Does Notre Dame deserve a BCS bowl?

[AbeFroman]

Needless to say, it's good to see some people in this thread (Rex, Krush, to name a few) that can actually step back and objectively analyze ND. I don't know what it is about ND that makes people so angry and/or irrational, but again, I find it quite funny.

 

Are claiming to objectively analyze Notre Dame? If you ask me, my post was much more objective than your overly rosy view of the program.

 

As a football coach, the guy has lost practically every big game in two years. USC, OSU in 2005 and Michigan, USC this year. He did beat Michigan last year, but that was a team that finished 7-5 and out of the top 25.

 

Other than Penn State (8-4) this year, I don't remember ND beating at team that finished in the Top 25 in two years. That statistic seems remarkably average. You can say he doesn't have talent and that he's playing with Willingham's garbage, but he's got an NFL top 5 Pick in Brady Quinn as QB and some damn effective weapons on offense. I don't think its a stretch to say that a LOT of coaches could have done the exact same thing that Charlie Weis has done as a coach at ND. That is an unbiased, truthful statement.

 

I think you have to assess this team in light of its accomplishments. Truth be told, they've beaten up a lot of bad opponents. Considering the pre-season hype, this Notre Dame team and UNDERPERFORMED! They've gotten clobbered by the legit top teams they faced... and they started this season as Number 2 in most polls.

 

I know the recruiting has apparently improved. Fine. I contend that recruiting is improving from the cache he has as coach on the patriots... not from anything he's actually accomplished at ND. The reality remains: 1) They don't have an eye-opening win in two years; 2) They are going to be a 6-12 point underdog against whomever they face in a bowl game which is likely to be another top 25 loss; 3) The defense has shown basically no improvement all year; and 4) The offense loses its All-American QB and WR plus 4 OL starters.

[Rex Hudler]

Fotop, some people just don't get it. Whether they can't or just refuse to, I don't know, but as you said, it is quite comical.

 

I could go on, but why. It's like beating your head against the wall hoping the light bulb finally comes on.

[IlliniKrush]

Charlie Weis may have been successful with the Patriots. But the fact remains that Ty Willingham, Bob Davie, or probably 50 NCAA coaches could have led the Irish to exactly the same record they have this year. In my mind, he hasn't done anything to set himself apart as a great NCAA coach yet.

LOL are you serious? Ty Willingham? Fotop already covered this guy, but yeah...Ty Willingham could have done this. I have got to laugh at that.

 

Also, Charlies is known as one of the best play callers in college football right now. This isn't anyone's opinion on here, this has come from people in the college football world who know more about the game than we all do. If you do watch every ND game, however, you notice his offensive play calling is pretty genius.

 

The argument "a lot of coaches could have done what Charlie did" can be used for any coach who had success in college football this year, presumably. There's no way to prove it true or false, so you can just use it at will. Matter of fact, i'll say that i could have done the job Pete Carroll did this year at USC with that talent. There ya go, sounds brilliant, doesn't it? That's an "unbiased, truthful statement."

 

Furthemore, if you are going to judge coaches purely by the talent level they have available (you seem to love the fact that they have quinn and other weapons on offense), then give credit to Charlie for working with piss poor defensive talent and getting something out of it. Not to mention that you are chalking up success in college football to purely talent and not scouting, game planning, play calling, etc. That's pretty ignorant.

Edited December 2, 2006 by IlliniKrush

[Fotop]

A few quick repsonses:

 

- Do you really think Brady Quinn would be a top 5 NFL talent if it weren't for Weis? Brady wasn't even recruited by ND until Ndukwe was in the fold. They went to the same high school, and Ndukwe practically had to throw Brady at Ty to get him to notice him.

 

- Do you really think Samardzija would have broken the ND record for most career TD receptions if it weren't for Weis? (Oh, and he did it in two years...too bad he didn't see the light of day when Willingham was coach).

 

- The offensive record book at ND has been completely blown up over the past two years. 30+ offensive records have been broken under Weis' regime.

 

- I did not make any claims about improving defense. If there's one knock on Weis its that the defense hasn't gone anywhere. This obviously needs to be improved.

 

- You still cannot deny the two year coaching comparisons; the numbers simply do not lie.

 

To be cliche, Rome was not built in a day. I dont think many understand the awful shape Willingham left this program in. The "marquee" wins aren't there yet, but there's finally a mentality that 9-3 and 10-2 seasons are, to use your own words, "underperforming". Big difference from being happy with just being in a decent bowl game.

 

 

 

Fotop, some people just don't get it. Whether they can't or just refuse to, I don't know, but as you said, it is quite comical.

 

I could go on, but why. It's like beating your head against the wall hoping the light bulb finally comes on.

 

This has been a slow realization for me, I figure if there's as much evidence as there is there has to be some point in which people finally have some sort of epiphany. Obviously, that's not the case...so looks I need to go cleanup the blood on my forehead after banging my head on the wall this afternoon. Lesson Learned.

