Tracer Bullet

I disagree. I thought they, overall, looked better in the beginning of the year, but the stupid turnovers (and some bad luck) really did them in against South Florida and Michigan. Up until USC, they were clearly the best team on the field in each game. Starting with USC and continuing through Saturday, the lack of depth and poor QB play really did them in. November consisted of too close games against crappy major conference teams and a poor showing against Stanford. Not sure how someone would think that's good. I said except Rees. Jonas Gray was a new man until his knee blew out. The secondary looked better, esp after the UM debacle. Where they looked bad was where they lost key starters including C and both DEs. But the kids looked much better late in the year than in September when, for example, Aaron Lynch was almost solely a pass rusher.

Yes, historically ND has played one of the toughest schedules in the country. And they don't play very many minor conference teams at all other than the academies. But typically their schedule has had a really tough September and then some weakness in October/November before the USC game (or if the USC game is in October some weakness other than one other strong October/November game). When does ND play the academies? Typically mid-October or later. They've also played some weak Big East/ACC teams during that time and those have usually been late in the season. Most schools schedules are much weaker in the first half than the second half. ND usually has the opposite. That's all I meant by the comment. I take issue with your comment about historical schedules. ND has always played the big ten early bc the big ten requires it. Maybe you think of big ten as better opponents, so that's why you think it's weighted heavy in September. ND has often scheduled other teams, like PSU, BC, Miami, FSU, and obviously USC and Stanford later in the season. Getting schools from the south to play in the cold in November is not easy, made more difficult by growing conferences requiring 9 game schedules, and bc SEC teams reserve 1 OOC cupcake for November. But if you look back at the pre-White years, I don't think you'll see cupcakes on ND's schedule every November. You seen to suggest that ND schedules a bunch of cupcakes before USC, which just doesn't have any support.

My comment wasn't about ND having a weak schedule, just that the idea that they played better late than early is skewed by the fact that they played some tougher teams early and some weaker teams late. How much was it about playing better against Navy, Wake Forest, Maryland and Boston College, than playing Michigan and Michigan State? They played USC and Stanford in the 2nd half. Yes, and lost. They played better late was a meaningless claim by you, supported only by the notion that they won 4 straight against garbage teams. Um two different points. You said ND played garbage games later in the season. I supplied evidence which directly refuted your claim. You don't think ND looked better in November. Outside of Rees, they did. You are free to disagree. I don't know if you watched any ND games since you hate the team, so maybe you're not the best judge of whether they improved. ND's toughest opponents were Stanford, USC, MSU, UM, Pitt. They're pretty evenly spread out in the season. ETA the play better late claim isn't meaningless when the question was the coach's ability to coach (which Andy raised). It's supported by what I saw and what other people, whose opinions I value on the matter, saw and reported. I don't much care if you think it's meaningless or if you disagree.

My comment wasn't about ND having a weak schedule, just that the idea that they played better late than early is skewed by the fact that they played some tougher teams early and some weaker teams late. How much was it about playing better against Navy, Wake Forest, Maryland and Boston College, than playing Michigan and Michigan State? They played USC and Stanford in the 2nd half.

Which does not mean: If you win your division, you should be in a BCS game. That wasn't what I asked. I'm asking if a BCS bowl this year, for whatever reason, had to choose between UCLA and Stanford and those were the only two choices, do you think UCLA should be the team picked? That's a ridiculous hypo.

Bc we already hired all the good ones?

Give me the seasons with all these November cupcakes. Like last year when they played #10 Utah in November? Outside of the last few years when Dr White's 7-4-1 was crapping all over the place, ND hasn't had cupcakes. They only did the last 2 years bc swarbrick had to scramble to find teams willing to play at ND in November in order to honor the NBC contract. Historically ND has played one of the toughest schedules in the country. You seriously want me to believe that you're an ND fan?

