What say you Domers?

[Nasty_Magician]

It's all about coaching. Notre Dame still recruits well, they still churn out NFLers but for whatever reason they don't put it together on the field. That's a coaching issue.

 

[Vyle203]

I thought both schools had the same academic requirements???

They're similar, and I think Notre Dame is actually more expensive. But I don't think it has quite the prestige attached to it that Stanford does. I still think location plays a part in why they've been able to recruit as successfully as they have.

 

[Rolltide94]

I thought both schools had the same academic requirements???

Technically all schools have the same academic requirements.

Some are just more selective than others.

I just think if your mindset is academics first, football second, you're probably picking Stanford over Notre Dame. I have no empirical evidence to back that up, just a gut feel.

 

[nddulac]

They seem to be happy with mediocrity. However, NBC won't be and then their cash cow will go on to greener pastures. It can't last more than a few more years.

I'm not going to predict what will happen to Notre Dame and NBC ....

But I will point out that people have made the same argument about hotel construction in Las Vegas for the past 70 years or so . . .

 

[nddulac]

Technically all schools have the same academic requirements.

No they don't.

 

[Rolltide94]

No they don't.

I was referring to the the 16 core course, 4 year English 2.0 GPA plus sliding scale ACT mandated by the NCAA. Notre Dame is not "required" to impose any academic standards beyond that.

 

[nddulac]

I was referring to the the 16 core course, 4 year English 2.0 GPA plus sliding scale ACT mandated by the NCAA. Notre Dame is not "required" to impose any academic standards beyond that.

Those are requires for eligibility - not admission. Big difference.

 

[fishinabarrel]

Wisconsin is definitely the better program in recent years. However, I feel like they are pretty much at their ceiling. ND has much more potential

 

[Deep Creek]

Didn't read anything but the title but think it's pretty obvious to everyone that Notre Dame is their own worst enemy.

They seem to be happy with mediocrity.
However, NBC won't be and then their cash cow will go on to greener pastures.
It can't last more than a few more years.

True, but who will draw the most eyeballs nationally or internationally? The domers.

The scuttlebutt is the next round of TV contracts will target the teams that draw the most eyeballs on a more global scale, not regionally. Like it or not, the B1G schools that are "in demand" year in and year out are tOSU, Michigan and Penn State. People on the West Coast and in the South will pay to see those, not so much teams like Purdue, Iowa State, etal.

 

[Wamu]

 

[Deep Creek]

But I don't think it has quite the prestige attached to it that Stanford does.

After being a school teacher/administrator in the El Paso area for 40+ years, believe me when I tell you it is still way above Stanford and similar universities...at least for Catholic students. Not even close.

A great many of the top students would choose ND over Stanford, MIT, Rice, Ivy Leagues, Service Academies, etc because of it being academically prestigeous AND Catholic. Two of my oldest daughter's best friends did exactly that. Thumbed their noses at better offers than what ND was offering just to go to Notre Dame.

That said, you may be 100% correct for non Catholic students.

 

[Rolltide94]

After being a school teacher/administrator in the El Paso area for 40+ years, believe me when I tell you it is still way above Stanford and similar universities...at least for Catholic students. Not even close.

A great many of the top students would choose ND over Stanford, MIT, Rice, Ivy Leagues, Service Academies, etc because of it being academically prestigeous AND Catholic. Two of my oldest daughter's best friends did exactly that. Thumbed their noses at better offers than what ND was offering just to go to Notre Dame.

That said, you may be 100% correct for non Catholic students.

Good point, I did not consider that in my earlier statement regarding Stanford. There are a couple of nuns from St. Dunstan's Elementary looking down on my Protestant butt reproachfully from Heaven.

 

[Smart]

Being a better "program" is an ambiguous term because it can be based on so many things. Yes, Wisconsin is currently more stable and has had a better stretch of football over the past two decades....but....if you had to bet which program would be more stable and win more games over the next 50, would you guess Wisconsin?

Also, which program has a better chance of a national title pretty much any year, even this? It's Notre Dame. Wisconsin is always going to be limited by their talent. They can win 10/11 games but that's as high as they can go. Notre Dame is capable of winning a title and bringing in top talent.

But ultimately, ND has made some really poor coaching hires and that's put them in their current position.

Michigan fans always say things like this. Why on Earth do you think we haven't had the "talent" to complete for a title? Because our recruiting rankings weren't good enough? You'd think you would have figured this out after you looked like an idiot during the Brady Hoke era.

2010 and 2011 Wisconsin were more "talented" than any team Notre Dame has fielded in decades. Both offenses were loaded with future NFL starters. Was that offensive juggernaut that only threw one pass in the second half against you guys but still scored 48 not "talented" because our "untalented" linemen like Kevin Zeitler and Travis Frederick were only 3 star recruits?

Winning with unheralded recruits is hard to do, but as long as we have Chryst, I have every reason to think we can get it done. I fully expect that we will be more "talented," especially on the defensive side and the offensive line, than every team we play this regular season.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Michigan fans always say things like this. Why on Earth do you think we haven't had the "talent" to complete for a title? Because our recruiting rankings weren't good enough? You'd think you would have figured this out after you looked like an idiot during the Brady Hoke era.

