Tracer Bullet

You can play that if your team loses a close one but then has some convincing wins and looks good. You can't play that when your team has been in 4 games decided on the last possession and has won 3 of them. 2 of those games were at home. There's a good chance that 2 of those teams won't make a bowl game. Notre Dame is 28th in the Sagarin ratings. The 4 last-possession games you've had have been against 42, 43, 47 and 80. Sure, and they played against PU without their #1: RB, WR, FB and half of their #1 QB. Their QB, RB, and FB are expected back for USC in 2 weeks, so it isn't like all those guys will be out the rest of the year. UW beat USC 2 weeks ago. So it's not like they're a terrible team. Seems like a lot of games this year, more than usual, are coming down to the 4th quarter. Maybe parity is here in CFB. There are a handful of teams at the very top, but after that, you are just playing for a W. So how close those wins are losses are maybe less relevant than in years past. Just come away with a W and don't worry about being pretty. I don't much care where ND is ranked October 4. The only reason it's relevant at all is it's really hard to jump teams later in the year. So if ND isn't getting votes now, even if they run the table (however unlikely), jumping the 27 or so teams that are ahead of them is going to be almost impossible. ETA: I'm not suggesting ND could or should be ranked #1 if they finish 11-1. I'm saying if they finish 11-1, they'll finish lower in the top 10 than they would if they started the run already ranked.

Which one of those teams do you think ND should be ranked ahead of? Are you asking which teams ND could beat head to head or which teams have performed worse against their schedule than ND has performed against its own? The latter. well, I don't know the schedules of most of those teams. But OU has 2 wins against bad teams and 2 close losses against the only good teams they've played. I don't like ND's chances against OU head to head, but that's a pretty weak effort through 4 games.

Which one of those teams do you think ND should be ranked ahead of? Are you asking which teams ND could beat head to head or which teams have performed worse against their schedule than ND has performed against its own?

It doesn't matter. Yes, if ND beats UM, they're clearly ranked near the top 10. But they haven't beaten anyone convincingly since week 1. They've had some issues to overcome, especially the Clausen and Allen injuries, but they need to actually beat teams before the last minute. And it's all going to come down to USC anyway.

I straight up love Theo Epstein. But screw Boston. They don't need a great GM. Interesting that not only do they ignore RBI (which you'd expect), they completely ignore RBI%. I've never been fond of it as an evaluation tool, but I've never been able to articulate why. I might have to see if he's explained that elsewhere. http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/10/03/theo/?6a52a940 After the radio guys say Drew's OPS hasn't resulted in "production" - “That’s not true. With RBIs, yes. Based on his skill set, he’s always going to have underwhelming RBI totals. I couldn’t care less. When you’re putting together a winning team, that honestly doesn’t matter. When you have a player who takes a ton of walks, who doesn’t put the ball in play at an above average rate, and is a certain type of hitter, he’s not going to drive in a lot of runs. Runs scored, you couldn’t be more wrong. If you look at a rate basis, J.D. scores a ton of runs. “And the reason he scores a ton of runs is because he does the single most important thing you can do in baseball as an offensive player. And that’s NOT MAKE OUTS. He doesn’t make outs. He’s always among our team leaders in on-base percentage, usually among the league leaders in on-base percentage. And he’s a really good base runner. So when he doesn’t make outs, and he gets himself on base, he scores runs — and he has some good hitters hitting behind him. Look at his runs scored on a rate basis with the Red Sox or throughout his career. It’s outstanding. “You guys can talk about RBIs if you want, I just … we ignore them in the front office … and I think we’ve built some pretty good offensive clubs. If you want to talk about RBIs at all, talk about it as a percentage of opportunity but it’s just simply not a way or something we use to evaluate offensive players.”

Paul DePodesta. Please

I still can't believe that crap. I was getting ready to post on how dumb of a playcall that was for a 2 point conversion and for some reason, the refs don't blow the play dead when that play is ALWAYS blown dead. The refs have been letting them play for way too long today. Locker had about 10 full seconds on one of his QB sneaks to try to get into the end zone before they finally blew it dead. Don't let facts get in the way of some good old fashioned ND bashing. My heart can't handle 7 more games like this. I wasn't really bashing ND there. I don't hate them as much as most people do. I just thought it was ridiculous that the play wasn't blown dead. I wasn't really talking about you. But the pile was moving forward, so there's no way the refs are going to blow it dead.

