Derek Chirch

@CoachD178 @CoachDeDario @tsnmike responds to every other comment in minutes, but can’t respond to this one loaded with facts.

You want an explanation? I'll do this thing that people call research and make an argument based on data and not feelings. So what's the value? There is plenty of value to anyone who is being objective and not trying to write a hit piece. For example, you brought up North Carolina and their ticket sales .... that was a beautiful example of cherry picking data to support a preconceived viewpoint instead of actually making a real argument. You can cherry pick UNC, how about cherry picking Pittsburgh? Their average attendance for ACC home games the last three seasons is 49,947 with only three games over 50K. The most is 58,667 (Clemson, 2024). Attendance for the Notre Dame game? 68,400. Attendance for the Miami game two weeks later? 49,845. How about Georgia Tech in 2024. Average attendance is 39,745 with a high of 47,358. Attendance for Notre Dame game? 59,021 Duke in 2023. Average attendance was 24,847. Duke vs Clemson game was 31,638. Attendance for the ND game? 40,768. Same year, Louisville. Average attendance was 48,797. Attendance for the ND game? 59,081 You could write this story for the vast majority of ND vs ACC games. Since ND joined, ACC teams sellout 23% of their games. They sell out for 90% of the ND games. Now, if you actually want to do your job and learn things, go look at the ticket prices for those games when Notre Dame is in town. Specifically, go look at what tickets were going for when Pitt played Notre Dame compared to when Pitt played Miami. So it's not just about "selling out" or "average attendance," the overall revenue increases far greater because Notre Dame games are almost always considered premium or marquee games. Actually, I'll make it easier for you. I'll show current ticket prices for ND vs UNC, Louisville vs UNC, and NC State vs UNC. Do some math, even if each game is solid out, you really think they are making even close to the same revenue in those games? Anyone trying to tell the real story would have discussed this. By not doing so it comes across as pure spin. Let's go look at TV numbers in ACC vs ACC games and then go look at the numbers in ACC vs Notre Dame games. Miami was the ACC's most viewed team in the regular season by over 7 million. 29% of their total RS views were the ND game. How about common opponents? Pitt vs. ND - 3.96M vs. UM - 2.22M Syracuse vs. ND - 1.89M vs. UM - 1.20M Stanford vs. ND - 1.52M (despite 10:00 PM kickoff) vs. UM - 1.21M How about common leagues? Both teams played a really good American team. ND vs Navy - 3.4M UM vs USF - 740K Go ask ACC coaches why they always schedule their big recruiting weekends when they host Notre Dame. Go ask ACC coaches why they use getting to play Notre Dame as a pitch with recruits. Finally, I'll use your own words. You wrote this: "Notre Dame could solve the ACC’s possibly existential crisis in an instant. All that is necessary to ensure the future of the league is for the Irish to join as a full member, possibly even while dictating some of the terms it would prefer, such as retention of its lucrative TV contract for home football games." So you're telling me that the best path forward for a dying league is to alienate a team that could solve it's problems?

@tsnmike @ericwildeman22 Because the ACC pays them to have a home for their non-football sports (which they don’t care about as much as football)? Seems pretty simple.

@ericwildeman22 @dchirch If it's dying, why does Notre Dame want to be involved?

With all that’s happened involving @NDFootball and @theACC lately, is it time for the league to give the Irish an ultimatum? I know what I’d say: sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-footba…

@tsnmike @ericwildeman22 They would take the exact same deal the ACC has and they’d probably pay more.

@dchirch @ericwildeman22 For hoops and soccer? Please

@tsnmike @ericwildeman22 The Big 10 would absolutely, 100% bend over backwards to get ND in the league. Be serious.

@ericwildeman22 The SEC and Big Ten certainly would not

@Richard_H96 Better than 6-0? No.

If Bron missed the playoffs the 6 years he lost in the finals, he’d be 4-0 in the finals. Better?

@_CCorey @Richard_H96 @MylesHive @aryh21 You were talking about significantly better rosters as if Lebron hasn't always loaded his team with Hall of Famers and all stars. The GOAT should be able to raise the level of play of super teams

@dchirch @Richard_H96 @MylesHive @aryh21 The hall of famer stat is going to be incredibly skewed at face value, but didn’t each of those other teams have their guy too? Jordan didn’t win anything without pippen. Why is bron the only NBA player in history where it’s problematic that he wanted to play with a good team?

Only swept 4 times in 20+ years with the most playoff games played ever as an underdog countless times is an achievement not an indictment

@_CCorey @Richard_H96 @MylesHive @aryh21 How many Hall of Famers has Lebron played with? Didn't he handpick most of those rosters?

@dchirch @Richard_H96 @MylesHive @aryh21 I mean, if you’re going up against a significantly better roster you can’t win 1v5. Jordan in all the playoffs he wasn’t good enough to make it to the finals couldn’t win 1v5. Bill Russell wasn’t the only player on the court during his 11 rings. who you’re with matters a ton.

@Richard_H96 @MylesHive @aryh21 So, now "favored to win" is a more important measure of greatness than whether you actually win or lose. Got it.

