Much like four years ago, I’m proud of both of my alma maters’ football teams tonight. Yes, USC committed some stupid penalties, and should have put the Irish away sooner, but ultimately, they made enough plays to win a very tough game on the road, and that counts for a lot. As for Notre Dame, they played with heart and determination, and proved that previous weeks’ late-game heroics weren’t attributable solely to the level of competition. These guys can play with the best.
For Irish fans — those who root for the Irish every week, that is — the end result must be agonizing. Indeed, I even feel a little tiny piece of that agony myself. I was rooting for USC, of course, and I’m glad they won, but at the same time, quite honestly, some part of my heart was cheering for the Irish to come back, to wake up the echoes, to make the home crowd go wild. In the fourth quarter of tonight’s game, for the first time since becoming an Irish Trojan, I actually felt truly, genuinely conflicted.
Ultimately, I’m glad Clausen didn’t complete any of those three passes in the final 9 seconds. (By the way: what was he thinking with that final pass?) But I’d dearly like to see the Irish re-establish themselves as a national power, once and for all, as they almost did four years ago, and as they again almost did tonight. It’s a cruelty of my dual loyalties that I always seem to end up rooting against the Irish on such nights.
In any event, hopefully Notre Dame wins out and goes 10-2, and hopefully that’s enough to get the Irish into the BCS Top 14 by season’s end. (Normally a top 14 ranking would be a foregone conclusion for 10-2 Irish team, but the pollsters have been skeptical of ND’s merits this year; despite the close call against the Trojans, they’ll presumably be unranked next week.) And then hopefully they win their big bowl game, be it a BCS game or the Gator Bowl.
As for USC: Virginia Tech giving up its spot in the pecking order is great news, but Texas’s win over Oklahoma is very bad news. The SEC vs. Big 12 scenario looks likelier than ever, even if the Longhorns lose a game but win the division and the conference (as they now likely would). It might take a team from the North pulling a Big 12 title-game upset to prevent a BCS championship game matchup of Texas vs. the SEC champ (unless the SEC somehow implodes and produces a two-loss champion). Oh, and Iowa still needs to lose, but is running out of realistic opportunities in which to do so; and it would be nice if Miami and Cincinnati lose, too.
Still, upsets can and will happen, so the Trojans’ BCS hopes are yet alive. The more important thing is, USC needs to keep taking care of business. They’re 2-0 so far in the five-game stretch that I feared would derail their season: @Cal, @ND, vs. Oregon State, @Oregon, @ASU. They get Stanford at home after that gauntlet, followed by another bye week, and then they finish with home games against UCLA and Arizona. The Trojans are halfway home, but there are plenty of potential bumps in the road still to come.
Anyway… Fight On! Beat the Beavers!
And… Goooo Irish, Beeeeat Eagles Fredo!
Pingback: Twitted by brendanloy
Pingback: Tweets that mention USC 34, Notre Dame 27 -- Topsy.com
While the “bread and circuses” aspect of the game was certainly entertaining for Notre Dame fans, what with the exciting goal line stand and suspenseful outcome, going inside the numbers is somewhat less promising.
Notre Dame’s defense allowed 500 yards in a make or break game, and their offense put the ball on the ground 4 – 4! – times, miraculously losing none of them. Those recovered fumbles, the timely interception, etc, worked to the advantage of the Irish – but if there were some college football equivalent to baseball’s Pythagorean Theorem – sort of what would have happened if luck had been removed from the equation – USC easily wins that game by 2-3 touchdowns.
Not a great outcome if Weis’ guys were supposed to be just as talented as Carroll’s – or anyone else’s – coming out of high school. In fact, with apologies to Rudolph and Tate, who are doing fairly well, there’s one Irish player who seems to be prepared enough to perform up to his potential…
…you know, the quarterback with the two older brothers who played major college quarterback at Tennessee.
The Weis apologism after this near-accidental victory is, again, a bane to the fortunes of Notre Dame, as they will once again think they are much closer than they are. Perhaps God doesn’t root for Notre Dame after all
On the off chance that someone replies that Notre Dame was closer than I gave them credit for, that I have grossly underestimated their performance by calling it a lucky close call, here’s a trivia question:
In how many of USC’s other 5 games this year did their offense rack up 500 yards and 8.1 yards/play?
