Sanders needs to win something first. You do know he is 4-7 and blaming everyone but himself?
General season in review thoughts
- Thread starter FightingIrish44
- Start date
You don't need to out-emote the home team when playing on the road and it is a bad proposition. It is best just to focus on executing the plays and wear them down.
By the scores Colorado-TCU-Texas are all about the same having played close games. The 3rd of that set is a top 10 team with good chances to make the four team playoff.
When the other squad is flying around with their hair on fire, it’s difficult to execute. Go rewatch ND play Duke, Louisville and Clemson.
PS Colorado stinks, USC, UCLA, Oregon State gave up garbage time points. They have been blasted in 5 out of 11 games and beat 4 non bowl eligible teams.
Colorado is the most penalized team in the Nation, they are the worst rushing team in the nation, they have the worst defense in the nation, and there QB has been hit more than any QB in the Nation.
Sanders is a Pee Wee football coach there to promote his kids.
Last edited:
I think it has been obvious in my postings on this board that I have been bullish on Marcus Freeman from the get go, though I know many here don't necessarily share my enthusiasm. Nothing in the past season has caused me to flinch from my support. Am I disappointed with the losses to OSU, Louisville and Clemson? Of course. But I expected there would be growing pains with Freeman learning the job on the fly; it would have been unrealistic to have expected otherwise. While the losses were disappointing, they weren't the curb stompings we had become accustomed to seeing in the past several decades when ND was playing in a game on the big stage. I suppose that is damning with faint praise, but it is progress in a perverse sort of way. I see slow but steady progress in the quality of player we are bringing in, and remain hopeful we will eventually make it over the hump. If we had an elite QB and at least one elite WR this year, I truly believe we would be playing in the national championship game. I love Sam Hartman's moxie and determination, but he is simply not an elite QB. Will Kenny Minchey or CJ Carr be that guy? I don't know, but I am eager to see where we go from here. I have been following ND football since the mid 1960s, so I have seen both the best of times and the worst of times. MF has given me a sense of optimism I haven't felt for many years, and I still feel that way even after this season. Does he have his flaws? Certainly. But he strikes me as someone who is both smart enough and honest enough to recognize and admit those shortcomings and hard working enough to overcome them. So I still believe the future is bright.
Agreed, I predicted 9-3 in MF second year and thought it would be a success 6 months ago..but the offense has been maddening in games that matter. This season was setup for the taking with the way the rest of college football played out. If the offense would have taken off, this had a chance to be the year.
Losing to a 4-4 Clemson team is what concerned me.
Yes, coaching mistakes were evident in the OSU game and Louisville appears to have been underrated, but a 4-4 Clemson team ?
I hope you’re right, but I’m not as optimistic as you.
Clemson is now 7 and 4 and ranked in the top 25. Very talented team. We should have won but they arent a bunch of scrubs
I agree in some ways but disagree in others. Yes, I agree that there are no truly great teams this year like we have had in the past with dominant teams possessing either a generational QB and/or dominant NFL dominant across the board, and as such, ND had a much better chance this year than it did in year’s past, especially as many of us thought that that our combination of talent surrounding a sixth-year QB who had already been successful would put us at an advantage at the QB position agaisnt most teams. Obviously some of the perceptions regarding no true great team existing may change once the season plays out and there may indeed be a team close to these teams of the past, but hasn’t been apparent until thst team goes on to tear up CFB the final three games.
On the other hand, the team looks to be strong and stable from a foundational standpoint to the extent that any team being absolutely head and shoulders better than it seem unlikely, and that’s a great position to be in. One could say that’s because there’s truly no great ream, but I think the program has reached a tier right under the very best programs due to the stability Kelly brought and the future potential via recruiting that Freeman promises.
