The state of Notre Dame football.

[Bigdaddydvo]

[ QUOTE ]
dam,

Neutered Fame?

[/ QUOTE ]

If 2008 remotely resembles '07, use this one all you want:

"No-Ty to Blame"

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He hasn't done anything. When he does, I'll credit him for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

We know he can coach, he went 10-3 his first year. (Oh, I'm sorry, he went 9-3, that was some other guy who went 10-3.)



[/ QUOTE ]

Ty also started that year 8-0. Funny, no contract extension.

I also wonder if people were blaming Ty's bad 3rd year at ND on the previous coach. Ummmm. Nope.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, you should give him credit for being 1-7, a home dog to Navy, and getting a puff piece passed on the AP wire by a fellow alum. That is skillz.


[/ QUOTE ]

He's a helluva salesman.

I'm still trying to figure out what the big deal is about him. It sure isn't based on perfomance.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey Bernie,

Let me tell you a little bit about the wonderful 8-0 start Ty had at ND in 2002, you know, the one you love to site as "OMG Ty started this well at ND and no contract extension." Through 8 games including their win at FSU on 26 October 2002, they had a plus 8 turnover margin, with 78 points scored off of turnovers, with 5 defensive touchdowns. Now, this being a poker board and all, I think you understand that luckboxing points at that rate is certainly unsustainable. The 2002 Irish featured an erratic and inconsistent offense that was consistently bailed out by big defensive plays. In truth, they were a couple of lucky bounces away from being 5-3. Once the team's short-term lucky breaks evened out to around its expected long term average, ND's season win totals came down to an expected 5 or 6 per season. After that 8-0 start you mention ad nausium, largely accomplished through an unsustainably high concentration of turnovers and defensive scores, the Irish dropped to 13-16 for the remainder of TW's tenure.

Expect similar mediocrity in Washington (your 20-6 home loss to previously winless Stanford at the end of last year is a good indication of what's to come).

There is no comparison to the 2005 Irish, which regularly blew opponents out, and only lost in OT to MSU, USC with the "Bush Push", and played OSU close for 58 minutes in the Fiesta Bowl until the Buckeyes put on a 2nd TD lead w/2 minutes left.

[/ QUOTE ]

[DesertCat]

[ QUOTE ]

I disagree that the problem is ineptness at rating players, although you are right that top 10 classes don't equate to top 10 finishes (just ask Bob Stoops last year). The problems with any recruit are due to injuries, academic issues, off the field issues, and development. Last year, oklahoma had players in trouble with the law with their starting qb who ended up kicked off the team. I think they even lost their second stringer, AP was hurt as well. End result of injuries and off the field problems - they were not a good football team. Experts do not predict academic and violence problems, although maybe they should?

Secondly, some coaches are better than others at player development. I like to bring up Jim Tressel here for turning AJ Hawk and Nick Mangold (3 star/ 1 star per Scout) into first round NFL draft picks (and starters now). Lloyd Carr has issues turning 5 starts into first day picks...

So scouting services I think separate atheletes well based on speed, strength, and other tangibles. But it will always be up to coaches to look for the intangibles in their recruits and develop them for the college game. I think domers fears CW is not a good developer of talent, because he should have enough talent to field a good team this year. Are domers now citing failures in the recruiting services for their bad results this year?? Does TW own scout.com or something??

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that scouting services can only rate a kid on how he performs at age 17. They can't tell how much faster , stronger and bigger he'll get. Or how he'll respond to college stresses. Whether he'll fail academically, or end up being a disciplinary problem. Whether he's coachable. Whether he will develop/maintain the level of skills in blocking, tackling, throwing, catching, route running, pass coverage, needed to be a stud college player. It's difficult to adjust for strength of competition. And intangibles are just as important as raw numbers. In the end it's a total crap shoot.

When scouts tested 1980 Southern California high school baseball prospects, Billy Beane dusted Darnell Coles and Cecil Espy in the 60 yard dash by at least three steps. Coles was a sprinter signed to play WR at UCLA who ended up playing 14 years in the majors. Espy was faster than Coles and ended playing 8 years in the majors with over 100 steals. Billy wasn't just faster, he was also bigger, 6'4" 180 lbs. He ran the 60 in 6.4 seconds. As a junior he pitched a two hitter, stole four bases and set a california school boy record with three triples all in the same game. He hit .500 as a junior. His arm was so strong Stanford recruited him to replace John Elway as their next quarterback.