One.
I have been struggling to find a site where any fan of that one opponent…San Jose Freaking State….characterized that as a “make or break” game for their team.
To say nothing of finding a site where a SJ State fan feels like that game went well for their team. But there may be one or two somewhere on the intertubes….
One last data point for the “If-Clausen-had-scored-late-Notre-Dame-would-be-prominent-again” crowd:
In the “Game of Their Lives”, in front of the outstretched arms of Touchdown Jesus and in front of 80,000 adoring fans, ND’s defense allowed the hated Trojans to rack up 8.1 yards per play.
In all of Division I college football this weekend, exactly two other teams allowed 8 yards per play:
Florida Atlantic, in defeating everyone’s favorite cupcake North Texas, and
Stanford, in losing to Arizona.
The Weis-men may be moving to ‘prominence’, but I do not believe it is the prominence you had in mind…
I must say that (as a USC fan) I am sick and tired of all of the personal fouls and unsportsmanlike conduct penalties that USC continues to get game after game and year after year. And really, there is only one person to blame for them….the coach. Somehow he has not been able to instill in his players that they MUST NOT get those penalties. There has to be a way to do this…other coaches of prominent teams seem to be able to do it and I can’t believe they have any fewer immature prima donas than does USC. Why not automatically remove a player when such a penalty is called? Sure that might cause a problem on that series of downs if it is Taylor Mays or someone like him….but maybe if Mays or others knew there would be an immediate consequence of such stupid action the peer pressure they would feel might have an impact….Or how about forbidding a player from celebrating HIS OWN great play. If it is such a great play then his teammates will come over to congratulate him…but he doesn’t have to do it for himself….Maybe none of these things are the right things to do…but whatever Pete Carroll has done (or not done) sure hasn’t worked!
Jazz…..maybe some credit for the 500 yards should go to Matt Barkley and company and Jeremy Bates. 🙂
Brendan…actually I think IF Texas loses before the conference championship game, USC (if it wins out) would end up higher than Texas in the polls given that it would come so late in the season and Texas has really not looked that good for several weeks now. After the performance by the offense this week, I do think USC may have a chance to win its remaining games…though I will be in New York City for the next two games..(my wife an I have an apartment there) and USC always seems to lose a game when we are there…starting with the Texas BCS game, continuing with the two Oregon State games and yes even this years’ Washington game.
I felt gut-punched in 2005 because I felt like Notre Dame should have won; today I’m only mildly disappointed because Notre Dame had absolutely no business winning, so you won’t hear any complaining out of me.
It’s clear that ND’s talent level still isn’t quite at the level of USC’s except for Clausen and Tate. Or, to refine it: ND’s talent is pretty good, but USC’s is very good AND very, very deep. How screwed would we be if Robert Hughes had dropped weights on his neck two weeks ago? Stafon Johnson did it and you wouldn’t have known anything about it from watching the game except for the helmet stickers.
ND may have one good offensive lineman; USC has five. (Probably ten.) ND has one good linebacker; USC has three, or six. This is the kind of talent gulf that ND faces because they have not been a consistently elite program for the better part of a decade. (So by all means, let’s fire the guy who’s gotten the talent we have got. I’m sure the next coach on the merry-go-round will do much better.)
That said, on offense we have a scheme and a quarterback that works wonders. USC’s vaunted defense allowed 25 points in their last three games — TOTAL, not average — and the Irish scored 27. It’s scary how good this offense could have been if Michael Floyd were healthy and USC’s secondary didn’t just sit on Golden Tate and Kyle Rudolph all game. Oh, and if the blockers up front could actually, you know, block.