[DrunkBomber]

It depends if by deserve you mean are better then the teams they would be replacing or if you mean would generate the most money for a meaningless bowl.

[THEWOOD]

It's simple. It doesn't matter how much effort they put into scheduling tough teams and its their own problem that they have to schedule 12 games of their own. If those teams turn out bad, then they have played a weak schedule and (based on their results this year) do not belong in the BCS.

They could schedule USC, OU, OSU, LSU, Florida, etc all in the same year. If those teams were to all turn out bad for whatever reason, then they have played a weak schedule.

This is not hard to understand. "But they try to schedule hard" remains the least convincing argument on why Notre Dame should be in a BCS bowl.

 

ND will not schedule Ohio State. OSU had a home and home with them back in 95 and 96. OSU won both games. OSU has wanted to schedule ND but each time they have been turned down.

[Soxbadger]

Wisconsin played a bad half against Illinois.

 

ND played a bad half against MSU.

 

Which is worse?

 

And yes Wisconsin's OOC schedule was weak, but at the same time Buffalo was a very late addition due to the 12 team rule, and not every year is Wisconsin going to skip OSU. Also some other Big 10 teams were supposed to be better as Wisconsin was not even ranked in the top 25 (as compared to ND).

 

At the start of the year Wisconsin had 3 teams that were ranked above them, UM, Iowa, PSU.

 

PSU and Iowa had down years. But that does not change the fact that Wisconsin played the Big 10 schedule it was given, and only lost to UM.

 

Now I am not saying that I dont think ND will be a BCS team, just that I think both Wisconsin and ND have similar arguments for being BCS teams.

[IlliniKrush]

Illinois handed the game to Wisconsin. Without it, they have a brutal loss.

 

BTW, you didn't say they have similar arguments for BCS originally, you flat out said Wisky would beat ND. How you can be sure of that is beyond me.

[Soxbadger]

Well I have watched both teams play and I think Wisconsin would beat Notre Dame.

 

Purdue scored 21 on Notre Dame, 3 on Wisconsin

 

Michigan scored 47 on Notre Dame, 21 on Wisconsin

 

Penn State scored 17 on Notre Dame, 3 on Wisconsin

[Fotop]

Well I have watched both teams play and I think Wisconsin would beat Notre Dame.

 

Purdue scored 21 on Notre Dame, 3 on Wisconsin

 

Michigan scored 47 on Notre Dame, 21 on Wisconsin

 

Penn State scored 17 on Notre Dame, 3 on Wisconsin

 

Because we all know that ND wins games on defense.... that's a terrible way to judge if a team could be another. Especially in the case of ND which is an offensive ballclub.

 

Just for fun here's the scores of those games:

 

ND 35 Purdue 21

ND 21 Michigan 47

ND 41 Penn State 17

 

Total difference: + 12

 

Wisky 24 Purdue 3

Wisky 13 Michigan 27

Wisky 13 Penn State 3

 

Total difference: +17

 

Not saying this is a better way to present it, but the five point difference is pretty negligble. Certainly not a basis for a definitive "Wisconsin would beat ND" statement.

[Soxbadger]

The shame is, if Wisconsin could have been taken for the BCS, its likely both them and ND would have been in it, and possibly played.

 

There is my first comment.

 

Now I believe that Wisconsin is a better team, and would beat Notre Dame. I obviously understand ND fans are going to disagree, but what stat is out there that would make me not have faith in Wisconsin winning?

 

As your own post shows, Wisconsin played better against the 3 teams that they both mutually faced.

 

I think Wisconsin would win, didnt realize that phrasing it as "Wisconsin would beat ND" would be so offensive?

[IlliniKrush]

Wisconsin would beat ND.

Again, how you can say that for sure (without using stats that are absolutely ridiculous to prove your point) is beyond me. Wow, a 5 pt margin with a million other factors involved tells the story...yeah...

[Soxbadger]

Why are you so offended that I said Wisconsin would beat ND.

 

I think they would and I think every single stat imaginable will be in my favor.

 

Im not going to say:

 

"Well I think its possible that Wisconsin would beat ND, but anything can happen."

 

I dont get why you are so touchy about it, I guess its because there really is no argument for why Wisconsin would lose to ND?

 

If you said "ND would beat Wisconsin" I wouldnt care. Its cleary your opinion.

[IlliniKrush]

There's no argument for why Wisconsin would lose to ND? You're right, they'd play it 10 times, and Wisky would win 10 times, and probly 8 of those would be blowouts.

[Soxbadger]

No they would play 1 time.

 

Are you just trying to create an argument?

 

I dont even understand how playing a game 10 times is at all relevant.

[Rex Hudler]

There is my first comment.

 

Now I believe that Wisconsin is a better team, and would beat Notre Dame. I obviously understand ND fans are going to disagree, but what stat is out there that would make me not have faith in Wisconsin winning?

