In a recent appearance on ESPN”s “First Take,” former NFL quarterback Cam Newton stirred controversy by labeling the prestigious Notre Dame football program as “irrelevant.” This remark came during a discussion regarding the upcoming changes to the College Football Playoff (CFP) format.
Newton”s comments were particularly striking given that Notre Dame had competed in the national championship game just a year prior, losing to Ohio State 34-23 on January 20, 2025. Despite this recent success, Newton asserted, “Notre Dame hasn”t been relevant in years,” sparking immediate backlash.
ESPN commentator Shea Cornette quickly defended the Irish, reminding viewers of their recent playoff appearance. In the 2025 season, Notre Dame finished with a 10-2 record but was ultimately the last team left out of the CFP, a situation that added fuel to Newton”s comments.
While Newton”s choice to criticize Notre Dame is puzzling, especially compared to other programs that have had fleeting success, it underscores the ever-evolving landscape of college football. Teams like Washington, which made the CFP in both 2016 and 2023, or Cincinnati, which appeared in 2021, could be deemed more fitting targets for such criticism.
Nevertheless, dismissing Notre Dame is a contentious stance, given their storied history, which includes 11 claimed national championships and multiple CFP appearances over the last decade. The program is not only a symbol of college football excellence but also a cultural icon, known for its legendary figures and moments.
Interestingly, Notre Dame”s unique status, which has allowed it to remain independent rather than join a conference, has been a double-edged sword, potentially costing them a playoff spot in 2025. Newton”s choice of words raises questions about the criteria used to define relevance in the competitive world of college football.
As discussions about playoff formats and team standings continue to evolve, Newton”s comments remind fans and analysts alike that perceptions in college football can shift dramatically, often overshadowing a program”s historical significance.
