Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

For ND, I think it's contingent on NBC.  NBC could delay or hasten their drop in relevance quickly.  Now sure, it's tied to winning, if ND goes 3-9 the next 5 years or whatever, and NBC doesn't extend their deal, the days of being special are flat out over. 

There is a difference between watching them on NBC every week vs. scrambling to find them on ESPN3 or FoxSportsRustBelt.

It would be more generational, wouldn't it?  More like stairs and not a steady decline.  Just a thought.

Probably, but I also wouldn't tie religious identity as closely to religious practice as you do, particularly with Catholicism.  Living in such a "heavy Catholic" city as Pittsburgh has taught me this.  I've known people for a decade who I had no idea had any religious affiliation, until it was time to go to church for the first time in a decade to get their kid baptized.

I've got extended "Catholic" family here who probably haven't been to church outside of a funeral mass since the 70s who are still die hard "ND Catholics" and their kids are too.

Next trio:

Michigan, Nebraska, Penn State

Michigan
Nebraska
Penn State

By Staying Independent ND can choose to make a schedule that will allow them to get to that magical 12-0, 11-1 to get into a big bowl. They won't go 20 years without justly or unjustly getting to NY6 bowl.

They could, especially if they end their ACC dalliance, but they show no signs of doing that.  Their schedule this year looks pretty tough to me.  A mediocre team won't go 12-0 with that slate, or even 10-2.  A mediocre team would probably lose to UGA, USC, NC State, Miami FL, and Stanford.  A pretty decent team might win two of those I mark as losses, maybe 3.

Sat, Sep 2   vs   Temple   
Sat, Sep 9   vs   Georgia   
Sat, Sep 16   @   Boston College   
Sat, Sep 23       @   MI State
Sat, Sep 30  vs Miami OH
Sat, Oct 7        @  UNC
Sat, Oct 21   vs USC
Sat, Oct 28   vs NC State
Sat, Nov 4    vs Wake Forest
Sat, Nov 11   @  Miami FL
Sat, Nov 18  vs  Navy
Sat, Nov 25   @  Stanford

I know we don't need to explain, but I feel like I should explain why I placed PSU ahead of UNL in this thing.

A non-helmet would not have gone through NCAA sanctions and climb out with a conference title 4 years later. Big bump for PSU on that. Plus, they have 3 conference titles since UNL last sniffed one. Those things, to me, placed PSU ahead of UNL.

A non-helmet would not have had their sanctions wiped away a couple years later

FIFY

Response to various Anonymous Coward points:
You know I respect you and I'm happy and debating not mad and hateful, right?

Ok, just checking:
I get that anything less than "all-time" is "arbitrary".  However, I believe that this point of yours is much more powerful against someone who cherry-picks a very specific group of years in order to say "My team is the best over the past __ years".  I understand that 10-90 is "arbitrary" but it is definitely NOT cherry-picking.  I'm letting you (or anyone else) select the number within a very wide range. 

Your original statement dealt with "the team that is winning".  I think that present tense "winning" is inappropriate when we are talking about 90+ years.  Thus I think that it is misleading to say that "Michigan is winning the most league titles".  They have won the most, but they are NOT currently winning the most.  Currently that would be:

• Penn State over the past year
• Penn State and Michigan State over the past two years
• Penn State, Michigan State, and Ohio State over the past three years
• Michigan State over the past 4-5 years
• Michigan State and Wisconsin over the past 6-9 years
• Ohio State over the past 10-90 years

I respect you as a poster enough to not entirely stick my fingers in my ears and say "meh, you're a fan, this feels predictable."  With that said, I commented a LONG time ago in the old version of this thread on the old board that it is interesting that for most fans the time-period that they find relevant is suspiciously convenient in reference to their team.  The specific reference I used was that it seems:

• Most Florida fans seem to think the world started in 1990
• Michigan fans tend to see that and say "no, you have to go back to pre-1900 history:
• Ohio State fans tend to settle on a middle ground that acknowledges the very old history and gives it SOME weight while still having a "bonus" of some sort for recency. 

For each of our teams, these positions are suspiciously convenient.  You made an objective argument for including all history with no recency bias.  A Florida fan can make an equally objective argument for ignoring everything that happened more than 27 years ago and an Ohio State fan can make an equally objective argument for using a middle-ground time-frame of something like 25, 50, or 75 years.  It doesn't mean that all of us or any of us are being intentionally deceitful, it just means that we all tend to settle on positions that are good for our points.