But on defense, well, we’re atrocious. We can’t rush, cover or tackle. Matt Barkley was/is good, but good Lord, this defense made him look unbelievable. He had 380 yards and I don’t think he threw a ball any farther than 15. The rest was just the Irish defense leaving SC’s receivers wide freakin’ open, not tackling them well, or both. I don’t know whether it’s talent, scheme, coaching, or some combination of the three, but something needs to change there, and quickly. A good defense and a lousy offense will get you to a BCS game — ask Ohio State, who’s lived on that for a few years until they got beaten by Purdue (whereas ND beat the Boilers with basically a second-string offense). A good offense and a lousy defense will get you either losses or wins that make you need to install a pacemaker. And that’s where we’re at now.
The one good takeaway, what it’s evident this team has that it’s lacked for years: character. They simply don’t roll over and accept defeat. They were down by three scores in the fourth quarter and furiously came back — how many other teams, even top-tier teams, could do that? Hell, USC played as frightened as I’ve ever seen them play during the last drive, and they were ahead!
Irish Nation is going to have to accept that the days are gone when Notre Dame perennially fields powerful juggernaut teams like, well, USC does now. It’s a private, academic, religious school in a tiny little town with a rotten climate. They are not going to get the caliber of players that USC, Florida, and Texas get. Not anymore.
And you know what? I kind of like it that way. I like having a team that’s unheralded, disrespected and completely outmatched, but still spits in the eyes of giants and fights for every yard, even when they’re down by too many points to come back with too little time to do it.
Mike,
The sentiment that Notre Dame is just a small bunch of Rudys trying to fight giants is rather sad. Full disclosure, I hate Notre Dame, but whatever the German word is for “beyond schadenfreude”, that’s how I’ve come to feel about Notre Dame football.
Talent shmalent. Notre Dame has PLENTY of talent. As I have said repeatedly on this blog, Talent is Overrated. USC is not better than Notre Dame because they have more talent, USC is better because they are better prepared than Notre Dame, every team is better prepared than Notre Dame, and it is preparation that wins the day. Always.
You say so yourself in your post…Notre Dame can’t tackle. This isn’t because they aren’t talented enough to tackle, surely Notre Dame can recruit kids who can tackle! They aren’t prepared enough to tackle. Mainieac’s point is well-taken that USC has good players, and sure Notre Dame played atrocious defense against a pretty good team, but they still played atrocious defense. USC is good, but not at all good enough to justify the 3rd-worst defensive performance of the weekend in the game of your lives. That’s crazy.
For me, the problem at Notre Dame is that the mystique has way too much of the echoes and the shaking thunder and other oogedy boogedy crap that has nothing to do with excellence (but may make good movies). Everything about Charlie Weis screams a guy who loves that oogedy boogedy crap – which is why Notre Dame is doomed to continue sucking, with excellent personnel perennially underachieving, as long as that inferior head coach is around.
Seriously, Notre Dame, its no fun to hate you when you hate yourselves.
The sentiment that Notre Dame is just a small bunch of Rudys trying to fight giants is rather sad.
Where do you think Rudy came from? We’ve always been the underdog! We were the underdog before we became a legendary program, and even since then our best moments have come that way: the Trojan Horse game in ’77. The Chicken Soup game in ’79. Catholics Vs. Convicts in ’88. The Game Of The Century in ’93. Underdogs, every time. “What tho the odds be great or small . . .”
Talent shmalent. Notre Dame has PLENTY of talent. As I have said repeatedly on this blog, Talent is Overrated. USC is not better than Notre Dame because they have more talent, USC is better because they are better prepared than Notre Dame, every team is better prepared than Notre Dame, and it is preparation that wins the day. Always.
It’s a combination of both. Navy gameplans and executes very well, because it’s all they do well; yet they’ve only won once against Notre Dame in almost half a century mostly because ND has more talent.
Don’t get me wrong, gameplanning and scheme helps, and to that end the offense of the “inferior head coach” scored 27 points in one game against a defense that to that point had allowed 43 points in five games. They got behind by three touchdowns and didn’t crap the bed. I dunno, that sounds like fairly good preparation to me. And SC didn’t prepare for this game. It was a glorified scrimmage until ND got the wind at their backs, and then they were absolutely panicking.
All the preparation in the world won’t matter a lick if your quarterback spends the entire game on his ass because three defensive linemen ate five offensive linemen alive — which USC was very close to doing.
