Rockne's Roundtable

I have stated before that a good, strong, tough schedule brings out the best in Notre Dame football. I'm tired of scheduling Tulsa, USF, etc at home and losing to them. How many times have you heard the NBC announcers state "so and so is excited to be stepping foot inside Notre Dame Stadium for the first time". Those teams ALWAYS bring their "A" game. When ND plays those types of teams, there is a tremendous let-down on the players' part, which in some cases, results in a loss.

Oh, ND plays a tough schedule...boo hoo. We won the tile in 1988 playing the toughtest schedule. Last year LSU started the season playing Oregon on a neutral field. they also played at WVU and at Alabama. They had home games with UF, Auburn (defending champs) and Tennessee and they played Georgia in the SEC title game. So now ND is supposed to cry because we play BYU...or because Stanford is suddenly difficult? A few years back Stanford was a one win team. They were not so hard then. They hired a great coach and things turned around for them and they went from 16-40 under their previous two coaches to a program that finishes with one loss and a win against Va Tech in the BCS bowl game. Harbaugh also beat USC three out of four times. I hope ND is able to hire their own version of Harbaugh one day instead of whining about the schedule.

ND became known because they played any team anywhere. A tough schedule is a HUGE part of their tradition and why So many people love the school. High academic standards and winning a tough schedule IS Notre Dame football. I want to see a schedule like this every year. Even if it means losing a few games. I would not want to win a NC if we did so after playing an easy schedule. USC, according to many, have a shot at a national championship this year. And, whenever it is discussed, they always bring up their favorable schedule. What they are saying is, their schedule is easy enough for them to go undefeated. Who would want that?

John, I can't speak for Jason. However, I'm not sure he was implying that LSU had "weak" schedule. You'd have to be crazy to make that argument against a team that essentially played 4 games against borderline top 5 teams, including 2 against the best, with another 2 games against borderline top 10 teams.

However, I think Jason is valid in pointing out that while LSU's schedule featured some incredible peaks, they also had their fair share of valleys. NW St, Ole Miss, Kentucky, and WKU are glorified Bye weeks.

It is a matter of opinion whether a marathon type schedule (featuring a steady grind of solid to great opponents) or a more volatile schedule (one like LSU's with extreme peaks and valleys) is more difficult. So, I won't make the argument one way or the other. However, I think the strength of a schedule is determined, not by a handful of your hardest opponents, but by its complete make-up.

Our 2012 slate seems to be the best (or worst depending on how you view things) of both worlds. We have some pretty extreme peaks, but we don't have as many obvious valleys. Obviously, this is all a guess at this point, as we won't know how tough a schedule truely is until after the season, once the results are final.

Don't call Ole Miss a weakness when they play LSU. As Stephen A. would say, "Don't be so disrespectful!"

While the four opponents you mentioned were clearly below average in 2011, I'm not sure you can compare them with the four I mentioned on LSU's schedule, which include an FCS opponent and arguably 3 of the 20 worst FBS teams. While I do expect Wake to be worse in 2012 (remember they bowled in 2011), I think the other three will improve, further removing them from the realm of comparison.

Regardless, I'm not making an argument for or against our 2012 schedule. I was simply pointing out what I believed to be valid criteria in evaluating a team's schedule.

Personally, I really like our 2012 schedule. It makes the season more exciting for the fans, IMO. I also agree that this is the type of schedule that can propel a team into the championship picture.

This is off topic, a bit, but I think this schedule is actually more manageable than 2011. Again, I realize this is all just speculation until the season is over. But I am willing to go on record with that statement.

Just play and win the games.

I am quite proud of ND's schedule this year, certainly not whining, and I hope it looks more like this every year.

I do have a question for anyone: was it shortly after the season where Bowden got the NC nod even though we had beaten them on the field, due to our loss in the last seconds to BC? I have often wondered if the scheduling philosophy at ND changed when it became clear that strength of schedule was not highly considered in the votes for the NC.

Thoughts about this, anyone?