I think the stages of college football programs looks something like this:
- Cannot compete at all and likely won’t regardless of anything, e.g., New Mexico
- Cannot compete in games at all due to many factors but did in the past and could in the future with the right circumstances, e.g., Colorado last year, Kansas in the past
- Can compete in most games as it has decent enough talent and resources but seems stuck in a cycle of hoping for 6-6 type seasons as best case scenarios as it likely won’t have enough high-end talent this won’t be capable of having winning seasons in conference, e.g., many, many programs, e.g., Illinois
- Competitive in just about every game, decent to good talent including just enough on the lines, expect 6-6 or 7-5 as floors (disappointed when not reaching these levels), hope to win some close games get to 8-4 or 9-3 and given enough chances, will. Have experienced success in the past, e.g., Wisconsin and current Nebraska
- Expected to win games vs. most teams, have high-end talent perhaps just below the true elite and have program stability. 9-10 wins expected as a floor, wins in big games make program CFP eligible, so reasonable CFP expectations in a good year. ND is right here.
- Expect to compete for a CFP, have high end talent, favorite in just about every gsme. ”Down year” is just outside CFP.
- Top of the heap. Alabama, Georgia, Ohio St., Miami of the past, ND from 1988-1993, Nebraska in the mid ‘90s.
As has been mentioned, Clemson was 4-4 due to a series mistakes that were somewhat fluky. Yes, they had blown their chances and were not mentally strong or composed and thus were 4-4, but talent wise and on a play-to-play basis, they were far from what someone typically considers a 4-4 mediocre team. At the time we played the Tigers, they had a top 10 defense (top 5 now) and still have not been soundly or comfortably defeated, a defeat in which you say “nothing the other team could do—they play this 10 times and the same thing will happen 8 or 9 times at least). That team is a few plays away from being 9-2 with even 10-1 and 11-0 within the realm of possibility.
Now, this doesn’t preclude ND or Freeman or staff from criticism, but this Clemson team isnt the typical mediocre team.
Even when we played them, the Tigers were a top 30 team by most computer models—these models showed that you had a very talented team, especially on defense they had under performed as far as overall record was concerned, but on a play-to-play basis, you had a top team 20-30 that would be difficult to defeat on the road.
As the great American philosopher, Bill Parcells, stated, you are who your record says you are. Clemson was 4-4, that’s undeniable.
We know that Dabo is a superior coach, that’s a fact !
With a great coach at the helm, if you’re 4-4, especially against their schedule, you can’t be that talented.
Stop making excuses for MF !
Actually there were a bunch of scrubs playing— they were without 8-11 starters depending on who was commenting on it. Given that, it was a bad loss to an undisciplined 4 loss team. Spin it any way you normally do
It was a bad loss. We should have won. But we didn't lose to a bunch of scrubs. That is a talented team with a HOF coach.
I don’t see how any fan can consider this a good year given pre season expectations that were very reasonable. A serious playoff contender with a legit shot at winning a semi final matchup. A roster stacked with 4th, 5th and 6 yr guys on D, an Offense with two of the best tackles in college football, a top 5 RB, 7 portal pickups filling critical holes, a QB who was ranked as one the top 5 portal picks and top QB, a very manageable schedule with toughest game at home. Preseason the thought was 2 of our 3 most difficult games would be USC and Clemson, both could be 5 loss teams. We played OSU tough in Columbus in 22 and they were starting a new qb after losing Stroud, Njigba and Johnson in 1st rd. Very reasonable to think with a better QB we could beat OSU. We were a Vegas favorite in every game this year except OSU ( -3). We were a 16 yd scramble by Sam from being a very mediocre to bad year. Overall, disappointing season with a B- grade. Coaching, Golden A-, Parker D, Freeman C- On recruiting front i give Freeman an A- B+ ( losing Scott / Rushing hurt).
Your argument is reductionist.
If we are looking at it from an evaluative standpoint, then yes, Clemson was 4-4, and its postseason hopes were determined by the record. In that sense, Clemson “was” what its record said it was.
But in this discussion, we are not talking about what Clemson was as far as its postseason hopes were concerned, but what it was capable of, and what it had shown it was capable of when it played us. Your argument is reductionist because it simplifies the assessment of a football team's talent and performance solely based on its win-loss record, neglecting the multitude of factors and specific plays that contribute to the team's overall dynamics and potential for success. We were playing a team that had made many mistakes and therefore was 4-4, but we were also playing a team that had a top 10 defense, which is top-five now, and had shown that it was very difficult for any team to defeat.
