Golden Dome Column: USC Are Babies For Discontinuing The Rivalry

I probably should've seen this coming considering Lincoln Riley is in charge of the Trojans and with both sides not agreeing on playing each other in 2026, but Notre Dame's rivalry with USC is dead, until 2030. The fact of the matter is that USC is more content with chasing money more than caring about traditions fans love. USC ended a rivalry that has been played every year since 1926 (aside from during World War II and the Covid Pandemic) and it's a very sad time for College Football.

So why did this rivalry end? Lot's of pundits have been critical of Notre Dame for it all ending, but the fact of the matter is that the school really didn't do anything wrong. Now while the two went back into discussing a meeting in a couple of years and restarting in 2030, but the rivalry is dead and money ruined it. While it might come across as that I am blindly defending Notre Dame here just simply because they are my favorite college football side, the fact of the matter here is that the facts would suggest this narrative I am projecting is the correct one. And there is one man to blame here and that's USC head coach Lincoln Riley. Yes, USC athletic director Jenn Cohen is to blame as well, but she would not have done this unless Riley said something.

Riley has changed the tune of the rivalry ever since he took over the job as he never seemed committed to continuing it. Riley criticized the new college football playoff system as he felt teams get punished for late season losses and suggested that Notre Dame be removed from the schedule. This was back in 2024, Riley was clearly looking for an out and now he got one. What a stupid mistake.

Simply, the annual meeting between the two makes a stronger strength of schedule for both parties. When USC joined the Big Ten, they admittedly would have to face a gauntlet of a schedule every season. While that is the price USC has to pay, it's also something they knew going in when joining the conference. But the Trojans chose to chase the money as the Big Ten is a higher profile and more competitive conference thus meaning more money for the school. You really can't blame USC for doing that, but Riley decided to ruin something sacred and special, a rivalry with Notre Dame.

The fact of the matter is that Notre Dame has dominated in the last 15 years and the fact that is the case only shows some sort of cowardice on USC's part. Notre Dame has won seven of the last eight meetings and 11 of the last 15, that's pure domination. While how dominant Notre Dame has been might not play as much of a factor, it's not a good look. Why is that? USC and Riley have proclaimed they already have "too difficult" of a schedule already and with having Notre Dame on there, it's even harder. Excuse me, in order to make the playoffs, wouldn't you want to have a strong strength of schedule? So if Notre Dame is a difficult matchup, why would you want to remove it? Which circles back to the point being made about Notre Dame's domination the last 15 meetings, is that the reason why the rivalry is ending? Just had enough of losing? Before 2010, USC won 11 of 14 dating back to 1996 thoroughly dominating the Irish. Did Notre Dame end rivalry after that? No. Yes, it was a different landscape back then monetarily, but Notre Dame could've just said "Oh, we're getting our butt's kicked by USC way too much, let's end this!" What is also stupid especially with the money Notre Dame brings to the table when they both play one another. Again, as I have said so many times and it cannot be understated, Notre Dame is the biggest brand in college football and that means more money comes in whether it's through TV money or even in ticket and concessions for a home game, you don't throw away that opportunity unless you're dumb. Even if I wasn't a fan of Notre Dame and even hated them, I totally get the value of having them on your schedule. This isn't trying to sound arrogant, this is just cold hard facts. While it's better to have each other on one another's schedules, USC needs Notre Dame more than Notre Dame needs USC does. That's another cold and harsh truth.

Making the College Football Playoff does indeed help make more money for schools, something USC should be striving for. But they are going about it the wrong way. Riley is full on admitting that not scheduling Notre Dame makes it easier for them to make the playoffs. There was a deal in place before the announcement of the rivalry ending as USC cited that late games in the season would punish them thus admitting that they saw Notre Dame on the schedule as effectively an automatic loss. Basically, they are too scared to play Notre Dame as that's what it's coming across. It's a scaredy cat way to getting out of the rivalry. Some USC pundits or alum will claim that Notre Dame rejected a Week 0 matchup and sure it makes head coach Marcus Freeman look bad after his "anytime, anywhere" speech about the rivalry, but the fact of the matter is, even offering that shows how unserious they were about continuing the matchup. The fact of the matter is that this game should be played either midseason or towards the end of campaign. And if supposedly having games late in the season that are losses and leading punishment come the committee selection process, then Notre Dame definitely should have been in the playoffs. See how the stories don't exactly line up? Trying to schedule a Week 0 game with less than a year out is not something feasible or would ever work out logistically as that is so little amount of time to prepare for. Some USC fans and biased pundits such as Su'a Cravens would continuously point out Freeman's "anytime, anywhere" speech and make it seem like that Notre Dame are the one's who chickened out, but no, USC just showed a lack of caring about this rivalry. USC essentially tried to control the narrative to make them look good and that's just pathetic.

What is funny is that actually Notre Dame met with BYU and started a series with them for the next two seasons which ironically makes their schedule better than having USC on there. That also negates the narrative that Notre Dame is trying to make an easier schedule for themselves to make the playoffs. USC also complained that Notre Dame was getting a sweetheart deal getting into the playoffs if they finish in the top 12 of the rankings, however, the NCAA had discussions with the Big Ten (you know, the conference USC is a part of) as well as other conferences about this situation and it was agreed upon, a year earlier. Yes, it does look like favoritism towards Notre Dame, but when you're the 12th best team in the nation and run into situations like what happened at the end of the 2025 season, you should be in the playoffs. Again, USC is trying to spin a narrative to make them look good despite that was something that was discussed and agreed upon. If USC was blindsided by this like they said they were when negotiating for 2026, then why was it reported that all members of the Big Ten knew about these playoffs discussions that was agreed upon? Again, an unserious program trying to look like the good guys when that was never the case. Let's say USC objected to that, it would've been reported that USC objected to that, but if there was an agreement, then that means no objections were made. Now maybe in USC's calculations if they made the playoffs was to face Notre Dame in whatever round (which would be awesome for both schools monetarily and in terms of the rivalry), but again, if there was no objections and negotiating a less than a year out Week 0 game, then there was a lack of care. Simply, Riley and USC wanted a softer schedule to make the playoffs.

Now, with USC finally agreeing to start the rivalry again in 2030 is great, but it's fairly obvious that after all that was discussed here, USC seemingly was pressured by the alumni of their program about this decision. Keyshawn Johnson was the most vocal about it, but if one of the biggest alumni of the program is saying this about how the school went about it, it's fairly obvious the entirety of their alumni on a whole feel the same. Some Notre Dame pundits and fans feel as though the school cowered to USC, but that couldn't be more of the opposite as it's clear Notre Dame wanted to keep it going and USC finally be willing to restart it despite all the rest of what was said shows that the Trojans realized they were in the wrong this entire time.

Sure it's nice that USC is going to restart the rivalry, but after all this, it feels forced now and that Notre Dame can go on to bigger and better things. Yes, USC is now replacing the Indiana series, but the Trojans got lucky with Indiana asking to cancel the series (that's also for another article) in order for this to come back. That being said, look at the facts here and look at why things went the way they did. Don't see how Notre Dame is at all at fault here.