College football thrives on tradition, and few traditions run deeper than its historic rivalries. Michigan-Ohio State.
The Iron Bowl. And yes, USC-Notre Dame.
While it may not always carry the same regional fire as some others, the Trojans and Fighting Irish have been squaring off since 1926 in one of the sport’s most storied cross-country matchups. It’s a rivalry that has weathered nearly everything - world wars, pandemics, coaching changes, and conference realignment.
But now, for the first time in over a century, it’s hitting pause for reasons that have nothing to do with global events and everything to do with scheduling conflicts.
USC head coach Lincoln Riley made that clear this week at the Valero Alamo Bowl press conference, where he didn’t hold back when asked why the historic series is going dark in 2026 and 2027. According to Riley, the Trojans were ready and willing to keep the tradition alive - but Notre Dame didn’t follow through.
“We took Notre Dame at their word that they would play us anytime and anywhere,” Riley said. “That proposal was rejected. Not only was it rejected, five minutes after we got the call, it was announced that they had scheduled another opponent [BYU].”
That’s the kind of scheduling pivot that turns heads - and raises eyebrows. Riley even gave Notre Dame credit for the speed of the move, calling it “the fastest scheduling act in college football history.”
Let’s take a step back. This rivalry has only missed four seasons since it began: three during World War II (1943-1945) and one in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
That’s it. Now, after Notre Dame’s 34-24 win this past October, the series is on hold for at least two years - and this time, it’s not because of circumstances beyond anyone’s control.
It’s about logistics, philosophy, and, from USC’s perspective, fairness.
Here’s the crux of the issue: USC, now a member of the Big Ten, wanted to shift the Notre Dame game to earlier in the season - specifically within the non-conference window. That’s a strategic move.
Over the past two seasons, USC was the only Big Ten team playing a non-conference opponent after Week 4, something the Trojans believe put them at a disadvantage in the College Football Playoff race. Juggling a rivalry game in the thick of conference play, especially one as physical and emotionally charged as USC-Notre Dame, isn’t ideal when you’re trying to make a postseason push.
USC’s proposal? Keep the rivalry alive, just move it to the front half of the season.
Notre Dame’s response? Thanks, but no thanks - and then came the announcement of a home-and-home series with BYU in those same 2026 and 2027 slots.
From Riley’s point of view, that was the final blow to hopes of keeping the series intact.
“Had Notre Dame lived up to their word and played us anytime, anywhere, we would be playing in the next two years,” Riley said. “They did not follow through on it. Thus, we are not playing them the next couple years.”
It’s worth noting that Notre Dame, as an independent, has far more flexibility in building its schedule than USC does now as part of the Big Ten. The Trojans are navigating a new landscape with limited non-conference windows and a full slate of conference obligations. That makes scheduling a rivalry game like this more complicated - but not impossible, if both sides are committed.
Despite the frustration, Riley made it clear that USC still values the rivalry and wants it to continue beyond 2027.
“We at USC would love for the game to continue,” he said. “And we have no problem following through on our promises in the future.”
For now, though, one of college football’s most iconic matchups is on hold. No touchdowns under the lights at the Coliseum.
No cold-weather clashes in South Bend. No gold helmets vs. cardinal and gold jerseys.
Just a pause - and a whole lot of disappointment from the USC side.
Whether this is a temporary break or the start of a longer hiatus remains to be seen. But one thing is certain: when two programs with this much history can’t find common ground, it’s a loss for the sport as a whole.