As mentioned, there is not a single team that was able to out play Clemson to the point where one could conclude that that other team was completely better than it was. If you change around a few plays here, and there than that Clemson team is now 9-2 or 10-1. Compare Clemson to a team like Boston College – you cannot take just a few plays here and there and say Boston College could have been 10-1 as it was soundly outplayed at a fundamental level by multiple teams. Was BC at 5-3 and 6-3 the same as and/or better than Clemson at 4-4? No, it wasn’t.
This is why the odds makers made the opening line what it was when Notre Dame and Clemson played — they knew how good Clemson was from a talent standpoint, and that with a few plays here and there that it would have a near perfect record, and what it was capable of especially at home. If the oddsmaker thought that Clemson was some run-of-the-mill average team, they would not have made the opening line what it was.
Last edited:
Good post. Results are important but one can’t just look at results if they want to effectively evaluate performance. The same principle can be used to evaluate the performance of a coach or unit like offense.
This is why I would argue that ND’s offensive performance against Ohio State was good (or at least showed a lot of potential) even though they only scored 14. A closer look at the drive charts show that they moved the ball, they had limited possessions, bypassed a FG for 4th down attempt, two failed 4th and 1’s when one really probably should have been converted. I’d say ND won the x’s and o’s battle too.
This is different than having a bunch of 3 and out’s and getting “lucky” and scoring a couple of long touchdowns. For instance, Navy had a very long TD run against Memphis but Memphis actually had the play covered…two players covered the same phase of the option for some reason and the play went 75 yards instead of a short gain. For evaluation purposes, I’m not going to say that its a great job even though they scored a 75 yard TD on one play.
Agreed that Parcells quote does not take into account injuries, schedule, etc. And knowing Parcells, he was probably trying to motivate his team. It's a nice sound bite but really isn't accurate.
Last edited:
From a philosophical standpoint regarding evaluation of where a team stands, he is probably correct that some team “is” what its record is because how it got to its record doesn’t really matter if one is purely evaluating where the team currently stands in any type of future possibilities regarding postseason and so on.
But a team in football, a sport that has a limited number of games, i.e., a small sample size, cannot be evaluated purely by a win-loss record when evaluating how difficult that team is to defeat, which is why we have advanced metrics today that take into account a much larger sample size of total plays run and factor in opponent strength, and that opponents total plays run and all of that opponent‘s opponents and their respective plays run.
Look at the 2010 Green Bay Packers. Here you had a team that was 8-6, it’s last two games to barely get into the playoffs with its last win being a lucky one over the Bears. The Packers’ record suggested that they “were” Mediocre, but everyone knew going into those playoffs, that if healthy, Aaron Rodgers give them a chance to win every single game, and even though their record was not indicative of a dominant team, their ceiling was super high, because you had an all-time, great quarterback, ready to do all-time great things.
It’s the same reason why Oregon, which will have one loss heading into the Pac 12 championship game, will be favored over a Washington team that will be undefeated AND will be the team that gave Oregon its only loss.
Last edited:
I’m watching Oregon now and am really impressed with Oregon’s offense and Nix. He’s 30-37 with 360 yards. OSU QB always seems to have a guy in his face.
I looked at the first Oregon Washington game. Oregon out gained Washington by 130, 8 first downs and won the TO battle by 1. I’d definitely favor Oregon
Very good season for year 2, but disappointing the way we lost the 3. OSU gift wrapped a pic for the win and we drop it, also a 3rd and 18. Ugh. Lou the dropped pass for the TD and your down one score instead. No way you go on 4th inside your territory. Then Clemson, that was just as piss poor of an O as I have seen since Marshall. How do you not pass the 50 for a full quarter and a half. I’d say great season if they beat Clemson. That was just bad. The rest, can complain. Far ahead of where BK had us going and more reinforcements on the way.
I think that you’ve drawn a flawed conclusion in stating that the oddsmakers knew how good Clemson was, they were 4-4, maybe the odds makers knew how mediocre ND was on the road.
