Notre Dame's CFP Agreement Being A Shock To USC Doesn’t Sound Right, And Neither Does Pausing The Game

Obviously, USC was not in the holiday spirit over the past two weeks, as the athletic department supposedly found out about the agreement between Notre Dame and the CFP that led to the longstanding rivalry being put on hold for at least until 2030. 

This is the story everyone is sticking to, correct? 

Over the past 24 hours, there have been numerous reports stating that one of the reasons why USC took such a hard stance on wanting to play Notre Dame during ‘Week Zero’ had at least something to do with Trojan administrators finding out the Fighting Irish had signed an MOU that guarantees them a spot in the CFP if ranked within the Top-12. 

CFP Quarterfinals Set For Loaded New Years Slate: Do We Blame Or Thank The Committee?

It's a holiday surprise! But, this is also a bit of a head-scratcher. 

Agreement With Notre Dame Surprises Everyone? Hmm

How in the world does an athletic department discover that Notre Dame has a guaranteed spot in the CFP almost a year after an agreement was signed? Clearly that's on Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti, if he did not inform schools within the conference about this MOU. 

How does this come as a surprise to leaders across powerful athletic departments? Multiple sources have told OutKick that the MOU which was signed was discussed with Big Ten conference members, and was also agreed to by each school. 

The playoff format has been a focal point of discussions over the past year, with commissioners having to decide on how many teams to add. This past May, OutKick discussed this dilemma and noted that there was talk of Notre Dame receiving an automatic bid, if ranked high enough. 

Because of that, I'm a tad confused. SEC and Big Ten leaders met twice last year to discuss a working agreement between both conferences. There was discussion about how Notre Dame would receive a spot in future CFP's if ranked high enough. 

Now, does that mean everyone was in the loop that a document was signed? I don't know, you'll have to ask them. 

I understand that USC might be a little timid about playing Notre Dame so late in the season. That could impact its CFP standing, given that we've seen the committee dish out a few confusing ‘data points’ during their embarrassing teleconferences. 

Biff Poggi: Michigan's 'Malfunctioning Organization' After Latest Scandal With Sherrone Moore Has To Be Fixed

Sure, USC proposed moving the game to ‘Week Zero’, after agreeing to compromise on playing the game in its normal slot for at least the next two seasons. And, Notre Dame had the right to say no to that proposal, which ultimately led to the series being canceled for the time being. 

This also has to do with decisions made by the CFP committee in its voting process on who to put in its final rankings, which played a pretty big part in discussions about moving the game to earlier in the season. 

But, I'm still having a hard time wrapping my head around the fact that Tony Petiti supposedly left out the fact that an agreement was signed. 

I guess we can just chalk this up to something lost in translation?  If that were the case, then the holiday surprise was a bag of coal that was left under the tree for athletic directors across the country. 

Dan Lanning Argues For On-Campus Quarterfinal

I have to say, it's refreshing to hear someone like Dan Lanning pointing out that the current CFP bowl system is not the most favorable, even when a team receives a first-round bye. 

Thanks to Texas Tech being ranked inside the Top 4 of the CFP's final rankings, the Red Raiders will have gone almost a full month without playing a game. When asked whether it was beneficial that Oregon was able to get on the field last weekend against James Madison, coach Dan Lanning pointed out that while it could be, he also made it a point to say that Texas Tech deserved a home playoff game. 

"We’re really excited to be going to the Orange Bowl, but this game should be played at Texas Tech…. There should be a home-field advantage for them," Lanning mentioned. 

Hey, credit to the coach for his lobbying skills. Sure, it would be amazing to see two rounds of on-campus games during the postseason, but that means the bowl games would take a financial hit. 

And you know officials who run games like the Orange Bowl, Rose Bowl, Cotton Bowl and Sugar Bowl are not going to give up easily on hosting a playoff game. 

As we get closer to the new deadline in January for conference commissioners to agree on a new CFP format, you can expect the outside lobbying to continue for expansion. 

In the end, money always wins. Now, whether that will be in 2026 or 2027 is up for debate, but ESPN is hoping to add more inventory to its lucrative deal with the college football playoff. 

Happy Holidays!!