Sunday, September 2, 2012

Moving beyond baseball?

By Joseph Dant

So, seeing as I am the fan of a team that has been out of contention since about April, I suppose I will be the one to do the first non-baseball post. As was noted in my profile, I am a rabid Notre Dame football fan. I was raised as a fan, and my devotion has only grown as I've aged.

Something that has been discussed ad naseum on ESPN recently is the idea of Notre Dame's relevancy. How relevant is a team that hasn't won a national championship in 25 years, or even contended for one (realistically) in nearly 20? I pride myself on trying not to be a blind fan just spouting rhetoric. I try to take a measured approach and be realistic with my opinions and expectations. In that vein, I have several reasons as to why I believe that Notre Dame is still very relevant in the upper echelon of college football.

What determines value? I have always believed that something is only worth what someone is willing to give you for it. Notre Dame was offered by the BCS a seat as the only independent school on their council. They were offered a huge television contract by a major network. Are these an indicator of value? I think they are.

What determines the "power schools" in college sports? Success is a major part of the equation, but I would postulate that the ability to draw to high-end recruits is just as important. Despite the fact that they are not in an exactly desirable location, despite the fact that they are not in a major conference, and despite the fact that they have not been a success on the national championship front for years, Notre Dame still manages to attract top 10 recruiting classes annually. I have heard many analysts state that Notre Dame means nothing to younger athletes. If that is the case, then why do so many of the top athletes keep choosing to attend the school?

I also think that Notre Dame holds its relevance in the fact that it is one of the few traditional powers that can hold aloft its athletes on the academic level. The school has refused to lower its academic standards to pick up a few more wins. This is what all of the other schools say they do or that their goal is to have great "student athletes", but few of them actually measure up when it comes time. Does being more than a so-called football factory equate to relevance? I think that until the NCAA comes out and admits that football is the minor league program for the NFL and eliminates the academic requirements, it absolutely does.

Now, by no means am I equating relevancy with success. If there is one thing that should be readily apparent by reading my posts, it is that I am an incredibly cynical sports fan. I am always waiting for the other shoe to drop. As opposed to being excited about the fact that we beat Navy 50-10 to open the season, I worry that it will inflate the ego of the team and cause us to overlook opponents. I have been burnt too many times to be an optimistic fan.

The argument for Notre Dame's relevance is the same as the argument for the Cubs' relevance. Yes they have not been overly successful in recent years, but they are both still very relevant and hold a lot of sway in their respective sport.

No comments:

Post a Comment