Official College Football Thread

[Rowand44]

The teams in the SEC are not as good as they have been in the past.  Trust me, I live this s*** down here.

I'm definitely not going to argue this point with you cause you're in sec country. That being said whether they're down this year or not what conferences are better then them? Big 10, maybe? Even being down compared to prior years they're still probably a top 2 conference in the nation.

Edited November 28, 2005 by Rowand44

[J-MAN]

Let me finish that for you...

 

I'll give you Michigan St. just because it happened; but on a normal day...not a chance.

 

Ohio St. would be close, as would Penn St.

 

Wisconsin... no.

 

Who else, Nostradamus?

 

Michigan? Purdue?

 

HA!

NU!!!!

 

How many teams with records over .500 did the Irish beat ?

[Wedge]

NU!!!! 

 

How many teams with records over .500 did the Irish beat ?

 

You're right, playing teams over .500 is the only indicator of a difficult schedule.

 

EDIT: Counter-point: Pittsburgh, Purdue, Tennessee and Stanford all finished at one game below 500. Had ND lost to them, they would have played 8 teams above .500. Removing the ND game, ND played 8 games against teams at 500 or better (Michigan, Navy, USC, and BYU are the others).

 

In the end, ND played five 5-6 teams (Michigan State included), but not all 5-6 teams are equal. There's got to be a difference between a 5-6 Purdue or Tennesse and 5-6 Louisiana-Monroe or San Diego State. When you account for opponents' opponents (i.e. opponents' SOS), the Sagarin rankings find ND to have the 20th hardest schedule this season. While you are correct that the Big 10 was typically a tougher schedule this year, I don't think that's a historic norm and ND had a pretty comparable schedule. As a comparison, USC had the 21st ranked schedule, Texas had 34, VTech was 32, LSU was 62, WVU was 68, and Oregon was 31.

Edited November 28, 2005 by Wedge

[knightni]

NU!!!! 

 

How many teams with records over .500 did the Irish beat ?

As many as the schedule that was made in 1998 allowed them to.

 

Why blame ND for the other teams' declines?

 

How is it ND's fault that nearly half of their 2006 opponents went from bowl eligible in 2005 to the proverbial cellar in '06?

[ZoomSlowik]

You're right, playing teams over .500 is the only indicator of a difficult schedule.

 

EDIT: Counter-point: Pittsburgh, Purdue, Tennessee and Stanford all finished at one game below 500. Had ND lost to them, they would have played 8 teams above .500. Removing the ND game, ND played 8 games against teams at 500 or better (Michigan, Navy, USC, and BYU are the others).

 

In the end, ND played five 5-6 teams (Michigan State included), but not all 5-6 teams are equal. There's got to be a difference between a 5-6 Purdue or Tennesse and 5-6 Louisiana-Monroe or San Diego State. When you account for opponents' opponents (i.e. opponents' SOS), the Sagarin rankings find ND to have the 20th hardest schedule this season. While you are correct that the Big 10 was typically a tougher schedule this year, I don't think that's a historic norm and ND had a pretty comparable schedule. As a comparison, USC had the 21st ranked schedule, Texas had 34, VTech was 32, LSU was 62, WVU was 68, and Oregon was 31.

 

Going from 5-6 to 6-6 doesn't make you a winning team. It doesn't make you an above .500 team either. It makes you a slightly better mediocre team. What does make a difficult schedule then, playing a bunch of usually good teams that are off this year? That makes no sense. Unless 3 or 4 of the winning teams you play are 9-2 or better, I don't see how you can argue that playing 4 winning teams out of 11 makes a tough schedule.

