Notre Dame doesn't want to go to Detroit --EDITED: Definitely not going to a bowl
"I agree [no bowl] is the likely outcome, but we are reconvening the leadership counsel to make a final decision," Swarbrick said, according to the report.http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4713316
Notre Dame, which finished 6-6, would be slotted into a bowl only after all of the bowl-eligible teams with seven victories have set their destinations, according to the report. That would likely leave two choices: The Little Caesars Pizza Bowl in Detroit on Dec. 26, or the GMAC Bowl in Mobile, Ala., on Jan. 6.A bowl game is looking unlikely for them, I wonder if they want the practices or not? EDIT -- apparently no bowl for Notre Dame. http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ap-notredame-bowl&prov=…
December 4th, 2009 at 2:31 PM ^
Are bowl rights assignable? If so, we'll take 'em!!
December 4th, 2009 at 3:20 PM ^
...unbelieveable, right?
We would have gladly gone to a low-tier bowl, but these arrogant pricks think God doesn't want them to play lowly CMU.
It's that holier-than-thou attitude I can't stand but even Michigan beat them so how good were they, really? Whatever, to hell with Notre Dame.
December 4th, 2009 at 3:56 PM ^
For a Bowl Game
-Its a bowl game
-Get to play another game
-Chance of sending out the senior class on a high note
-Might make some money out of it, but not likely
-More Practice time
Against a Bowl Game
-Lowest Tier Bowl, against probably a MAC team
-Whole team does not have the motivation needed
-No Head Coach
-No one on staff with experience calling offensive plays
-Draft Prospects risking injury for a win over a MAC team (there is more than 2 btw)
-Last Bowl game with an interim HC resulted in a shellacking
-Could result in a losing season
-Coaches can focus on recruiting efforts
It comes down to priorities different people are going to have a different opinion because of them. I would love to see Clausen to Tate in a bowl game but you can argue thats gambling their futures, both probable draftees I can't say that is worth the trade off. This is not the same ND team without Weis, they're hurting; the way Swarbrick talked about releasing Weis from his duties made it sound like he had died, and that is very much how the team has taken it.
December 4th, 2009 at 4:14 PM ^
So are you for or against?
December 4th, 2009 at 4:19 PM ^
Neither it seems, I would like to watch the game and would probably even go to it but I understand why it is unlikely.
Honestly if not going to the bowl game allows the AD to focus on the coaching search and the current staff to focus on recruiting it will be favorable trade off. So I guess I am against it...but not really because I would like to go to the game.....does that make sense? :)
December 4th, 2009 at 7:16 PM ^
Kind of. I can see where you're torn over it but I think that the coaching search and recruiting can be carried out even if they are in a bowl. The practices are the biggest thing.
December 4th, 2009 at 10:37 PM ^
I agree that there will be some favorable trade off with recruiting in terms of time allowed, but do you see any backlash against a coaching staff whose players didn't feel compelled to play in a bowl game? How do you spin that as someone that's been recruiting a kid throughout the season?
Moreover, how much more focus could really be put on recruiting if a new coach comes in and overhauls all of the assistant/coordinator positions? The decision not to go bowling damns the old guys, and the transition, smooth or not, damns the new guys.
December 4th, 2009 at 10:53 PM ^
-I don't know how much they actually have to spin anything. The same disappointment that the players expressed in Weis's removal is echoed by the committed recruits. As hard as that can be for some UM fans to comprehend they were coming to ND to be coached by Weis.
-That can probably serve as a guide to the way the AD is hoping the coaching search goes tbh. It is obvious he is making some sacrifices at the end of this season to make the eventual transition as smooth as possible. Obviously there will be negatives to a coaching change, and most of them can't be prevented but only minimized. It is apparent that Swarbrick put a lot of thought into the decision to release Weis, all I can do is trust him thats all there is to it.
December 4th, 2009 at 6:31 PM ^
you are entirely too rational to really be a Notre Dame fan.
With the exception of sideline call photo interpretation.
December 4th, 2009 at 11:52 PM ^
...if I were a ND fan I would like to see them play the game and win, but they have no coach and their QB is likely gone.
Let them regroup and we'll see them in September
December 5th, 2009 at 12:15 AM ^
I understand the points you're making when it comes to being against a bowl game, but from a competitive point of view it's a bunch of crap. If you boil down those arguments, you end up with the conclusion that all the coaches are incompetent, and the players are lazy and a bunch of pu$$ies. Collectively they don't want to end up with a losing season. I guess too bad they couldn't vote to stop the season even earlier to ensure a winning record. Anything can happen during a game, but the risk of injury won't be greater than playing against the USC athletes. If those two or more NFL prospects are scared, they don't really have to play in that game. I think ND could easily whoop a MAC team just like Hawaii last year, but them not wanting to take that chance is kind of embarrasing. As a ND fan you should be hoping they have more confidence by the time they play us next year.
