Tobias Fünke;852046 wrote:How so?

An 8-5 team returns 18 starters, including 8 on the 23rd-best scoring defense, and has four players on all-American lists is "way too high" at 18? Their coach has a proven track record, so there is reason to believe they'd be good.

So when a certain 7-5 team with a second-year coach with a proven record, is ranked 13th in a preseason poll, did you bitch about that?

I can't say they'll have a great season, no one here knows one way or another, but to say they don't deserve the hype is pretty dumb. Especially so when you don't back it up with anything.

Look at Florida State. Ended the year 10-4 and preseason #5 is alright. However, your post above is ludicrous.... ok?

bigkahuna;852225 wrote:It's not just Auburn. There were 4 teams that jumped those 2 last year even though they were obviously still winning. There's no reason 1 of them shouldn't have been #1 at some point last year.

At what point should they have been #1? Maybe after Boise beat Virginia Tech in the first week, just because there had been no other real games at that point. But they would've plummeted immediately following that when VT was beaten by an FCS school. All of the variables balance throughout the year. Voters have proven that when it comes to the last vote, previous rankings (including preseason and the previous week) don't hold the greatest weight - they evaluate the body of work, which is exactly how it should be. Rankings are fun from week-to-week, but the only important vote is the last one and that has to be based on total resume for that particular season (which is what precluded TCU from the title game) - it isn't about one single win or who you think could play with anyone on a given day because they've won a couple bowl games in five years.

Tiger2003;852122 wrote:Notre Dame will finish the season outside of the Top 25 with a 7-5 record.

That'd be a huge disappointment IMO. I think they'll have a better record than that. Anyways, what 5 games do you see them losing?

Stanford, Michigan, Michigan St, USC, Pitt.

Tiger2003;852509 wrote:Stanford, Michigan, Michigan St, USC, Pitt.

Certainly all losable, but I don't see them losing all 5 of those games. 3-2 would be my guess. Maybe 4-1 with the most likely L coming against Stanford.

killer_ewok;852519 wrote:Certainly all losable, but I don't see them losing all 5 of those games. 3-2 would be my guess. Maybe 4-1 with the most likely L coming against Stanford.

You've been saying shit like this for the past 20 years. When are you going to man up and admit your team is TERRIBLE? They are bad, the end.

sleeper;852559 wrote:You've been saying shit like this for the past 20 years. When are you going to man up and admit your team is TERRIBLE? They are bad, the end.

You've known me for 20 years? LOL

Anyways, I've admitted when they've been terrible. Based on last season, especially how they finished it out, I don't think they're terrible. I think most non-ND fans would agree with that. But I know you've got to keep your act going so I wouldn't expect anything less from you.

23rd best scoring defense, and returning 8 starters. Players who have made all-American lists at safety, receiver, linebacker, and kicker. Ten returning players on offense. Yeah, they're terrible...

Sleeper make a bet or shut the fuck up, the end.

Tobias Fünke;852815 wrote:23rd best scoring defense, and returning 8 starters. Players who have made all-American lists at safety, receiver, linebacker, and kicker. Ten returning players on offense. Yeah, they're terrible...

Sleeper make a bet or shut the **** up, the end.

I already made the mistake of overestimating the strength of schedule that ND has. They don't play anyone except Stanford who's only a flash in the pan. They will lose any big time relevant game and they will never be anywhere near the level of any big time program.

And they are terrible, you know it, I know it, hell even the dog knows it.

So the schedule ranked toughest in the country was overestimated?

enigmaax;852233 wrote:At what point should they have been #1? Maybe after Boise beat Virginia Tech in the first week, just because there had been no other real games at that point. But they would've plummeted immediately following that when VT was beaten by an FCS school. All of the variables balance throughout the year. Voters have proven that when it comes to the last vote, previous rankings (including preseason and the previous week) don't hold the greatest weight - they evaluate the body of work, which is exactly how it should be. Rankings are fun from week-to-week, but the only important vote is the last one and that has to be based on total resume for that particular season (which is what precluded TCU from the title game) - it isn't about one single win or who you think could play with anyone on a given day because they've won a couple bowl games in five years.

I don't necessarily disagree with Auburn and Oregon being 1 and 2 at the end of the season; they both would have made it there. It was inevitable. However Boise and TCU hovering from week to week is where I have issue. It's not the end result, it's some of the events on the way that I have issue with.

sleeper;853025 wrote:I already made the mistake of overestimating the strength of schedule that ND has. They don't play anyone except Stanford who's only a flash in the pan. They will lose any big time relevant game and they will never be anywhere near the level of any big time program.

