re: In the last 40 years Notre Dame has 1 NC.

quote:

---

They forfeited wins due to academic fraud a few years ago.

They can read but had give out false grades

---

That’s literally the exact opposite of what happened. A student who was technically an athletic department employee because she had a job with the athletic department cheated for five players. This led to two problems:

1. Impermissible benefits from an athletic department employee.
2. It violated the honor code at ND. This led to the students, retroactively, receiving failing grades for the courses after it was discovered. This meant that, retroactively, their GPAs were below the NCAA threshold for eligibility. (So, ironically, it was ND’s own academic policy that caused this. If ND’s policy allowed the students to keep their grades for the course but get put on academic probation, then the players wouldn’t have been ineligible for this particular reason as their GPAs wouldn’t have dropped below the threshold. Issue #1, however, would have still been a problem and ND would’ve still had to forfeit the wins).

This is not an excuse to say ND shouldn’t have forfeited the wins. Either (and both) of those reasons made the players ineligible so any games in which any of the five played should’ve been forfeited. But it wasn’t for false grades. Quite the opposite.

There’s a reason the punishment was only vacated wins (because of the reasons 1 & 2 above) and not a postseason ban or loss of scholarships (because there was not a lack of institutional control or widespread fraud or anything like that).

Auburn fans immediately start talking about UGA in this thread but they aren't obsessed

quote:

---

You can say that ND isn't the powerhouse they once were but they'll always be a blue blood. That's not something that goes away. Current status rises and falls but being a blue blood is a permanent state.

---

Of course a Tennessee fan says this

quote:

---

Hell if that’s the case then Yale, Princeton and Harvard are blue bloods.

---

Harvard definitely is. I don't understand the problem. It's a matter of applying the correct terms.

quote:

---

Current status rises and falls but being a blue blood is a permanent state.

---

In that case Princeton and Yale are the greatest college football dynasties in the history of the sport.

quote:

---

In that case Princeton and Penn are the greatest college football dynasties in the history of the sport.

---

I have no problem with that if the stats bare it out. The current mood is to prop up recency while erasing the past. That's idiotic.

Also, if you're incapable of making an argument about how when the Ivy's ruled there were only so many teams, you deserve what you get.

quote:

---

You can say that ND isn't the powerhouse they once were but they'll always be a blue blood. That's not something that goes away. Current status rises and falls but being a blue blood is a permanent state.

---

Not true. In fact, according to the OED, any team that hasn't won a national title since 1999 no longer qualifies as a blueblood. They had a long explanation about it, which I don't remember very well, but it was indisputable and convincing. The OED guys know their stuff.

quote:

---

Also, if you're incapable of making an argument about how when the Ivy's ruled there were only so many teams, you deserve what you get.

---

I did a report on the history of college football in high school. I know exactly what I'm talking about. Don't get pissy because your argument was ridiculously easy to poke holes through.

quote:

---

I did a report on the history of college football in high school. I know exactly what I'm talking about. Don't get pissy because your argument was ridiculously easy to poke holes through.

---

I'm not. You didn't say anything that remotely perforated it.

You're ok with using your logic to justify Princeton and Yale as football blue bloods.

Go see how many people you convince of that.