of ND fans favoring more aggressive football scheduling, but to me that doesn't mean a top 20 team 11 or 12 weeks out of the season.
Without the benefit of reviewing historical scores, I feel that I'm familiar enough with Notre Dame schedules over the years to assert that even in those seasons with the most challenging schedules, there are always uninteresting games that don't create much buzz. Start with Navy, until we entered the wilderness. Rice, Tulane, Pitt for many years until Johnny Majors arrived. Air Force, Purdue once Jack Mollenkopf retired in 1969, Northwestern, with very few exceptions, etc., etc.
We apparently disagree that relying on the ACC for the "no buzz" games is materially worse than Notre Dame's historical scheduling, and I think any difference is justified by the benefits to other sports, overall. Again, if I believed the ACC arrangement prevented Notre Dame from having an appropriate football schedule, my position would be 180 degrees different.
As for other possibilities to provide reasonable conference memberships for other sports (again, without significantly diminishing the football program), you have asserted here that such options existed.
Posters on both sides of that issue are left to argue the existence/non-existence of deals not pursued, not consummated or not possible.
I will note that I don't consider it a coincidence that we struck a deal with the weakest P5 football conference. I don't think the Pac-12 made sense due to geographic considerations, but I'm not convinced that they would have granted Notre Dame "partial membership" regardless. I'm among those who consider it laughable to think that the SEC or Big 10 would have considered such an arrangement. That leaves the Big 12, which is about to expire -- and I don't think they would have gone for it, either.