 

If you're going to bring in the computer rankings, how many spots does playing USC increase that difficulty? My guess would be quite a bit. You argue that all 5-6 teams aren't equal, but how about those "winning" teams that ND played? BYU and Navy are supposed to impress me? I'll give them Michigan and their two loses because MSU was playing much better at the time (probably had a lot to do with their early schedule, but I digress). However, as others have said, playing these super-crappy schools in between helps them out. They don't have a stretch where they have to play Michigan, Iowa, and OSU all in a row like Northwestern did. Getting those service academies and schools like Syracuse and Stanford in there sure makes life easier. Schools that are in a conference (with a couple of exceptions) get all of their cupcakes at the beginning of the year so they don't get any breaks once the tougher games start coming. Notre Dame has played some good teams in the past, but with the exception of USC this year wasn't one of them. Even when they do play several top 10 teams, they get the other end of the spectrum too, making it easier to get a bowl bid regardless of the tougher games. Notre Dame is a decent but not spectacular team this year, with a defense that is a bit overrated. In terms of their talent and team setup, they're a poor man's USC. I'd be very intrigued to see what happens when they play a team full of quality athletes on both sides of the ball like OSU.

[ZoomSlowik]

As many as the schedule that was made in 1998 allowed them to.

 

Why blame ND for the other teams' declines?

 

How is it ND's fault that nearly half of their 2006 opponents went from bowl eligible in 2005 to the proverbial cellar in '06?

 

There's a difference between blaming them for scheduling crappy teams and playing a less than stellar schedule. Even assuming all of the teams played at the level that people expected, they still have Washington, Navy, Syracuse, BYU, and Stanford on the schedule, all of which are schools that are good maybe once every 10 years. Pittsburgh probably falls into this category too, especially if the games were scheduled in 1998 (I don't think it's quite that far in advance. Maybe 4 years, but I don't think it's 7). By that logic, USC was still a patsy back then. They didn't get good again until Palmer emerged. Regardless of what people thought at the beginning of the year, the teams that ND played were in general not very good this year. Those are the problems with trying to rank teams before they've even played a down: no one knows what is going to happen. That's not necessarily ND's fault, but praising them for being one of the top teams in the country when they have rarely been tested has its own problems.

[knightni]

ND plays - USC, Navy, Stanford, Purdue and Michigan State EVERY YEAR.

 

They have YEARS of tradition against these opponents.

 

They play Michigan and Pittsburgh nearly every year when scheduling allows.

 

They play 3 Big 10 teams, 2 Pac-10 teams, 2 Big East teams, an SEC team, an ACC team, a Mountain West team and Navy every year.

 

Look it up.

 

 

Notre Dame has a tradition with most of these schools dating back 25+ years.

[Wedge]

Going from 5-6 to 6-6 doesn't make you a winning team. It doesn't make you an above .500 team either. It makes you a slightly better mediocre team. What does make a difficult schedule then, playing a bunch of usually good teams that are off this year? That makes no sense. Unless 3 or 4 of the winning teams you play are 9-2 or better, I don't see how you can argue that playing 4 winning teams out of 11 makes a tough schedule.

 

I said that about the 500 teams because somebody else was using that as a point to show ND's schedule is weak. It's a weak line of reasoning that the number of 500 or better teams you play is a good metric, that's why I went into the computer rankings, which show that ND has played a schedule that ranks in the top 20. Not the toughest in the country, but one that is pretty credible.

 

If you replaced Tennessee on ND's schedule with OSU or PSU, would it really look that much different from a typical Big 10 Schedule, aside from the spacing issues you mentioned?

 

Notre Dame has played some good teams in the past, but with the exception of USC this year wasn't one of them. Even when they do play several top 10 teams, they get the other end of the spectrum too, making it easier to get a bowl bid regardless of the tougher games. Notre Dame is a decent but not spectacular team this year, with a defense that is a bit overrated. In terms of their talent and team setup, they're a poor man's USC. I'd be very intrigued to see what happens when they play a team full of quality athletes on both sides of the ball like OSU.

 

I agree that ND's schedule isn't as tough as it has been in the recent past, but this year's schedule was not easy by any stretch of the imagination and bringing it back full circle, I think that ND's schedule makes them a much more legitimate BCS team than Oregon.

