If you’re not a Colin Cowherd fan, you’re not alone. Unless you’re eager to get riled up, I’d advise against tuning into his interview with The Athletic’s Bruce Feldman. But if you’re curious, here’s the condensed version of his take on the Notre Dame-USC rivalry.
From what I could gather from the clipped video, Cowherd was defending USC head coach Lincoln Riley, who allegedly attempted various methods to avoid playing LSU in week 1 of the 2024 season. As part of his argument for Riley’s leniency, Cowherd listed the tough teams USC would face as a new member of the Big Ten. To alleviate USC’s predicament, Cowherd proposed removing Notre Dame from their schedule.
Thankfully, Feldman called out Cowherd’s flawed reasoning, albeit diplomatically. He pointed out that USC isn’t obligated to face all tough Big Ten teams annually, emphasizing college football’s reliance on tradition and the non-negotiable nature of certain rivalries.
Cowherd’s assertion that USC is too prestigious for the Mountain West was countered by his own examples of other programs with less rigorous schedules. However, his arguments seem to overlook the true intentions behind USC’s decisions—profit over championship aspirations.
While Cowherd’s claims may seem absurd, they reflect a broader trend in college football—prioritizing financial gains over competitive integrity. USC’s shift to the Big Ten might not enhance their championship prospects, but it’s a strategic move aimed at maximizing revenue.
In essence, Cowherd’s stance highlights the commercialization of college football, where monetary considerations often outweigh sporting objectives.