EDIT: I replied before I noticed 'scottcha' had made a similar argument below.
December 4th, 2009 at 4:11 PM ^
go to Detriot, maybe the lions can play em.
December 4th, 2009 at 7:40 PM ^
First, they'd have to figure out where Detriot is.
Sounds like a dangerous place, what with the "riot" and all.
December 4th, 2009 at 4:48 PM ^
there to play football and if they turn down a bowl bid that is a total slap in the face to that bowl, and something only an aroragant ND program would do. Also they can bring more players to a bowl game than any other away game, giving under classmen the chance to experience a bowl which would help down the road.
December 4th, 2009 at 5:01 PM ^
Their title is student-athlete you seem to be missing half the equation there
December 4th, 2009 at 5:36 PM ^
Somewhere, Jerome Bettis just wept.
December 4th, 2009 at 6:20 PM ^
ND is not going to any bowl this year.
December 4th, 2009 at 9:02 PM ^
Frauds. People talk about Michigan living in the past too much, but Notre Dame takes it way too far. They suck, I mean they're a terrible football team, I don't see why they think they're entitled to something better than this. Are they not there because they want to play football? Is it just about being on some imaginary Notre Dame pedestal? Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue better pound these frauds next year. If you don't want to play football, you don't deserve a D1 scholarship, go play intramural.
Don't give me the money argument, or the circumstances argument. The players and coaches met to see if they wanted to play.
December 4th, 2009 at 9:48 PM ^
The argument against taking a bowl game is completely rational. No head coach, playing against a MAC team (oh gasp!), more focus on selecting a new coach--all that shit. The whole thing isn't rooted in ND's continually growing arrogance.
Being at 6-6 also puts them in prime position to be dealt a horrible, horrible loss. No winning season, the potential of getting slapped around by the MAC, an even bigger hit to recruiting than Weis leaving is already going to be; it makes sense to turn all of that negativity down.
All that said, it looks like they're running away from a fight. They're scared of losing even more face, scared of getting hurt on the way to the NFL. Their "leadership council" looks gutless. Their team looks broken. This isn't even what ND pretends to be.
A loss would surely look bad, but backing out of proving yourselves for one last time looks infinitely worse. Logistics be damned.
December 4th, 2009 at 10:35 PM ^
All that said, it looks like they're running away from a fight. They're scared of losing even more face, scared of getting hurt on the way to the NFL. Their "leadership council" looks gutless. Their team looks broken. This isn't even what ND pretends to be. A loss would surely look bad, but backing out of proving yourselves for one last time looks infinitely worse. Logistics be damned.I can see where your coming from but I basically see it as a business decision, and that is what college football comes down to now. When Weis was released Swarbrick ended the season right there, from that point on it was all about the future. Ianello is running things because he was the recruiting coordinator, and that is all the staff has done from that point on. The extra time off gives the current players time to go back to the families over winter break and decide whether their future lies with the next HC. It is all about building the foundation of the future ND team. Falling into a losing record would obviously be bad on its own, but what do you think ND would actually gain from beating CMU or Ohio? Do you honestly think ND is going to be given any respect for it? Hawaii (the favorite) was utterly destroyed last year on their own field against ND and what was the consensus response? Well Hawaii sucks. So ND could lose, and be in an entirely worse place, could win and be given the "that doesn't mean anything" treatment or just say no to all of it and move forward. Option 3 it is.
December 5th, 2009 at 11:20 AM ^
Like I said, I 100% agree that the decision is completely logical. After Weis got fired, voting down some bowl was a formality, as there are too many loose ends to take care of, too many logistics to worry about.
But like I said, logistics be damned. It still feels wrong.
December 4th, 2009 at 10:45 PM ^
with a new coach (probably a whole set of coaches) coming in after the bowl game, there's not much value in 15 additional practices. CW is already gone; it's not like the last hurrah for LC, Henne, Hart, Long and company. ND not going to a bowl means another 6-6 team will go bowling. There are pluses and minuses; I can't fault the "leadership council", they need to look to the coaching search.
December 4th, 2009 at 10:08 PM ^
I understand that Notre Dame is a proud program historically, but in modern times it doesn't make any sense to decline a bowl invitation. It loses money for Notre Dame and it is also unfair to all the players, assuming that most of them wanted to play in a bowl. I especially feel bad for all the seniors who stayed through all the diversity this team faced. They were probably hoping to play one more game and leave with a good memory. By doing this, Notre Dame is also turning down a couple weeks of extra practice time. I don't think this is a smart move.