I take back my entire post. Sincerely, I was wrong. The lurkers from Purdue and Trojan-land showed me the light. I'd like to do the right thing and admit that I was entirely wrong, and that pretty much every team Notre Dame plays is a RIVAL. Except for the Trojans, who are not a riva because we haven't beaten them lately.
Nevermind that the Trojan fan that convinced me of this fact then claimed that UCLA is their rival. Because, you know, UCLA has won JUST ABOUT 50% of their recent games I guess. It must be so, since that's the qualification to be a rival, right? Right.
Purdue? They're clearly a rival. They're close by and we've played them a lot. By that criteria, Michigan (sucks) and Michigan State are ND rivals as well. And if you go by the longevity part of that equation, throw in BC, Navy, Pitt and Stanford too.
Man, ND sure has a lot of rivals. How can we keep track of all of them, and how can we be sure to CARE just THAT MUCH MORE EVERY SINGLE WEEK? Well, we'll just have to, because I've been clearly convinced by the awesome use of language and insurmountable logic of our lurkers that this is the case.
Nevermind that rivalries are supposed to be special, and about tradition, history and mutual respect. Nevermind that both sides must consider it to be a rivalry for it to be a rivalry (you 3 people that claim that USC does not consider ND a rival have literally no clue about anything, ever, in college football).
ND has sooooo many rivals:
Michigan, MSU, Purdue, Navy, USC, Stanford, BC? All rivals. Man, it must be weird to be on the ND schedule and NOT be a rival.
Doesn't matter that the only game we "circle" before the season is USC, bc the other side "circles" ND in each instance, which MAKES it a rivalry. But wait! Nevada said that they had the home opener this year circled SINCE THE END OF LAST SEASON. WOW, ANOTHER RIVAL! Score!
And hold on, I think Washington players say the same thing, and Washington State and UCONN too! HOORAY! ND plays 12 rivals in a row this year. That's just a-MA-zing!
Can't wait for ANOTHER rivalry game this weekend!
SIDE NOTE: Idiots.
By DeepTeaKup September 25, 2009 - 5:39 pm
Biscuit, I disagree with one part of your rivalry definition, “mutual respect”. IMO, the best rivalries are those based on pure unadulterated hatred for the other side, see: UM-OSU, Auburn-Bama, Clemson-SC, Sparty-Sustained Success, ND-humility.
PS. A school can only have one rival, again IMO. UM has OSU, ND is a special game but not a rivalry.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit September 25, 2009 - 5:45 pm
Yep, very much disagree. My hatred is for UM, which, to me, eliminates you as a rival. At least we can agree on that part – we’re not rivals. We can be friends! (no we cant)
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Darius Fleming's Jockstraps September 25, 2009 - 11:33 pm
LOL. you are a baby.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By trey September 26, 2009 - 8:14 am
I disagree on it a little bit because I feel Michigan is a rival as well. I think the contempt angle can make a rival as well. I consider us with two rivals, scUM and U$C
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By DillonSucks September 26, 2009 - 11:01 am
Biscuit, overall I agree with you. But you have to give the ND-UM relationship its due. The genesis of ND’s football program lies in its turn-of-the-century competitions with Fielding Yost’s Michigan juggernaut. In the early 1900s ND was playing only tiny Catholic schools (and some local HIGH SCHOOLS). Michigan and the other midwest schools wouldn’t let them into the Western Conference for many reasons (anti-Catholic bias foremost among them), but when Michigan left the “Big Nine,” it was the only notable football school ND could play to earn respect and the attention of national media. Without the ND-Michigan rivalry back then, ND football as we know it would be very different today, if it existed at all. I know this is all 100 years ago, but still, they were the first rival, and to this day it’s a big game.
Maybe you’d prefer a word other than “rivalry.” They’ve never really respected each other and most of their history is pocked with nasty scheduling and “cheating” controversies. Yet through this decade, each team has made a habit out of dashing the other’s early BCS hopes when they come in highly ranked. Maybe ND-UM is less like a competitive sports rivalry and something more like a Cold War, and admitting that takes nothing away from your definition of a rivalry nor the animosity between the teams.
(Michigan sucks).
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit September 26, 2009 - 11:44 am
DillonRules, I pretty much agree. That’s why I called Michigan our Enemy in the original post. Some would say that the dynamic makes it a rival, and I’m fine with that, though I wouldnt use the same word. And unlike DTK, I think a team can have 2 rivals (USC has ND and UCLA, etc), so I’m okay if folks say UM is our rival. But I dont give them that kind of respect. I hate them, they’re our Enemy, not our rival.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Dan September 26, 2009 - 3:09 pm
Biscuit, may I suggest, in lieu of the “Sucks!” suffix, which has been rightfully discontinued, and in light of today’s game against IU, we now follow all mentions of UM with “Cheats!”
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Bad Kermit September 28, 2009 - 9:28 am
Re: Who is and who is not a “rival.”
Who gives a shit?
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit September 28, 2009 - 10:25 am
Me. I don’t know why you read this site. You never care about anything on it.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0