Weis is an offensive mind. That’s his strength and also his weakness. Manti Te’o is the FIRST defensive playmaker he’s brought in that has any kind of ability comparable to what Clausen, Tate, and Floyd can do.
Tackling was only part of the problem. USC’s receivers were just more talented than ND’s defensive backs. They were open nearly every freaking catch. You could have made most of the throws Barkley had to complete. On the other hand, how many receptions did Golden Tate make in double coverage? And let’s not forget Robby Parris, who made a catch while his knee was imploding from one USC defender’s hit while his helmet was being torn off by another’s.
Jazz, what’s the point in dumping on ND and its fans? I think a lot of ND fans are fully aware that a last minute win over USC isn’t exactly a full-on “return to glory.” You act like no one is aware of how bad ND’s defense is. The point is, this horrible team almost knocked off USC. I get that you “hate” ND, but it’s pretty lame to post 4 multiple-paragraph screeds just dumping on a team.
USC is a good team, ND isn’t as good, but had a chance to win it. Would you be citing all of these statistics if ND pulled it off? It wouldn’t mean much – it’s the score that matters.
This isn’t the right forum to go into detail, but you really should read Colvin’s book Talent is Overrated, linked in my post just above. Colvin convincingly makes the case that the people that are most successful in life, regardless of whether the domain is chess or physics or sports, are the ones who do the most of a particular type of deliberate practice, which Colvin outlines in his book (and I will leave that detail for the book).
But per Colvin’s thesis, if USC’s high school All-American wide receviers are routinely wide open against Notre Dame’s high school All-American secondary, then per Colvin’s thesis, it is a safe inference that the USC players are doing substantially more of the deliberate practice – that leads to greatness – than Notre Dame’s are.
Indeed, none of us not on that team really knows what goes on in the locker room, or the practice field, etc, but its safe to infer from Notre Dame’s poor discipline, poor execution, and underachievement that what happens in the Notre Dame locker room is not the road to greatness, per Colvin.
Perhaps the saddest comment, with all due respect, in your post Mike, is your defense of Weis as an offensive mind. That was evocative of those President Bush defenders who thought he was a great President because he had the right ideas. There’s just so much more to leadership than ideas.
Don’t get me wrong, Notre Dame floundering for another decade of futility will make me happy – but it only goes so far….
kcatnd – I didn’t see your post before I posted my last one – suffice it to say that it obviously doesn’t matter what I think, it only matters whether my underlying observations are true or not. My specific motives for ranting are not at all related to the truth value of what I posted, right?
Perhaps Weis is really a great coach, and the echoes and thunder and all that will make things right at ND again. Good luck with that….
One last kc – for what its worth, I was all over ND after both the Purdue and MSU wins, arguing after both (contra Mike Marchand) that Notre Dame pulled out both games as a result of superior talent, though in neither game did their performance suit their potential. Did it?
So – yeah if they had won at the last second yesterday maybe I wouldn’t have ranted this much…
But back at you – if ND had won at the last second, in spite of the 3rd worst defensive performance of the weekend – in the game of their lives – would you have concluded that all was well in Notre Dame world?
It might take a team from the North pulling a Big 12 title-game upset
Oh please no. Not that again. Or should I say that you have a decent chance of that? The Big 12 shoots itself in the foot with that title game about every other year. (Or at least did from 1998-2006.)
Thought about it a bit more, and I think kcatnd is right, I went too far on this thread, so to you, Mike Marchand and any others, I apologize for that. Its really not any of my business, and I shouldn’t have made it so.
In (minor) defense of myself, I was initially refuting the argument in the open that ND was a late touchdown away from returning to glory, but then Mike M’s first post touched a bit of a nerve, when he advanced the “We are a private, academic, religious school…” argument.
This irritates for two reasons: 1) ND always lands a Top 5 recruiting class, and 2) they have their own network. Surely having all 12 games heavily marketed will ensure that ND will always have access to top flight recruits, irrespective of their affiliations or academic mission. To some small extent, I feel like the NBC Network sort of involves all of us in the school’s football frustrations, even though we are all obviously free to change the channel…realize I’m on a bit of thin ice with this point.