 

I think you're right on about the comparisons to a poor man's USC. They're USC without Reggie Bush, so their bowl game fate will probably be indicative of what USC will do next season without Bush. I think you're wrong when you call them a "decent, but not spectacular team". I can't think of a team outside of the top 10 that would beat them 9 times out of 10 on a neutral field. I think that's a bit better than decent. I think they're also even with all the teams in the top 10 except for USC and Texas.

 

I'm not sure who's overrating their defense. It's been solid and has improved since last year, but I think many Irish fans think it needs to improve to have a real chance to compete for a National Title.

 

ND vs OSU is a very intriguing game. It's a historical rivalry and there's a lot of bad blood between the schools, particularly the older alumni. OSU has more marquee players on defense, but I think ND has more marquee players on offense. Weis vs. Tressel is an interesting match-up, since Tressel is known to do well in the big game. I think on a neutral field that they split 10 games played and I definitely don't see ND getting blown out by 4 or 5 TDs as I've seen posted.

[ZoomSlowik]

ND plays - USC, Navy, Stanford, Purdue and Michigan State EVERY YEAR.

 

They have YEARS of tradition against these opponents.

 

They play Michigan and Pittsburgh nearly every year when scheduling allows.

 

They play 3 Big 10 teams, 2 Pac-10 teams, 2 Big East teams, an SEC team, an ACC team, a Mountain West team and Navy every year.

 

Look it up.

Notre Dame has a tradition with most of these schools dating back 25+ years.

 

How is that relevent to anything? That doesn't change the fact that they are on the schedule, and doesn't change the quality of their oponents at all. Notre Dame used to play Northwestern at least fairly regularly (don't feel like researching it right now), and they haven't played since NU upset ND in 1995. They also typically play BC and Army, and used to play FSU regularly, but none of them are on this year's schedule. Nobody says they have to keep all of those schools on the schedule, but they can because they aren't in a conference. You're also contradicting your own point, because unless someone changed conferences recently there is no ACC team on this year's schedule.

[ZoomSlowik]

I think you're right on about the comparisons to a poor man's USC. They're USC without Reggie Bush, so their bowl game fate will probably be indicative of what USC will do next season without Bush. I think you're wrong when you call them a "decent, but not spectacular team". I can't think of a team outside of the top 10 that would beat them 9 times out of 10 on a neutral field. I think that's a bit better than decent. I think they're also even with all the teams in the top 10 except for USC and Texas.

 

Unless you're playing a directional school, most teams aren't going to beat anyone 9 out of 10 times on a nuetral field. That's irrelevant, because few teams are going to dominate other major schools that significantly, with the possible exception of Texas and USC this year. However, there are a lot of other teams that I think might go 5-5 if you played 10 times. That's probably what would happen if you're going up against quality opponents. Also, since you only play a team once and there is no way to prove whether or not a team could do it, the whole idea is pure conjecture and adds nothing to an argument.

[Wedge]

Unless you're playing a directional school, most teams aren't going to beat anyone 9 out of 10 times on a nuetral field. That's irrelevant, because few teams are going to dominate other major schools that significantly, with the possible exception of Texas and USC this year. However, there are a lot of other teams that I think might go 5-5 if you played 10 times. That's probably what would happen if you're going up against quality opponents. Also, since you only play a team once and there is no way to prove whether or not a team could do it, the whole idea is pure conjecture and adds nothing to an argument.

 

I use the 10 game measure because funny things can happen, especially in football. When I say 5-5, that means there's an even match-up. I said what I said because you called ND "decent, but not spectacular" which I don't think is true at all. They're in the elite of college football this season. They've qualified under the terms of the BCS for a BCS bowl and deserve inclusion.

