Here ya' go, Domers: Actual ND football talk

[Van]

Terry, ESPN has three Domers in key positions. Their main CF guy, besides Kirk Herbstreit, is a mush mouthed Domer. He was a senile embarassment LONG before the "Dr Lou" segment...

It's not important that ESPN "gets" ND. Nobody "gets" ND, and everyone "gets" ND. What's there to "get"? Posing the question of whether ND ought to join a conference is perfectly valid. Who cares if it's not part of their tradition?

It's what they need to do now.

They added girls, right? That didn't used to be part of their tradition either.

All that matters is ESPN continues to hype ND, far and above anything merited by ND's performance. ESPN recruits for ND, every time they do another fluff piece about the tradition of ND.

They don't do such pieces on, say, Auburn, or Cal.

As for the racism question, of course it was merited. ESPN and ND made a big deal out of hiring a black guy, so of course they made a big deal out of ND breaking tradition and firing him before his five seasons were up. The issue took on a helluva lot more validity when ND gave Weis more rope than they gave Ty, despite a poorer performance by Weis.

Of course ESP was forced to address the question. Thing is, ESPN is so goddamn PC that they never really addressed it with any of their usual hype and fervor. They tip toed around it, barely paying it lip service...

[TheJON]

FACT:

Charlie Weis has been to 2 BCS bowls but has ZERO quality wins in 4 years as coach.

FACT:

Notre Dame hasn't been in contention for a national title since 1993

FACT:

Notre Dame has ONLY made the BCS because of their ability to sell tickets and get fans in front of the TV over the last decade

FACT:

Notre Dame has had quite a few .500 or losing seasons in the last decade

FACT:

Notre Dame hasn't even finished in the Top 10 in about 15 years

FACT:

Notre Dame is still widely considered a top program, and a top job

FACT:

No other school in the country that's had similar success to what Notre Dame's had the past 15 years is even considered a Top 40 program.

FACT:

The media (most notably ESPN) masterbates constantly to Notre Dame and talks about them regularly like they're competing for national titles every year.

FACT:

No other program that's had even close to as little of success as Notre Dame has had the past 15 years gets even 10% of the media attention of Notre Dame.

FACT:

Notre Dame, despite what I've mentioned above, is still able to land great recruiting classes even with their tough academic restrictions.


Those are all facts, not opinions. So based on that, if don't you think Notre Dame isn't still considered this great program by everyone because of the media, well.....I've got some land I'd like to sell you.....!

[Laxplayer]

FACT:

Charlie Weis has been to 2 BCS bowls but has ZERO quality wins in 4 years as coach.

He did beat Michigan at their place when they were ranked in the top 5. He also beat Pitt a year after Palko threw for half a mile against them when Pitt was ranked in the top 25.


FACT:

Notre Dame hasn't been in contention for a national title since 1993[/b[]

Wow, more genius from JON

FACT:

Notre Dame has ONLY made the BCS because of their ability to sell tickets and get fans in front of the TV over the last decade

Right, and I'm sure those cities who benefitted from the money ND fans poured into the economy are real upset. We all know it's about money.

FACT:
Notre Dame has had quite a few .500 or losing seasons in the last decade

Which also means they have had quite a few where they were above .500.

FACT:Notre Dame hasn't even finished in the Top 10 in about 15 years

duh.......Neither have a lot of other programs.

FACT:

Notre Dame is still widely considered a top program, and a top job

I don't think it's a top program because they haven't really done anything in recent memory. Is it a top job? I think so because if someone's successful at ND then that person will be considered a fantastic coach.

FACT:
No other school in the country that's had similar success to what Notre Dame's had the past 15 years is even considered a Top 40 program.

Didn't you say that ND hasn't had success the past 15 years? No top 10 finishes, several losing seasons? I don't think they're a top 25 program right now, but top 40? Yes.

FACT:
The media (most notably ESPN) masterbates constantly to Notre Dame and talks about them regularly like they're competing for national titles every year.

They're trying to get viewers and no matter how good or bad ND football is people will watch because of their love for Nd and their hate for ND. They're just doing their job to make money for the network. If you don't like it, change the channel.

FACT:
No other program that's had even close to as little of success as Notre Dame has had the past 15 years gets even 10% of the media attention of Notre Dame.

See my coments above.

FACT:
Notre Dame, despite what I've mentioned above, is still able to land great recruiting classes even with their tough academic restrictions.

True, however Weis has underachieved as a coach as have his assistants which makes it much more difficult to stomach being an ND fan.


Those are all facts, not opinions. So based on that, if don't you think Notre Dame isn't still considered this great program by everyone because of the media, well.....I've got some land I'd like to sell you.....!


Maybe the media thinks they are, however there are many people who know that they're not among the elite programs of CFB right now as far as wins and losses go. Can they get there? I'm not so sure with Weis as a coach. Maybe Weis has an average year this year and they buy him out and make a run at Meyer or Gruden. One thing that's for sure is that win or lose ND football is a topic of conversation.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Terry, ESPN has three Domers in key positions. Their main CF guy, besides Kirk Herbstreit, is a mush mouthed Domer. He was a senile embarassment LONG before the "Dr Lou" segment...

So you're saying that Lou probably isn't the greatest source for ESPN to rely on when it comes to ND?

It's not important that ESPN "gets" ND.

It wouldn't be, except for their rather implicit claim to be THE source for sports.

Nobody "gets" ND, and everyone "gets" ND. What's there to "get"? Posing the question of whether ND ought to join a conference is perfectly valid. Who cares if it's not part of their tradition?

It's what they need to do now.

They added girls, right? That didn't used to be part of their tradition either.

For that matter, it used to be that ND didn't do bowl games, period, no matter the circumstances. That has changed as well.

Not to change this thread into yet another Great Conference Debate, but I don't agree with your take that ND should join a conference, but I'm hardly a reflexive proponent of independence no matter what. Case in point: about a decade and a half ago, ND's fanbase was having this same debate when it came to the basketball program. Back then, I was a strong advocate of ND joining a basketball conference. That may sound inconsistent, but it really isn't: in both cases I was/am going with what I thought was best for ND's program.

In any event, reasonable minds can differ as to whether ND should join a conference. If ESPN wants to advocate for that, I don't have a problem with that if they go about it the right way. But that's not what's happening.

If you want to advocate for ND joining a conference, you need to start by acknowledging that independence has been an important part of the fabric of ND's football program. You have to acknowledge that ND will lose certain things by giving up independence. Then you focus on what ND would gain in a conference, and argue that those gains outweigh the losses.

But that's not what ESPN is doing. ESPN is bringing to the table the old chestnut that "everyone else does it" and nothing else. I remember, as a kid, going to the "everyone else does it" card with my parents a time or two. And I suspect most others in here did the same thing at one point in their lives or another. I know how that turned out for me. I suspect I know how it turned out for everyone else. And that argument should never carry any more weight than that even when applied to the question of whether ND should join a conference.

All that matters is ESPN continues to hype ND, far and above anything merited by ND's performance. ESPN recruits for ND, every time they do another fluff piece about the tradition of ND.

They don't do such pieces on, say, Auburn, or Cal.

Let's be clear about why they do it. It's not about any pro-ND bias. They do it because, plain and simple, ND sells. ESPN is about bigger ratings, more subscriptions to their magazine, etc., and ND provides that in a way Auburn or Cal never will. (More on that later, btw.) For that matter, it need not be positive coverage of ND to sell, and as I pointed out earlier, you can find plenty of negative coverage of ND on ESPN as well.

As for the racism question, of course it was merited. ESPN and ND made a big deal out of hiring a black guy, so of course they made a big deal out of ND breaking tradition and firing him before his five seasons were up. The issue took on a helluva lot more validity when ND gave Weis more rope than they gave Ty, despite a poorer performance by Weis.

Of course ESP was forced to address the question. Thing is, ESPN is so goddamn PC that they never really addressed it with any of their usual hype and fervor. They tip toed around it, barely paying it lip service...

ESPN may have made a big deal of it, but again, ND probably was one of the highest-profile programs ever to have a black HC (Oklahoma is the only comparable program to come to mind, and if you blinked, you missed the John Blake era). But ND never made a big deal about hiring a black guy. In fact, if you look at the particulars of that hire (the Gruden snafu, followed by the O'Leary resume fiasco), the opposite conclusion is in order, i.e., that ND wanted to get the hire behind them and get the program back to normal ASAP.

As for firing Ty before the five seasons were up, there was a difference in his contract from those of his predecessors: the buyout provision (Davie had one as well, but not in his first contract. His second contract, after White foolishly re-upped him following the 2000 season, had a buyout.) Weis also has a buyout provision, so the only possible comparison for Ty, among ND coaches, is with Weis. That being said, there are at least three reasons I can think of, all non-racial, as to why Ty was bought out but Weis wasn't.

1. Recruiting. Ty had one good recruiting class, his first, then got really lazy on the recruiting trail. Weis' first class wasn't good, but it was essentially Ty's last class, and he was still the Patriots' OC until just a few days before LOI day. Under the circumstances, he did a pretty good job keeping the class together. His next three classes after that were ranked, in order, #8, #8 and #2 (btw, that last ranking came from both Rivals and Scout; the WWL had the class ranked at #9 -- what's that again about a pro-ND bias at ESPN?) Personally, I've always been somewhat skeptical about recruiting rankings, for reasons I've posted here in the past. But they're not about to go away just because I, and others, have expressed some doubt over them. Good results in recruiting often can get a coach a temporary reprieve when the team isn't performing up to expectations on the field.

2. The buyout. Ty was actually paid more per season under the buyout than Weis was being paid to coach the team. That fact alone tells you that the buyout payments are bound to be pretty substantial. Now remember, Weis signed a significant extension during his first season. In hindsight, that was a mistake on ND's part, but we're stuck with it now. Reportedly, Weis' buyout is worth $20 million. That's a pretty significant dead horse. Of course, the buyout will diminish somewhat after next season.

3. Assistants. Weis at least has shown a willingness to get rid of assistants who failed to live up to expectations. Ty, OTOH, was loyal to a fault to his assistants. Admirable though that trait may be, on a personal level, it's not likely to buy you a whole lot of patience from either the administration or ND's fanbase.

As for ESPN being too PC about it, you couldn't possibly have been watching the same stuff on TV as I was. John Saunders (on ESPN's sister network) made it the centerpiece of his halftime show during the ND-Washington game in '05. Btw, New Mexico State fired their African-American head coach right around the same time ND fired Ty. And unlike Ty, that coach happened to be the all-time winningest head coach in that program's history. Of course, ESPN isn't going to generate a whole lot of ratings by accusing New Mexico State of racism.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Let's address this, shall we?

FACT:
No other school in the country that's had similar success to what Notre Dame's had the past 15 years is even considered a Top 40 program.

Since the inception of the BCS, ND has had three BCS bowl bids. That's under two head coaches universally considered failures at ND, and a third as to whom, to put it VERRRY charitably, the jury is still out. Not to mention that, if the current rules had been in effect in 2002, ND would've had a BCS bid that year as well.

ND is not an easy place to win, necessarily. It takes a special coach to flourish there. But with the right coach, the sky is the limit.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Getting back more on topic, and from a more technical point of view, a few additional observations . . .

1. Brady Quinn showed the most improvement during his college career between his sophomore and junior seasons. That point is relevant because that's the same point where Clausen is in his college career right now. With Clausen, of course, the most significant question has been about his mental makeup rather than his physical attributes. On that point, he has an advantage: he was actually older as a sophomore than I was as a senior. Hopefully, with that additional age has come a muturity that hasn't yet been self-evident. This year is a big test in that regard.

2. As Killian mentioned, offensive line play is the key this season. The offensive line did improve slightly last season -- at least Clausen wasn't running for his life on every single play. But while pass blocking improved, run blocking did not. Most upsetting to me about last season was how badly we sucked on third-and-short. It's been posted on ND Nation that ND should be able to line up, point to exactly where they are running the ball, and gain a minimum of three yards on any given play. I won't go quite that far, since among other things, it doesn't account for the fact that several teams play outstanding defense. Having said that, I will say that ND should be able to convert at least 70% of the time on third-and-3 or less, and on third-and-2 or less that number should go up to 80%. And if anything, those are probably conservative numbers. I don't have last year's numbers on that point in front of me, but I'd bet my next paycheck against anyone's on this board that we weren't even close to those numbers last year. Simply put, there is too much talent both on the OL and at RB for us to suck that badly.

