Talk:Notre Dame–USC football rivalry

Page creation

I created this page to give the rivalry its own page separate from the trophy page and the Notre Dame football rivalries page. The first page, while great, should be more about the trophy itself. The latter page covers all rivalries and I felt that the USC-ND rivalry was more important than being combined with other rivalries. The naming convention follows the alphabetical order of the schools. Records and game notes have been moved from the Jeweled Shillelagh page. The specific game recaps were moved, edited and cited from Notre Dame Fighting Irish football rivalries page. My goal is to get this elevated to the highest status possible for Wikipedia. Tedmoseby (talk) 00:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC) This page seems a little , I don't want to say biased but it seems there is more ND information than USC especially when one of the teams does well. Take 1974 for example: USC won the Rose Bowl over highly ranked Ohio St. in thrilling fashion (late TD and win or lose 2 pt. conversion) and ended up being voted National Champions in UPI poll. There is no mention of this. There are other examples. Also in 1964 game about "controversial officiating" I know Craig Fertig did say that when Alan Page hit him he just threw the ball away saying, "I had my screen actors card..." but where's the reference. I think USC has gotten the short end of the officials calls (bad spots especially) in this series more than Notre Dame has.Bbigjohnson (talk) 11:51, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:SCinterlock-trojans.gif

The image Image:SCinterlock-trojans.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Rivalry Name

It should be noted that the rivalry has a second, albeit more colloquial, name: The Catholics versus Condoms rivalry. (Akin to the Catholics versus Convicts rivalry with Miami (FL))

Several things to consider: This is an encyclopedia, not a fan blog. The information on Wikipedia should be factual and the series would as such have to be referred to in this manner by a variety of media. Moreover, Catholics vs. Condoms would be a name an ND fan would give the series, not a Trojan fan. This page, like all other college football and Wikipedia pages, should be neutral. This might not actually be the case on Wikipedia, as you referenced in the case of Notre Dame vs. Miami, but Bobak and myself, as members of Wikipedia:WikiProject College football, regularly try to edit this page for neutrality.Tedmoseby (talk) 02:28, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

While I agree with Tedmoseby's answer, I disagree that the trolling warranted anything other than another violation for blatant violation of talk page policy (especially since this wasn't the first time). Sports geeks can be the worst, even worse than Anime geeks. Any more and I will continue to issue warnings and bans as necessary. --Bobak (talk) 05:16, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

On the Road reference

I have deleted the On the Road reference as spurious to this article. In the context of college football, California is of course the Golden Bears, so it seems dubious to link this reference to this rivalry. Admittedly Cal never played Notre Dame until 1959, but this is of course a work of fiction anyway. Alvie3 (talk) 06:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

USC NCAA Penalties

Given the recent news regarding USC's sanctions from the NCAA, I reverted the edits that argue ND wins the 2005 game and instead just took the win from USC and noted the forfeiture. This game was played, and ND did lose, even if the player who pushed Leinhart over the goal line was deemed ineligible. A vacated win by USC does not mean ND wins the game. It just means USC can no longer claim the victory. This is how i read this based on past NCAA penalties and vacated wins, especially in basketball. Tedmoseby (talk) 23:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for making these corrections. I had made the same point at Reggie Bush. It's my understanding that a vacated win is still treated as a loss for the losing team.[1][2] So, oddly, I guess that would mean Notre Dame's record in the series is still 42-34-5 while USC's is now 33-42-5. Still looking around for a definitive statement of this.--Arxiloxos (talk) 23:21, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Which is EXACTLY why vacating wins is totally useless. This series is, in reality, 43-35-5. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.181.253.17 (talk) 09:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

I've changed the record back to show USC's win, because the most current versions of the USC and Notre Dame (http://www.und.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/11-m-footbl-media-guide.html) media guides show the record in tact. USC's include the win in USC's win total while mentioning that the win was vacated, while Notre Dame's Media Guide include the game in USC's win total with no mention at all of the win being vacated. Clearly, both school intend to continue to treat it as a USC win. And this pattern of mostly ignoring the ncaa on this one seems to be pretty consistent. Both USC and ucla's Media Guides include the vacted USC wins in their totals for their series as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.181.254.3 (talk) 03:06, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Early Season, Late Season Games