[Fotop]

Unless you're playing a directional school, most teams aren't going to beat anyone 9 out of 10 times on a nuetral field. That's irrelevant, because few teams are going to dominate other major schools that significantly, with the possible exception of Texas and USC this year. However, there are a lot of other teams that I think might go 5-5 if you played 10 times. That's probably what would happen if you're going up against quality opponents. Also, since you only play a team once and there is no way to prove whether or not a team could do it, the whole idea is pure conjecture and adds nothing to an argument.

 

Discussing the relative strength of schedules based upon records is pure conjecture too, if we want to discuss something that adds nothing to the argument. I really don't understand how people can be so stuck in their ways about scheduling being the root of the problem here. Luck plays an extremely large role in whether or not future opponents are any good...seeing as though scheduling takes place years in advance. And I don't buy that ND is dodging "tough" opponents 5 years from now, nor did they five years ago...they schedule major conference teams with consistent programs and keep their rivalries alive. Period.

 

I mean how many of you actually WATCH ND games? Do you realize that every team on their schedule circles them as the game of the year every year? Hell, Purdue engraved the score of the ND/Purdue game inside their Sun Bowl rings last year, they gave two s***s about the sun bowl. Teams play their absolute best against ND and it's pretty impossible to name another team in the country that consistently experiences this outside of their rivalry matchups. I mean you can bring in all the records and numbers you want, but to me all of these teams consistently scheduled by ND are a threat to beat ND year in and year out (barring navy)...maybe not a few years from now when ND is back on top, but in the past 10 years this is certainly true.

 

Also, if you watched this team at all this year, as well as the other top 10 teams, there's no way in hell you can say ND doesn't belong. In the end, for me, watching this team (mostly in person) is reason enough to believe they are more than worthy for a BCS bowl. That is why I don't really think anyone can whine about all this right now. This is not the Bob Davie team that got torched by Transfer-State University (aka Oregon State). This is not smoke and mirrors Ty Willingham ball. If they get blown out, then start talking but I firmly believe a lot of people are setting themsevles up for a situation where they will be eating their words. Not saying ND will win, I'm not that crazy, but it's going to be one hell of a game, whatever game that may be.

 

ND is GOOD and watch them compete on a national stage before saying they can't hang...hmmm I think the Fiesta Bowl presents a good opportunity for this.

[J-MAN]

I use the 10 game measure because funny things can happen, especially in football. When I say 5-5, that means there's an even match-up. I said what I said because you called ND "decent, but not spectacular" which I don't think is true at all. They're in the elite of college football this season. They've qualified under the terms of the BCS for a BCS bowl and deserve inclusion.

Too bad there aren't any more service academies for them to play !

 

Maybe the Coast Guard - kind of hard not to be five hundred when you line up a bunch of cupcakes - three service academies and Stanford who they almost lost to last weekend!

[danman31]

As many as the schedule that was made in 1998 allowed them to.

 

Why blame ND for the other teams' declines?

 

How is it ND's fault that nearly half of their 2006 opponents went from bowl eligible in 2005 to the proverbial cellar in '06?

I'm sorry that argument is pure bulls***. It's not about how tough of a schedule you tried to schedule, it's all about how tough your schedule was. Strength of schedule is merely about proving how good you are, not who has the balls to schedule tough teams.

[Wedge]

Too bad there aren't any more service academies for them to play !

 

Maybe the Coast Guard - kind of hard not to be five hundred when you line up a bunch of cupcakes - three service academies and Stanford who they almost lost to last weekend!

 

You're hilarious. I guess I didn't realize that Mark May posts here.

[ZoomSlowik]

Discussing the relative strength of schedules based upon records is pure conjecture too, if we want to discuss something that adds nothing to the argument. I really don't understand how people can be so stuck in their ways about scheduling being the root of the problem here. Luck plays an extremely large role in whether or not future opponents are any good...seeing as though scheduling takes place years in advance. And I don't buy that ND is dodging "tough" opponents 5 years from now, nor did they five years ago...they schedule major conference teams with consistent programs and keep their rivalries alive. Period.

