Thoughts on the season

[irishwolfie]

Not sure if there is already a topic for this, but didn't feel like digging.

Positives- Although I was disappointed not to be in the playoff conversation late in the season, I thought it was a very respectable season.. It is extremely hard to finish a top 15 team, and I think it could be argued this was a top 10 football team. I have seen too many Notre Dame seasons fall apart after a championship run ending loss (Michigan) because of the fact that Notre Dame is not in a conference, but the team did not fall into the mudslide and actually finished the season very well.

Negatives- The thing that stood out to me were not the losses, although the Michigan one hurt. It was the toughness. I am not saying it was not a tough team because they did show toughness in finishing strong, but there were moments that I feel this area could be improved. Georgia- I honestly don't mind the fake injuries/gamesmanship all that much, but what did bother me was once we showed weakness, you could see Georgia smell the blood and go in for the kill. Championship teams don't show that weakness. This was also shown in the Michigan game when we were being bullied up front.

** Like I said, in no way am I calling these young men weak, but those types of things can be trained. They must be ready for high pressure situations like the ones mentioned.

I am excited for a large group of guys to return next season and predict a top 6 team in 2020.

 

[stu4don]

I thought our defense was very tough. We will miss the guy who set the tone: Gilman (in some ways he is the guy I believe we will miss the most next year -- not Jones, not Kmet, but Gilman who also made Elliot a better player by example. (I really hope Aholi comes back to coach at ND someday. Like Tommy Rees, he seems to have the trait that makes him a leader, a guy kids would want to play with and follow into the trenches. He's probably my favorite player since Q and Theo Riddick.)

Positives: Clark Lea's defense. Polian's special teams. Pass protection. Winning 11 games and dominating a bowl game. Going undefeated at home, (again), finishing very strong (even with several key injuries to big-time starters) winning in November.

Negatives: Despite that fact that this offense avg. the most points in the Kelly era (yes, there were real cupcakes this year), I never really felt this offense fully found themselves. Running game was so inconsistent. Also, not closing at Georgia. And the debacle that was the Michigan game (lowest pt.)

 

[Shulkswagen]

On the one hand a very good even if not great season ... on the other hand the schedule somehow seemed blah and after the close call at Georgia it was a combination of blah and waiting for disaster which ultimately struck ... after that it was tough to get the excitement back in the remaining schedule. I attended UVa amd USC amd the stadium atmosphere was still great IMO

 

[scubastevefl]

Thoughts are ND can beat the teams of equal or lesser ability. Can’t win a big game. (Georgia, Michigan). Kind of par for the course

 

[Catholicfan95]

We went 11-2 and won a bowl game.

We all know some posters hate it , some posters love it. There is no in between or rational as this thread will be proof of that by 7:00.

Regardless of your stance there's a lot to look forward to in 2020.

 

[Shulkswagen]

We went 11-2 and won a bowl game.

We all know some posters hate it , some posters love it. There is no in between or rational as this thread will be proof of that by 7:00.

Regardless of your stance there's a lot to look forward to in 2020.

People forget the Davie-Ham era ... I guess that’s a good thing.

 

[TDIrish27]

We went 11-2 and won a bowl game.

We all know some posters hate it , some posters love it. There is no in between or rational as this thread will be proof of that by 7:00.

Regardless of your stance there's a lot to look forward to in 2020.

We will be very inexperienced at the skill positions offensively and defensively. Hopefully our young guys grow up quickly.

We're fortunate that our first 3 are doable games .

I like this team on the LOS both sides of the ball.

An experienced QB is a real plus here.

 

[HDK]

I record all the games every year. After the season, I review them quickly.

The defense was impressive; but I surprised by how poorly our defensive backs (except Hamilton) often played even with our excellent pass rush. For what it's worth, I think we got away with a ton of pass interference and defensive holding all year long.

For the life of me, I can't figure out our offense and haven't been able to for most of Kelly's time at ND. Usually, it seems we can score bunches of points, but our offense just seems random and scattershot to me. What you see week one is pretty much what you see week 10.

There were a lot of complaints about the offensive line, but I thought by and large they did well in pass protection. However, the run blocking leaves much to be desired. It seems what our offensive linemen do best is run over to the running back or quarterback who has just been plastered and help him off the ground.

