Decision to not accept a bowl bid just adds to program’s disgrace. Dave Miller
Citing “unique circumstances” surrounding the Notre Dame program, athletic director Jack Swarbrick confirmed reports throughout the week that Notre Dame will not accept an invitation to a bowl game after finishing its disappointing season at 6-6.
The decision reportedly had not yet been finalized before a team meeting between players and coaches on Friday, but it was common knowledge that the administration was not interested in any type of postseason.
Why you ask? I asked the same thing myself before I quickly came up with the answer that fits in so many instances when it comes to the folks in South Bend.
Simply put, this decision—once again—wreaks of Notre Dame pomposity.
Before dropping the ambiguous “unique circumstances” line, Swarbrick wrote in the prepared statement: “Notre Dame institutionally always has been a strong advocate of the bowl system, and we sincerely appreciate the bowls and individuals representing them who reached out to us.”
Well if this is the case, why not give every senior on the team a chance to put on the pads for what would be, for many, the final time in their lives? Oh that’s right, these “little” bowls just don’t pay enough for the Irish.
Is Notre Dame also worried that players, specifically draft-bound QB Jimmy Clausen and WR Golden Tate, wouldn’t be focused enough on a “minor” bowl game? Please, these are kids who love the game of football. If anything, it’s yet another draft showcase for Clausen and Tate, and a chance for the entire team to end the rough year on a high note.
Is the administration, perhaps, worried about getting embarrassed by, say, Central Michigan in the GMAC Bowl?
That’s truly the only thing that comes to mind. The Notre Dame officials are letting the college football world know that they believe the school is too good for anything less than a BCS berth.
That delusion will only further bury the school on the national landscape.
Even with the dismissal of head coach Charlie Weis—a coach who the players loved—you don’t think the team would play hard for assistant head coach and recruiting coordinator Rob Ianello? For Corwin Brown and Jon Tenuta?
It’s one thing if the game was being played tonight and the players’ and coaches’ minds were elsewhere. But with the team having three-to-four weeks of extra practice and reps, don’t you think that those players would be salivating at the chance to bang helmets and pads against a team with a different jersey color?
The Irish likely would have been destined for the Little Caesars Pizza Bowl in Detroit on December 26 or the GMAC Bowl in Mobile, Alabama on January 6. Granted, Detroit is not Pasadena. And the GMAC Bowl isn’t the Orange Bowl. But for a school that is supposed to be The Example of how a program should be run, taking away an opportunity from a team—a family—to have a few more weeks of brotherhood together doesn’t seem right.
In my opinion, there’s nothing embarrassing about a lower-tier bowl. The only embarrassment is the school’s continued insistence that it is mightier than every other institution across the country. That bad attitude is the very unique circumstance which will continually plague the Irish as 68 other teams go bowling this holiday season.
Dave Miller is the Web Manager of the National Football Post. You can follow him on Twitter at Miller_Dave.
Good synopsis of everything that's wrong with ND. They're now the Raiders of college football - constant second guessing from above and no stability.
Until ND joins the Big Ten, they're going to continue spending their time wondering why nothing else they do works. Recruits don't care about the history or the exclusive tv deal. They need to get into a competitive league. It's worked for them in basketball - they were awful prior to joining the Big East, now they're in the running every year.
I hope they keep up this nonsense of 'win now or else', mostly because I love seeing them lose.
College football is rife with corruption and hypocrisy. It's also lame.
I find it very amusing the different takes on what Notre Dame shoud and shouldn't do. If they decide to go to a bowl, they are faced with the charges of, " Wow, Notre Dame has fallen so far that they are willing to accpet a bowl at 6-6! What a disgrace for a tradition like that to be happy to be invited to a bowl with a 6-6 record".
When they decide not to go, and honestly, with everything going on, isn't that the most logical choice, it is, "Notre Dame shows its true colors". Give me a break!
They made the only decision they could make. ND lost their coach and are trying to figure out what direction they need to take for the future. There is not a good answer here, only speculation and frivoulous accusations from those who can't do, therefore, criticize.
ESPN today said that Notre Dame is too focused on making a "big splash" in the hiring of a new coach. This was right after the short interview with Swarbrick who said, " I can't give a short list or names of those we have contacted, nor will I give a wish list". This is a big Splash? Really? That statement says that ND is looking to make a big splash? I know Herbstreet is a former player and fairly knowledgable with regards to college football but he got a "big splash" from the comments from ND's AD? Are you kidding me? The media makes everythinhg more than it is and Notre Dame's biggest aponent is not USC, but the biased and story hungry media.
The report out of South Bend is that the players voted against the bowl. Prior to the vote JS said the players would have input into the decision and after the vote he said unless something changed they wouldn't be going.
So it's not just the arrogant administration, the players you pretend to care about don't want to leave their families for 5 days over Christmas just to bust their ass for a coach they don't have.
Can we just boil this down to the bare essentials? How about just playing the bowl game because the kids like to play football? Yes, with all the turmoil ND might lose the game. Well, if they turn down every game in which they might lose due to this problem or that...hmmm...maybe just need to rethink overall why play the game. Oh yes, it is just a game...and supposed to be a fun game at that...
I can't believe this qualifies as journalism. The players voted against going to a bowl, there is no coach left who would be able to call plays, and the list goes on.
Way to actually do research--you know, what you should have done before you started writing. Good lord, what a disgrace.
All you Notre Dame apologists crack me up. I was hoping that they would have accepted so my Temple Owls could've dropped the hammer on them.
