either Big Game school wanted an October contest.  The October date was given to the teams by the conference because the schools did not want Thanksgiving Saturday.  Remember this is a conference obsessed with maximizing the value of its product for the content providers.  Thursday games, Friday games, Rivalry games in October, it is all about TV revenue.  By the way, no team in the conference needs this TV money more than UCB so I am sure Barbour is fine with the maximization model.

As a Stanford alum, I know Stanford should play Big Game in October (like Texas vs Oklahoma) rather than agree to play the game post-Thanksgiving.  I was not wealthy enough to fly home back in the day, and didn't really want to fly across the country for 3 days anwyay.  So I know from 4 experiences that dorms are very, very empty with most students literally thousands of miles away from campus.  I have strolled around campus before the Notre Dame games even when a BCS bid was on the line and there is literally no one around once you get about 400 feet away from the stadium.

A Big Game on Thanksgiving Saturday would have very few students from Stanford.  That probably is OK for Berkeley types, but it would essentially kill Big Game in a generation as more and more young Stanford alums would have never seen a Berkeley Big Game.  So while I am not in love with October, I definitely see the strategic value of October over Thanksgiving Saturday.

[jayasena]

The conference DEFINITELY does not want the rivalry games to overlap each other.

This makes sense. The Pac-12 region has a lot of families with allegiances to multiple schools through siblings, kids/parents, marriages, friends, cousins, whatever. Plus it's the end of the season -- there's always interest in seeing how other teams do and what impact that has on where your your team ends up in the standings. If highly-ranked teams are involved, there's even national interest. I can definitely see how non-overlapping rivalry games can lead to a non-trivial bump in aggregate viewership.

Thanks Farm93 for the explanation of the scheduling conflicts that led to the big game being bumped. I think yours is the most detailed explanation I've seen.

[jayasena]

The conference DEFINITELY does not want the rivalry games to overlap each other.

This makes sense. The Pac-12 region has a lot of families with allegiances to multiple schools through siblings, kids/parents, marriages, friends, cousins, whatever. Plus it's the end of the season -- there's always interest in seeing how other teams do and what impact that has on where your your team ends up in the standings. If highly-ranked teams are involved, there's even national interest. I can definitely see how non-overlapping rivalry games can lead to a non-trivial bump in aggregate viewership.

Thanks Farm93 for the explanation of the scheduling conflicts that led to the big game being bumped. I think yours is the most detailed explanation I've seen.