I've become intrigued with the idea of Notre Dame joining the Big East since it was suggested to me last week. I've begun to wonder what it would take. Assuming Notre Dame has concluded conference membership is inevitable, here are some thoughts:

1. Although I don't think that this is the most important consideration for them. . . MONEY. Notre Dame would not want to lose on the deal, so they would need a guarantee similar to what the Big East offered Miami. The Big East will have no problem with this. They will probably also look for a TV deal for the non-Big East portion of their schedule similar to what they have now - or even a separate TV contract for all Notre games except for a couple that are designated as part of a Big East TV package.

2. Membership - Notre Dame might want a guarantee that the league would NOT expand beyond 8 members. They might insist that Navy be one of those members. This would mean that a Big East schedule would only represent 3 new games for ND since they already have 3 Big East schools on the schedule + Navy. This would mean NO Louisville. With 7 Big East games, ND could still play USC, 2 - 3 Big Ten games, & 1 or 2 additional games such as another West Coast opponent &/or a power team like Miami or Florida State for their RPI. A second West Coast team like Washington would guarantee them an annual appearance out West for alumni & recruits, given home & home scheduling.

3. Schedule - This could be the biggie. How can Notre Dame maximize any advantages of Big East membership? Alumni, recruiting, & attendance. So, perhaps they insist on 3 locations at which they appear annually to facilitate their outreach to recruits & alumni while maximizing attendance revenues - Boston @ Foxboro, New York @ The Meadowlands/Giants Stadium, Pittsburgh @ Three Rivers Stadium. This would mean alternating BC & UConn @ Foxboro, Rutgers & Syracuse @ The Meadowlands, Pitt & West Virginia @ Three Rivers. Remember that Pennsylvania & New Jersey are big recruiting bases for Notre Dame so an annual presence in both areas would be a plus. Moving the games to off campus sites would be a big concession for the Big East schools - especially Syracuse, but I think they would consider it. They may even want to consider playing Navy in Philadelphia.

It will be interesting to see what moves the Big East makes over the next year. If they stay pat & do not add Louisville, if they decide to stay together with the non-football schools, this may be an indication that Notre Dame is pulling the strings behind the scenes.

It will take the image of the Blessed Mother appearing on the forehead of Trangese - nothing more, nothing less.

Nert, I think you're probably right.

BTW, I have this great vision of Tranghese's forehead . . . Would this be a Gorby kind of thing? ;D

As a PSU alum, nothing would make me happier than Notre Dame and Pitt playing at 3 Rivers Stadium. Of course, it would have made me happier, if they played the day that 3 Rivers was imploded. ;D

I guess Heinz Field will have to do.

3. Schedule - This could be the biggie. How can Notre Dame maximize any advantages of Big East membership? Alumni, recruiting, & a....

************************

You may have left out an important fourth point:

4. The Big East agrees to rename itself the Big Notre Dame.

Oops! :-[ Thanks for the correction, Danny. :)

Well here's another interesting thought about NotreDame going East.

It is commonly assumed that if NotreDame did not join the Big10, the next most likely school the Big10 would look at, if it were desirable to have a championship game, would be Pitt.

But if NotreDame did join the BE, there is no way either Pitt or Syracuse would leave the BE. Their future would be secure there. Why have three or four big-school hurdles preventing a conference-championship run (Penn, Michigan, OSU, etc.), when there will only be one big hurdle--NotreDame.

The only option for the Big10 if NotreDame joins the BE is to start looking at Mizzou. This is an interesting example of what we might call a "reverse-domino" effect (lol); one domino preventing others from falling, rather than precipitating the fall of more.

FriarFan, I think your points have some merit and represent the best case available for recruiting ND. Don't forget the issue of what should the BE do to keep ND if it comes? Offering separate, guaranteed financial incentives is not fiscally prudent, and places ND in an even more powerful position to control the league. "Won't pay us more? Then we'll go indie again!!" And given that status, would their exit clause be more stringent?

With ND sliding into the fb camp, who would be the 14th school added, if at all? Suddenly the bball schools are back in the minority, which they may not want even if Notre Dame stays on board.

Javaman-I think Pitt and Rutgers would still jump at the Big 10 even if ND were in the BE. The private schools, SU and BC, I think are a different story. I think UConn would stay also.

I don't know where this "common" wisdom comes from, but it flies completely counter to statements from Big11 conference officials and from officials at most of the Big11 schools (save PennState) that say Pitt is not being considered. The PennState comments were simply that "they" would like to see Pitt added - but there is no support for it in the rest of the Big11. If Pitt (or Missouri) was such an easy to arrive at 2nd choice to NotreDame; then why haven't they been asked?

The Big11 has been giving up the considerable added revenue from a conference championship game for a decade now (in the neighborhood of $120 million in foregone revenue) and there have been no efforts to invite anyone but NotreDame. Would they wait this long and give up that much revenue - to then turn and settle for Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers or Missouri? They could have had any of these at any time in the last decade simply by asking, yet they have not asked.