This was a good team, hardly a great team. We are going to miss Gilman and Claypool in a big way next year.

 

[Catholicfan95]

We will be very inexperienced at the skill positions offensively and defensively. Hopefully our young guys grow up quickly.

We're fortunate that our first 3 are doable games .

I like this team on the LOS both sides of the ball.

An experienced QB is a real plus here.

Pretty spot on with what I see. I feel like this team is going to be raw and I have a feeling that by the 4th game we will be polished. I see is going 11-1 or 10-2 next season. 11-1 we make the playoffs (baring the field is not loaded with undefeateds).

I like who we've become as a program, sad others just don't see the big picture here.

 

[Catholicfan95]

People forget the Davie-Ham era ... I guess that’s a good thing.

Notre Dame was arguable the most outdated program in the country 10 years ago. Resting on old traditions and old victories. Now everything is within reach and our goals are tangible. I just don't see how posters don't see that. Maybe they do, but they certainly just focus on the micro aspect.

 

[ajcgn]

My clothes only recently dried out from attending that Michigan debacle, so it’s still hard for me to appreciate 11-2
But, hope springs eternal and I’m looking forward to 13-1 next season.

 

[Leahylads]

Just like Kelly, good but not great.

 

[Kelso86]

Not sure if there is already a topic for this, but didn't feel like digging.

Positives- Although I was disappointed not to be in the playoff conversation late in the season, I thought it was a very respectable season.. It is extremely hard to finish a top 15 team, and I think it could be argued this was a top 10 football team. I have seen too many Notre Dame seasons fall apart after a championship run ending loss (Michigan) because of the fact that Notre Dame is not in a conference, but the team did not fall into the mudslide and actually finished the season very well.

Negatives- The thing that stood out to me were not the losses, although the Michigan one hurt. It was the toughness. I am not saying it was not a tough team because they did show toughness in finishing strong, but there were moments that I feel this area could be improved. Georgia- I honestly don't mind the fake injuries/gamesmanship all that much, but what did bother me was once we showed weakness, you could see Georgia smell the blood and go in for the kill. Championship teams don't show that weakness. This was also shown in the Michigan game when we were being bullied up front.

** Like I said, in no way am I calling these young men weak, but those types of things can be trained. They must be ready for high pressure situations like the ones mentioned.

I am excited for a large group of guys to return next season and predict a top 6 team in 2020.

"Thoughts on the season"

Most people thought ND was a 10-3 / 11-2 team this year. While the Georgia loss was expected (although, that night, ND had a shot), no one expected the Michigan Meltdown. Every team has its own unique mental make up, and this one fit the bill to a tee -- you never knew mentally, who was going to show up. For the 1st half of the year (maybe up to Michigan), Book seemed to play very tight, the defense was solid for the most part, and the kicking game surprised (JD was solid).

ND won the games they were expected to, which, a few years ago, was a question at times. Now, ND needs to begin winning the games they are not expected to (Clemson 2020 comes to mind). Depth continues to get better, and Kelly needs to bring in an OC and let him do what he is supposed to do -- run the offense. Lea is getting better and better as a DC. I believe the program is close -- they need that one major break-through.

 

[ND4Real]

The schedule was full of tomato cans. Best win was vs Navy. I hope BK can turn some things around this off season with great hires. I never got excited for the season like I usually do. It is what it is.

 

[stu4don]

The schedule was full of tomato cans. Best win was vs Navy. I hope BK can turn some things around this off season with great hires. I never got excited for the season like I usually do. It is what it is.

I agree that it worked out to be the easiest total schedule in a while, but disagree that there weren't any good teams among the ones we beat: USC, VTech, Virginia, Navy, Louisville (watch out next year) -- were not cupcakes (Louisville beat an SEC team in the bowl and Virginia and VTech held their own) and these teams had wins against good teams . Hey, Georgia lost to South Carolina! OSU to Purdue last year!

 

[wetwater]

"Thoughts on the season"

Most people thought ND was a 10-3 / 11-2 team this year. While the Georgia loss was expected (although, that night, ND had a shot), no one expected the Michigan Meltdown. Every team has its own unique mental make up, and this one fit the bill to a tee -- you never knew mentally, who was going to show up. For the 1st half of the year (maybe up to Michigan), Book seemed to play very tight, the defense was solid for the most part, and the kicking game surprised (JD was solid).