The game is played early in the season (October) when it is played in South Bend; it is played late in the season (November) when it is played in Los Angeles. I seem to remember that the game used to always be played in November, but the South Bend games were moved to October so the Trojans wouldn't have to play in the cold mid-western November weather. The Trojans having to play in South Bend in the cold was seen as an unfair advantage to the Irish, who were used to playing in cold weather. Does anybody else recall this? I think in the early 1970s the South Bend games were moved to October. The article ought to mention this interesting tidbit in the greatest rivalry in the history of human sporting endeavors. Chisme (talk) 05:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

That's what I also recall. Not sure where there'd be a source on it... maybe in reference to the ND vs Stanford rivalry... which was created so ND could end the season in California every year? Go for it!Tedmoseby (talk) 03:52, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain John McKay had something to do with moving the games in South Bend to mid-October. McKay's first year has Head Coach was 1960, the October games start the next year. All the South Bend games are in October after that except for 1971, which was ironically a USC win. I think it was a case of if you want us to travel back there and play you, it's going to be in October.Bbigjohnson (talk) 11:36, 3 May 2014 (UTC) It is sourced here from USC Media guide as USC AD Jess Hill's idea.76.168.100.131 (talk) 12:14, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

There is a clear consensus to merge. Go Phightins! 01:40, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

---

Jeweled Shillelagh into Notre Dame–USC football rivalry. The content is repetitive and the trophy is notable primarily because of the rivalry, where information about it would best be presented in the appropriate context. It also follows the established precedent of other rivalry trophies being described or merged within a parent rivalry article.CrazyPaco (talk) 21:14, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

• Merge per Crazypaco's rationale. Cbl62 (talk) 00:30, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
• Merge per Crazypaco. Propose a trophy section within the rivalry article. Tedmoseby (talk) 00:52, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
• Merge per Crazypaco. Tuck it into the article. Chisme (talk) 02:23, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
• Merge per Crazypaco. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
• Merge per Crazypaco. Duplicative.--GrapedApe (talk) 01:42, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
• Merge. It's time to go forward with this.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
• Merge and move to close and implement the merge. Anyone who wanted to voice an opinion has had 21 months to do so. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:03, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Notre Dame–USC football rivalry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080404061835/http://www.heisman.com:80/winners/hsmn-winners.html to http://www.heisman.com/winners/hsmn-winners.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:05, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

How to handle Notre Dame vacated wins in 2012 and 2013?

The NCAA just ruled (Nov 22, 2016) that Notre Dame must vacate its wins in the 2012 and 2013 football seasons. Notre Dame says it will appeal the ruling. For the purposes of this article, how do we handle this? Notre Dame defeated USC in 2012 and 2013. Do we wait for a ruling on the appeal (the NCAA often backs down on appeals) or do we record the vacated games now? If the wins are vacated it changes the win-loss records in the rivalry. Note that USC's 2005 win over Notre Dame, which the NCAA vacated, is not included in USC's win total in this article. Do we do the same for Notre Dame's wins in 2012 and 2013? Chisme (talk) 18:31, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

No comments on this? Should I go ahead and change the wins total? I notice it was done on the Brian Kelly article.Chisme (talk) 03:26, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

I used a CBS Sports article from November 22, 2016 as a source for vacating Notre Dame's 2012 and 2013 victories. The score chart at the bottom was different from the summary box at the top, and added a sentence near the top that the official records show Notre Dame has two fewer wins and one fewer loss than the on-field records. Other users have changed it, and I'm not sure why. The appeal has not been granted, and it seems logical to note, as the universities' media guides to, the on field result that was vacated. Fergus O'Reilly (talk) 05:50, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

In game results table, show both teams and their ranking

See AL vs TN series. One can easily see what the opponent was ranked at game time. 2601:C2:5:285B:ED49:E9D6:1A51:73A6 (talk) 12:58, 4 September 2023 (UTC)