ND was not a 10-11 win team. Jeepers. I think there's definitely an argument that they were, considering they won 8 and essentially gave the first two games away. Yes, they could have won 10. They were also lucky to escape Pitt with a W and played Wake and BC closer than they should. They were a solid team with a bad QB and depth issues. Those teams can be competitive in all their games and with some luck win 10 games, but can also win 7-8. It's not like BK drove an LSU-type team into the ditch.

Huh? They lost by 14 at home to USC, and 14 again to Stanford (and were down 21-0 with the game over at halftime). They were better late in the season because that is when they schedule all their garbage games. They were a fumbled snap from tying the USC game and it turned into a 14-point swing. They put a lid on Stanford at the half and Hendrix was moving the ball well. I didn't say they were going to win but ND was competitive in both. And your last sentence is nonsensical.

Fixed I don't understand the Urban Meyer criticism. I think the reasons he left Florida were valid. I also think it is very possible that he has a better plan for health and family going forward. I don't have a problem with the reasons he had for leaving Florida. I think the way he kept wavering was a little sketchy. Resigning, then coming back with a leave of absence then resigning again less than a year later left him with a label as a serial quitter. Yeah, it's not the reasons but the way he handled it. OSU will be an even easier gig for him in terms of lack of travel. Really a perfect fit for him. Hope he beats UM every year on his way to habitual 7-5 finishes and annual scandals.

Does not compute Using Sagrin ratings which were updated yesterday I get that, I just think sagarin must be pretty crazy for having ND that high. Nah. They lost to 3 ranked teams and didn't get blown off the field by anyone. The first 2 losses were flukey and they were better in November than early in the year. If they win their bowl (probably against FSU) they'll finish in the top 20.

Of course. But we have a better sense of the top 40 or so teams. Once you get below a certain point, how bad the opponent is doesn't make a great deal of difference to great teams. If the only difference were the OOC crap teams, it would be easier to take. But every other factor suggests MSU played a harder schedule.

ND isn't ranked. I dismiss them bc the conclusion looks pretty bad (esp the one that has MSU 40+ spots lower). No coach in the country would say MSU played an easier schedule, esp not after playing Wisconsin twice. As CCP wrote, SDSU is in the position of being difficult to judge - they lost to teams that were clearly better, they beat really bad teams, but they did nothing to say they were significantly better than a couple dozen other programs. So basing BCS berths off the difference between them and some other cupcake school when the other factors (h2h, MSU playing the 2nd best team twice when UM played then 0 times, UM has the worse loss, and UM's 3 hardest games at home when MSU played each of those 3 teams on the road) support a different conclusion. But I guess if the numbers support your argument, they must be right.

Amazing. Instead lose 2 games and sit at home while a team that spanked you risks it's BCS berth.

It's called independent analysis. I prefer to look at situations and make my own conclusions rather than blindly accept someone else's opinion. Maybe that's a foreign concept to you. And which 3 top 25 teams did UM play? I only see MSU and Nebraska.

Haha. So UM is a BCS team bc they played W Michigan and SDSt. I don't think so. MSU played the more difficult schedule.

I was just passing along that info, because it didn't make sense at a cursory glance. I thought maybe their game against each other was a factor, but they're right next to each other in Sagarin. It must be the OOC games plus the home/road balance of their common games. Ok. It makes no sense then. As I said, UM played OSU, Nebraska and ND at home. MSU played each of those three on the road. Both played at Iowa. That clearly favors MSU. MSU got Wisconsin at home while UM had to go to Illinois. Another point in MSU's favor. When they played each other, MSU was at home. UM finally gets a check. None of their other 6 games is of any significance or at least not enough to swing the balance back to UM's side. SOS sites are a crock.

Why are you ignoring the fact that Michigan isn't any good? Michigan is going to get housed if they get to a BCS game. Outside of LSU/Alabama and OSU I think Michigan would compete with just about any other team in the country. Oregon would destroy them. Stanford would likely also. I'd actually like to see Wisconsin play them. I generally think there is more balance in cfb this year - outside of LSU and Bama. There are a lot of flawed teams.

