the notre dame thread

[Andy]

Voters are uneducated and only look at box scores and word of mouth. Consider the fact that we dropped in the rankings because of a close win.

 

Notre Dame dropped two spots because they very nearly lost that game, not because the margin of victory was small. If they'd been in control of the game most of the way and won by a TD, that would've been different.

That is crap and you know it. Notre Dame controlled the entire second half especially on defense, but since they didn't score enough, the pollsters dropped them. And they should correct that by moving them back up to 2 after this one.

 

Why does ND deserve the 2nd spot over other unbeaten teams like Auburn for example?

They don't necessarily, but I have a hard time telling you that Auburn, who has played nobody, should be ranked 2nd over ND, who has played a good ACC team on the road, and absolutely plastered a good Big Ten team at home.

[Derwood]

I have no problem admitting that PSU got totally pantsed today. None. The better team totally won. I won't argue ND was better. But my opinion still stands on the fake punt and 4th down attempts. To me, those plays are different than just trying to keep making good offensive plays.

 

Listen, there are always blow outs. I was at a Penn State game probably 15 years ago where we beat Cincinnati 81-0. JoePa had the 3rd string QB (a freshman) out there just handing it off, and on one play, the designed run screwed up and the QB ended up scrambling.......75 yards for a score. As someone else said, you can't ask the guy to just fall down out there. That is WAY different than what Weis did. If you can't see the difference, I don't know what else to say

[TruffleShuffle]

Voters are uneducated and only look at box scores and word of mouth. Consider the fact that we dropped in the rankings because of a close win.

 

Notre Dame dropped two spots because they very nearly lost that game, not because the margin of victory was small. If they'd been in control of the game most of the way and won by a TD, that would've been different.

That is crap and you know it. Notre Dame controlled the entire second half especially on defense, but since they didn't score enough, the pollsters dropped them.

 

Notre Dame was trying to score in the 2nd half and didn't. You're mixing this up with when teams get a big lead and just run the ball to avoid embarrassing their opponent. Tech had the ball on first down in ND territory with 7 minutes left in the game - that's not exactly a walk in the park.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Voters are uneducated and only look at box scores and word of mouth. Consider the fact that we dropped in the rankings because of a close win.

 

Notre Dame dropped two spots because they very nearly lost that game, not because the margin of victory was small. If they'd been in control of the game most of the way and won by a TD, that would've been different.

That is crap and you know it. Notre Dame controlled the entire second half especially on defense, but since they didn't score enough, the pollsters dropped them. And they should correct that by moving them back up to 2 after this one.

 

Why does ND deserve the 2nd spot over other unbeaten teams like Auburn for example?

They don't necessarily, but I have a hard time telling you that Auburn, who has played nobody, should be ranked 2nd over ND, who has played a good ACC team on the road, and absolutely plastered a good Big Ten team at home.

 

Auburn plastered a conference opponent. The fact is, the polls are bogus at this point. It's too early to tell how good these opponents are. Who's to say Penn State is good. Their win was against Akron. Does that one win make them a quality opponent?

 

The truth is that Notre Dame has done nothing to prove they are any better than Auburn, LSU, Flordia, West Virgina and some others. Neither of those teams have done anything to mark them better or worse than the other. I know polls are a necessary evil, and it's part of why I have trouble getting into college football as much as I do the pros, but you're acting as if ND has some "right" to that second spot and if someone else is in it, it's a slap to ND. If so, it could also be a slap to all the teams listed above. Each of those has just as much right to that spot as ND.

[DCNashville]

I think there's room between "playing until your opponent gives up", and faking a punt when up 24 points(and the other team has only a FG) with just over a quarter left to play.

 

We were down 19 to Michigan State last year, heading into the 4th quarter. Of course we came back to take that one into overtime. I'm slightly amazed that everyone thinks a 24 point lead would be insurmountable for an '05 BCS team, midway through the 3rd quarter. Let's say we punt, and PSU returns it for a TD. All of the sudden, its a 17 point game midway through the 3rd.