ND won the games they were expected to, which, a few years ago, was a question at times. Now, ND needs to begin winning the games they are not expected to (Clemson 2020 comes to mind). Depth continues to get better, and Kelly needs to bring in an OC and let him do what he is supposed to do -- run the offense. Lea is getting better and better as a DC. I believe the program is close -- they need that one major break-through.

Before the season started I thought ND was a 9-3/8-4 team this was before Stanford turned into not just a down year but one of the worst teams on the schedule. Including a lot of programs in the ACC continuing to royally suck.

If ND played a similar schedule to the ones they used to play back during the first half of BKs tenure, they probably would have finished with at least 3-4 losses.

Again that's why a system like F/+ exists. So that we can make these type of comparisons.

ND was the #10 or #11 team back in 2011 despite losing 5 games ... their schedule was tough combined with being on the wrong side of a lot of bad luck that year. In 2019 (this past season) ND might finish BEHIND that ranking DESPITE an 11-2 record.

Point here is that the way we evaluate the quality of a season has to go beyond record and we need to evaluate performance in each game vs the good, bad, and mediocre teams. Every play/drive in non garbage time can give us evidence about the quality of a football team and how good that team is relative to their peers. We also need to factor in the quality of the performance in those games vs the quality of the opponent. e.g. against good competition driving the ball up and down the field is a lot more difficult. vs bad competition it's a lot easier (duh) ... a system like F/+ can make these type of distinctions.

LSU lost 3 games last year but were one of the best teams in the country based on how well they played their schedule and this year they are having better luck and those same core of players returned in 2019 and now they are in a national title game.

Just some food for thought/things to consider when evaluating the quality of the season and evaluating the performance of the program.

 

[iwish]

Appreciative that the team was made up of seemingly hard working, good young men who give their all for the Irish. Appreciative for yet another strong, winning season and a bowl game victory. Thankful to be an Irish fan vs. any other football program.

Hopeful the team can add the missing pieces to get back into the Playoffs.

 

[Golson5]

Before the season started I thought ND was a 9-3/8-4 team this was before Stanford turned into not just a down year but one of the worst teams on the schedule. Including a lot of programs in the ACC continuing to royally suck.

If ND played a similar schedule to the ones they used to play back during the first half of BKs tenure, they probably would have finished with at least 3-4 losses.

Again that's why a system like F/+ exists. So that we can make these type of comparisons.

ND was the #10 or #11 team back in 2011 despite losing 5 games ... their schedule was tough combined with being on the wrong side of a lot of bad luck that year. In 2019 (this past season) ND might finish BEHIND that ranking DESPITE an 11-2 record.

Point here is that the way we evaluate the quality of a season has to go beyond record and we need to evaluate performance in each game vs the good, bad, and mediocre teams. Every play/drive in non garbage time can give us evidence about the quality of a football team and how good that team is relative to their peers. We also need to factor in the quality of the performance in those games vs the quality of the opponent. e.g. against good competition driving the ball up and down the field is a lot more difficult. vs bad competition it's a lot easier (duh) ... a system like F/+ can make these type of distinctions.

LSU lost 3 games last year but were one of the best teams in the country based on how well they played their schedule and this year they are having better luck and those same core of players returned in 2019 and now they are in a national title game.

Just some food for thought/things to consider when evaluating the quality of the season and evaluating the performance of the program.

F minus is trash Chase

 

[twalsh]

Before the season started I thought ND was a 9-3/8-4 team this was before Stanford turned into not just a down year but one of the worst teams on the schedule. Including a lot of programs in the ACC continuing to royally suck.

If ND played a similar schedule to the ones they used to play back during the first half of BKs tenure, they probably would have finished with at least 3-4 losses.

Again that's why a system like F/+ exists. So that we can make these type of comparisons.

ND was the #10 or #11 team back in 2011 despite losing 5 games ... their schedule was tough combined with being on the wrong side of a lot of bad luck that year. In 2019 (this past season) ND might finish BEHIND that ranking DESPITE an 11-2 record.

