There is a certain blunt logic to Curt Cignetti’s pitch, and it is hard to argue with the basic idea: if Indiana is going to lose a Notre Dame series, then the Hoosiers might as well push for a deal that actually helps them. On Friday, Aug. 14, Cignetti said on the Big Ten Network that he would like to play Notre Dame and suggested a 2-to-1 site arrangement. In plain English, his version of the Notre Dame football schedule would have the Irish coming to Indiana twice and Indiana going to South Bend once.
That is not subtle diplomacy. It is a coach making the obvious point that Notre Dame, by not being in a conference, can afford to be more flexible than most. Cignetti’s exact line was simple enough: “I’d like to play Notre Dame.” Then came the sharper part: “They ought to come to our place twice, and we’ll go there once, since they’re not in a conference.”
A canceled series changes the picture
The backdrop matters. Indiana and Notre Dame had been scheduled to play in 2030 and 2031, with the two-game series set to be played on their respective campuses. Instead, the series was called off at Indiana’s request, according to the South Bend Tribune. That leaves Indiana without a Power Four nonconference opponent over the next six seasons, which is exactly the kind of scheduling hole that looks minor in March and suddenly feels very real when the calendar gets closer.
It also means Notre Dame did not sit around waiting for the dust to settle. The freed dates were turned into additional USC games, which is the sort of tidy scheduling move that makes sense for one program and leaves another one explaining itself. Indiana still has open dates in 2030 through 2032, so the issue is not just philosophical. It is practical, immediate, and very much still unresolved.
That is what makes Cignetti’s comments worth more than a polite soundbite. He is not merely reminiscing about a rivalry that has barely existed in modern times. The two in-state schools had met only once since 1958 before Indiana last played Notre Dame in the College Football Playoff in 2024, when Notre Dame won 27-17 in South Bend. That is a thin history for two schools separated by geography but divided by football reality. Cignetti is basically saying: if the series is going to happen, at least make it worthwhile.
And honestly, there is a case for that. If Notre Dame wants the prestige and the leverage that come with being independent, then the schedule should reflect it. The Irish already have the ability to shape their own path in a way most Power Four programs cannot. Indiana, meanwhile, is left trying to patch together its nonconference future after losing a series that would have brought some obvious value to the program.
So yes, Cignetti is asking for a favorable split. But he is also asking the right question. If Notre Dame and Indiana are going to do this again, why settle for a neat little home-and-home when Indiana has room on the calendar and Notre Dame has already shown it can move quickly? That is the real point of the Notre Dame football schedule conversation now: not whether the matchup is interesting, but whether Indiana can turn a canceled series into something more useful than a missed opportunity.