 

I mean how many of you actually WATCH ND games? Do you realize that every team on their schedule circles them as the game of the year every year? Hell, Purdue engraved the score of the ND/Purdue game inside their Sun Bowl rings last year, they gave two s***s about the sun bowl. Teams play their absolute best against ND and it's pretty impossible to name another team in the country that consistently experiences this outside of their rivalry matchups. I mean you can bring in all the records and numbers you want, but to me all of these teams consistently scheduled by ND are a threat to beat ND year in and year out (barring navy)...maybe not a few years from now when ND is back on top, but in the past 10 years this is certainly true.

 

Also, if you watched this team at all this year, as well as the other top 10 teams, there's no way in hell you can say ND doesn't belong. In the end, for me, watching this team (mostly in person) is reason enough to believe they are more than worthy for a BCS bowl. That is why I don't really think anyone can whine about all this right now. This is not the Bob Davie team that got torched by Transfer-State University (aka Oregon State). This is not smoke and mirrors Ty Willingham ball. If they get blown out, then start talking but I firmly believe a lot of people are setting themsevles up for a situation where they will be eating their words. Not saying ND will win, I'm not that crazy, but it's going to be one hell of a game, whatever game that may be.

 

ND is GOOD and watch them compete on a national stage before saying they can't hang...hmmm I think the Fiesta Bowl presents a good opportunity for this. 

 

Again, what type of schedule they tried to put together doesn't matter. So Tennessee was supposed to be a top 10 team. They aren't. That means that ND doesn't get credit for beating a top 10 team, because Tennessee isn't one. How does that rip them for scheduling? Also as I said, even if you ignore the teams that were supposed to be good that weren't, they still had several cupcakes on the schedule that rarely have good teams, like BYU, Stanford, Syracuse, Navy, and Washington. In the past they've played the big guys when they were good, but this year simply wasn't one of them. That's more the way it is than anything.

 

My main argument is that ND hasn't really been tested this year outside of their loses to MSU and USC, the Michigan game that they just barely won that involved a lot of luck (how often is Michigan going to go 0-4 in the red zone? I can give ND credit for two, but not all four. Plus one of ND's touchdowns was tipped up, turning a possible pick into a touchdown, and the refs chose to review the play where Henne fumbled instead of the one before it when it looked like he was clearly in the end zone), and a Stanford team that they should have smoked. In their BCS bowl, they're going to play a team that is far better than anyone they've faced but USC. We don't really know exactly how they'll perform because they haven't played anyone like OSU, PSU or LSU that can actually stop people. If they play someone with a top level defense, which they probably will, they could be in trouble. Their defense isn't exactly the greatest and they rely on their offense a lot. Even the most of their weaker opponents were able to score 20. So far the only game I've really been impressed with how they played was that USC game, which also happened to be USC's worst game of the year in my opinion. Could that be attributed to ND? Partially. However, parts of that game were self inflicted. ND played about as well as they could and still lost. They almost certainly won't get blown out because they have a solid offense and a good coach, but I wouldn't be too confident about getting a win just yet.

 

Don't give me that everyone targets ND crap either. Maybe some of the teams do, but several of them have bigger rivals. USC actually has the target on their back. Michigan would like it a lot more if they beat OSU than ND. Tennessee's biggest rival is clearly Florida. Most of the other ones have no real rivalry with ND. Plus, it's an out of conference game for everyone else, dropping its significance. The only team I can see that clearly targets ND is the Purdue team you already mentioned. Maybe next year this will be the case after ND's season, but they snuck up on a lot of people this year.

[Wedge]

Again, what type of schedule they tried to put together doesn't matter. So Tennessee was supposed to be a top 10 team. They aren't. That means that ND doesn't get credit for beating a top 10 team, because Tennessee isn't one. How does that rip them for scheduling? Also as I said, even if you ignore the teams that were supposed to be good that weren't, they still had several cupcakes on the schedule that rarely have good teams, like BYU, Stanford, Syracuse, Navy, and Washington. In the past they've played the big guys when they were good, but this year simply wasn't one of them. That's more the way it is than anything.