@dchirch @MylesHive @aryh21 Fewer titles than he was favored to win. Bron has more than he was favored to, which is a better stat to use anyways

@FleenorSports @MylesHive @aryh21 In 97-98 the Bulls beat two Hall of Famers in Stockton and Malone. The Jazz had to get through the Rockets (Hakeem, Barkley, Drexler), the Spurs (Robinson, Duncan) and the Lakers (Shaq, Kobe).

@MylesHive @aryh21 You think MJ would be the favorite if he played Steph Curry, Kevin Durant, Green and Klay Thompson. Jordan never went against more than 2 all stars lol let him go against 4 and see what happens. He went against 3 when he played the Celtics but got swept lol add another.

@Richard_H96 @MylesHive @aryh21 What's Tom's record in the Super Bowl?

@MylesHive @aryh21 Because it’s a team sport? Tom Brady has been the underdog before and he’s the undisputed goat of football

@RodMurrow @Wendi_Irlbeck But you're missing the part where they are already D1 athletes (in the SEC in Big 12 no less) in other sports. Variability in training and, maybe even fun, is what they are looking for in these secondary sports. These athletes have already been "developed" at the highest level.

@dchirch @Wendi_Irlbeck Focused individually that’s a state champ in the javelin and a top-three or even champ in the PV. Raw athleticism lets you get away with a lot at the high school level, but that should never be confused with actually developing athletes.

Youth sports is on life support. If you think it’s fine, you’re not paying attention. Kids age 10-12 are playing way too many tournaments and travel ball. Parents treat it like the World Series. They need less travel, more rest, fueling, and actual development. They’re 12 YO. The data backs it up: ❌70% of kids drop out of organized sports by age 13. ❌Professionalization (year-round single-sport focus, heavy travel/tournaments) drives overuse injuries, overtraining, and burnout. ❌Nearly 1 in 10 youth athletes experience burnout; up to 35% deal with overtraining. ❌Early specialization before 12-13 raises injury and burnout risks significantly. Multi-sport kids who rest and play for fun stick around longer and develop better. Let them be kids. Prioritize recovery, fun, and long-term health over trophies. The best athletes often sample multiple sports early and specialize later. Who else sees this?

@RodMurrow @Wendi_Irlbeck I just gave you two examples from this week where it was done very well. Our training staff- which is one of the best in the state- agrees. LTAD may be fine for most athletes, but it is not a one-size fits all. These kids wouldn't trade these incredibly successful experiences.

No, they can’t. Something is sacrificed even if the athlete performs acceptably and isn’t injured. Pull one of the sports and focus on one sport at a time and see what happens to performance. And you can actually measure recovery or the lack thereof. The LTAD multi-sport model is built on one sport per season, with a different sport each season. Somewhere along the line that got bastardized into simultaneous sports.

@RodMurrow @Wendi_Irlbeck Those are just two of multiple examples from this week alone...and I've seen many, many examples of this type of dual-sport success in 22 years and minimal if any injury or burnout from it. The right coaches, training staff, and athletes can do this all very well.

@RodMurrow @Wendi_Irlbeck Two recent examples- D1 softball commit is top 5 in the state in most stats, leads team to playoff win on Weds and finishes third in the state in javelin on Thursday. D1 football commit takes 9th in the state in pole vault on Thurs, state runner up in oly/trad weightlifting Fri

@RodMurrow @Wendi_Irlbeck Depends on what you mean. Intense travel team during a school season? Or a kid running track and playing a primary school sport in the same season?

@Wendi_Irlbeck One huge caveat - “multi-sport,” at least in the LTAD context, does NOT mean “simultaneous” sports. That is no better than what you describe. Multisport should be encouraged, while simultaneous sports should be strongly discouraged.

@Wendi_Irlbeck Life support is a bit much, but I agree with a lot of your points!

@DTMoore7 @ScottKacsmar You’re right, it was just like every other NBA title ever won. No different at all.

@dchirch @ScottKacsmar You're right, it is. Best team in basketball lost home court and one of their starters in the bubble. And their direct competition (Giannis, PG, and Kawhi) all had injuries that would have impacted them had the season not stopped.

How people view the bubble playoffs is a good litmus test for intelligence. Taking homecourt out of playoff basketball is a huge equalizer. It wasn't easier to win that year. And we saw crazy comebacks (mostly Denver) because of it.

@ScottKacsmar @CarpeCanus He’s probably not counting the fake bubble title.

@CarpeCanus You didn't even get the numbers right, so I wouldn't even want to see you try to explain why that is.

Career games vs. 65+ win teams Jordan: 0-6 (.000) LeBron: 16-28 (.364) Career games vs. NBA champions Jordan: 9-29 (.237) LeBron: 27-55 (.329) Pct. of games vs. 60-win teams while playing for a 60-win team Jordan: 47/100 (47.0%) LeBron: 8/115 (7.0%)

@PlayoffKaden In terms of money and age and the future, yes, LeBron is the problem.

Luka - out Austin Reaves - trash in the playoffs every year LeBron James - never missed a playoff game, 23,7,7 this year But LeBron is the problem