Realize also that if Notre Dame had landed Urban Meyer a couple of years back, all of this would have been moot, as there would likely have been no disturbance in the force.
Thanks, Jazz. I just thought it was a bit much to be kicking a team when they’re so obviously down. I think the whole “Return to Glory” thing is more a product of analysts and annoying NBC hype than actual fan sentiments. A last-minute win over USC would have been thrilling and unexpected, but would certainly not magically do away with obvious problems (see the upset over Michigan in 2004 – great, but no one seriously believed it had put them back on the map). The scenario of a USC upset and BC letdown seemed entirely plausible to me all of last week.
To address your other points, ND simply does not always land a top 5 recruiting class. Look at the rankings over the last decade. Weis has had success the last few years (2008 the only top 5 class according to Rivals), but there is some truth to the idea that it’s a bit easier for a school like Florida, a large state school with an appealing climate, etc. to attract your average recruit out of the Texas/California/Florida hotbeds. It’s no excuse for ND, but it’s harder to do, period. It’s impressive that Weis has even managed to get the likes of Clausen/Floyd/Tate, and I wouldn’t be surprised if, when comparing ND and Florida side by side, Meyer saw that Florida would be the better opportunity to succeed. It is what it is and ND is still capable of being a national contender if they do things like tackle the opposing team once in a while!
What kcat said re: the rankings.
As for the NBC contract, when that was signed in 1991 there was only one ESPN network (if you can conceive of the world that way; I think you had to hand-crank your TV to get it to start in those days), and it only had games like North Dakota State against Sioux Falls Tech. Now there’s five ESPN networks airing college football, plus the Internet, plus CBS College Sports Network, FOX College Sports . . . modern college athletes are not lacking for exposure. In fact, I’m not up on my prison etiquette, but I’m pretty sure the SEC has made both CBS and ESPN its bitches.
I’m not saying it’s not helpful — I’m pretty sure I read somewhere that one of the many reasons Manti Te’o chose Notre Dame was because his mom in Oahu was guaranteed to see him seven times per year — but “OMG NOTRE DAME HAS ITS OWN NETWROK!” isn’t the self-explanatory kingmaker it once was. You can go to Notre Dame and have half your games on nationwide broadcast, or you can go to Florida and have virtually all of your games on nationwide broadcast, including your spring scrimmage. Or you can go to USC and be the only relevant football team within one hundred miles.
If it were that awesome, other schools would do it. As I’ve said many times, USC could probably withdraw out of the Pac-10 today and get virtually the same deal Notre Dame gets with NBC. Notre Dame football owns the #1 and #3 markets, why wouldn’t the Peacock want the same deal for #2? Plus, the Pac-10 would could pick Boise State or Hawaii and put them in a major conference. That’s a win-win. Wait, we could also get ex-Trojan Tom Haden out of our broadcast booth — it’s a win-win-win!
Just went to rivals.com for curiosity – ND’s recruiting classes in 2006-8 were top 10, though ’09 wasn’t (and ’10 so far isn’t). ’04 and ’05 were horrid – cue the inevitable Willingham was he?/wasn’t he? discussion.
I admit that in addition to rival-driven hatred of Notre Dame I find the whole enterprise quite fascinating, and I sure don’t envy the school’s trustees and directors for the challenge in managing the whole thing. My initial reaction to Mike’s comment about the ND Network was, sure, Florida has about equal exposure, but in terms of stockpiling players, Notre Dame ought to be able to get about as much talent (as they did in 2006-8) and then win it on the field.
But for ND things are WAAY more complicated than Talent just being Overrated. There’s Rudy, and the need for the coaching staff to indulge Rudy-loving fans, while the coaches simultaneously don’t take the Rudy mystique home with them…but in this discussion another complication occured to me:
How many Notre Dame football players are at the school as the fulfillment of a lifelong dream? If Notre Dame and Florida both sign top-rated All-American running backs, and the Notre Dame guy went to Mater Dei, has several relatives that are Irish alumni and always dreamed of playing for them, won’t he be in a different place than the Florida guy? The Florida All-American is certainly only looking for the program that will allow him to take the next step – to the pros – and surely couldn’t care less about tradition or the Gator Chomp or whatever they do in Gainesville. No one cares about that stuff at Florida, and so no one is distracted by such things.