I still can't believe that crap. I was getting ready to post on how dumb of a playcall that was for a 2 point conversion and for some reason, the refs don't blow the play dead when that play is ALWAYS blown dead. The refs have been letting them play for way too long today. Locker had about 10 full seconds on one of his QB sneaks to try to get into the end zone before they finally blew it dead. Don't let facts get in the way of some good old fashioned ND bashing. My heart can't handle 7 more games like this.

Depo or Towers. Though I assume Towers was fired to the Padres could hire DePo before some other teams come calling. Just a guess.

It's too bad USC only has 4 or 5 other 5-star RBs on which to rely...

What do you mean? Iowa dropped out of the top 25 after week 1 for winning a nail biter.

17? Nice. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/usatpoll.htm PSU fell to just 13, which is sort of ridiculous given who they've played and how they've performed in those games. 3 terrible teams, 3 almost identical scores (~ 30-7). Not exactly tough games, but not laughers either. 1 good team, 1 loss. I'm not suggesting they fall from 5 to out of the top 25, but I thought they'd be at the bottom teens, right next to Cal and Ole Miss.

Charlie does deserve a hell of a lot of credit for the gameplan he had. Those crazy couple of drives in the second quarter where we were running Wildcat every other play and passed like twice were weird to see, but they got us two scores, without which we lose. I don't like Tenuta so far though. I know he's got the reputation, but he gets way too carried away with the blitzing and that killed us against UM and MSU. It was nice to see him back off a little bit against Purdue, and I'm certain that's part of why we held them in check until late. Jimmy and Allen need to be back next week, I don't think we'll get away against Washington the way we did last night. I'd expect Allen back. Weis said he looked good in warm-ups. I'm not sure JC will be healthy before USC, if then. It would have been nice to not use him much yesterday. Tenuta has 2 major issues that are killing him here. 1 - in 2 years, he hasn't had a good Mike. Brian Smith is a very good Will, he's a terrible Mike. Toryan is really bad there too. Te'o isn't ready. Hopefully Te'o can play Mike next year, which will solidify the LBs greatly. 2 - we don't have interior DL worth crap. Charlie's biggest recruiting misses have been DL, which is always a tough spot to get at ND. But the lack of a true DT that can hold down the middle have been disastrous. Putting our best DE at DT has hurt the line badly. I don't know if that's on Tenuta or Weis. Next year, when we're not starting 2 true sophomores on the DL, I expect it to be much better. Those 2 issues on defense make it difficult to stop the run or get any pressure on the QB without bringing blitzes. I would have hoped Tenuta would have improved Filer and Fleming better than he has in his time on campus. But there's still hope. He's had very good defenses everywhere he's been, usually with less talent than he has now. The D played better at times yesterday, but they also benefited greatly from Weis running it a bunch in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. It's hard to get burned on defense when they aren't on the field. As with the disaster against Cuse last year, the D gave up lots of points in the 4th quarter. That just can't keep happening.

Iowa jumped to 17 in the coaches poll. ND, despite winning, lost votes for the 2nd week in a row.

What do you think of Weis as a coach? I don't really know what ND fans think of him. I really want to like him. He's a decent (not great, but decent) offensive coordinator, and a fantastic recruiter. But he's made some horrible staff choices (Minter and Tenuta as DCs, John Latina as OL coach), he gets too cute way too damn often, and he completely and totally lacks the ability to finish teams off (ND lost 3 games last year in which they led by double digits in the 2nd half, and they should have 2 more such losses this year but was bailed out both times). If tonight was a sign of what we can expect to see without Floyd, it looks like that injury may finish him at Notre Dame. Come on, Andy. Weis made mistakes early with his staff hires, w/o question. The timing of his hire and the SB made his first staff and recruiting sort of a disaster. But Tenuta is a "horrible" staff choice? Come on. He's widely considered one of the greatest DCs in CFB. Verducci was a fantastic hire, as was Alford. There are holes in the coaching staff, but Tenuta isn't horrible. Weis is a great OC and a very good to great recruiter. After a couple of misses his first couple seasons, he seems to be improving. He doesn't manage the clock well and burns a lot of TOs that way. He goes for it on 4th in dumb situations (at the 20 yard line last night and then on the 4th and 10 - both with backups). But instead of accepting that JC was out last night and just game planning for Crist, he planned for both. If Clausen and Allen miss significant time, it's not going to matter the results as long as recruiting is still there. No coach should be fired b/c his #1 QB, RB, and WR miss the same game(s).

