The state of Notre Dame football. - Page 5

shemp · #41 09-20-2007, 07:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is there one of those conferences that this year's ND team would stand a chance in?

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly, I think ND could struggle a bit playing Div. 2 schools this year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Boy. Ty must've really screwed'em!

deacsoft · #42 09-20-2007, 07:54 PM

Dude, I'm not blaming Willingham. I really liked Willingham. I was sorry to see him go. But I don't think race had anything to do with it. I think having two straight seasons of being .500 or less (5-7, 6-6) had a lot to do with it. I'm also not blaming the other things you listed. Though they do contribute in ways to their struggles as of late. I'm pretty certain I stated in my OP that I place the blame on Weis.

The following may have also contributed to Willingham's departure... [ QUOTE ]
Notre Dame under Willingham lost by at least 30 points 5 times. For perspective, in the previous 40 seasons (1961-2000), Notre Dame lost by at least 30 points a total of 4 times

[/ QUOTE ]

Gregatron · #43 09-20-2007, 07:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, I'm not blaming Willingham. I really liked Willingham. I was sorry to see him go. But I don't think race had anything to do with it. I think having two straight seasons of being .500 or less (5-7, 6-6) had a lot to do with it.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm honestly glad to see a ND fan say this.

damaniac · #44 09-20-2007, 08:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Notre Dame under Willingham lost by at least 30 points 5 times. For perspective, in the previous 40 seasons (1961-2000), Notre Dame lost by at least 30 points a total of 4 times

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank God Weis put a stop to that.

shemp · #45 09-20-2007, 08:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, I'm not blaming Willingham. I really liked Willingham. I was sorry to see him go. But I don't think race had anything to do with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

If only he would've gone 10-3 his first year he might have gotten that 9 year contract like the White Man.

[ QUOTE ]
I think having two straight seasons of being .500 or less (5-7, 6-6) had a lot to do with it. I'm also not blaming the other things you listed.

[/ QUOTE ]

These excuses are routinely trotted out by domers.

I'm really not invested in this-- just derive a guilty pleasure from tweakin Irish fans.

NozeCandy · #46 09-20-2007, 08:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So let's suppose that, say, Michigan St is a team without a bunch of top 30 recruiting years. Did Ty leave enough in the cupboard for a genius football coach to beat them?

Purely a hypothetical question.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both members of ESPN's PTI say, "Yes!". Despite being 14 point underdogs at home quite a few "experts" have ND winning on Saturday vs Michigan St. Because I'm a Notre Dame nut I pick them to win every game. But I don't bet on it. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, seriously. I love how they gave zero rationale for the pick besides, "Well these guys are tired of hearing how bad they are for a week." Well, MSU has had 17 sacks through 3 games. Notre Dame can't block a volleyball. MSU has the same two running backs that beat the living hell of out ND last year. I just don't see how ND wins this game.

einbert · #47 09-20-2007, 09:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
UCLA, Stanford, and Boston College as possible wins

[/ QUOTE ]
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

MicroBob · #48 09-20-2007, 09:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So let's suppose that, say, Michigan St is a team without a bunch of top 30 recruiting years. Did Ty leave enough in the cupboard for a genius football coach to beat them?

Purely a hypothetical question.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both members of ESPN's PTI say, "Yes!". Despite being 14 point underdogs at home quite a few "experts" have ND winning on Saturday vs Michigan St. Because I'm a Notre Dame nut I pick them to win every game. But I don't bet on it. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Calling the PTI guys "experts" is beyond stretching it.
I don't think that ESPN refers to them as expert-analysts nor do I think that even they would refer to themselves as experts.
They very much act like, "hey, we're kinda just guessing here and having a good time" a lot of the time and that very much seemed to be the case when they picked ND.

bottomset · #49 09-20-2007, 09:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Notre Dame under Willingham lost by at least 30 points 5 times. For perspective, in the previous 40 seasons (1961-2000), Notre Dame lost by at least 30 points a total of 4 times

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank God Weis put a stop to that.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah Weis could top Willingham this year alone lol

damaniac · #50 09-20-2007, 10:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Notre Dame under Willingham lost by at least 30 points 5 times. For perspective, in the previous 40 seasons (1961-2000), Notre Dame lost by at least 30 points a total of 4 times

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank God Weis put a stop to that.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah Weis could top Willingham this year alone lol

[/ QUOTE ]

Stat of absolutely no value whatsoever: ND has lost by 20 or more points 6 times since Charlie Weis was hired in 2005.

Michigan has lost by 20 or more points 7 times since Bo Schembechler was hired in 1969.

No real point (although again, thanks for sucking worse than us this year), but really I don't know why a logical Domer can't see why this isn't a huge problem. This assumes a logical Domer exists, which if you read NDNation at all you might start to doubt.