 

All this Notre Dame hate for a 41-17 win is ridiculous. 41 points is not running up the score, regardless of who was in the game in the 4th quarter. PSU hadn't put in their second string, and good teams can make a game of 24 point deficits in the 3rd quarter.

[TruffleShuffle]

I think there's room between "playing until your opponent gives up", and faking a punt when up 24 points(and the other team has only a FG) with just over a quarter left to play.

 

We were down 19 to Michigan State last year, heading into the 4th quarter. Of course we came back to take that one into overtime. I'm slightly amazed that everyone thinks a 24 point lead would be insurmountable for an '05 BCS team, midway through the 3rd quarter. Let's say we punt, and PSU returns it for a TD. All of the sudden, its a 17 point game midway through the 3rd.

 

All this Notre Dame hate for a 41-17 win is ridiculous. 41 points is not running up the score, regardless of who was in the game in the 4th quarter. PSU hadn't put in their second string, and good teams can make a game of 24 point deficits in the 3rd quarter.

 

I'm less pissed about the fake punt than the 4th down plays, playing all the regulars early in the 4th quarter up 31 points and throwing a TD pass. Maybe sometime down the road Weis will do this and one of his big offensive stars will suffer a serious injury, and he'll think twice about piling on next time.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

How many of those games had the 2nd and 3rd string offense in there? I'd bet most. In fact, I would lay money that Paterno didn't have the starting QB passing to the starting RB in the 4th quarter of that Illinois game.

 

We have to worry about voters who only read box scores. Penn State's feelings shouldn't be any part of Coach Weis' thought process. Playing the game to win with your best players should never be seen as being unsportsmanlike.

 

Lets face it---you all are focusing on anything other than the fact that Notre Dame just completely took apart your program. Thats fine---I wouldn't want to think about my team being humiliated this soon either.

 

You're right. The voters don't pay much attention to Notre Dame, especially when they play Penn State. They'll just check the box score.

 

It's classless when Spurrier does it. When Pom Pom does it. When Mack Brown did it last week. And it's classless when Weiss does it.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'd love to hear from a neutral party on this, unfortunately if you're not a Notre Dame fan, you're a wild eyed Notre Dame hater.

[Flames24Rulz]

edit Edited September 10, 2006 by Flames24Rulz

[CP_414]

I think there's room between "playing until your opponent gives up", and faking a punt when up 24 points(and the other team has only a FG) with just over a quarter left to play.

 

anybody who disagrees with this is really just kidding himself

 

Thats just not true. The Irish fell in the polls by not winning by enough last week. It would be idiotic to not "run up the score" every chance you get.

 

You can't run up the score when you're losing most of the game. Notre Dame never had the chance to run up the score because they were holding on by the skin of their teeth. It's not like Notre Dame had the opportunity to score another 2 TDs and didn't out of sympathy for their opponent.

 

If Notre Dame shut down the offense at 27-3, and ended up winning 27-17, I would be willing to bet money that they would be behind USC and Auburn in the polls on Monday night. Now, I think they are now lower than #3, probably #2. Also, as I mentioned earlier, margin of victory is a factor in the BCS. You are hurting YOUR team if you are worried about the feelings of your opponent. If Penn State wanted to stop Notre Dame from "running it up" they should have played better. Play till the clock says zero.

[CubColtPacer]

I think there's room between "playing until your opponent gives up", and faking a punt when up 24 points(and the other team has only a FG) with just over a quarter left to play.

 

anybody who disagrees with this is really just kidding himself

 

Thats just not true. The Irish fell in the polls by not winning by enough last week. It would be idiotic to not "run up the score" every chance you get.

 

You can't run up the score when you're losing most of the game. Notre Dame never had the chance to run up the score because they were holding on by the skin of their teeth. It's not like Notre Dame had the opportunity to score another 2 TDs and didn't out of sympathy for their opponent.

 

Also, as I mentioned earlier, margin of victory is a factor in the BCS.

 

To be fair to the other side, this is not true. The only way that margin of victory factors into the BCS is the polls (which you already mentioned earlier in your post, so you can't double count it). The computer rankings were forced to exclude any margin of victory component 3 or 4 years ago.

[adamb0719]

"Great call, until that happened, I still thought we had a shot at it"

 

 

Paterno when talking about the fake punt.