 

As your own post shows, Wisconsin played better against the 3 teams that they both mutually faced.

 

I think Wisconsin would win, didnt realize that phrasing it as "Wisconsin would beat ND" would be so offensive?

 

 

I have no problem with Wisconsin and do think they are a good team. They just don't belong in this discussion. It is not Notre Dame's fault that Ohio St and Michigan were better than the Badgers this year and the BCS only allows two teams per conference. Without that rule, Wisconsin probably would be in a BCS bowl. It just doesn't apply in a discussion of whether Notre Dame deserves to be in a BCS bowl.

[Soxbadger]

Which is why I dont understand the ND fans trying to attack Wisconsin for no reason.

[Rex Hudler]

Which is why I dont understand the ND fans trying to attack Wisconsin for no reason.

 

Maybe my memory is foggy, but I thought the Wisconsin talk began when the uninformed stated they belonged instead of ND earlier in the thread.

 

When someone says name 10 teams that deserve to go more and people list 8 teams that are already in and 2 that aren't eligible, then arguments begin. ND got compared to Wisconsin I guess because they have similar schedules.

[Fotop]

Wisconsin would beat ND.

 

Sorry but they both played Michigan, and Wisconsin played them much better. If anything it is possible had Wisconsin played Michigan later in the season when their WR's started to play much better that Wisconsin could have had a chance to beat Michigan. Not to mention Michigan played at ND, where as Wisconsin played at the Big House.

 

You seem to believe that because ND played a better team USC, and lost, that they are some how better than Wisconsin. Wisconsin beat the same quality of teams as ND.

 

I dont see why losing to a team should get you bonus points.

 

Nope, I'm pretty sure this post started it.

[IlliniKrush]

So...how does the UCLA win that ND has look now? Just wondering.

[Rex Hudler]

So...how does the UCLA win that ND has look now? Just wondering.

 

It doesn't help them at all. UCLA had ND beat and it was pure luck. Besides the USC win for UCLA was a total fluke!

[Soxbadger]

I responded to this:

 

Wisconsin has a JV schedule, just like ND's. Actually, ND played 2 elite teams this year, Wisconsin played 1.

 

at Bowling Green

WESTERN ILLINOIS

SAN DIEGO STATE

at Michigan

at Indiana

NORTHWESTERN

MINNESOTA

at Purdue

ILLINOIS

PENN STATE

at Iowa

BUFFALO

 

ND would be 1-loss playing that schedule. Hell, maybe they'd catch a few breaks and even beat Michigan.

 

I also posted prior to that:

 

The 3rd team rule was started prior to there being more BCS bowl games.

 

When a situation presents itself such as if Wisconsin, Michigan, and OSU all had 1 loss, and by virtue of big 10 rules Wisconsin had to be champ, you know the next year the rule would be changed so that the BCS could have gotten both OSU and Michigan.

 

It sucks for Wisconsin because they are a legitimate BCS team, only losing to Michigan this year. It also sucks for college football, because it gives a team like Wisconsin no incentive to schedule better teams. They might as well schedule powder puffs and hope for the best.

 

So its pretty clear that I already knew Wisconsin could not be in the BCS regardless.

 

The conference rule was also pointed out before I said it as well. So I dont understand why after I said that an ND fan had to come in and keep harping on Wisconsin.

[IlliniKrush]

Nope, I'm pretty sure this post started it.

[knightni]

Badger, Wisconsin's schedule is a lot weaker than ND's.

 

at Bowling Green (4-8) at Air Force (4-8)

WESTERN ILLINOIS (5-6) at Navy (9-3)

SAN DIEGO STATE (2-9) ARMY (3-9)

at Michigan (11-1) MICHIGAN (11-1)

at Indiana (5-7) UCLA (7-5)

NORTHWESTERN (4-8) at Michigan St (4-8)

MINNESOTA (6-6) at USC (10-2)

at Purdue (8-5) PURDUE (8-5)

ILLINOIS (2-10) NORTH CAROLINA (3-9)

PENN STATE (8-4) at Penn State (8-4)

at Iowa (6-6) at Georgia Tech (9-4)

BUFFALO (2-10) STANFORD (1-11)

[Soxbadger]

Where have I said anything about ND's strength of schedule?

 

Wisconsin and ND played 3 similar teams, Wisconsin played all of them arguably better. If the 2 teams met, I believe Wisconsin would win.

 

What does that have to do with strength of schedule, Wisconsin being in the bcs, or any of the other ridiculous arguments that people are making with me?

 

If you want to argue SOS or BCS, dont refer to me, because I honestly dont care and think ND will be a BCS team. Which I said from the very start.

 

And I assume the rest of the ND bandwagon will just ignore the fact that one of theirs, Wedge, started talking s*** about Wisconsin, prior to me saying anything about Wisconsin beating ND.

 

Classic.

Edited December 3, 2006 by Soxbadger