Point here is that the way we evaluate the quality of a season has to go beyond record and we need to evaluate performance in each game vs the good, bad, and mediocre teams. Every play/drive in non garbage time can give us evidence about the quality of a football team and how good that team is relative to their peers. We also need to factor in the quality of the performance in those games vs the quality of the opponent. e.g. against good competition driving the ball up and down the field is a lot more difficult. vs bad competition it's a lot easier (duh) ... a system like F/+ can make these type of distinctions.

LSU lost 3 games last year but were one of the best teams in the country based on how well they played their schedule and this year they are having better luck and those same core of players returned in 2019 and now they are in a national title game.

Just some food for thought/things to consider when evaluating the quality of the season and evaluating the performance of the program.

A new screen name for Chase?

 

[IrishFforida]

Solid season 11-2, and end up barely outside the Top 10. But the missed opportunity at UGA, and the no show at 9-4 Michigan was a real disappointment.

LSU
Clemson
Ohio State

Were simply the cream of the crop and everyone else was a distant 4th.

ND could have played and beaten all the other teams that were in contention for that last playoff spot on a neutral field IMO

UGA
OU
Oregon
Alabama
Baylor
Utah

 

[wetwater]

A new screen name for Chase?

I created this account back in september and was considering a permanent name change. But when you make a new account it's heavily restricted e.g. you can only make a few posts per day so I scratched that idea and went back to my chaseball account.
Recently my chaseball account was banned for a week because I made a sexual joke about Brian Kelly that offended someone and they reported me.
So i'm using this account I created for now and since the account is no longer limited I may continue to keep it but who knows.

Nevertheless I hope we would all stop talking about me and go back to discussing notre dame football. any non notre dame discussion should be removed from these topics as to not distract from otherwise good posts/good notre dame football discussion.

 

[deadprez3]

Before the season started I thought ND was a 9-3/8-4 team this was before Stanford turned into not just a down year but one of the worst teams on the schedule. Including a lot of programs in the ACC continuing to royally suck.

If ND played a similar schedule to the ones they used to play back during the first half of BKs tenure, they probably would have finished with at least 3-4 losses.

Again that's why a system like F/+ exists. So that we can make these type of comparisons.

Agree.

Those 2010 and 2011 teams were quite a bit better than the records indicated.

Conversely, these recent teams aren't nearly as good as their record would lead a casual observer to believe.

Depending how Stanford and Louisville progress in the offseason, four losses are not out of the realm of possibility next year. Clemson and at least one of Wisconsin or USC are almost statistical locks for losses (although losing to both Wisconsin and USC would be even more statistically likely than a split given they would be top 25 road opponents--another data point that does not paint Kelly in a very favorable light).

A 8-4 type record would certainly move Kelly back in line with his historical mean.

 

[deadprez3]

Nevertheless I hope we would all stop talking about me and go back to discussing notre dame football. any non notre dame discussion should be removed from these topics as to not distract from otherwise good posts/good notre dame football discussion.

I agree.

Although I believe there should also be room to advise and guide individual posters in hopes of improving them as contributors to the board. Obviously, this would need to be done in a repectful manner so as not to offend.

It would also be helpful if we agreed on the use of advanced metrics to bring some much needed standardization and objectivity to the board although I also acknowledge how its concepts may escape some due to various factors.

I do hope that you reclaim your chaseball username when its banishment expires.

 

[REMND]

Good year. We were not a playoff caliber team so I am glad we missed that.

11-2 says it all. We were very competitive and deserve a top 10 ranking but our uncompetitive display on a rainy night in Ann Arbor was too much to overcome. We will be 12 or 13 in the human polls but 10 in computer polls,

I expected 10-2 pre season.

Next year will be a challenge. We have to replace a ton of production from departing offensive skill guys. Talent is there but it is inexperienced. There is a depth challenge with CBs but the DL puts a lot of pressure on QBs. Plus Jok is part run stopper part coverage and part blitzer.

Now we need a good OC hire and good CB coach to replace Lyght.

 

[NIN Irish]

I agree.

Although I believe there should also be room to advise and guide individual posters in hopes of improving them as contributors to the board. Obviously, this would need to be done in a repectful manner so as not to offend.

It would also be helpful if we agreed on the use of advanced metrics to bring some much needed standardization and objectivity to the board although I also acknowledge how its concepts may escape some due to various factors.