 

 

I also think that the fake punt call was more to give Michigan something else to think about next week.

 

Paterno was still trying to win the game when it was obviously over, so should Weis have just let him get back in it?

 

I did question the 4th down run, but that is really nothing new for Weis. When he worked for the Patriots they brought some math guy in to figure the odds of going for it in certain situations, and if it is beneficial to try to keep possession or not. He sticks pretty religiously to those findings, and this is really just a sample of that.

 

 

By the way, just got back from Vegas and couldn't watch the game at the ESPN Zone because someone had rented it for the day!! Does anyone have any clue how much that would cost?

[dew1679666265]

I'd love to hear from a neutral party on this, unfortunately if you're not a Notre Dame fan, you're a wild eyed Notre Dame hater.

 

I'm pretty neutral on this, I don't like or dislike ND that much.

Ultimately, toning things down in the second half is a show of respect by both teams. If it's a big enough blowout, which last night was, both teams should have focused on running out the clock with their backups in.

Weis should have pulled his starters and played his backups, as should have JoePa.

It's difficult to argue two teams being on a similar level (not a major vs mid-major or I-AA) and one pulls their starters and the other doesn't. I don't like that Weis went for some fourth downs in the fourth quarter, but PSU isn't completely blameless in all this.

For example, in 2002 Georgia was absolutely destroying Tennessee by the third quarter and both teams pulled their starters and let the backups play out the game. If one teams lets up, the other should too.

[CP_414]

I think there's room between "playing until your opponent gives up", and faking a punt when up 24 points(and the other team has only a FG) with just over a quarter left to play.

 

anybody who disagrees with this is really just kidding himself

 

Thats just not true. The Irish fell in the polls by not winning by enough last week. It would be idiotic to not "run up the score" every chance you get.

 

You can't run up the score when you're losing most of the game. Notre Dame never had the chance to run up the score because they were holding on by the skin of their teeth. It's not like Notre Dame had the opportunity to score another 2 TDs and didn't out of sympathy for their opponent.

 

Also, as I mentioned earlier, margin of victory is a factor in the BCS.

 

To be fair to the other side, this is not true. The only way that margin of victory factors into the BCS is the polls (which you already mentioned earlier in your post, so you can't double count it). The computer rankings were forced to exclude any margin of victory component 3 or 4 years ago.

 

I wasn't clear there. What I meant was not only does it influence the AP and Coaches Poll, but the Computer Poll (1/3 of the BCS standings) and the Harris Interactive Poll( 1/3 of the BCS). It's all about perception and 41-17 looks better than 27-17, and that helps you in the BCS.

[Careless]

How many of those games had the 2nd and 3rd string offense in there? I'd bet most. In fact, I would lay money that Paterno didn't have the starting QB passing to the starting RB in the 4th quarter of that Illinois game.

 

By the way, are you saying it is totally fine for Joe to run up 56 in the first half on Illinois with his starters, as long as he doesn't pull that in the second half? Somehow that is fine, but Weis lacks class.

You have to get your starters game experience. You can't just sit them the entire game. You can't hurt your future chances to win (not just get higher in the polls) to be nice to the other team

[soccer10k]

This whining is classic. If PSU would have rolled on Notre Dame, 90% of this forum would have celebrated Paterno laying it on the Irish. After Paterno's comments ripping Notre Dame for being independent and his obvious disdain for the Irish, I wish we would have let the score get to where it easily could have been---about 56-3.

 

I just can't wait to hear all this week that "Penn State just wasn't that good" and Weis "still has never beaten anyone good." The same will be said after we beat Michigan. 'Michigan and Penn State aren't what they used to be."

 

ND didn't beat any good teams last year and we don't know how good Penn State and Michigan will end up being this year. You can't give a team credit for winning a game early in the season against a highly ranked team if that team ends up having an average year that year. It's just like with Pittsburgh and Michigan last year. Those games looked like big victories and many people continued to mention that Notre Dame beat Michigan when they were ranked #3 in the nation and they beat a ranked Pittsburgh team. Neither of those teams ended up being very good last year so why should ND get credit for beating a good team when said team ends up being no more than an average team. If Penn State finishes the year 5-6, it's obvious that ND's victory over them wasn't actually that impressive.