No Clausen. No Allen. No Floyd. No D. Uh oh

That's unfair and you know it. Michigan is 2-2 without significant help from the refs.

Abreu's EqA is .292, whereas Dye and Cameron are both .279. Not sure if makes up for the defensive difference from Abreu to Cameron, but Abreu is the better hitter. Dye is really up and down year to year.

Yeah. I never thought I'd stop hating Miami, but I really like Shannon. And that second sentence is about the most heart-wrenching thing I can imagine as a parent.

Are we better off with 2 guys that play good defense and post .800 OPS (give or take) in CF and RF or an .800 OPS, average defensive CF and taking a shot on a better hitting, worse fielding RF? In other words, should we leave Kosuke in CF where his .800 OPS (if he does it again) plays better and his defense is acceptable or go with a lighter hitting OF and hope we get enough from Lee, Ramirez, and Soto? Seems like adding Cameron means we're relying on Soto and Soriano to bounce back pretty significantly. Or am I missing something?

He and everyone else not named manbearcub

It's certainly not ideal. However, I'm not sure how unusual it is for a coach to name/post the starting lineup the day of the game. I'm sure it's far more unusual with quarterbacks, but still. Further, favoritism towards the starter seems to be the inherent inclination of any coach. Of course a coach is going to favor the starter (i.e., at least theoretically the superior player). The article does seem to sew the seeds of discontent at both QB and RB positions at minimum. Not ideal? I think you'd be hard pressed to find another QB in the country that doesn't know he's the starter at least a few days before the game. Or, if there is no true starter, be told that both QBs will be getting reps (like MSU is doing). The problem is not knowing where you stand one way or the other doesn't show a great deal of confidence or trust. And it's certainly preferential to tell one QB more than a week before his start and never tell the other QB. Sure, once they're the starter, it's likely they'll get better treatment in certain respects. But that's not what happened here. I don't exactly remember, but did Michigan know how was to start the first game at QB? I know Rodriguez had stated to the media he planned on playing three QB's. He said Forcier would start and that all 3 would play. Again, a completely different situation. Deflection makes it look like you think Carroll was dicking Corp around but you just don't want to say it.

It's certainly not ideal. However, I'm not sure how unusual it is for a coach to name/post the starting lineup the day of the game. I'm sure it's far more unusual with quarterbacks, but still. Further, favoritism towards the starter seems to be the inherent inclination of any coach. Of course a coach is going to favor the starter (i.e., at least theoretically the superior player). The article does seem to sew the seeds of discontent at both QB and RB positions at minimum. Not ideal? I think you'd be hard pressed to find another QB in the country that doesn't know he's the starter at least a few days before the game. Or, if there is no true starter, be told that both QBs will be getting reps (like MSU is doing). The problem is not knowing where you stand one way or the other doesn't show a great deal of confidence or trust. And it's certainly preferential to tell one QB more than a week before his start and never tell the other QB. Sure, once they're the starter, it's likely they'll get better treatment in certain respects. But that's not what happened here.

you don't think it's an issue to never actually tell a guy he's starting a game until you tell him to run out on the field?

Corp beat out Barkley in the spring. That's not surprising. Corp had 2 years in the system, Barkley was 18 and just on campus. In fall camp, Corp was hurt but I'm not positive Petey wouldn't have gone to Barkley anyway. It wasn't like the competition had been deemed completely sealed for the year (it's not like ND, and a lot of other schools, where Clausen was the starter, even if he crapped the bed the first game, he was going to be the starter). I'm not sure how much you can judge Corp based on what he does in games, but it seems like Carroll thinks Barkley is the guy. If a freshman beats out a 5-star junior, even if the incoming freshman is the #1 overall player, that doesn't spell good things for the junior.