CCP, TT (since you both disagree with me), what is your independent analysis of their schedules. You're intelligent fans. Do you believe UM's schedule was harder, let alone 43 spots harder, like one site has them ranked?

If MSU loses the title game, absolutely. They will have played a weaker schedule and have a worse record against that schedule. Michigan State will have a fluke win over Wisconsin and a win over Michigan. Michigan has a fluke win over ND and a win over Nebraska. Both teams struggled in some of their other games (Michigan against Ohio State, MSU against Minnesota). Michigan has lost their 2 games by a combined 22 points while MSU lost their two games by 39 points combined. If MSU loses to Wisconsin, that will tip the scales in Michigan's favor. If MSU wins that game, that would tip the scales in MSU's favor (but obviously that would be irrelevant because they would have the automatic bid anyway). Whose SOS rankings are you using and when were they updated? MSU played and beat the 2 other best teams in the Big Ten (and will play the 2nd best team in the conference twice). UM played the best team in the Big Ten and lost. UM got to play Purdue and Illinois - a classic Big Ten team that wins 6 games against cupcakes - ASU turned out to be as good as Illinois turned out to be - and then shows their true colors when they play teams that don't totally suck (UM should recognize this scenario from last year - right down to firing their coach at the end). MSU got Indiana and Wisconsin. They both played ND and 3 body bags OOC. They both played at Iowa, UM got beat, MSU soundly beat the Hawkeyes. UM had to go to MSU, but the next 3 hardest games (OSU, Nebraska, and ND) were all at home. MSU had to play at OSU and at Nebraska (and at ND). The schedules are so close as to be negligible, but I'd say MSU had the harder schedule. So UM has a fluke win against ND and barely beat OSU, plus a loss to a bad Iowa team. MSU got beaten by ND when Rees stopped turning the ball over and got beat by a ranked Nebraska team. The point differential in their losses is meaningless. UM isn't going to get blown out b/c they can score. They just can't play defense against good teams. MSU is willing to play a close defensive game b/c they run the ball well and play better defense. There is no way that MSU playing a 13th game against the 2nd best team in the conference and losing would put UM (sitting at home) ahead of them. Sagarin Michigan Schedule-38th ranked Michigan State-55th Colley Michigan Schedule-30th Michigan State-73rd Massey games played Michigan-37 Michigan State-58 Massey games full (takes into account MSU's game against Wisconsin coming up) Michigan-38 Michigan State-47 Anderson/Hester Michigan-25 Michigan State-59 It will get closer when MSU plays Wisconsin, but right now the computers are in agreement that Michigan's schedule was harder than MSU's. I couldn't find a SOS on Wolfe's ratings. I'd love to see those explained. Were UM's 3 cupcakes OOC that much better than MSU's? The only meaningful differences in their schedules were Indiana/Wisconsin and Purdue/Illinois and that MSU had to play more difficult road games. What a crock.

I think the top 14 rule doesn't make a lot of sense and the BCS is already set up to allow exceptions to get a name program in. So you would cut out the top 14 rule? Well then, that's where it really helps ND and the name schools in the Big 12. Jesus, CCP. This isn't about ND. Look about 10 posts up. ND doesn't need help getting into the BCS under the current system. If they finish with 9+ wins, they're going to go to a BCS game. If they finish with 8 or fewer, they won't. And outside of UT and OU, there are no name schools in the Big 12. Not really a concern. Remember I'm an ND fan-no agenda against ND here. If you cut out the top 14 rule, what's to prevent a 7 or 8 win ND from making the BCS? or a 7 or 8 win Texas or Oklahoma? The bowls would certainly love that. If you're an ND fan, you'd see that this doesn't benefit ND. The current system already allows the bowls to take ND when they're in or near the top 10. That's not going to change. No BCS bowl is going to take a 7-win ND team. That's ridiculous.