The only possible conclusion: they are not being conisdered.

BEST BET:
If NotreDame stays independent, the Big11 stays at 11.
If NotreDame joins the BigEast or ACC (both exceptionally unlikely), the Big11 stays at 11.

The only way the Big11 expands is if NotreDame asks to join - and even then there is no gaurantee they'll be invited - not after the last fiasco. Last time, NotreDame's academic interests asked to be considered...the Big11 Presidents debated and almost rejected the idea of extending NotreDame an invitation because of NotreDame's lack of research facilities and graduate programs...the Big11 finally gave NotreDame an invitation...NotreDame then fussed about it and finally turned the Big11 down. The Big11 is in no hurry to get back to NotreDame - and isn't interested in anyone else.

As for the theory that NotreDame could benefit from conference games in the east:
(1) If the BigEast was a minor conference (non-BCS), NotreDame could still play in the east as often as they would like to (and dictate the sites, times and gate revenue split).
(2) Without the BigEast as a BCS conference, they would have an easier path to a BCS game (less automatic bids means more at-large ones).
(3) And finally - a weak, disorganized, non-BCS east is easier to recruit against in the east than a strong BCS BigEast with viable BCS teams. NotreDame would be stupid to give up their most fertile recruiting grounds by creating stong alternatives in the recruits' own back yards.

I agree with some of this also.

The following is worth reflecting on, though:

" Without the BigEast as a BCS conference, they would have an easier path to a BCS game (less automatic bids means more at-large ones)."

I think there is a good likelihood there will be only one at-large bid in the future. The reasoning?

I don't think the the BCS schools will shoot themselves in the foot by making their number smaller than the non-BCS schools in the next BCS go-round. This creates possibilities of being outvoted in other forums such as NCAA meetings, etc. My personal view is that BE will retain BCS status by adding two schools (whole lot of flack if they don't--you can bet ACC will be lobbying on their behalf considering what happened, the lawsuit and all). The BCS will also add a strengthened and expanded MWC, always the conference with the best case for BCS status, and probably with even a better case than the BE now.

The problem: this will leave only one at-large slot rather than two. The formula will have to select beween the highest-ranked BCS non-champion (USC was ranked 3rd last year, I believe), the highest independent, or the highest non-BCS school. The mind boggles to think of the politics here. I don't think they will add a fifth-bowl; they are too greedy for that.

If this scenario is true, it makes it harder for Notre Dame to participate, and even more likely they will join a conference before its too late. The longer Notre Dame waits to join a conference, the less power it will have, as has been pointed out by several of you before.

Nert, I agree that the Big Ten is unlikely to add anyone other than Notre Dame. But just for historical puposes . . . I seem to recall statements to the effect that overtures had been made by the Big Ten to Syracuse & possibly to Pitt as well at the time that the Big East added Miami in the late '80s. These statements were offered as a rationale for adding Miami, saying that the league was afraid of losing either Syracuse or Pitt or both if they did not accomodate their football needs.

I suspect that the BCS is privately wrestling with all of the options that have been so articulately stated here & that this will become more public as we approach 2005. I think that there dilemma is that if you keep a watered down Big East & add the Mountain West, you are eliminating at-large spots for more deserving non-champions from BCS leagues, which would be upalatable to these members. Would this also mean an unattractive Big East/Mountain West match-up? I forget how the lower pairings are determined. Perhaps the addition of a fifth bowl would be the solution - or God forbid :o, a true play-off system. :P ;D

The BCS will NOT give up a bowl slot. And given the existing configurations, MWC doesn't have any edge over CUSA. CUSA is the stronger overall all-sports conference which carries some impact on the decisions by the BCS members. An expanded MWC wouldn't get a bid over a East WAC/Southern CUSA either.

There has been some discussion of a 5th bowl. IMO, the most likely BCS deal in 2006 is 5 bowls, 6 automatic bids, 3 wildcards for BCS schools and 1 slot for the best champ of the non-BCS conferences (no guaranteed slot for any of those 3-5 conferences)

bullet, there is some truth to what you say, but also think about this:

There was an article a few months back in one of the western newspapers (I'll try to do some searching again if I have some time), and it talked about the logic of future BCS expansion from the standpoint of the television networks, who after all, are one of the most significant power blocks in BCS negotiations. The basic rationale of the article was that ABC wanted to have more and more states (not schools) represented in the BCS configuration. The article then made the point that an expanded MWC would deliver all remaining BCS-less states except three or four. C-USA or others just duplicate existing states, and do not represent the most prestigious and powerful schools in their area. The MWC schools for the most part provide both this prestige and new regions of television ad dollars--they are for the most part flagship institutions in their region, a region whose growth rate is faster than any other in the country, with very favorable family, age and income demographics from the network's point of view.

Just something else to think about... :)