In response to Tim O'Malley, I'd just point out that Notre Dame is not the only football program in history to fire a coaching staff before a bowl game. Other schools have sent lame duck staffs to bowls, either under the lame duck head coach, or under his coordinators if the head man either wasn't invited to finish out the bowl season, or if he was unwilling. If assistants leave immediately for other jobs (unlikely... it's not like anyone is banging down this staff's doors at this point, and most schools will allow an assistant to finish out his bowl commitment before bringin him aboard), then you've still got graduate assistants. Georgia's going into the Independence Bowl, with Mark Richt, the d-line coach, and two grad assistants coaching the defense. Or you've got your new coaches. If you bring in a new staff in time, and they want to go ahead and coach, I don't think there's going to be any confusion about who the new sheriff in town is. Any holdovers for the bowl could even treat the bowl as their audition for the new head guy, a last chance to keep their jobs.
No, this refusal to take a bowl is just Notre Dame taking its ball and going home, because it's too proud to stoop low enough to head to a low-tier bowl game. Perhaps pomposity isn't such an outrageous charge after all.
This article is right on... only Notre Dame would feel a bowl game was beneath them... It is an absolute joke...
It seems the school administrators were wiser than most. They realized what it seems many
making comments did not. That is, Notre Dame was not good enough to play in a bowl game.
Bowl game participants should be limited to champions. I would hardly consider a team with
a 6-6 record a champion or worthy of participating in a bowl game. Who wants to watch
a team with that record play in a bowl game, when there are so many more choices? I am not
an anti ND fan. I am just being realistic. i also think there are others who should not be in bowl
games.
Thanks to the ND administration for their sensible decision.
Slobodan-
I actually did make sure to research before I wrote, as I do believe in providing readers with opinion based on facts. There was never a formal vote about bowl participation, despite reports that you may have read. Swarbrick met with the captains and members of a leadership committee. There were plenty of players who expressed interest in playing a 13th game. Thanks for reading.
A week ago, a lot of sports blogs had "GMAC Bowl: Notre Dame vs Ohio U." I agree that would have been a no-win situation for The Irish. Ohio gave good game to Connecticut and Tennessee. Notre Dame is so self-important that some thought playing Georgia Tech in the 1999 Gator Bowl was not deserving of wearing their sacred green jerseys. By the way Notre Dame lost 35-28.
Maybe a team/school shouldn't be rewarded with a bowl game and a million-dollar payout for going 6-6.
Dave,
Nice to see you're so concerned about the players. Those same players voted - regardless of how many were for or against - not to go to a bowl.
Without a head coach, or offensive coordinator, the team would not be nearly as competitive as possible (go ahead, insert joke). It makes no sense for those same players - the guys you seem to care so much about - to play a game and be even more demoralized by a preponderance of anti-ND journalists not unlike yourself should they come up lame. How willing would you be to write an article about them getting an E for effort? You'd be salivating at the thought of taking yet another shot at the team and the school. A no-win situation, press-wise.
Beneath them? I was in Shreveport, LA to see the Irish play LSU - in the Tigers' own backyard, for God's sake! - in the Poulan Weed Eater Bowl in 1997. There isn't much lower than that on the college football food chain. so don't talk about Notre Dame being above playing in a second or third tier bowl.
This is a team matter and you should respect their decision. Put aside your anti-Notre Dame jealous rage and be a responsible journalist rather than a douche.
Have a great day,
Kevin
Kevin- I remember that Independence Bowl very clearly. Ron Powlus will always be my favorite Golden Domer of all-time. I wouldn't go ahead and say that "there isn't much lower than [the Independence Bowl] on the college football food chain," however. It's not exactly a garbage bowl game. At the end of the day, it really wasn't about the players, though. Clausen and Tate were "the players" whose influence mattered most. Thanks for reading.
Or MAYBE they declined the bowl bid because many of the players hate football now because the season destroyed any sense of camaraderie within the team? There are quite a few seniors who were dead set on coming back for a fifth year that are now....not. Guaranteed they don't want to play in a bowl game either. The response from them about whether or not they wanted to play was overwhelmingly negative, and maybe the school actually took that into account. Just saying.
Green Bay hikes prices up to $5...
Where will Peyton Manning end...
Velocity and throws to the left...
Who makes up this talented small-school...
A look at the most impressive...
Dec 05, 2009
01:37 PM
Dave,
So much anger, my friend. I'm not rejecting your entire argument but, there are other reasons that Notre Dame may have chose not to pursue a bowl bid (for which they're barely eligible):
1. Perhaps, the assistant coaches are on their way to taking jobs in the near future themselves and would not be able to adequately prepare the team and recruit during this span.
2. A new coach could be hired in the next week or so, leaving a bit of a confusion: who is the real staff of the unit? The new coach and his assistants, or the old coaches? Which of them would make the transition to the new regime? That's a lot of distraction in an already distracting situation.
3. Charlie Weis was not only the head coach--but also the offensive coordinator. So, you would need someone who has never been a head coach to also fill in as the offensive coordinator.
4. The players, in their private meeting, may not have come to a consensus decision regarding whether they wanted to go to a bowl. Even if 80% of the team wanted to do it, that would leave 20%, who didn't care that much.
Maybe, just maybe, Notre Dame made the right decision in this particular instance. But, I suppose in the world of pseudo-sports journalism, it is a lot easier to compose a tirade than a reasoned analysis.