[soccer10k]

I think there's room between "playing until your opponent gives up", and faking a punt when up 24 points(and the other team has only a FG) with just over a quarter left to play.

 

I completely agree. The fake punt is the only thing I had a problem with.

[Andy]

This whining is classic. If PSU would have rolled on Notre Dame, 90% of this forum would have celebrated Paterno laying it on the Irish. After Paterno's comments ripping Notre Dame for being independent and his obvious disdain for the Irish, I wish we would have let the score get to where it easily could have been---about 56-3.

 

I just can't wait to hear all this week that "Penn State just wasn't that good" and Weis "still has never beaten anyone good." The same will be said after we beat Michigan. 'Michigan and Penn State aren't what they used to be."

 

ND didn't beat any good teams last year and we don't know how good Penn State and Michigan will end up being this year. You can't give a team credit for winning a game early in the season against a highly ranked team if that team ends up having an average year that year. It's just like with Pittsburgh and Michigan last year. Those games looked like big victories and many people continued to mention that Notre Dame beat Michigan when they were ranked #3 in the nation and they beat a ranked Pittsburgh team. Neither of those teams ended up being very good last year so why should ND get credit for beating a good team when said team ends up being no more than an average team. If Penn State finishes the year 5-6, it's obvious that ND's victory over them wasn't actually that impressive.

I would argue that Notre Dame's victory over PSU is still pretty impressive even if they finish 5-6, just not as impressive. It doesn't get much more one-sided than 41-3.

[TruffleShuffle]

This whining is classic. If PSU would have rolled on Notre Dame, 90% of this forum would have celebrated Paterno laying it on the Irish. After Paterno's comments ripping Notre Dame for being independent and his obvious disdain for the Irish, I wish we would have let the score get to where it easily could have been---about 56-3.

 

I just can't wait to hear all this week that "Penn State just wasn't that good" and Weis "still has never beaten anyone good." The same will be said after we beat Michigan. 'Michigan and Penn State aren't what they used to be."

 

ND didn't beat any good teams last year and we don't know how good Penn State and Michigan will end up being this year. You can't give a team credit for winning a game early in the season against a highly ranked team if that team ends up having an average year that year. It's just like with Pittsburgh and Michigan last year. Those games looked like big victories and many people continued to mention that Notre Dame beat Michigan when they were ranked #3 in the nation and they beat a ranked Pittsburgh team. Neither of those teams ended up being very good last year so why should ND get credit for beating a good team when said team ends up being no more than an average team. If Penn State finishes the year 5-6, it's obvious that ND's victory over them wasn't actually that impressive.

I would argue that Notre Dame's victory over PSU is still pretty impressive even if they finish 5-6, just not as impressive. It doesn't get much more one-sided than 41-3.

 

17

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

This whining is classic. If PSU would have rolled on Notre Dame, 90% of this forum would have celebrated Paterno laying it on the Irish. After Paterno's comments ripping Notre Dame for being independent and his obvious disdain for the Irish, I wish we would have let the score get to where it easily could have been---about 56-3.

 

I just can't wait to hear all this week that "Penn State just wasn't that good" and Weis "still has never beaten anyone good." The same will be said after we beat Michigan. 'Michigan and Penn State aren't what they used to be."

 

ND didn't beat any good teams last year and we don't know how good Penn State and Michigan will end up being this year. You can't give a team credit for winning a game early in the season against a highly ranked team if that team ends up having an average year that year. It's just like with Pittsburgh and Michigan last year. Those games looked like big victories and many people continued to mention that Notre Dame beat Michigan when they were ranked #3 in the nation and they beat a ranked Pittsburgh team. Neither of those teams ended up being very good last year so why should ND get credit for beating a good team when said team ends up being no more than an average team. If Penn State finishes the year 5-6, it's obvious that ND's victory over them wasn't actually that impressive.

I would argue that Notre Dame's victory over PSU is still pretty impressive even if they finish 5-6, just not as impressive. It doesn't get much more one-sided than 41-3.

