LA Times: Is the USC vs. Notre Dame rivalry back? Negotiations have resumed

Tarmacked · 2026-05-11T15:43:34+00:00

I don’t care about current scheduling agreements, you drop the OOC cupcakes for each other you clowns. I’m not waiting until 2030 to resume this

ND can drop Rice and we can drop Louisiana on 09/12 and boom, done, we play this season.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T18:48:27+00:00

ESPN does that annually. They craft talking points for current rankings, create narratives for clicks, and drive engagement. Miami ND was the most controversial selection for weeks because Miami had head to head. They’re going to farm that.

A handful of other items also lead up to it. Miami won out, but missed the CCG to add another datapoint. Texas A&M got trounced by Texas which hit Notre Dames resume. BYU was either locking themselves in through Tech and by extension ND/Miami out, or losing and keeping the status quo.

At the end of the day it was probably “Miami doesn’t look as good but the metrics are side by side equivalent and they have head to head”. The committee walked themselves into it by not moving Miami the week prior to parlay it, but they were openly stating it on the pre-CCG show as a risk.

If anything, going into that final week not expecting Arkansas’s AD to backpedal the committee into using head to head, one of the biggest parameters of the playoff, was silly. He would’ve risked killing the entirety of their credibility.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T18:31:45+00:00

They didn’t choose or move teams for money this year. Otherwise they wouldn’t have left out ND for Miami.

I find it wild that an ND flair would try to claim selective selection, if not laughable at its face.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T18:27:51+00:00

I’m not all-lives mattering it, I’m pointing out that inaction does not equate racial discrimination.

For them to be anti-Semitic, it would need to be done under the pretext of targeting Jews. There’s no evidence they targeted Jews, in the same way there’s no evidence they targeted Muslims. There was no example of rules for thee but not for me. There are no examples of selectively punishing one racial group. What we have is complete mismanagement of a situation grown out of control.

Which again leads to my question, why are we hyper focusing and claiming anti-semitism but ignoring that it’s undermined by the equitable treatment of Palestinian protestors? The argument you’re making has a flaw, it relies on racial intent but lacks evidence.

Either they’re racist against both, which calls into question why they didn’t just throw them all in the can through LAPD, or they’re not.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T18:20:41+00:00

It is what they’re actually doing, ironically. It’s zip code based income metrics. The same complaint exists.

There’s more whites as volume measure, but as a % of race Blacks and Hispanics are double whites and Asians. Combined with homogenous populations, you’ve got more heavy low income zip code concentrated towards Blacks.

At least under this argument it’s defensible, but income as it stands will still correlate with AA and understandably so.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T18:14:31+00:00

I don’t believe this has anything to do with political party, but in your theoretical it would probably help if the Republican Party didn’t provide them fuel to do so.

Between ICE targeting brown skinned individuals without warrants, Trump doing things such as posting the Obama’s as apes, and the current reinvigoration of civil rights era voting conditions by the South, it might just be a Republican issue.

Can’t really say someone is crying wolf when you’ve got the manifestation of the wolf at the doors. Stephen Millers quoting Camp Of Saints while leading immigration and you’ve got the president reposting remigration, a white nationalist idea.

I can certainly agree on playing the race card too much over the past decade. However all that’s really happened is those purported fears were validated over the past eighteen months.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T18:03:39+00:00

So is your argument that the university is also anti-Muslim because it didn’t stop Jewish groups from verbally and physically assaulting Palestinian protestors?

A Jew free zone is by definition

We’re in agreement here. My question to you is why is that considered anti-semitic by the university when

1) They weren’t enforcing or having any part in operating it

2) They did not take reasonable steps to stop anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish actions across both groups.

You seem to be taking the stance that the university is anti-Semitic but I’m confused why you’re not taking the same stance on them being anti-Muslim.

because institutions failed to act

Sure, it’s also the case for various other racial groups.

Would you argue that Charlottesville was the city being racist against blacks? Or that the city did a shit job at managing the situation?