And they are terrible, you know it, I know it, hell even the dog knows it.

In the words of Ellen Griswold-- SIT DOWN ANDDD SHUT UP!

athlete37;853042 wrote:In the words of Ellen Griswold-- SIT DOWN ANDDD SHUT UP!

Don't you mean Mrs. Crabtree?

Tobias Fünke;853034 wrote:So the schedule ranked toughest in the country was overestimated?

Some people can't handle the truth. Join a conference, and then we can talk about this supposed "toughest schedule in the country" BS.

It'll be intersting to see what these polls look like after week 3 and some high profile matchups early on

sleeper;853276 wrote:Some people can't handle the truth. Join a conference, and then we can talk about this supposed "toughest schedule in the country" BS.

You're a fool. We don't back down from scheduling anyone. In the past 15 years we've scheduled Texas, Ohio State, Washington on multiple occaisions, Nebraska when they were a powerhouse, Tennessee multiple times (and around their NC), LSU, Arizona State, USC, Stanford, Texas A&M, Washington State (when they went 10-2), Penn State, Pittsburgh, Florida State when they were top 10, Michigan, Utah, Nevada, Boston College, Air Force, Oklahoma, West Virginia. In the next few years we have Miami, Oklahoma, Michigan, Texas, Stanford, and more lined up.

athlete37;853339 wrote:You're a fool. We don't back down from scheduling anyone. In the past 15 years we've scheduled Texas, Ohio State, Washington on multiple occaisions, Nebraska when they were a powerhouse, Tennessee multiple times (and around their NC), LSU, Arizona State, USC, Stanford, Texas A&M, Washington State (when they went 10-2), Penn State, Pittsburgh, Florida State when they were top 10, Michigan, Utah, Nevada, Boston College, Air Force, Oklahoma, West Virginia. In the next few years we have Miami, Oklahoma, Michigan, Texas, Stanford, and more lined up.

That's nice and all, but how many of those teams have you beaten? It's been 20 years since ND has beaten a top 10 team, they lose because they aren't any good.

sleeper;853342 wrote:That's nice and all, but how many of those teams have you beaten? It's been 20 years since ND has beaten a top 10 team, they lose because they aren't any good.

Going down that list of regular season games in that time frame, we are 5-0 against Washington, 2-2 against Tennessee, 2-0 against LSU, 2-0 against Arizona State, 5-9 vs. SC, 9-5 against Stanford, 1-1 against A&M, 1-0 against Wazzou, 1-1 vs Penn State, 7-4 v. Pitt, 1-1 v. Florida State, probably a split with Michigan, 1-0 v. Oklahoma, 2-0 v. WVU, 1-0 v. Utah and Nevada.... Like I said, sit down and shut up

Oh and I forgot to add in North Carolina, UCLA, Georgia Tech, and Maryland (coming off a 10-1 season) during that stretch... We had a 6-2 record against those teams during that frame

athlete37;853355 wrote:Going down that list of regular season games in that time frame, we are 5-0 against Washington, 2-2 against Tennessee, 2-0 against LSU, 2-0 against Arizona State, 5-9 vs. SC, 9-5 against Stanford, 1-1 against A&M, 1-0 against Wazzou, 1-1 vs Penn State, 7-4 v. Pitt, 1-1 v. Florida State, probably a split with Michigan, 1-0 v. Oklahoma, 2-0 v. WVU, 1-0 v. Utah and Nevada.... Like I said, sit down and shut up

Thanks for answering my question. None of those teams were in the top 10, thanks for playing.

sleeper;853463 wrote:Thanks for answering my question. None of those teams were in the top 10, thanks for playing.

Top Ten: Texas, Washington, Michigan several times, Tennessee, USC (and I think all but Tennessee in that group were actually top 5). Pitt, Air Force, Florida State, Utah, LSU were all top 15. Penn State was top 20. West Virginia was ranked I believe and I sure Pitt, Purdue and others have been top 20 when we've beaten them. Once again, shut up. Making fun of Notre Dame accurately is a much easier task than you apparently make it.

athlete37;853475 wrote:Top Ten: Texas, Washington, Michigan several times, Tennessee, USC (and I think all but Tennessee in that group were actually top 5). Pitt, Air Force, Florida State, Utah, LSU were all top 15. Penn State was top 20. West Virginia was ranked I believe and I sure Pitt, Purdue and others have been top 20 when we've beaten them. Once again, shut up. Making fun of Notre Dame accurately is a much easier task than you apparently make it.

That's nice and all, zero BCS bowl wins. You're program is garbage.