Very very difficult to manage this stuff at Notre Dame. The tradition drives the endowment and many other good things, but while indirectly helpful in winning football games, it also presents challenges to the school. A fascinating and unique phenomenon.
I don’t see Boise State ever being admitted into the Pac-10. At one point (although this does not appear to currently be the case) they couldn’t have joined at all as they are not a research university (Hawaii is, so they could qualify) but even if not an official position, its a tradition I don’t see changing anytime soon. In fact all but one school (Oregon) are classified at the highest level (Research University/Very High) by the Carnegie Foundation. Oregon is one step below (Research Unviersity/High). (Note to self, point this out to Duck fans).
If the Pac-10 were to expand, the two most likely candidates would be BYU and Utah, both classified as Resarch Univeristies (High and Very High respectively). They have a natural and existing rivalry as well, and would make an easy north/south division possible (Washington, Oregon and Utah schools in the North, California and Arizona schools in the South).
Personally I prefer the 10 member setup and round-robin scheduling and I would in fact go so far as to say that I think ALL conferences should be limited to 10 members and required to schedule round-robin. This would give a better picture of who is actually best in each conference. I don’t see that happening, but it would be nice.
Note to self, point this out to Duck fans
Hahaha! Nerdiest. Trash-talk. Ever. “We’re a Research I university and you’re not! Suck on THAT, Ducks!”
(By the way, as I understand it, “Research University/Very High”:”Research I University”::”Football Championship Subdivision”:”Division I-A.” I prefer the non-Orwellian terms, thank you very much. 🙂
This has been discussed on the blog before, and while the BYU/Utah thing makes a lot of sense, I personally endorse the concept of the Pac-10 stealing Colorado from the Big XII and Colorado State from the Mountain West, which I understand are both Research I universities. The fact that this arrangement would allow me to frequently attend USC games without leaving my home state has NOTHING to do with my endorsement. 🙂
The Big XII could then dump Baylor, move one Big XII North team (Missouri, Kansas or Kansas State) to the Big XII South, and add BYU and Utah to the Big XII North. Problem solved!
Oh, and the Mountain West, having lost BYU, Utah, and Colorado State, could then merge with the WAC, creating a 16-team megaconference sure to make David K.’s head explode with a total lack of round-robin-ocity! 🙂 They’d need one additional team to make it 16 instead of 15… let’s say Tulsa from C-USA… and heck, let’s switch Louisiana Tech and Houston, since the former clearly does not belong in a “western” conference, and LaTech sucks anyway. Result:
WESTERN MEGACONFERENCE NORTH
Boise State
Fresno State
Nevada
Idaho
Utah State
Wyoming
Air Force
San Jose State
WESTERN MEGACONFERENCE SOUTH
TCU
Hawaii
Tulsa
Houston
UNLV
New Mexico
New Mexico State
San Diego State
I don’t actually endorse this idea, but it’s always fun to think about silly conference re-configurations. 🙂
Speaking as a sports fan junkie who’s lived his entire life in the Midwest, and consequently engages in the ritual overlooking of all things Pac-10, I feel that there would be significant marginal benefit to the Pac-10 in choosing the Colorados over the Utahs in terms of getting folks like me to pay attention.
Its true that we pretty much ignore everything west of the Mississippi, but Colorado still feels like the US while points further west seem to be so far away that they feel like another continent. Indeed, if getting Midwesterners to regard the Pac-10 like the SEC is the goal, the Pac-10 may wish to consider going all out and prying the Iowas away. I know it makes no geographic sense, but that didn’t stop the Big East from adding Notre Dame, Marquette, Cincinnati, Louisville and DePaul, or the “Atlantic” 10 from adding Xavier, Dayton and (west of the Mississippi, so definitionally not Atlantic) St. Louis.