 

My main argument is that ND hasn't really been tested this year outside of their loses to MSU and USC, the Michigan game that they just barely won that involved a lot of luck (how often is Michigan going to go 0-4 in the red zone? I can give ND credit for two, but not all four. Plus one of ND's touchdowns was tipped up, turning a possible pick into a touchdown, and the refs chose to review the play where Henne fumbled instead of the one before it when it looked like he was clearly in the end zone), and a Stanford team that they should have smoked. In their BCS bowl, they're going to play a team that is far better than anyone they've faced but USC. We don't really know exactly how they'll perform because they haven't played anyone like OSU, PSU or LSU that can actually stop people. If they play someone with a top level defense, which they probably will, they could be in trouble. Their defense isn't exactly the greatest and they rely on their offense a lot. Even the most of their weaker opponents were able to score 20. So far the only game I've really been impressed with how they played was that USC game, which also happened to be USC's worst game of the year in my opinion. Could that be attributed to ND? Partially. However, parts of that game were self inflicted. ND played about as well as they could and still lost. They almost certainly won't get blown out because they have a solid offense and a good coach, but I wouldn't be too confident about getting a win just yet.

 

Don't give me that everyone targets ND crap either. Maybe some of the teams do, but several of them have bigger rivals. USC actually has the target on their back. Michigan would like it a lot more if they beat OSU than ND. Tennessee's biggest rival is clearly Florida. Most of the other ones have no real rivalry with ND. Plus, it's an out of conference game for everyone else, dropping its significance. The only team I can see that clearly targets ND is the Purdue team you already mentioned. Maybe next year this will be the case after ND's season, but they snuck up on a lot of people this year.

 

It's your beliefs and the fact that they are somewhat pervasive throughout the college football fanbase that will make ND's BCS game so intriguing. If they go to a lesser game, like the Cotton Bowl, they'll face a much lesser opponent and probably kill them like they've done to many teams on the schedule. A BCS game for ND is really the only way to satisfy both the "ND isn't back yet" crowd and the 'ND is back" crowd since it's the only way they'll play a high enough quality opponent to answer everybody's questions.

[THEWOOD]

It's your beliefs and the fact that they are somewhat pervasive throughout the college football fanbase that will make ND's BCS game so intriguing. If they go to a lesser game, like the Cotton Bowl, they'll face a much lesser opponent and probably kill them  like they've done to many teams on the schedule. A BCS game for ND is really the only way to satisfy both the "ND isn't back yet" crowd and the 'ND is back" crowd since it's the only way they'll play a high enough quality opponent to answer everybody's questions.

 

What is your definition of "kill them"?

 

I have been out of town and not able to check soxtalk so I quickly skimed over this thread. So forgive me if I mention something that has already been brought up and/or discussed.

 

It seems there is a lot of talk about ND being a great team and individuals having a false sense of what ND is as a team. They simply have a good offense and best an average defense. When you let Navy put up 21 points on you AT HOME that is not impressive. I also saw something about marque players for ND on offense. I will give you Brady Quinn, but who else sticks out at a national level?

 

Also I support ND, I am not "anti-ND". I just dont think they are as good as everyone wants to believe.

[IlliniKrush]

Samardzija leads the nation in receiving TDs, IIRC.

 

Edit: And 3rd in yardage.

Edited November 29, 2005 by IlliniKrush

[Chisoxfn]

Samardzija leads the nation in receiving TDs, IIRC.

 

Edit: And 3rd in yardage.

Both him, Stovall, and Fasono will be playing in the pro's as will Brady Quinn (who has the chance to be a top 10 pick if he stays another season).