I do hope that you reclaim your chaseball username when its banishment expires.

Chase, it's amazing how you continue to reply and agree to yourself. Have you no shame?

 

[twalsh]

Good year. We were not a playoff caliber team so I am glad we missed that.

Neither was Oklahoma.

 

[Golson5]

I created this account back in september and was considering a permanent name change. But when you make a new account it's heavily restricted e.g. you can only make a few posts per day so I scratched that idea and went back to my chaseball account.
Recently my chaseball account was banned for a week because I made a sexual joke about Brian Kelly that offended someone and they reported me.
So i'm using this account I created for now and since the account is no longer limited I may continue to keep it but who knows.

Nevertheless I hope we would all stop talking about me and go back to discussing notre dame football. any non notre dame discussion should be removed from these topics as to not distract from otherwise good posts/good notre dame football discussion.

And we all hope you would stop talking about F minus but yet you continue to do so

 

[tbonesays]

F minus is trash Chase

IT's unhelpful for evaluating teams like 2011 ND that Chase referenced. Pretty much no computer ranking will predict a turnover prone team that lobs up ducks to a stud WR. If you just look at the #s, turnovers appear unpredictably and are therefore treated as "variance" aka 'bad luck.'

 

[wetwater]

IT's unhelpful for evaluating teams like 2011 ND that Chase referenced. Pretty much no computer ranking will predict a turnover prone team that lobs up ducks to a stud WR. If you just look at the #s, turnovers appear unpredictably and are therefore treated as "variance" aka 'bad luck.'

From my understanding, the only turnovers that aren't explained away as luck/variance are turnovers caused by the pass rush of the team.
In the case of F/+ a team that causes a lot of turnovers based on their pass rushers getting to the QB will get credit in the rating system, a team that randomly falls on a special teams fumble/mishap or a random misnap or a runningback randomly getting hit in the precise spot that knocks the ball out is all considered 'bad luck'. There have been comprehensive studies done on this and there's no evidence that turnovers are a result of anything other than random variance/luck.
That 2011 team, especially looking back to the USF game, was on the wrong side of all kinds of bad luck. I don't know how many times some random fumble/turnover got tipped into the air landed in the other teams hand and they had a clear path for a pick 6. Or a misnap that resulted in a TD the other way. I think the USC game had a lot of that kind of stuff going on too.

 

[tbonesays]

From my understanding, the only turnovers that aren't explained away as luck/variance are turnovers caused by the pass rush of the team.
In the case of F/+ a team that causes a lot of turnovers based on their pass rushers getting to the QB will get credit in the rating system, a team that randomly falls on a special teams fumble/mishap or a random misnap or a runningback randomly getting hit in the precise spot that knocks the ball out is all considered 'bad luck'. There have been comprehensive studies done on this and there's no evidence that turnovers are a result of anything other than random variance/luck.
That 2011 team, especially looking back to the USF game, was on the wrong side of all kinds of bad luck. I don't know how many times some random fumble/turnover got tipped into the air landed in the other teams hand and they had a clear path for a pick 6. Or a misnap that resulted in a TD the other way. I think the USC game had a lot of that kind of stuff going on too.

I recall two separate 14 pt swings in 2011 when a fumble near a score was returned 99 yds, that's mostly variance {that btw was corrected in 2012}. But the usual pass play of Rees floating it up so Floyd could win a jump ball was a known turnover risk. So we cannot really complain we were unlucky.

The effect is less noticeable with Book but it's still there a bit. IB is just never going to a powerful long ball threat and attempts to do so carry risk.

 

[Catholicfan95]

@wetwater heres the thing, in what world would anyone put any amount of confidence into a metric system that ranks team A higher than team B when team A wins the national championship over team B? Does that not just astonish you? Who cares if it was the 1 out of 10 times ( or 1 of 4 so on) they would have won, that's not a measurable stat, is an assumption and in no way should benefit the losing team.

Why even play the game of you have a metric that will evaluate teams? I keep looking at this thing and it doesn't make sense, not just the Bama Clemson thing, but across the board.