By the way, speaking again as a Midwesterner-flyover-country-struggles-to-keep-Western-stuff-straight-sports-fan, I fully endorse the idea of the Western mega-conference. It would go a long way in helping us keep stuff straight. None of us know…is Boise State in the WAC? What about Utah? Mountain West is better than the WAC, and BYU is Mountain West, but they were WAC when they won the championship, right? Very hard for us to keep straight. A mega-conference would be very helpful in this regard.
Incidentally, according to atleast one site I cam across the reason for Texas’s exclusion from the Pac-10 is apparently due to Stanford. New membership requires a unanimous vote and the Drunken Trees aparentally felt like Texas would hurt the conference’s ACADEMIC reputation. Meanwhile WSU and ASU sit looking suspicious over in the corner? To be fair WSU was a Pacific Coast Conference (the first incarnation of the Pac-10) member before Stanford.
Random fact. Two schools have been continous members of the Pac-10 and all its previous incarnations since the PCC’s inception, Washington and Cal.
David,
That’s an interesting allegation regarding UT-Austin. Per your link above, that school is RU/VH (or, as the cooler nerds would put it, “Research 1”).
Beyond that, it seems to me that most people generally think of it as a pretty good university. The latest US News rankings has them 47th, which would rank them 6th in the Pac-11.
But…of course…Stanford is higher…
More on the story here:
http://www.fanblogs.com/big12/005466.php
It’s not clear if Texas was rejected purely for academic’s by Stanford since the article says they battled athletically and academically it may have been a jealousy thing in fact?
David K,
That’s a pretty provocative link. I liked the quote that UT Austin wanted the patina of being associated with those California schools, but one, at least (Stanford) didn’t want the negative association with Texas.
This is interesting if you revisit the US News report I linked in post #25. Disclaimer: that US News ranking is a “comprehensive” one, which means it inevitably includes some hocus-pocus, probably a casting couch, and maybe a few well-heeled donors writing checks to US News. Caveats aside –
– The California Pac 10 schools show up quite well on that US News list, which pretty much matches our expectation (except USC! USC sux!….am I banned? ;). Your Huskies also do quite well. Beyond those 5, though, the rest of the conference leaves a little something to be desired.
Interestingly, long before you find the lower half of the Pac-10 ranked in the 100’s on the US News list, you bump into Texas A&M at 61 – and since Texas A&M is also Research 1, you would think that Texas + Texas A&M would have met the (academic) criteria for expansion.
Heck, if the intellectual California royalty were unable to extract Colorado State out of the Mountain West, per the US News link, they could have gone with Colorado + Colorado School of Mines, both tied at 77th best college, and both better than the lower 5 in the Pac 10. The Colorado School of Mines doesn’t have a great football reputation, but apparently they’re scrappy and really know how to dig it out.
In all seriousness, David, your link gives the flavor of a conference intellectually dominated by its high-prestige California universities, assuming that it is facie true that they really felt like Texas/Texas A&M weren’t intellectually good enough for them…maybe the California schools’ administrations are only marginally aware that the Oregons and Washington State are in their conference…
Jazz, first this happened almost 20 years ago, second, they could on their own refuse admission to new schools, they didn’t have the power to kick out current members, so while the standings of the lower academic echelon of the conference may not be stellar, its also not something they could change.
I’m sure I’m the only one interested in this…but first, David, while Stanford can’t kick out the WSU’s of the conference, its interesting that they felt like adding Texas would be “slumming”. I didn’t look it up, but I’m pretty confident Texas was a more highly regarded university than either of the Oregons, either of the Arizonas, or WSU in 1995.
The intrigue lies in the possibility that there is some sort of California intellectual elitism driving the expansion decision, as if the mindset is, we can’t get rid of the Oregons or WSU, but if we have only two more schools to add, let’s keep it in the Golden State. Turns out there are no fewer than 4 other schools in the UC system that are Research 1 and also in the US News top 50: UC San Diego, UC Santa Barbara, UC Irvine, and surely-ready-for-prime-time-by-almost-defeating-a-powerhouse UC Davis.
Except,
UCSD = no football and Div II athletics
UCSB = no football
And i’d hardly say its a California intellectual elitism since it was only Stanford, not Cal, USC or UCLA that opposed Texas joining.