Lincoln Riley calls out Notre Dame for rejecting USC’s proposal to extend rivalry series

Lincoln Riley spent Monday’s Alamo Bowl press conference making one thing abundantly clear: if the USC-Notre Dame rivalry is dead, it’s because Notre Dame killed it.

“I think everyone knows how I feel about the game,” Riley said. “I’ve said it multiple times that one of my first thoughts when I took the job at USC was to get to be a part of that rivalry. I have deep respect for college football; been a part of some really great rivalries. Obviously, this is right there up at the top.”

Riley said both schools spent months trying to find a solution. During that time, Notre Dame repeatedly said publicly they’d play USC any time, anywhere. USC took them at their word.

“It’s pretty simple,” Riley explained. “We both worked for months on trying to find a solution. Notre Dame was very vocal about the fact that they would play us any time, anywhere, and obviously, them not having a conference affiliation gives them an ability to be pretty flexible with their scheduling.”

According to Riley, USC athletic director Jen Cohen went to Notre Dame roughly two weeks ago with a proposal to extend the series for two more years. The Trojans took the Irish at their word about playing any time, anywhere.

“That proposal was rejected,” Riley said. “Not only was it rejected, five minutes after we got the call, it was announced that they had scheduled another opponent, which I’ll give them credit, that might be the fastest scheduling act in college football history.”

The timeline does look suspicious from USC’s perspective. The schools announced Monday morning that the rivalry would pause starting in 2026. By that afternoon, Notre Dame had finalized a two-year home-and-home with BYU for 2026 and 2027.

That said, Riley’s framing ignores some key context. The dispute appears to center on when to play the game, and USC’s position isn’t exactly flexible. The Trojans reportedly wanted the rivalry moved to Week Zero or early in the season because of Notre Dame’s College Football Playoff exception. Starting in 2026, the Irish are guaranteed a playoff spot if they finish ranked in the top 12, even if they lose their final game.

The Big Ten signed off on those CFP guidelines in March 2024, and all member schools — including USC — gave unanimous support. USC has since claimed it didn’t fully understand the implications, though it voted yes at the time.

“I know there’s been a lot of back and forth on it. I know college football has changed a lot,” Riley said. “But the fact is very, very clear, and this can all be settled very quickly. Had Notre Dame lived up to their word and played us any time, anywhere, we would be playing in the next two years and looking ahead after that, and hopefully continuing the series. They did not follow through on it, thus we’re not playing them the next couple of years.”

USC did explore alternatives. The school approached Netflix about moving the rivalry to a neutral site in Las Vegas or Mexico City and streaming it exclusively on the platform. That would’ve worked around both schools’ media rights deals while generating significant revenue. The Big Ten and its network partners rejected it immediately, which suggests USC’s options were limited even if it wanted to be creative.

Riley has faced significant criticism from former USC players since the announcement. Petros Papadakis, a former Trojans captain and Fox Sports analyst, called it “a dark mark on the university for a lack of leadership,” while questioning whether Riley, who’s 23-16 in four seasons at USC, had earned the credibility to make these kinds of decisions about the program’s future.

“We’re hopeful something can be worked out in the future. That would be fantastic,” Riley said. “We at SC would love for the game to continue, and we have no problem following through on our promises in the future.”