In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 795
The place for Irish fans to engage in hardcore discussion about Notre Dame athletics
Talk with Irish fans from around the globe about college football's most storied program
The spot for anything on your mind outside of Notre Dame athletics
The place for Notre Dame fans to trade and exchange tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Dont forget about 1989 and 1990. We were RIGHT THERE in the thick of it til the final bell.
With that talent, Yes you could!!
I'm with the, "It just got easier" crowd. It's probably harder for Notre Dame to win a title in the four-team format than it was for them to win one in the early 90s or before that (the last time they actually had a chance), because there was no No.1 vs. No. 2 championship game established then.
But, when the four-team playoff starts in the future, it will be easier. Under the current system you have to be one of the best two teams in the country to have a shot. In the new system, you only have to be one of the best four teams in the country to have a shot. And once you get into a one-and-done playoff situation any of those fours team is equally likely to win. The men's bball tournament has provided plenty of examples of that.
This post was edited by Dan Murphy 2 years ago
Unfortunately, in 1990 Notre Dame was ranked No. 5 with a 9-2 record, so it doesn't appear they would have made the cut, at least from the outside looking in.
In 1989, I would have like ND's chances better than in 1988.
Yes!! But, wasn't that the year when Miami had 3rd and forever (38 yards +) and made the play. I was there in the O (very ugly) Bowl. BTW, I made a pledge never, NEVER to return to that den of _ _ _ _ (fill in the blank). I think that I broke that pledge and returned for the bowl game with CO. That's when Lou # 1 said; (I think.) "You go bed and wake up National Champs." Memory is fading.
won't be under the current MAC coaches
I found myself in yester-year while reading your post, then I woke up and said to myself, "Self, stop being an arse!" We haven't sniffed the NC picture since 1988 and it certainly isnt going to happen in 2012. Now, 2013, assuming the heir apparent (EG) at QB learns the plays and takes a leadership role in the offense, could have us thinking and even competing in a yester-year type of mode!!
Sorry, didn't know how to delete this so I edited it all out.
This post was edited by Mr Rice128364 2 years ago
Naturally, having to win two is tougher than having to win one. However, getting in as a top four team is much easier than getting in as one of the top two, so I don't see that it's a disadvantage. In fact, given that we won't schedule our way to four wins to start the season, I suspect our chances of a top four finish are six to eight times greater than being in the top two.
While I think Kelly made a lot of mistakes last season, and followed that up with a poor recruiting strategy, I think he learned from every mistake, and has corrected the deficiencies. His staff changes have all been home runs. Heistand is a huge upgrade, Elliot is a tremendous teacher, and Booker is about as good as they come, it would seem, on the trail. Getting Martin into the position in which he belonged from the start, while removing Molnar will benefit the offense enormously.
Finally, if Kelly continues to recruit at the current trajectory, by 2015 we'll have top front line talent and superb depth across the board. A few years back, we all bemoaned Notre Dame's utter inability to recruit top flight DL. Now, we're pretty well stocked and looking to improve still more with Rochelle, Teller, etc. I suspect Jaylon Smith will be Irish, and we'll get some corners this year, and then be able to perhaps be a bit more picky next year.
I think we finally have a football coach on our hands, and I restate what I've said before. When Notre Dame has a top flight coach, it has a top flight program. We'll be contending for BCS appearance more years than not, probably beginning in 2013.
I am curious about something, and I ask this respectfully: Where is this "huge upgrade" business coming from along the offensive line? What is the evidence that we are basing this on beyond just the usual rhetoric?
Brian Kelly used "upgrade" about three times during the press conference when he introduced the new coaches, and frankly it came across as petty.
I understand that's part of the coach speak with any new hiring, but Ed Warinner has proven himself to be a pretty doggone good coach. He was part of constantly overachieving teams at Air Force and was a line coach/coordinator of a Kansas staff that went 12-1 a few years ago. KANSAS!!!! Try going 12-1 and finishing in the top 10 at Kansas sometime. And if Warinner was so bad, why did Urban Meyer — he of two national titles in three years plus a 12-0 season at Utah — hire such chopped liver? Wasn't it just two years ago when Kelly was asked what surprised him the most, his reply was the offensive line that had to find several new starters and seemed to acclimate so well to change. How could that be?
I'm sure Harry Hiestand is a fine coach in his own right, and he too has a fine background. These men are professionals and have been in the business for a couple decades.
Why does there always have to be these shots at predecessors, especially when nothing has been achieved on the field yet? This is why ND fans get mocked so often. They're seen like Jackie Gleason on The Honeymooners — "This time, Alice, I've found the perfect idea! We're going to be rich! — and then it becomes the same old story.
