Because it was off before: College Football 09!

[Drex]

I'm worried for USC, because Notre Dame sucks and USC always loses to teams nowhere near as good as they are

[Akiyama]

Honestly, and I hate to say this, but it shouldn't be close. The athletes are on different levels. Hell, the USC Back-ups would be stud starters for Notre Dame. ND has a couple offensive weapons for sure, but sadly, you have to play defense in games too, and they just can't keep up. As Colin Cowherd said, and I hate agreeing with him, but you can't run laterally on teams like Alabama, Florida, Texas, USC, etc. Purdon't and Washington did run laterally on Notre Dame. ND athletes just aren't there anymore. The prestige is strong, but not strong enough to attract 4-5* athletes.

[Stiker]

Honestly, and I hate to say this, but it shouldn't be close. The athletes are on different levels. Hell, the USC Back-ups would be stud starters for Notre Dame. ND has a couple offensive weapons for sure, but sadly, you have to play defense in games too, and they just can't keep up. As Colin Cowherd said, and I hate agreeing with him, but you can't run laterally on teams like Alabama, Florida, Texas, USC, etc. Purdon't and Washington did run laterally on Notre Dame. ND athletes just aren't there anymore. The prestige is strong, but not strong enough to attract 4-5* athletes.

Notre Dame Commit List for 2006

Notre Dame Commit List for 2007

Notre Dame Commit List for 2008

Notre Dame Commit List for 2009

That's what's on the field right now. Here's what is coming (thus far):

Notre Dame Commit List for 2010

Now, I'm not even going to try to attempt to argue that USC doesn't have more talent than us at this point at all. I know very well they are able to reel in more 4-5* than us (except for 2008, we were ranked #2 in recruiting classes then), but the gap is actually starting to narrow for once instead of the increased separation we've seen in the past.

We aren't able to attract as many 4-5* as USC, but to say we can't attract the 4-5* athlete is stretching it just a bit. However, defensive recruiting has been an issue as of late, with exception of Manti Te'o, we haven't had any 5* defensive studs sign in years (and we were able to lure Manti away from USC, which shocked me). The rest of our recruits on that side of the ball have been 3-4* for the most part.

[Akiyama]

Yeah, and even with those athletes, they still manage to give up tons of points to teams not notoriously known for giving up a lot of points and what not. They just look lost against speedy defenses is all. I do hope it's a close game, just so I'll have something to watch.

[Stiker]

I want a close game too, because I will be miserable and freezing my ass off otherwise (hey at least no snow in the forecast) which is never a good combination. Especially since I'm sure my BAC will be off the charts. So drunk, pissed off, and cold -- never a good combo.

The defense has been my biggest concern all season. Tenuta loves to blitz like there is no tomorrow and we just flat out don't hit home far too often. I'm not even talking sack numbers here, but at the very least rushing the QB and forcing bad decisions. The times we have backed off a bit have been some of the times our defense has looked its best. Although late in games, we've had some blitzes pay off big: think ND/MSU and the game ending INT.

My hope is that the blitzing schemes can confuse and rattle a true freshmen QB on the road. My worry is that USC's speed will burn damn near any blitz we throw at them and quick hot route throws will turn into 20+ yard gains and TDs.

Based on the way or D has been playing all season, I really fear the later is more likely.

[archibaldcrane]

USC doesn't lose to teams that aren't in the Pacific Northwest, and they already lost that game this year.

Notre Dame has no defense and is going to get torched.

How do you go from receiving only 9 votes in the AP, to fucking 75, without winning a game? In week 5, they were receiving 7 votes. They beat Washington and picked up...2 votes.

Then pick up 68 in a bye week?

I mean seriously. Wut?

However, we all know what really matters, and that's the rivals.com top 120.

Rivals.com College Football - Ranking them all: Rivals.com 120 at 1:20

Spoiler: show

Yeah I'm showing that because Wisconsin is #18, sue me.

[Stiker]

How do you go from receiving only 9 votes in the AP, to fucking 75, without winning a game? In week 5, they were receiving 7 votes. They beat Washington and picked up...2 votes.

Then pick up 68 in a bye week?

I mean seriously. Wut?

I wish I knew. Maybe we can thank a lot of other teams for falling on their faces in front of us? Either way, I find it funny considering Weis bitching about this same situation via the "Cheeseburger" comment not too long ago.

But hey, we are either going to make a big jump in the rankings or take a huge swan dive out of them after Saturday.

[archibaldcrane]

Wow. Early lines have Wisconsin as 1.5 point favorites over Iowa.

[archibaldcrane]

As much as I hate Notre Dame, their ascent in the bye week actually kinda makes sense. Of all the teams receiving more votes than them, Wisconsin, Georgia, Stanford, Michigan, and Boston College all lost. The two teams that won, Houston and Utah, are now ranked, and ranked ahead of ND.

The only teams that can really be pissed are Auburn (falling out of the top 25 from 17), Pittsburg and West Virginia (the two teams receiving votes behind ND that both won and aren't ranked - 26 and 27)

[Akiyama]

As much as I hate Notre Dame, their ascent in the bye week actually kinda makes sense. Of all the teams receiving more votes than them, Wisconsin, Georgia, Stanford, Michigan, and Boston College all lost. The two teams that won, Houston and Utah, are now ranked, and ranked ahead of ND.

The only teams that can really be pissed are Auburn (falling out of the top 25 from 17), Pittsburg and West Virginia (the two teams receiving votes behind ND that both won and aren't ranked - 26 and 27)

Naw. If I were Auburn, I'd be glad to be out of the Top 25 for now. If they finish in it? Awesome, but I don't think they've earned it. They need to beat some real SEC teams first. D:

[Teorem]

I want a close game too, because I will be miserable and freezing my ass off otherwise (hey at least no snow in the forecast) which is never a good combination. Especially since I'm sure my BAC will be off the charts. So drunk, pissed off, and cold -- never a good combo.

When I went, South Bend always started off cold but warmed up pretty nicely during the day. While the sun was out, it wasn't too bad anyway. The year that sucked was 1999, when it was cold AND wet (nice downpour during the game soaked all of us on the field) AND we were all pissed because of the loss.

I'm looking forward to the game, ND is always an interesting week regardless of the teams' standings.

[Tahona]

Aki what are you predicting about the score (Auburn) this weekend?

[Stiker]

When I went, South Bend always started off cold but warmed up pretty nicely during the day. While the sun was out, it wasn't too bad anyway. The year that sucked was 1999, when it was cold AND wet (nice downpour during the game soaked all of us on the field) AND we were all pissed because of the loss.

I'm looking forward to the game, ND is always an interesting week regardless of the teams' standings.

Warming up is relative. I'm sure if I was still a student, a high in the upper 40s with sun wouldn't bug me much, but considering I've been back home in Texas for a few years means that is downright fucking freezing.

Plus, it is South Bend...sunny one hour, and cloudy/raining/snowing for the rest of the fall/winter.

[Akiyama]

Aki what are you predicting about the score (Auburn) this weekend?

Kentucky's coming to Auburn right? Hrm. I dunno. Kentucky's defense is probably the same or a little worse than Auburn's, but their offense struggles outside of one guy. Not to mention it's in Auburn, and I think Kentucky is something like 8-27 on the road in the SEC? Some crazy statline. I think Auburn could win by ten or more.

[Bregor]

However, we all know what really matters, and that's the rivals.com top 120.

Rivals.com College Football - Ranking them all: Rivals.com 120 at 1:20

How come Rivals always seems to get it right when 90% of the country can't?

ESPN Pick'em needs more SEC games, there's only one this week. I've missed one game so far this year (had Tennessee over Auburn. )

And I've already started changing the channel every time I hear "Notre" "USC" or "Clausen." A man can only take so much.

[Byrd]

USC doesn't lose to teams that aren't in the Pacific Northwest, and they already lost that game this year.

October 17: @ Notre Dame
October 31: @ Oregon

USC's letdowns seem to be either before or after big games. Between these two games, they host ... Oregon State. I think the chances of another overlook/letdown are slim, but I thought the same thing last year.

[Plow]

I find it beyond funny that just a few years ago, Weis was bitching and moaning about teams rising up in the rankings on bye weeks "sitting at home and eating cheeseburgers."

Fast forward to now, and ND does the same damn thing and there isn't a peep out of Weis or anyone in South Bend. Oh how things change.

Actually, he was talking shit last week about how they should be ranked lol.

Yeah, and even with those athletes, they still manage to give up tons of points to teams not notoriously known for giving up a lot of points and what not. They just look lost against speedy defenses is all. I do hope it's a close game, just so I'll have something to watch.

The problem, in my eyes, is that Notre Dame has game coaches, not college football coaches. I mean, Notre Dame will always be able to recruit as well as anybody. They're Notre Dame. But (outside of qb), you just don't see the development in their players that you should with those kinds of recruiting classes.

For example, Golden Tate at this point should be one of the premier route runners in cfb. But for some reason he's just not. He sometimes does, but doesn't very often get the kind of separation before the catch a wr of that caliber should get against the opposition they've played. I can think of like 1 time he's made a nice double move and blown past his guy, he should be doing that a time or two per game, and we know Claussen will get the ball there if he does.


They get by, mostly on having the athletes to just make good play calls and hope someone beats their guy. But the level of raw incoming talent they've had recently should have developed into a really, REALLY dominant team with the schedule they play.


Put Lou Holtz and his early 90's staff in charge of a ND team with this level of players, give em last year and the year before to develop... and I GUARANTEE this season ain't no 35-0 followed by 4 straight 3 point games. We'd be looking at a team with an average score this year around 45-7.

[Plow]

Oh, also, ND being ranked is enough of a joke... but them in over Michigan? lawlzzzzzz

[Akiyama]

Oh, also, ND being ranked is enough of a joke... but them in over Michigan? lawlzzzzzz

Eh? Either Michigan or ND being ranked would be enough of a joke. Michigan has.. two losses. ND has one. Either way, both suck, so what's the point?

[Plow]

Eh? Either Michigan or ND being ranked would be enough of a joke. Michigan has.. two losses. ND has one. Either way, both suck, so what's the point?

Michigan lost in overtime to Michigan State on the road.


Notre Dame beat Michigan State by 3 at home.



Michigan's other loss is by 2, @ a top 10 team...


Notre Dame's loss is @ Michigan...



I would love to hear someone explain how that adds up to Notre Dame being considered the better of the 2 teams.