 

So, how impressive is Auburn's win over Miss St or LSU's over Arizona? We don't know. What if Arizona finishes 4-7 and Penn State finishes 5-6? Which team's victory was more impressive?

 

That's why it's stupid to start clamoring about strenght of schedule after two [expletive] games!

[soccer10k]

This whining is classic. If PSU would have rolled on Notre Dame, 90% of this forum would have celebrated Paterno laying it on the Irish. After Paterno's comments ripping Notre Dame for being independent and his obvious disdain for the Irish, I wish we would have let the score get to where it easily could have been---about 56-3.

 

I just can't wait to hear all this week that "Penn State just wasn't that good" and Weis "still has never beaten anyone good." The same will be said after we beat Michigan. 'Michigan and Penn State aren't what they used to be."

 

ND didn't beat any good teams last year and we don't know how good Penn State and Michigan will end up being this year. You can't give a team credit for winning a game early in the season against a highly ranked team if that team ends up having an average year that year. It's just like with Pittsburgh and Michigan last year. Those games looked like big victories and many people continued to mention that Notre Dame beat Michigan when they were ranked #3 in the nation and they beat a ranked Pittsburgh team. Neither of those teams ended up being very good last year so why should ND get credit for beating a good team when said team ends up being no more than an average team. If Penn State finishes the year 5-6, it's obvious that ND's victory over them wasn't actually that impressive.

I would argue that Notre Dame's victory over PSU is still pretty impressive even if they finish 5-6, just not as impressive. It doesn't get much more one-sided than 41-3.

 

So, how impressive is Auburn's win over Miss St or LSU's over Arizona? We don't know. What if Arizona finishes 4-7 and Penn State finishes 5-6? Which team's victory was more impressive?

 

That's why it's stupid to start clamoring about strenght of schedule after two [expletive] games!

 

Couldn't agree more.

[SouthSideRyan]

This whining is classic. If PSU would have rolled on Notre Dame, 90% of this forum would have celebrated Paterno laying it on the Irish. After Paterno's comments ripping Notre Dame for being independent and his obvious disdain for the Irish, I wish we would have let the score get to where it easily could have been---about 56-3.

 

I just can't wait to hear all this week that "Penn State just wasn't that good" and Weis "still has never beaten anyone good." The same will be said after we beat Michigan. 'Michigan and Penn State aren't what they used to be."

 

ND didn't beat any good teams last year and we don't know how good Penn State and Michigan will end up being this year. You can't give a team credit for winning a game early in the season against a highly ranked team if that team ends up having an average year that year. It's just like with Pittsburgh and Michigan last year. Those games looked like big victories and many people continued to mention that Notre Dame beat Michigan when they were ranked #3 in the nation and they beat a ranked Pittsburgh team. Neither of those teams ended up being very good last year so why should ND get credit for beating a good team when said team ends up being no more than an average team. If Penn State finishes the year 5-6, it's obvious that ND's victory over them wasn't actually that impressive.

I would argue that Notre Dame's victory over PSU is still pretty impressive even if they finish 5-6, just not as impressive. It doesn't get much more one-sided than 41-3.

 

So, how impressive is Auburn's win over Miss St or LSU's over Arizona? We don't know. What if Arizona finishes 4-7 and Penn State finishes 5-6? Which team's victory was more impressive?

 

That's why it's stupid to start clamoring about strenght of schedule after two [expletive] games!

 

Well the Pac-10 sucks at football so LSU's was definitely the least of the 3. :)

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

This whining is classic. If PSU would have rolled on Notre Dame, 90% of this forum would have celebrated Paterno laying it on the Irish. After Paterno's comments ripping Notre Dame for being independent and his obvious disdain for the Irish, I wish we would have let the score get to where it easily could have been---about 56-3.

 

I just can't wait to hear all this week that "Penn State just wasn't that good" and Weis "still has never beaten anyone good." The same will be said after we beat Michigan. 'Michigan and Penn State aren't what they used to be."