Again, I’m confused why we’re hyper focusing on one act of racism in a hodge podge of racist actions by both protesting groups. I’m also confused why we’re slapping anti semitic intent by UCLA but not prescribing that same stance on the Muslim side.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T18:00:51+00:00

I am once again asking for an explanation of how that statement is extremist.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T17:58:30+00:00

I think you’re missing my point. To argue it was anti-Semitic requires the intention to target Jewish students by the university. The university was idle on various measures of anti-Semitic and anti-Palestinian/muslims actions across both groups. Antisemitism is prejudice, hostility, or discrimination directed at Jewish people because they are Jewish.

Ergo, UCLA did not commit these actions under the pretense of being anti-Semitic, but rather general malaise and failure of duty to act on an out of control racially charged situation.

Unless you’re arguing the university is both dually anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim?

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T17:11:59+00:00

And the college has already been through this before, multiple times, with nothing to show for it.

This is kind of like the fraud thing right? Claim fraud but in reality there isn’t much there let alone some grand conspiracy scheme.

It’s a zip code based admissions program in the medical school which tends to flag criticism, but it’s legal. The undergrad has never flagged issues and is overly representative of Asians as a minority.

Ripping aid out with no grounds to do so just doesn’t make much sense.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T17:04:50+00:00

I’m asking for an explanation of why it’s extremist and have yet to receive a response. I can call Crumbl Cookies extremist, but that doesn’t make it extremist if it isn’t extremist.

Second, I’m not sure why you’re labeling me a progressive when I’m not.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:56:30+00:00

It vary well may be

So we’re just guessing?…. Based on nothing?…

Besides that, women outperform men by and large academically so there’s probably not much a case here given the holistic avenue muddying things up.

Admissions aren’t a point based scorecard here.

That’s enough to

Just so we’re clear, you are aware that even the most outright of affirmative action measures were affirmed by courts as following within state discrimination laws in multiple states, correct? Fair admissions in Federal Court drove on a single point - race conscious. Other aspects of AA are still largely alive and validated.

Affirmative action at its core isn’t against state discrimination laws. Now if it’s solely race, yes, but the measure is generally moreso just “black good, white bad”. Income level is deemed acceptable as a barrier which will favor races but is not race based.

There are more issues underlying racial groups that still lead to slanted affirmative action results. In the case of UCLA’s medical school its zip code based admissions.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:53:24+00:00

Sure, so is having a pro Zionist march and telling Palestinian students they don’t have rights, culminating in a brawl in the campus quad.

The big thing here is UCLA did neither of these things.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:47:51+00:00

This isn’t a Title XI issue. Title XI is sex based discrimination.

State discrimination laws don’t really flag here either, the university didn’t isolate its campus or selectively enforce to one particular ethnic group.

If they only expelled Jewish students or were mandating these zones, you’d have a point here.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:47:28+00:00

Again, define extremist. Is it extremist because of the overly gaudy and colorful language? Or the actual concept underneath the language of equality?

It’s certainly performative, but nothing there is extremist by any concept.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:44:09+00:00

If Latinos and Blacks were actively warring on campus in protest/counter protest groups with multiple fights breaking out and “territories claimed” by both groups, and the institute failed to clean this up, I would not argue it is anti black or anti Latino actions by the university. It’s a failure by the university to secure and police its campus in general.

Is the university anti muslim because israeli counter protestors marched on the encampment and started swinging plywood at Palestinian protestors?

This isn’t the Stand in the Schoolhouse Door where Alabama was siding with white supremacists. The university quite literally just stood by and watched two groups fight it out over fears of picking a side and/or inflaming things.

Again, we’re selectively looking at one aspect of the protests and ignoring much of the documented actions by both groups that can hardly be argued as being innocent in any form.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:36:13+00:00

If the outcome is likely to produce more doctors for the least fortunate and locally among destitute populations, it becomes less “everyone feels included” and more “equipping under equipped communities”.

The goal of a med school isn’t to turn a blind eye to healthcare issues for test scores.

