Bobref

I think, in context, Swarbrick’s remark did not imply anything nefarious. He simply meant if Notre Dame’s path to a national championship faced significant obstacles that conference members did not, the issue would be reevaluated. IMO, it does. Under the current format, ND can never be an automatic qualifier, and can never get a first round bye. Now, it appears the Committee is placing increased emphasis on participation in conference championship games, making them “no lose” propositions. Even if conference championship games go away - which they are likely to do with an expanded playoff - there are plenty who believe that Notre Dame is able to manipulate its schedule in a way that provides an advantage, which they could not do to that extent if they were members of a conference. And I firmly believe that line of thinking was a factor in the Committee’s disappointing, but understandable, decision.

Under NFHS rules, if an A player is forced out of bounds by an opponent, he may legally continue to participate so long as he returns inbounds at the “earliest opportunity.” So, the real question is “when a player is out of bounds, what must he do to change his status to inbounds?” The rule is very clear: A player who is out of bounds “remains out of bounds until returning to the field with any body part touching the field and no body part touching out of bounds.”

Jack Swarbrick, the guy who ushered Notre Dame athletics into the modern age, always said there were only a few things that could prompt the Irish to re-examine their independent status: if they lost their strong broadcast partner (NBC), couldn't secure a fair path to the postseason (like CFP access), or faced an unsustainable financial disadvantage due to conference realignment, especially concerning lucrative TV deals. I firmly believe that the bolded language represents exactly what happened this year. And there’s no reason it won’t happen again. It was absolutely predictable, and it’s totally repeatable. I fully support a complete re-examination of the cost/benefit of independent status in football, in light of the massive changes in the college football landscape since that policy was established.

Notre Dame’s exclusion - which I described previously as being a 100% self-inflicted wound - was a very clear message from the “join a conference like everyone else” people, although it might be difficult even for them to keep a straight face with Tulane and James Madison in the field. Be interesting to see if someone can estimate how much it co$t them to miss the playoffs.

A lot better than Alabama.

If Alabama gets “punished” it won’t be because they played. It will be because they did not look like one of the 12 best teams in the country … and haven’t for some time now.

The pass was forward, but the contact occurred behind the neutral zone. You can only have PI beyond the neutral zone.

Oh for God’s sake.

Really? Shoulder in the middle of his chest. Took less than one step. Best R in the conference standing right there.

If you’re talking about Curry’s hit on Mendoza, it was clean.

So far today (knock on wood), things have gone about as well as they could for the Irish. Boise State won handily, which will improve ND’s SOR and SOS. Texas Tech won, so BYU is out. And Georgia is making Alabama look bad. Don’t know what more we could ask for in the way of help.

Can we agree that the medical care provided by the teams now is light years better than it has been as recently as 20 yrs. ago?

On the other hand, these are consenting adults, getting paid a lot of money. And that “one thing and one thing only” seems to be fine with the players. All this stuff is collectively bargained. They walk a fine line between the violence that makes the game appealing, and trying to take the catastrophic injuries out of the game. There is absolutely no question that the game is orders of magnitude safer than it was when I played, and that is true at every level. It will never be as safe as tiddlywinks, but there’s no question it’s safer now than ever.

Don’t understand how you can say that when you look at all the rules changes that have come in the last several years.

A lot of the player safety stuff is initiated by the NFLPA.

😅🤣😂

So, the doomsayers who said the expanded playoff would mean the death of the bowl system may have been right after all? The immutable law of unintended consequences.

This sounds perilously close to @Muda69’s process of promotion and relegation.

I really don’t understand why this hasn’t gotten some traction on the GID. It’s the only fair way, right?

An exaggeration … but not a gross one. Perhaps more of a generalization than an exaggeration. But the one thing that’s undeniable is that things continue to trend in that direction. No end in sight.

I wonder if he’ll feel the same way if UGA blows them out in the SEC championship game and they miss the playoffs?

Sure. Just give us a list of which rules we’re supposed to ignore.

Not in Indiana. Video is everywhere. And if something like that occurred with any frequency, sooner or later it gets around to the powers that be. And then there can be consequences.

No, it’s not a penalty. Here’s the actual rule: “When any required player equipment is missing or worn improperly, an official's time-out shall be declared. If the missing or improperly worn equipment is detected during the down or subsequent dead-ball action related to the down without being directly attributable to a foul by an opponent or if a player is wearing otherwise legal equipment in an illegal manner, the player shall be replaced for at least one down, unless halftime intermission or an overtime intermission occurs. If proper and legal equipment has become improperly worn through use but prompt repair is possible and does not delay the ready-for-play for more than 25 seconds, such repair may be made without replacing the player for at least one down.”

I think the law of unintended consequences is in effect here. With the expanded playoff format, conference championship games will disappear.