 

ND didn't beat any good teams last year and we don't know how good Penn State and Michigan will end up being this year. You can't give a team credit for winning a game early in the season against a highly ranked team if that team ends up having an average year that year. It's just like with Pittsburgh and Michigan last year. Those games looked like big victories and many people continued to mention that Notre Dame beat Michigan when they were ranked #3 in the nation and they beat a ranked Pittsburgh team. Neither of those teams ended up being very good last year so why should ND get credit for beating a good team when said team ends up being no more than an average team. If Penn State finishes the year 5-6, it's obvious that ND's victory over them wasn't actually that impressive.

I would argue that Notre Dame's victory over PSU is still pretty impressive even if they finish 5-6, just not as impressive. It doesn't get much more one-sided than 41-3.

 

So, how impressive is Auburn's win over Miss St or LSU's over Arizona? We don't know. What if Arizona finishes 4-7 and Penn State finishes 5-6? Which team's victory was more impressive?

 

That's why it's stupid to start clamoring about strenght of schedule after two [expletive] games!

 

Well the Pac-10 sucks at football so LSU's was definitely the least of the 3. :)

 

Ok, but the SEC is great at football, so I guess an SEC win over a marginaly good SEC team should count for more right?

[Andy]

This whining is classic. If PSU would have rolled on Notre Dame, 90% of this forum would have celebrated Paterno laying it on the Irish. After Paterno's comments ripping Notre Dame for being independent and his obvious disdain for the Irish, I wish we would have let the score get to where it easily could have been---about 56-3.

 

I just can't wait to hear all this week that "Penn State just wasn't that good" and Weis "still has never beaten anyone good." The same will be said after we beat Michigan. 'Michigan and Penn State aren't what they used to be."

 

ND didn't beat any good teams last year and we don't know how good Penn State and Michigan will end up being this year. You can't give a team credit for winning a game early in the season against a highly ranked team if that team ends up having an average year that year. It's just like with Pittsburgh and Michigan last year. Those games looked like big victories and many people continued to mention that Notre Dame beat Michigan when they were ranked #3 in the nation and they beat a ranked Pittsburgh team. Neither of those teams ended up being very good last year so why should ND get credit for beating a good team when said team ends up being no more than an average team. If Penn State finishes the year 5-6, it's obvious that ND's victory over them wasn't actually that impressive.

I would argue that Notre Dame's victory over PSU is still pretty impressive even if they finish 5-6, just not as impressive. It doesn't get much more one-sided than 41-3.

 

17

I hate garbage-time TDs...if they're scored against my teams :D

[Andy]

This whining is classic. If PSU would have rolled on Notre Dame, 90% of this forum would have celebrated Paterno laying it on the Irish. After Paterno's comments ripping Notre Dame for being independent and his obvious disdain for the Irish, I wish we would have let the score get to where it easily could have been---about 56-3.

 

I just can't wait to hear all this week that "Penn State just wasn't that good" and Weis "still has never beaten anyone good." The same will be said after we beat Michigan. 'Michigan and Penn State aren't what they used to be."

 

ND didn't beat any good teams last year and we don't know how good Penn State and Michigan will end up being this year. You can't give a team credit for winning a game early in the season against a highly ranked team if that team ends up having an average year that year. It's just like with Pittsburgh and Michigan last year. Those games looked like big victories and many people continued to mention that Notre Dame beat Michigan when they were ranked #3 in the nation and they beat a ranked Pittsburgh team. Neither of those teams ended up being very good last year so why should ND get credit for beating a good team when said team ends up being no more than an average team. If Penn State finishes the year 5-6, it's obvious that ND's victory over them wasn't actually that impressive.

I would argue that Notre Dame's victory over PSU is still pretty impressive even if they finish 5-6, just not as impressive. It doesn't get much more one-sided than 41-3.

 

So, how impressive is Auburn's win over Miss St or LSU's over Arizona? We don't know. What if Arizona finishes 4-7 and Penn State finishes 5-6? Which team's victory was more impressive?

 

That's why it's stupid to start clamoring about strenght of schedule after two [expletive] games!

I agree. So tell all the ND haters on this board who crack on the Irish schedule on a weekly basis to put a lid on it, because I don't like debating SOS, as it's not very germane to the situation right now.