3. Along those lines, Aldridge has moved from TB to FB. It's more of a numbers thing at both positions than anything else. Of course, with a relatively green FB, and with an OL that I expect to underachieve again, that puts extra pressure on the TE position within the running game. And that worries me. ND recently has developed something of a reputation as Tight End U, but this year that doesn't necessarily translate into a soli run-blocking corps. Rudolph and Ragone are at the top of the TE depth chart. Rudolph made every all-freshman team last season, and rightfully so, but he was used more as a slot receiver than as a true TE. That helped us in the passing game, by creating mismatches, but hurt us in the running game. Rudolph has to put on some muscle mass to help us in the run-blocking game. Ragone has fought a series of injuries throughout his career. Fasano and Carlson circa 2005 this is not, at least not insofar as the running game is concerned. Losing Yeatman really hurt us in two respects. First and more obvious, we could have used the added depth this year. Second, Yeatman is a two-sport guy, and his second sport is lacrosse. While combination football/lacrosse players are relatively rare, ND should have a built-in edge when it comes to getting these guys. There are only 12 schools which play FBS football and Division I lacrosse (three of which are the service academies, btw), and the other schools are all schools which, athletically speaking, ND at least should have an edge over, either in football (Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Syracuse, Virginia), in lacrosse (Ohio State, Penn State), or in both (Air Force, Army, Navy, Rutgers).

If ND can develop a running game, this has potential to be a satisfying season for ND fans, at least relative to recent years. But that's a big if.

[Van]

The offensive line did improve slightly last season -- at least Clausen wasn't running for his life on every single play.

I saw no evidence of improvement in the O line. All I saw was a continued sieve. When ND played good teams, Claussen was running for his life. When ND played good teams, ND had no running game.

When ND played Hawaii, ND's O line suddenly looked like they'd improved.

[Terry in Crapchester]

The offensive line did improve slightly last season -- at least Clausen wasn't running for his life on every single play.

I saw no evidence of improvement in the O line. All I saw was a continued sieve. When ND played good teams, Claussen was running for his life. When ND played good teams, ND had no running game.

When ND played Hawaii, ND's O line suddenly looked like they'd improved.

You don't remember '07 very well, then. ND didn't necessarily have to be playing a good team in '07 for Clausen to be running for his life, or to have no running game.

[Van]

I remember '07 quite well. ND was horrible, and they got shut out, at home. '08 was pretty much the same thing, except they could barely even manage a first down.

[Terry in Crapchester]

I remember '07 quite well. ND was horrible, and they got shut out, at home. '08 was pretty much the same thing, except they could barely even manage a first down.

Basing your observations on a single game, I see. Do you ever watch ND when they're not playing USC?

[Van]

Did you read this thread? ND did nothing against the three good teams they played.

Also, yes, unless your goal is to simply be a middle of the pack also-ran ND damn well better use the USC game as the yardstick by which they measure their progress. Do you really care how you do against Purdue, if you can't get a first down against USC?

[Terry in Crapchester]

Did you read this thread? ND did nothing against the three good teams they played.

And in '07 they did nothing except against the very worst teams they played.

Pitt provides a good example of what I was talking about. In '07, a team like that would've pushed us around all over the field. Would've made our offensive line look like a Pop Warner offensive line, in fact. In '08, we had improved enough that we could actually move the ball on a team like that, even well enough to put us in position to win the game.

Also, yes, unless your goal is to simply be a middle of the pack also-ran ND damn well better use the USC game as the yardstick by which they measure their progress. Do you really care how you do against Purdue, if you can't get a first down against USC?

I agree with you in part. USC has to be the measuring stick, ultimately. At the same time, you have to be able to walk before you can run. In light of '07, USC wasn't a realistic measuring stick last season.

'07 was a disaster of a year for us. The type of year you might expect to see if you followed, say, New Mexico State. Maybe even if you followed an Iowa State or a Mississippi State. But if you followed ND? Never. In fact, ND has had plenty of down seasons since I was a student, but none of those came even remotely close to approximating '07. Worse even than the 9 losses was the fact that we never even had a chance to win 8 of those 9 games. And the OL was, far and away, the worst unit on the team in '07.

Against that backdrop, stating that I saw some level of improvement in the OL play the following season is hardly remarkable. Nowhere did I say that the improvement was substantial, or that it brought our OL play to a level that was even satisfactory or acceptable. I merely stated that there was some improvement in the OL play in '08. Hell, your own Purdue reference was tantamount to an admission on that point, particularly when you consider what happened in the Purdue game in '07.

But while we're on the subject, if I were guaranteed an 11-1 season with a loss to USC, in most seasons I'd take that, including this year. I would've made an exception for the Tollner years, though.