How can you base effective metrics off of ifs and maybes? Do results not matter? Since when do we start measuring a teams luck to determine who the bear is? Auburn got lucky to make the championship in whatever year it was, but they played like they deserved to be there and that's all anyone will remember.

In most metrics results do matter and there are better metrics out there than F+ plain and simple.

To me the thing is with F+ is, let's see how many obscure data points we can cobble together to try and make a ranking system, and it clearly doesn't work. It's over evaluation of the simplistic which data people do from time to time. Just like not data people can tend to ignore data completely.

You have to give up on this thing Chase.

 

[tbonesays]

On the one hand a very good even if not great season ... on the other hand the schedule somehow seemed blah and after the close call at Georgia it was a combination of blah and waiting for disaster which ultimately struck ... after that it was tough to get the excitement back in the remaining schedule. I attended UVa amd USC amd the stadium atmosphere was still great IMO

The 11-2 2019 ND Football team was quite orderly. We were better than the 11 and worse than the 2. It actually is an achievement to beat a lot of medium strength teams without an upset. Even the Mighty Dabos have stumbled in quite a few opponents who forgot they were basketball schools. So 2019 was exactly what we expect from 2.0:

unqualified to challenge the first tier
1 disaster where we came out flat an poorly prepared.
taking care of business against the rest of the schedule

 

[wetwater]

The 11-2 2019 ND Football team was quite orderly. We were better than the 11 and worse than the 2. It actually is an achievement to beat a lot of medium strength teams without an upset. Even the Mighty Dabos have stumbled in quite a few opponents who forgot they were basketball schools. So 2019 was exactly what we expect from 2.0:

unqualified to challenge the first tier
1 disaster where we came out flat an poorly prepared.
taking care of business against the rest of the schedule

Here's the problem with the schedule .. 1 team was really good Georgia, 1 team was good Michigan, and 3 other teams were back end top 25 teams (Iowa State, USC, Navy) but after that .. the schedule was not just bad it was bottom percentile of college football bad.

There were basically 6+ games the quality of some FCS team on the schedule. The traditional powers other than Georgia were all down including the traditional rivals.

The other 8 teams on the schedule had an aggregate F/+ ranking of like 78th out of 130 or something.

This is important because when you play teams that rate this poorly you should be dominating them in the way Clemson dominated 12 of 13 games on their schedule if you have any hope of being considered a playoff team. As an example, Clemson dominated everybody on their schedule the way Notre Dame dominated Bowling Green & New Mexico. Basically non competitive games over by the third quarter week in and week out.

But ND found themselves in some dog fights against really bad teams, including a 55+ ranked Virginia Tech, a 22nd ranked (at the time) USC, on top of their 1 sided losses to Michigan and Georgia. Hell even games vs Louisville and Virginia took way too long to pull away given the quality of those teams/programs.

All of this adds up to the 10-15th final ranking they will likely get across the board.

 

[Kcndmis97]

Here's the problem with the schedule .. 1 team was really good Georgia, 1 team was good Michigan, and 3 other teams were back end top 25 teams (Iowa State, USC, Navy) but after that .. the schedule was not just bad it was bottom percentile of college football bad.

There were basically 6+ games the quality of some FCS team on the schedule. The traditional powers other than Georgia were all down including the traditional rivals.

The other 8 teams on the schedule had an aggregate F/+ ranking of like 78th out of 130 or something.

This is important because when you play teams that rate this poorly you should be dominating them in the way Clemson dominated 12 of 13 games on their schedule. Basically non competitive games over by the third quarter week in and week out.

But ND found themselves in some dog fights against really bad teams, including a 55+ ranked Virginia Tech, a 22nd ranked (at the time) USC, on top of their 1 sided losses to Michigan and Georgia.

I have to ask, serious question....do you even watch college football? Or do you just check f/p+ every week? If you actually watch the games, you will realize that ND dominated Va Tech and the game was only close because of a fluke fumble return for TD, a missed 35yd FG and a couple of bad passes by Book. You just posted how a lot of turnovers were random and bad luck yet fail to mention this when referencing the Va Tech game. Are you even a ND fan or are you a secret Michigan fan that likes to complain about ND on this board? Some of your stuff is ridiculous. ND found themselves in “some” dog fights against really bad teams....which ones????? Please list because VT was not a bad team, they were a mid-level P5 team, period. ND dominated every “bad” team they played, period. Any real fan that actually watches the games would realize that.