2010 and 2011 Wisconsin were more "talented" than any team Notre Dame has fielded in decades. Both offenses were loaded with future NFL starters. Was that offensive juggernaut that only threw one pass in the second half against you guys but still scored 48 not "talented" because our "untalented" linemen like Kevin Zeitler and Travis Frederick were only 3 star recruits?

Winning with unheralded recruits is hard to do, but as long as we have Chryst, I have every reason to think we can get it done. I fully expect that we will be more "talented," especially on the defensive side and the offensive line, than every team we play this regular season.

Wisconsin is very good at finding no-name HS recruits from farming towns and simply pushing over other teams. This is where they succeed and why they have been consistent. That's the best thing you can say about Wisconsin football -- they are consistently good. But Wisconsin is never a great, or elite, team because they're unable to recruit the the elite talent that a team like ND can. ND's problem, like Michigan under Hoke, was/is not talent -- it's coaching. The difference coaching can make can be seen from 2014 Michigan vs. 2015 Michigan. People shit all over the "talent" on Michigan's 5 win 2014 team...those were pretty much the same players that came back and won 10 games the next year.

 

[outofyourmind]

So which is it.
1. A Coaching Problem at Notre Dame.
2. Adequate Talent at Notre Dame.

 

[Smart]

Wisconsin is very good at finding no-name HS recruits from farming towns and simply pushing over other teams. This is where they succeed and why they have been consistent. That's the best thing you can say about Wisconsin football -- they are consistently good. But Wisconsin is never a great, or elite, team because they're unable to recruit the skilled the elite talent that a team like ND can. ND problem, like Michigan under Hoke, was/is not talent -- it's coaching. The difference can be seen from 2014 Michigan vs. 2015 Michigan.

Literally the most efficient offense of the past decade was 2011 Wisconsin by a wide margin. The single most elite offense of your college football viewing lifetime was Wisconsin. Nobody (not Alabama, Oklahoma, USC, Michigan, Ohio State, or whatever other blue blood you can name) has had an offense as good as the one run by our current head coach.

Again, the fact that you are arguing Hoke's teams had more talent than THE MOST EFFICIENT OFFENSE OF THE LAST DECADE or one with 10 OFFENSIVE STARTERS DRAFTED IN THE FIRST FIVE ROUNDS (the only one not, ironically to your position, being a five star recruit) is fucking incredible. You are truly stupid.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

So which is it.
1. A Coaching Problem at Notre Dame.
2. Adequate Talent at Notre Dame.

It's Karma for ND continuing to employee the Ray Rice of coaches.

 

[ericd7633]

Michigan fans always say things like this. Why on Earth do you think we haven't had the "talent" to complete for a title? Because our recruiting rankings weren't good enough? You'd think you would have figured this out after you looked like an idiot during the Brady Hoke era.

2010 and 2011 Wisconsin were more "talented" than any team Notre Dame has fielded in decades. Both offenses were loaded with future NFL starters. Was that offensive juggernaut that only threw one pass in the second half against you guys but still scored 48 not "talented" because our "untalented" linemen like Kevin Zeitler and Travis Frederick were only 3 star recruits?

Winning with unheralded recruits is hard to do, but as long as we have Chryst, I have every reason to think we can get it done. I fully expect that we will be more "talented," especially on the defensive side and the offensive line, than every team we play this regular season.

Our 2013 and 2015 teams would rival those teams in terms of talent. We just didn't have a QB in 2013 because our starter was suspended for the year for being being a dumbass, so we had turnover Tommy all season.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Literally the most efficient offense of the past decade was 2011 Wisconsin by a wide margin. The single most elite offense of your college football viewing lifetime was Wisconsin. Nobody (not Alabama, Oklahoma, USC, Michigan, Ohio State, or whatever other blue blood you can name) has had an offense as good as the one run by our current head coach.

Again, the fact that you are arguing Hoke's teams had more talent than THE MOST EFFICIENT OFFENSE OF THE LAST DECADE or one with 10 OFFENSIVE STARTERS DRAFTED IN THE FIRST FIVE ROUNDS (the only one not, ironically to your position, being a five star recruit) is fucking incredible. You are truly stupid.

Yes, using some random metric Wisconsin was elite. When you actually look at the normal numbers that everyone else uses, Wisconsin ranked:

11th in Rushing offense
61st in Passing offense

Wisconsin also went on to lose 3 games that year. So (like I said) Wisconsin is great at pumping out good teams that peak out with 9-11 wins.

You often repeat the whole "10 drafted offensive starters thing" like Wisconsin had this elite stable of RB's, WR's and QBs. I'm assuming you're referencing the 2011 and 2012 NFL drafts? Of those "10 offensive starters", half were offensive lineman, one was a fullback, one was a TE and two were truly skilled positions -- Russel Wilson and Toon. And we're stretching this by counting Wilson, who spent the majority of his college career elsewhere, coached by other coaches and wanted to simply bolster his NFL draft chances by staying in college one more year.

So like I keep saying, Wisconsin is good at producing good teams with great lineman. I'd take the ND talent any given day and I assume Wisconsin fans would too. If you could swap recruiting classes for 4 years, you wouldn't? The facts don't lie here. With all the good teams Wisconsin produces, when was the last time they sniffed a chance at a national title? IE -- might have been considered the top 2 teams under the BCS or were fighting for a CFB playoff birth? Because Notre Dame went to a title game in the last 10 years.

 

[JuiceTheGator]