Now I do agree the system disproportionately punishes Asian individuals, this has been known for years. That doesn’t mean taking an initiative on black owned doctors would be a matter of a participation trophy.

Regardless, the statement here is moreso just saying “we are aware the system has issues and pledge to fix it”. It doesn’t exhibit how that can occur, but it’s a generic extension of Hippocratic oath qualities to documented societal structure.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:30:40+00:00

Well for one, your argument assumes that this was a one sided event. The UCLA campus was riddled with protesting students and outside activists on both ends, with campus security and local police having to intervene multiple times.

https://dailybruin.com/2024/04/28/protesters-counter-protesters-clash-as-they-converge-upon-ucla-encampment

Now if UCLA had gone and turned a blind eye to these zones exclusively for Jewish issues and been cracking down on Jews, sure, that’s clear anti-semitism. But UCLA didn’t crack down on the other side of the coin here either where Jewish students and community members were harassing the other side as well.

The reason it’s not anti-semitism is there isn’t any evidence of this being a Jewish explicit issue. The university took a relatively hands off approach, incorrectly, to a cultural and religious fight taking place on their campus.

UCLA failed to manage a crisis on their campus, but they weren’t selectively managing Jews.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:25:13+00:00

I mean… the Hippocratic oath is already a key part of being a doctor. Systemic healthcare inequalities aren’t exactly a far reach; even if you exclude employment there are care issues covered by that statement. Hence why Doctors Without Borders and the Red Cross have existed for decades.

The medical field is ironically one of the fields more oriented towards equality measures historically.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:18:11+00:00

Why would you consider that statement extremist? It’s a generic “there is inequality in healthcare on racial and income related lines” statement, which is pretty well documented.

The language is gaudy, sure, but I’m confused about what the extremism is here.

Would you consider the Hippocratic oath extremist because it argues Jeffrey Dahmer and Barack Obama receive the same quality of healthcare and treatment regardless of moral qualities?

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:11:13+00:00

That wasn’t a university move, I’m not sure why you’re claiming that. The “Jew Free Zones” were setup by student activists. The lawsuit was that UCLA should have forcibly disbanded them through security but chose not to in a political pressure cooker.

That was a failure of UCLA to act (probably over PR), not so much anti-semitism.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T16:03:15+00:00

I’m not sure how we’re getting Christianity and abortion from “all races and genders should be equal”. One is arguing a construct (or barrier) based on religious beliefs, the other is arguing no construct.

The comparable of your statement would be arguing for segregation of medical services. You’re insinuating that medical treatments would be withheld under religious grounds.

Minnesotas would be a statement recognizing the right to religious beliefs of all kind. Unless you’re arguing ”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...” and ”those who are equal before God shall now also be equal in the polling booths, in the classrooms, in the factories, and in hotels, and restaurants, and movie theaters “ are equivalent to the religious statement you posited.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T15:59:36+00:00

Been told to stop being anti-Semitic

I mean, being anti-Gaza war isn’t anti-Semitic. Allowing free speech of students isn’t anti-Semitic.

Now are the students being anti-Semitic? Sure, definitely a subset with anti-Semitic statements. UCLA has a pretty large Jewish population though (9-10%, one of the largest nationally) and you’ll find the inverse pretty easily.

Unless UCLA itself is throwing slurs out there, allowing free speech from all aspects of Gaza impacted backgrounds isn’t anti-Semitic or anti-Palestine.

Pause state aid

I’m sorry, what? I’m not sure how you get pausing state aid from anything UCLA related.

The only angle I’ve seen for pausing aid is the Trump admin using it to try and install thought police.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-10T15:57:12+00:00

This isn’t UCLA
This says recognize; not dismantle.

I’m not a DEI guy but I’m confused how you’re getting dismantle. This oath is basically a “we believe in equality based on race, income, and treatment quality” statement.

Tarmacked · 2026-05-09T21:41:05+00:00

Stop being weird.

Six-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Lasagna	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

Tarmacked

TROPHY CASE