Rockne's Roundtable

I think I might stick with what we got.

If we get physically molested by USF like that, my outlook for the season is a lot bleaker. Like John H said in another thread, physically we're getting there. Mentally, we still look like a team that's used to losing 6 games a year. Believe it or not, that's still progress from where we were a year ago though. The rebuild is going slower than we hoped, but it's a rebuild nonetheless.

Winning that game in the fashion USF did would have just been a paper victory to me. It would have clouded a lot of deficiencies that would have inevitably been exposed later in the year. Given the nature of college football, it's not about the wins and losses. Perception plays the biggest role, and I think the lasting perception of this game for the voters will be that we simply beat ourselves.

Great post.

But "stats are for losers" - I will take the W and the bad feelings. It's like skulling a shot to two feet for birdie; I'll take the tap in and go to the next hole.

IFR - I think that is a great way to view this game in hindsight. Yes, Jim, stats might be for losers, but those stats were particularly telling. I think that IFR's perspective brings that nicely to light. Out of all the bad that happened on Saturday, there was an awful lot of good bubbling underneath.

Saturday night will certainly provide us with answers as to where we go from here.

I'm the opposite on the golf course. If I'm hitting the ball well and I blow a par then I'm angry and the next hole becomes a blow up hole. If I get a lucky par, I start to get some confidence and play better.

Hopefully this team doesn't have a temper like me and they do bounce back next week knowing they're the better team.

That's a good point. People will definitely have differing feelings after something like that (or what happened on Saturday). It's Kelly's job to get everyone on the same page and convince them all that Saturday was simply a fluke. He needs to coach these kids up and get their confidence back up going into Michigan. He did it last year after Tulsa. Let's see if he can do it again.

We lost because we played like pooh when it counted. Fumbles, interceptions, and stupid penalties (Harrison Smith can you hear me?)
We moved the ball well until it counted. We couldn't catch a punt (what the hell was up with that?)
We lost not because we were outplayed, we lost because we couldn't make the plays when it mattered.
I am moving on.
Muck Fichigan.

We had a defense that played pretty darn well on Saturday. We need to tighten up containment and maybe get a little more aggressive on certain coverages, but it was a very good effort. I know, we didn't have enough sacks or pressures, but Daniels got the ball out to his receivers quickly. Our offense put up 508 total yards and we had a RB rush for over 100 yards. Defenses are going to have to find creative ways to stop Floyd, and that will open up other areas. Yes, we need to improve our short yardage offense. There are the makings of a very good team (minus the blunders).

I, personally, cannot take anymore squeak-by games where we play horribly. We did not play horribly Saturday. We made a bunch of horrible mistakes. If the game numbers were reversed and we snuck one by on the scoreboard, I would be very nervous about the rest of the year. I am not right now. Bring on Michigan!

GO IRISH!!!!!!!!!!!!

IFR,

Interesting perspective - I'd agree that our team has some positives to build on and I'd rather be building on positives than starting from the standpoint of "nothing is working" and "our entire team sucks." That being said, I disagree that you could characterize USF as their entire team sucking. They didn't turn the ball over and their QB played well enough to beat a ranked team on the road. So, while they were outgained in yardage and they might have lost the battle of statistics, they also have some positives to build on - including a victory.

Great post and perspective. I would have to agree that 0-1 under these circumstances is preferable to 1-0 under those outlined. Sometimes bad things happen to good teams, which results in a loss (see: Saturday). For me, I'd rather know we have a good product capable of playing well than one that gets by on luck. Someone mentioned the San Diego State opener a few years ago, and I think it's apt. I would also mention the 2002 team which was very fortunate to open the season as they did. A number of those games should have been losses. As the season wore on, with a few exceptions, that team showed the good fortune it experienced early on was unsustainable and it fell at the end. That's the other part of this argument, I'd rather have a fundamentally sound team which slips early due to correctable mistakes, but is well-positioned for the long haul.

KingSol wrote: "...and their QB played well enough to beat a ranked team on the road."

I guess that is where we are seeing things differently, King. True - he didn't turn the ball over. But he wasn't on the winning side because he didn't turn the ball over; he was on the winning side because the other team self-destructed. Their QB didn't cause any of Notre Dame's errors.

Just take away one turnover. Just one and make us eat the other four. Let us score on that opening drive and take away the seven they got for it. That alone and all of a sudden their QB didn't play well enough to beat a ranked team on the road...yet he hadn't even seen the field yet.

There was a 14-point swing before anybody on their offense even stepped on the field. Notre Dame beat Notre Dame. I can not think of a more clear-cut domination in a loss in recent memory. I'm sure Lou can. None of the turnovers were even because of good defensive plays. All Notre Dame mistakes.

We dominated - and that's why I feel better after this loss moreso than I would had we won USF-style.