The head scout of the Mets wanted to take Billy instead of Darryl Strawberry with the #1 pick that year, but the team was afraid he'd go to college. They got him later in the first round. Billy's major league career peaked as a part-time backup over six years, hitting .211.

While football skills aren't so esoteric as the ability to hit a baseball, guys like AJ Hawk show that measurables are only part of the picture. The margin of error with high school athletes is immense.

[Bigdaddydvo]

Here is an excellent post from NDNation which highlights ND's youth and inexperience compared to other major programs. 1-7 is 1-7, but I'm unwilling to write Weis off until these guys get a chance to learn and develop.

[ QUOTE ]
The problems that Notre Dame has encountered in 2007 are not solely related to the youth of the roster. Coach Weis and his staff made a terrible error by not having full contact practices until after the Michigan game. It is likely the most damaging error that Weis has made in his football career. When you're record is 1-7 you deserve almost all the criticism, valid or imagined, that you get.

There are, however, other factors at play. One is the schedule. Jeff Sagarin currently has it rated the 2nd most difficult schedule in the country.

Another is the lack of seniors, both on the team and in the starting lineup. For all intents and purposes this team is missing an entire class of players. Notre Dame has a total of 16 fourth and fifth year seniors. USC has 28. Boston College has 17 fifth year seniors alone.

Here is how the breakdown of starts compares between the Irish, Boston College, USC, and Penn State. Those teams are the highest ranked of ND's opponents.

I am working on getting the data for Michigan, Georgia Tech, etc. But I can tell you with the utmost confidence that those numbers will look a great deal like what I'm about the show you.


The numbers are the amount of starts that players in each class have accumulated thus far in the season:

NOTRE DAME - eight games played
Fr - 15
So - 48
Jr - 45
Sr - 21
5th- 47

SOUTHERN CAL - seven games played
Fr - 5
So - 22
Jr - 36
Sr - 39
5th- 52

BOSTON COLLEGE - seven games played
Fr - 7
So - 19
Jr - 24
Sr - 12
5th- 92

PENN STATE - eight games played
Fr - 1
So - 25
Jr - 57
Sr - 79
5th- 14

Put another way, each team has started these amounts of fourth and fifth year seniors per game:

ND - 8.5
PSU - 12.88
SC - 13
BC - 14.86

And here is the average number of starts per game for freshmen and sophomores:

ND - 7.9
PSU - 3.25
SC - 3.9
BC - 3.7

STARTS:

NOTRE DAME OFFENSIVE LINE
Fr - 0
So - 16
Jr - 16
Sr - 0
5th- 8

SOUTHERN CAL OFFENSIVE LINE
Fr - 3
So - 3
Jr - 1
Sr - 11
5th- 17

PENN STATE OFFENSIVE LINE
Fr - 1
So - o
Jr - 8
Sr - 29
5th- 2

BOSTON COLLEGE OFFENSIVE LINE
Fr - 7
So - 0
Jr - 5
Sr - 4
5th- 19

Also, at QB here is how the starts shake out:

NOTRE DAME
Fr - 6
So - 1
Jr - 1
Sr - 0
5th- 0

USC
Fr - 0
So - 0
Jr - 2
Sr - 0
5th- 5

PENN STATE
Fr - o
So - 0
Jr - 0
Sr - 8
5th- 0

BC
Fr - 0
So - 0
Jr - 0
Sr - 0
5th- 7


[/ QUOTE ]

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
1) How would you rate Ty's performance at ND?

[/ QUOTE ]

It was ok. Nothing atrocious. Not near as bad as domers like to think. But then records don't mean anything or Weis would easily be on the hot seat this year.

[ QUOTE ]
2) You keep saying Ty has accomplished more at Washington than CW has at ND. Explain how.

[/ QUOTE ]

You really got the blinders on?

He's accomplished more in college football than Weis.

But in comparison, look at both teams and where they started(UW was in much worse shape). Look at them now. One team was left with much worse players to start with. One is 1-7 and not even competetive, the other is 2-5 and very close in many games against the toughest schedule in the nation(not to mention showing marked improvement over every year Ty has been here).

