Marcus Freeman Admits Notre Dame Backed Out Of USC Rivalry, Contradicts Himself

The collapse of the rivalry between the USC Trojans and Notre Dame Fighting Irish has been one of the biggest storylines of the postseason period. Along with the Big Ten becoming the dominant force in the College Football Playoff at the expense of the SEC, it's demonstrated the rapidly-shifting dynamics underpinning the sport.

There's been blame to go around, and who you think is most responsible will likely depend on which team you root for. Notre Dame fans blame Lincoln Riley and USC, claiming the Trojans are scared to keep the series going, for example. But as the fallout has continued and more information has been reported, it's become clear that's not accurate. And that's come into even sharper relief with new comments from Notre Dame head coach Marcus Freeman. 

It's important to first back up and revisit what Freeman said in mid-2025 about the yearly SC game.

"It’s pretty black and white for me," Freeman said, per Blueandgold.com. "You want my opinion? I want to play them every single year. When? I don’t care. I don’t care when we play them. Start of the season, middle of the season, end of the season — I don’t care. I want to play USC every year because it’s great for college football."

RELATED: Notre Dame Wasn't Honest About Wanting To Keep USC Rivalry Going

Well, USC took him at his word, made an offer to continue the series on those terms, and the Irish turned it down. Despite that, Notre Dame fans have rushed to blame Riley, the SC administration, and defend Freeman. After what he said this week though, that's become virtually impossible.

Notre Dame Fighting Irish head coach Marcus Freeman. (Mandatory Credit: Michael Caterina-Imagn Images)

Marcus Freeman Contradicts Marcus Freeman With Latest Comments

Freeman this week spoke to the media and defended the end of the rivalry by completely contradicting what he said previously.

"You know, I don't listen to a lot of noise. Look, I've said this before: That rivalry's important for college football, and I'm confident that with Ron Powlus and Pete Bevacqua we'll get that rivalry back," he said.

"You know me, I'm a competitive individual, and I wanna go and go play anytime, anywhere. But at the same token, it's important that I make decisions too that are best for the program. And to move a game that we were pretty sure was gonna be Week 12 to Week Zero isn't what's best."

What? 

He said he wants to play "anytime, anywhere," which is what he said in 2025. Yet in the very next sentence says that moving the game to a different week of the year "isn't what's best," which justifies canceling the rivalry. That makes zero sense. It's also contradicted by what he said when he and his players decided not to play in the Pop-Tarts Bowl because their feelings were hurt after missing out on the College Football Playoff. 

In a bizarre new video celebrating their decision to quit, Freeman says he's "proud" of his players for refusing to go to Orlando and play a bowl game. He claims it wasn't a choice made because they were mad or emotional, then the very first player interviewed says it was an emotional decision made after they "got the rug pulled out from under" them. 

RELATED: Notre Dame Inexplicably Releases Video Praising Players For Quitting Instead Of Playing Bowl Game

Apparently, the "anytime, anywhere" mantra doesn't include bowl games in Orlando if you don't get what you want. 

Regardless, his remarks about the end of the USC rivalry demonstrate exactly what happened here. Freeman said he wanted to play the game anytime, anywhere. USC made an offer to the Irish to move the game to Week 0, because that would have allowed the series to continue while also removing a gigantic disadvantage for the Trojans relative to other Big Ten teams. They then learned that Freeman's comments were false, he did not want to play the game anytime, because he's now said that moving the game "isn't what's best." Notre Dame rejected the offer, because it wasn't in their best interests. Then the national media blamed USC. Why? Nobody knows.

Additionally, why wasn't it in Notre Dame's best interest to play the game earlier in the season? They have no conference schedule to worry about. They don't deal with the same level of travel SC does, because they're in the middle of the country and have more control over their road games. If they're not "scared" of a potential loss, as they've won the majority of the games the past seven, eight years, why would time of year matter? 

The real reason they backed out is that they don't need to play USC to reach the playoff. They can schedule 12 easy games, win 11 or 12, easily be ranked in the top-12, and be guaranteed a playoff spot. All while avoiding the pitfalls of excessive travel or a conference championship game. That's an arrangement no other team has or can duplicate. Oh, and they get to keep all the money from that playoff appearance too. It's that simple. Even if the Irish view the game as a 60-40 win in South Bend, and a 50-50 game in LA, that's an unnecessary risk. Time of year doesn't matter to them, the potential for adding a loss matters. Which is why Freeman's comments look so absurd and contradictory now. They were never willing to play the game anytime, anywhere. Just like they weren't willing to play a bowl game because they'd be missing players, or something. As if every other team playing a meaningless exhibition bowl game isn't missing players. 

In a sane world, this would end all discussion of who's at fault for the rivalry ending, which side was more disingenuous and more contradictory. But college football is not a sane world. Not even close.