What Clemson did post ND is irrelevant, they were 4-4 losing to Duke, FSU, Miami and NC State and they barely beat Wake Forest, hardly murderers row.
Everyone knew they were a talented team at home. It was always going to be a tough game. That was obvious
Oregon has great speed at their receiver positions forcing State DBs to play ten yards off, etc…. Reminds me of Kelly’s Oregon team with Mariota as qb.
Oregon will be difficult to defeat—it puts so much pressure on the defense to align on downs, tackle in space, defend the perimeter while also being physical enough to play power when needed. The offense is a top 2 offense that almost never punts and can score methodically or in bursts, has playmakers, and what’s turned into an NFL QB. As the season has gone along, its defense has also improved and is a top 15 type defense.
9-3 for his second season at ND is definitely a success.
Now that MF has set the bar for expectations as he moves forward
He's recruiting well, but, more talent will be needed to reach higher goals.
I know I'm preaching to the choir, but this is my take
Now that MF has set the bar for expectations as he moves forward
He's recruiting well, but, more talent will be needed to reach higher goals.
I know I'm preaching to the choir, but this is my take
Last edited:
I'd give the team a B+ on the season. We had a tough schedule this year.
The program took a step backwards the last 2 years. 2020 10-2 CFP and played 2020 Alabama about as well as anyone played 2020 Alabama. Then 2021 ND was 11-1 and finished #5 in the CFP.
Those on the Fickel bandwagon assumed the program would go backwards with Freeman since he would be learning on the job. Those in favor of the Freeman hire were banking on him recruiting at a higher level, which would take ND to the next level which is winning in the CFP.
Well, the first part of the equation has taken place 8-4 and 9-3, and ND never being in contention for the CFP is undeniably a step backwards.
Now, it is time to retire all the excuses (Brian Kelly, Tommy Rees, WR Room, QB Room, Andy Ludwig, Gerard Parker, tougher schedule etc.) and see the improved recruiting manifest itself on the field and more importantly in the win column next season.
Looking at the Coaches Poll this morning ND ended up playing 3 teams that are currently ranked. Ohio State #6 Louisville #14 NC State #20. I have seen Clemson ranked #24 in other polls. If that is the case ND went 1-3 vs Top 25 teams this season. Duke & Louisville were ranked when ND played them, but they ended up 7-5 and unranked football teams.
Those on the Fickel bandwagon assumed the program would go backwards with Freeman since he would be learning on the job. Those in favor of the Freeman hire were banking on him recruiting at a higher level, which would take ND to the next level which is winning in the CFP.
Well, the first part of the equation has taken place 8-4 and 9-3, and ND never being in contention for the CFP is undeniably a step backwards.
Now, it is time to retire all the excuses (Brian Kelly, Tommy Rees, WR Room, QB Room, Andy Ludwig, Gerard Parker, tougher schedule etc.) and see the improved recruiting manifest itself on the field and more importantly in the win column next season.
Looking at the Coaches Poll this morning ND ended up playing 3 teams that are currently ranked. Ohio State #6 Louisville #14 NC State #20. I have seen Clemson ranked #24 in other polls. If that is the case ND went 1-3 vs Top 25 teams this season. Duke & Louisville were ranked when ND played them, but they ended up 7-5 and unranked football teams.
Despite being 9-3, I think this year's team is actually better than the 2021 team that went 11-1. We had a much tougher schedule this year. And the 2021 team barely beat a bunch of mediocre teams, like Toledo and Virginia Tech. This year's team blew out the mediocre teams.
And I believe our rankings in total offense and defense are better, too.
Yeah but you are what your RECORD SAYS YOU ARE.
The record says the 2021 team was near the best in the nation, and therefore Toledo should have playoffed.
When the signature win is against NC st it’s hard to say there was improvement. Having said that there’s only 4 teams I’ve seen this year that I think ND would struggle against—- Tx, Oregon, Ga, Bama. Every other team we have the talent to beat if we bring our A game. Coaching really let this group down