 

So basically put I feel Nd's offense has Walker (the RB), Quinn, Stovall, Fasano, and Samardzija on offense. All of them will be in the pro's. Not going to speak of there oline, but I'm guessing they may have a pro or two in there as well.

[thedoctor]

notre dame is as offensively talented as anyone in the country.

 

i do think they deserve a bcs berth. that said, i think there's a fair amount of clubs that deserve bcs berth's that won't get them (auburn and oregon to name two). i doubt anyone outside of alabama and/or eugene are going to cry if those teams are left out.

 

fwiw, i think notre dame's chances lie in who they play. against virginia tech? very good. against penn state? pretty good. against ohio state? not so good.

[Wedge]

What is your definition of "kill them"?

 

I have been out of town and not able to check soxtalk so I quickly skimed over this thread.  So forgive me if I mention something that has already been brought up and/or discussed.

 

It seems there is a lot of talk about ND being a great team and individuals having a false sense of what ND is as a team.  They simply have a good offense and best an average defense.  When you let Navy put up 21 points on you AT HOME that is not impressive.  I also saw something about marque players for ND on offense.  I will give you Brady Quinn, but who else sticks out at a national level?

 

Also I support ND, I am not "anti-ND".  I just dont think they are as good as everyone wants to believe.

 

I agree that the defense is suspect, but it has been effective at times as well. Out of curiousity, did you watch the Navy game or just see that Navy scored 21 points on ND?

 

Maybe kill is too strong a term, but I really think that ND would soundly beat any team it would play in the Cotton Bowl or another non-BCS game.

 

The argument is mostly over whether ND should get a BCS berth or not. Out of a pool of ND, OSU, and Oregon, I think ND definitely deserves the berth.

[THEWOOD]

I agree that the defense is suspect, but it has been effective at times as well. Out of curiousity, did you watch the Navy game or just see that Navy scored 21 points on ND?

 

Maybe kill is too strong a term, but I really think that ND would soundly beat any team it would play in the Cotton Bowl or another non-BCS game.

 

The argument is mostly over whether ND should get a BCS berth or not. Out of a pool of ND, OSU, and Oregon, I think ND definitely deserves the berth.

 

Samardzija...damn I forgot all about him...yes he is a great player. Hopefully he sticks with football.

 

To answer your question about the Navy game, yes I did watch the game. I think I have seen just about every ND game besides the Pitt game this year. As long as it didnt conflict with OSU.

 

If you could pick one why do you think ND should get the nod over OSU? I dont think Oregon deserves to be in a BCS game. OSU vs ND...why ND for the bowl bid?

[Wedge]

Samardzija...damn I forgot all about him...yes he is a great player.  Hopefully he sticks with football. 

 

To answer your question about the Navy game, yes I did watch the game.  I think I have seen just about every ND game besides the Pitt game this year.  As long as it didnt conflict with OSU.

 

If you could pick one why do you think ND should get the nod over OSU?  I dont think Oregon deserves to be in a BCS game.  OSU vs ND...why ND for the bowl bid?

 

I didn't mean ND deserved a bid at the exclusion of OSU, sorry that wasn't very clear. Out of OSU, ND, and Oregon, I think the choices are clearly ND and OSU. Picking ND over OSU isn't really an issue in my mind.

 

Scary thing about ND: their offense could be even better next year. They've got a 5-star RB coming in via early enrollment that might be even better than Walker.

[Rex Hudler]

I could care less about all of these scheduling arguments. I honestly believe if you watch Notre Dame play and have an ounce of an open mind, you will see them to be an extremely exciting team to watch and one that finds ways to win.

 

They do it differently every week. They find ways to beat you and Quinn has stepped right into the role of the guy that can do just that.

 

Notre Dame's defense isn't great, I don't think that is a secret. But I do believe their offense has shown it can score against anyone. I have no doubt that playing OSU in the Fiesta Bowl will make for an outstanding game, regardless of which team you foot for (or against as many here seem to do).