If MSU loses the title game, absolutely. They will have played a weaker schedule and have a worse record against that schedule. Michigan State will have a fluke win over Wisconsin and a win over Michigan. Michigan has a fluke win over ND and a win over Nebraska. Both teams struggled in some of their other games (Michigan against Ohio State, MSU against Minnesota). Michigan has lost their 2 games by a combined 22 points while MSU lost their two games by 39 points combined. If MSU loses to Wisconsin, that will tip the scales in Michigan's favor. If MSU wins that game, that would tip the scales in MSU's favor (but obviously that would be irrelevant because they would have the automatic bid anyway). Whose SOS rankings are you using and when were they updated? MSU played and beat the 2 other best teams in the Big Ten (and will play the 2nd best team in the conference twice). UM played the best team in the Big Ten and lost. UM got to play Purdue and Illinois - a classic Big Ten team that wins 6 games against cupcakes - ASU turned out to be as good as Illinois turned out to be - and then shows their true colors when they play teams that don't totally suck (UM should recognize this scenario from last year - right down to firing their coach at the end). MSU got Indiana and Wisconsin. They both played ND and 3 body bags OOC. They both played at Iowa, UM got beat, MSU soundly beat the Hawkeyes. UM had to go to MSU, but the next 3 hardest games (OSU, Nebraska, and ND) were all at home. MSU had to play at OSU and at Nebraska (and at ND). The schedules are so close as to be negligible, but I'd say MSU had the harder schedule. So UM has a fluke win against ND and barely beat OSU, plus a loss to a bad Iowa team. MSU got beaten by ND when Rees stopped turning the ball over and got beat by a ranked Nebraska team. The point differential in their losses is meaningless. UM isn't going to get blown out b/c they can score. They just can't play defense against good teams. MSU is willing to play a close defensive game b/c they run the ball well and play better defense. There is no way that MSU playing a 13th game against the 2nd best team in the conference and losing would put UM (sitting at home) ahead of them.

I think the top 14 rule doesn't make a lot of sense and the BCS is already set up to allow exceptions to get a name program in. So you would cut out the top 14 rule? Well then, that's where it really helps ND and the name schools in the Big 12. Jesus, CCP. This isn't about ND. Look about 10 posts up. ND doesn't need help getting into the BCS under the current system. If they finish with 9+ wins, they're going to go to a BCS game. If they finish with 8 or fewer, they won't. And outside of UT and OU, there are no name schools in the Big 12. Not really a concern.

ND was not a 10-11 win team. Jeepers. Kelly got Jonas Gray to remember he was once a top RB recruit and a great combo of size and speed for about 10 games before his knee got destroyed. The LBs, esp OLB, are just not great (outside of Teo, who played hurt almost all year). The team lacked depth, as was evident when the starting C, both DEs, and 2nd RB went down. After Floyd, the WRs are questionable (made more so by a weak armed QB). The only reason the defense held up is bc last year Kelly landed the greatest DL recruiting class in the history of the world. While I wasn't wild about the QB situation, Kelly banked on Rees improving throughout the year and either (a) becoming the clear starter in 2012, or at least (b) being a decent game manager. Turns out, his quick release couldn't overcome his physical limitations (weak arm, slow feet) and he kept turning it over. I would have preferred Crist come back after Tommy nearly gave away the Pitt game (or even after UM), but once we got beyond USC, there was no reason to play Crist again. Let him graduate and leave football or go to a school in need of a QB and try to play 1 full year. Glad Hendrix showed flashes against Stanford and hopefully he plays the entire bowl game. Rees can be a career backup.

I think the top 14 rule doesn't make a lot of sense and the BCS is already set up to allow exceptions to get a name program in. Yup, posted that on the last page last night. I've only seen that from one source, ESPN, and saw someone debunk that saying the blogger misinterpreted the rule and the only way someone outside the top 14 could be picked for at large is if there were not 10 eligible teams in too 14 for an at large. I don't know if that's right either. UM should probably make sure they get into the top 14 to be safe. UM has no control over where they end up now. They only end up in the top 14 if one of the 2 teams that is better than them, but has to play the other team that is better than them, loses and falls below them. What a ridiculous system.