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Are we watching the same Washington team? Going to miss a bowl game for 3 straight years.

[/ QUOTE ]

You really haven't watched any Washington football the last 4 years, have you? You have no idea just how bad they were when he took over. They've shown obvious improvement every year. Unless all your scope is limited to is the final score w/o ever actually watching a game.


[ QUOTE ]
ND will play Washington next year and we'll see a match-up of Weis recruits and Willingham recruits. Hopefully it'll put that argument to bed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure if UW wins NDNation will blame it on anything else but their messiah.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
The day ND starts improving is the day they quit talking about or obsessing over Ty Willingham.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be a step in the right direction.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Apparently you didn't see Husky football the couple years before Ty got there.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you still think you should have Gilbertson? After all, he only had two years, and teams can improve a lot from year to year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gilbertson sucked. Flat out. His teams quit on him and he was a terrible head coach. I watched him get outcoached game after game.

He sucked at Cal as HC before that.

He did inherit a bad situation. He was really only meant as an interim. But the players still weren't really responding to him at all. They were pathetic to watch. Low point was losing to Nevada at home. They got pounded that last season, game after game, with no real help in sight.

b

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Here is an excellent post from NDNation which highlights ND's youth and inexperience compared to other major programs. 1-7 is 1-7, but I'm unwilling to write Weis off until these guys get a chance to learn and develop.

[ QUOTE ]
The problems that Notre Dame has encountered in 2007 are not solely related to the youth of the roster. Coach Weis and his staff made a terrible error by not having full contact practices until after the Michigan game. It is likely the most damaging error that Weis has made in his football career. When you're record is 1-7 you deserve almost all the criticism, valid or imagined, that you get.

There are, however, other factors at play. One is the schedule. Jeff Sagarin currently has it rated the 2nd most difficult schedule in the country.

Another is the lack of seniors, both on the team and in the starting lineup. For all intents and purposes this team is missing an entire class of players. Notre Dame has a total of 16 fourth and fifth year seniors. USC has 28. Boston College has 17 fifth year seniors alone.

Here is how the breakdown of starts compares between the Irish, Boston College, USC, and Penn State. Those teams are the highest ranked of ND's opponents.

I am working on getting the data for Michigan, Georgia Tech, etc. But I can tell you with the utmost confidence that those numbers will look a great deal like what I'm about the show you.


The numbers are the amount of starts that players in each class have accumulated thus far in the season:

NOTRE DAME - eight games played
Fr - 15
So - 48
Jr - 45
Sr - 21
5th- 47

SOUTHERN CAL - seven games played
Fr - 5
So - 22
Jr - 36
Sr - 39
5th- 52

BOSTON COLLEGE - seven games played
Fr - 7
So - 19
Jr - 24
Sr - 12
5th- 92

PENN STATE - eight games played
Fr - 1
So - 25
Jr - 57
Sr - 79
5th- 14

Put another way, each team has started these amounts of fourth and fifth year seniors per game:

ND - 8.5
PSU - 12.88
SC - 13
BC - 14.86

And here is the average number of starts per game for freshmen and sophomores:

ND - 7.9
PSU - 3.25
SC - 3.9
BC - 3.7

STARTS:

NOTRE DAME OFFENSIVE LINE
Fr - 0
So - 16
Jr - 16
Sr - 0
5th- 8

SOUTHERN CAL OFFENSIVE LINE
Fr - 3
So - 3
Jr - 1
Sr - 11
5th- 17

PENN STATE OFFENSIVE LINE
Fr - 1
So - o
Jr - 8
Sr - 29
5th- 2

BOSTON COLLEGE OFFENSIVE LINE
Fr - 7
So - 0
Jr - 5
Sr - 4
5th- 19

Also, at QB here is how the starts shake out:

NOTRE DAME
Fr - 6
So - 1
Jr - 1
Sr - 0
5th- 0

USC
Fr - 0
So - 0
Jr - 2
Sr - 0
5th- 5

PENN STATE
Fr - o
So - 0
Jr - 0
Sr - 8
5th- 0

BC
Fr - 0
So - 0
Jr - 0
Sr - 0
5th- 7


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[TomCollins]

Isn't it Weis's fault that the younger guys never got playing time? I guess not in fantasyland.