 

[wetwater]

I have to ask, serious question....do you even watch college football? Or do you just check f/p+ every week? If you actually watch the games, you will realize that ND dominated Va Tech and the game was only close because of a fluke fumble return for TD, a missed 35yd FG and a couple of bad passes by Book. You just posted how a lot of turnovers were random and bad luck yet fail to mention this when referencing the Va Tech game. Are you even a ND fan or are you a secret Michigan fan that likes to complain about ND on this board? Some of your stuff is ridiculous. ND found themselves in “some” dog fights against really bad teams....which ones????? Please list because VT was not a bad team, they were a mid-level P5 team, period. ND dominated every “bad” team they played, period. Any real fan that actually watches the games would realize that.

I used to get these same rhetorical questions when I was beating the "recruiting" drum back before they became the conventional wisdom it is now.

We could basically replace F/+ with "recruiting rankings" in this post and it would be nearly identical. Funny that none of those people are singing the same tune with the benefit of hindsight now.

On my chaseball account I recently did a post, posting all of the final F/+ rankings of the competition on the schedule.

After you take out the top 5 teams, the bottom 8 teams had an aggregate ranking of 78th out of 130. There are only 65 "power 5" teams in college football. Basically there were 8 teams on the schedule that would lose a ton of games to G5 competition several of which would be mediocre FCS teams (Bowling Green & New Mexico).

Games vs Virginia Tech were way too competitive. Virginia Tech was ranked 50th+ in F/+. The games vs louisville were back and forth and competitive for several quarters (ND clinging on to 2 possession lead through 3 quarters in that game before finally putting them away with a third score). Louisville finished somewhere in the 40s-50s in F/+.

Clemson's games outside of their near loss to North Carolina were all the equivalent to how ND beat up on New Mexico and Bowling Green. Basically no contest after the 2nd quarter with their 2nd and 3rd teamers in for the majority of the 2nd half.

ND was in way too many competitive games vs way too many bad teams which drove their F/+ ranking down on top of their convincing losses to Georgia and Michigan. They were also on the receiving end of a lot of turnover luck with a hugely disproportionate turnover differential relative to the rest of the league.

edit i had it backwards: virginia & virginia tech were ranked in the mid 40s ... it was Louisville that finished ranked 60.

These teams all got to beat up on poor ACC competition so their record looks much better than the actual quality of their teams/performance this season.

 

[spenna]

People forget the Davie-Ham era ... I guess that’s a good thing.

I don't forget the Davie era. It just seems to me that we are content with the season that just ended . The schedule was nothing to write home about. One more lose and the season would have been considered a failure. I know we all live and die with N D . But ten win seasons are not that big of a deal anymore . We must recruit better than we have been . I believe we are a long way from being an elite team . If the university does not let Kelly bring in some border line players we will never be elite again .

 

[Kcndmis97]

I used to get these same rhetorical questions when I was beating the "recruiting" drum back before they became the conventional wisdom it is now.

We could basically replace F/+ with "recruiting rankings" in this post and it would be nearly identical. Funny that none of those people are singing the same tune with the benefit of hindsight now.

On my chaseball account I recently did a post, posting all of the final F/+ rankings of the competition on the schedule.

After you take out the top 5 teams, the bottom 8 teams had an aggregate ranking of 78th out of 130. There are only 65 "power 5" teams in college football. Basically there were 8 teams on the schedule that would lose a ton of games to G5 competition several of which would be mediocre FCS teams (Bowling Green & New Mexico).

Games vs Virginia Tech were way too competitive. Virginia Tech was ranked 50th+ in F/+. The games vs louisville were back and forth and competitive for several quarters (ND clinging on to 2 possession lead through 3 quarters in that game before finally putting them away with a third score). Louisville finished somewhere in the 40s-50s in F/+.

Clemson's games outside of their near loss to North Carolina were all the equivalent to how ND beat up on New Mexico and Bowling Green. Basically no contest after the 2nd quarter with their 2nd and 3rd teamers in for the majority of the 2nd half.