Ed Warinner is a fine, proven coach. Harry Hiestand is a fine, proven coach. They come and they go. Let's move forward and start doing it on the field instead of with constant verbiage trying to convince ourselves that this time we got it right.
"When we're good, I won't have to tell you." — Lou Holtz, circa 1988.
"Where did that come from?" Did I miss something due to my limited time to read the boards? Did someone slip a Freudian drug in your night cap?
Doc, that is one very interesting, insightful and informative post.
Agree 100% with - "do it on the field!!" - mantra. That is a great segua to the theme of this thread. ND is capable of winning it all no matter the number of games. It it weren't for money, power and greed, college football would not be the only sport, game or contest without a playoff. For crying out loud, there is a playoff in spelling.
Eventually there will be a 16 + palyoff around the bowl system. ND will fare well. I will look down from above on game day.
Until then, ND is in the capable hands of Jack & Fr. J. And, no matter what leaves Sir Kelly's lips, the arrow for ND Football & all sports is pointing due North.
Polls are still gigantically biased, ie coaches voting in their own interests, and the biggest part of the BCS formula. Supposedly are going to look at schedule strength, but voters only look at wins and losses unless they play almost nothing but cupcakes like Boise. So our tough schedules might hurt us there unless lose 1 or less.
Still our name allows us more votes which always helps. The biggest conferences should cause more teams to lose, which will help.
Bottomline if we deserve it by record, this will help since it is 2 more spots. If we have no more than 2 losses voters will like us regardless of the competition because of our history. May need more realistic schedule to give us the best shot though or finally put out a really good team. In terms of other good bowls it depends on how well we have to do if they change it at all.
Lou, under a BCS type of computer system that weighs strength of schedule, I believe ND would've made the top 4 in 1990. The human polls had them at 5 with wins @ SEC champ Tennessee, @ P10 champ USC, B10 champ Michigan and Miami. I would think between the SOS component and the computer rankings, that would've bumped us up 1 spot into the top 4 where we would've played #1 Colorado in the semis which we ended up doing anyway and losing 10-9.
This post was edited by simm 2 years ago
My luck w/the Irish 20-6...GO IRISH!!!
Lou, you're right, it's unnecessary, but sometimes there's an undercurrent of personal history that provokes such a shot. Pure speculation in this instance, of course, but there might have been a bit of discord in the house. Even the "upgrade" portion, besides being a possible shot at the departed, might actually be a reflection of Kelly's feeling that he has folks on the same page, now. Who knows? As you say, it's a form of coach speak, but, in truth, not just limited to the coaching profession. Still, it would be nice to see them just take the high road in such matters, and compliment the current staff without reflecting poorly on those who have moved on.
I may not be pretty, but I'm fast.....
POTW 1/31/11 - 2/6/11
I thought the same about the 1990 team, but you never know. The wins were very impressive, but two home losses (one of them to a 5-6 Stanford team) might have kept it where it was.
The final poll had No. 1 Colorado (10-1-1), No. 2 Georgia Tech (10-0-1), No. 3 Miami (9-2) and No. 4 Texas (10-1).
Colorado won a controversial game against Missouri in which it was mistakenly awarded a fifth down, but the computers and human element polls didn't take that into account. Georgia Tech's SOS was low in the ACC, but it couldn't be matched up with Colorado in the Orange Bowl because of the automatic tie-ins to bowls back then. I found it odd that 9-2 Miami was ahead of 9-2 ND when the Irish had defeated Miami 29-20 on Oct. 20.
Would today's polls have had ND in the top 4 in 1990? I can't say that for sure. Miami beat FSU in 2000 — yet it was FSU that was chosen over Miami to play Oklahoma for the national title that year even though both the 'Noles and Hurricanes only lost once.
I would have liked ND's chances more in '89 and '93 — and even '92 — in a four-team playoff than in 1988. That 1990 team was immensely talented but, according to some seniors I talked to, had more a sense of entitlement. Plus, the chemistry was hardly the same between DC Gary Darnell and Holtz the way it was with Barry Alvarez and Holt.
Even as a 9 year old boy, I argued the point to my ever arguing uncle, that Notre Dame indeed deserved to at least split the title. Well, back then I thought it should've been Notre Dame's National Championship outright. I was a little too obsessed with Notre Dame Football and a little biased. (Some things never change). Now I realize it should have been a split. If only they didn't fall behind to "Back up College" Too little too late. That knuckle ball field goal, would prove to be the worst nightmare that I ever has as a kid. Better days to come for the Irish. Good read Lou. Go Irish Go!
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports