Notre Dame ended negotiations with Rutgers on a 6 year home and home series because, get this, Rutgers was not willing to play their home games off campus. Notre Dame wanted them to play at the new pro stadium. What's even more surprising is that UConn actually agreed to a similar deal, playing all of their home games off campus and some even out of state.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3366349

I know there are some Irish fans on this board but this is one team that I love to hate.

If you have the ability to have others play on your terms I cannot blame them, nor do I call them arrogant. The fact that someone was willing to agree with the requirement shows that it was commercially attractive to someone.

How is this different from our wanting what we want when we schedule games with USU?

jimmyz2 wrote:

How is this different from our wanting what we want when we schedule games with USU?

True, except that Notre Dame has not exactly been dominant over the last few years, and they still act like teams should bend over backwards for the privilege of playing them. Yes, that's how BYU treats USU sometimes, but then again, BYU takes a serious SOS (and financial) hit for playing USU, so it's only fair that Provo dictates some of the terms. In the case of Notre Dame, it could be argued (especially considering last year's season) that Rutgers is taking a major SOS hit to play Notre Dame, so Notre Dame isn't in as strong a position to be picky as they've been in the past. Too bad we didn't have Notre Dame on the schedule during their current run of mediocrity--it would be nice to add another road win in South Bend to the record books.

jimmyz2 wrote:

If you have the ability to have others play on your terms I cannot blame them, nor do I call them arrogant. The fact that someone was willing to agree with the requirement shows that it was commercially attractive to someone.

How is this different from our wanting what we want when we schedule games with USU?

Doing 2 for 1's or even saying "If we play, we play at our place" are commonplace when one team is on an obviously different playing level than the other and when one team has much more to lose than the other. I don't remember us doing any exchanges with USU where we demanded that they not play home games in Logan. UConn is a bunch of suckers and I am glad Rutgers told them where they could put their home and "home" series.

aegis47 wrote:

jimmyz2 wrote:

How is this different from our wanting what we want when we schedule games with USU?

True, except that Notre Dame has not exactly been dominant over the last few years, and they still act like teams should bend over backwards for the privilege of playing them. Yes, that's how BYU treats USU sometimes, but then again, BYU takes a serious SOS (and financial) hit for playing USU, so it's only fair that Provo dictates some of the terms. In the case of Notre Dame, it could be argued (especially considering last year's season) that Rutgers is taking a major SOS hit to play Notre Dame, so Notre Dame isn't in as strong a position to be picky as they've been in the past. Too bad we didn't have Notre Dame on the schedule during their current run of mediocrity--it would be nice to add another road win in South Bend to the record books. ;)

Not if it meant taking an SOS hit.

aegis47 wrote:

jimmyz2 wrote:

How is this different from our wanting what we want when we schedule games with USU?

True, except that Notre Dame has not exactly been dominant over the last few years, and they still act like teams should bend over backwards for the privilege of playing them.

Granted, but as long as they have the networks salivating over playing their games, they are in the power negotiating position regardless of their relative success on the field. Besides, even a blind squirrel (Weiss) can find a nut once in a while, no? It is the possibility of playing the storied program that is alluring. If there were rumors going around that we were negotiating a new contract with them, we would all be excited despite their recent train wrecks, because it is national exposure and they are who they are.