ND was in way too many competitive games vs way too many bad teams which drove their F/+ ranking down on top of their convincing losses to Georgia and Michigan. They were also on the receiving end of a lot of turnover luck with a hugely disproportionate turnover differential relative to the rest of the league.

edit i had it backwards: virginia & virginia tech were ranked in the mid 40s ... it was Louisville that finished ranked 60.

These teams all got to beat up on poor ACC competition so their record looks much better than the actual quality of their teams/performance this season.

OK so you just proved you don’t watch the games, got it now. If you had watched the games you would have noticed that ND dominated VT and the game was only close due to bad luck and a few bad plays by Book. Also, convincing loss to Georgia? What?!? Did you watch that game? Oh yeah, you didn’t.....far from a convincing loss. Finally, why are you comparing ND’s season to Clemson? We are clearly not in Clemson’s class so that comparison is worthless. I suggest you start actually watch these games and then maybe your posts will be respected a bit more. It would also help if you not look at f/p+ as much.

 

[wetwater]

OK so you just proved you don’t watch the games, got it now. If you had watched the games you would have noticed that ND dominated VT and the game was only close due to bad luck and a few bad plays by Book. Also, convincing loss to Georgia? What?!? Did you watch that game? Oh yeah, you didn’t.....far from a convincing loss. Finally, why are you comparing ND’s season to Clemson? We are clearly not in Clemson’s class so that comparison is worthless. I suggest you start actually watch these games and then maybe your posts will be respected a bit more. It would also help if you not look at f/p+ as much.

The problem with this analysis is that a lot of fans/nd establishment people will now say something like "we are not [enter whatever popular first tier team is at the top of college football at the moment]" but then make the claim that Notre Dame is in the next group or will even suggest they are somewhere close "just a player or two away .. " "just a qb away" .. "just a better playcaller away" is the rhetoric ...

I hope that my posts convey that ND is not only not the popular dominant team at the moment, they are REALLY FAR AWAY from that tier, like not even close. Like the distance from ND and the handful of favorites for playoff spots is the equivalent between Notre Dame and some team ranked on the bubble of 25th.

A team/program on the cusp of that Alabama/Clemson/OSU/LSU tier would be Georgia, Oklahoma, or maybe even a Penn State in 2019.

 

[Kcndmis97]

The problem with this analysis is that a lot of fans/nd establishment people will now say something like "we are not [enter whatever popular first tier team is at the top of college football at the moment]" but then make the claim that Notre Dame is in the next group or will even suggest they are somewhere close "just a player or two away .. " "just a qb away" .. "just a better playcaller away" is the rhetoric ...

I hope that my posts convey that ND is not only not the popular dominant team at the moment, they are REALLY FAR AWAY from that tier, like not even close. Like the distance from ND and the handful of favorites for playoff spots is the equivalent between Notre Dame and some team ranked on the bubble of 25th.

A team/program on the cusp of that Alabama/Clemson/OSU/LSU tier would be Georgia, Oklahoma, or maybe even a Penn State in 2019.

The fact that you claim ND is miles away from the top tier is your opinion only and it depends how you define “close” or how you define “far away”. If ND is Sooooo far away, then how did ND hang with UGA, on the road, at night? Tell me, I’m curious.

Personally I don’t think ND is far away but I don’t think they are super close either....like a couple players away. I believe ND is 2-3 recruiting classes away only if those classes contain 3-4 difference making players with one of them being a QB. So I believe ND is about 8-10 really good players away from truly competing in the top tier.....just my opinion.

 

[Catholicfan95]

The problem with this analysis is that a lot of fans/nd establishment people will now say something like "we are not [enter whatever popular first tier team is at the top of college football at the moment]" but then make the claim that Notre Dame is in the next group or will even suggest they are somewhere close "just a player or two away .. " "just a qb away" .. "just a better playcaller away" is the rhetoric ...

I hope that my posts convey that ND is not only not the popular dominant team at the moment, they are REALLY FAR AWAY from that tier, like not even close. Like the distance from ND and the handful of favorites for playoff spots is the equivalent between Notre Dame and some team ranked on the bubble of 25th.

A team/program on the cusp of that Alabama/Clemson/OSU/LSU tier would be Georgia, Oklahoma, or maybe even a Penn State in 2019.

You know Utah and Wisconsin are ranked ahead of Penn Sate this year in the F+ right?