poewelch84
Well-Known Member
6-0 is consistent.
7-0 actually
6-0 is consistent.
covering the spread 3 out of the last 4 week.7-0 actually
your mama.6-0 is consistent.
they've covered the spread 3 out of the last 4 weeks. the spread was so high against pitt because of their good performances.your mama.
i don't care! they played like crap on saturday and i am disappointed with them .. O freaking K?they've covered the spread 3 out of the last 4 weeks. the spread was so high against pitt because of their good performances.
i don't care! they played like crap on saturday and i am disappointed with them .. O freaking K?
let me address this.nd hasn't won a championship in decades. what exactly are you expecting from them, domination all the way to the championship. if i were an nd fan, i'd just be glad the dark time of nd football is over with, and they are back in the mix.
not sure what you mean by 'written them off'. i haven't written them off either. i just think they stunk against pitt and i suspect they are nowhere near the 4th best team in the nation. i'll be surprised if they win out and amazed if they do well in the post season.I think most Notre Dame fans are disappointed with the game but I haven't written them off yet.
let me address this.
let me explain something to you. i don't know how old you are or when you became a fan. but i became a fan in about 1963. i grew up with parsegian (.836 and who lost 3 games in a season only ONCE and won 2 national championships!)followed by dan devine (.764 and a national championship!)suffered thru gerry faust for 5 seasons! finally with lou holtz (.765 and who never lost more than 3 games and won a national championship)
over 30 years of great football (minus 5 years of notre dame stupidity) and it's been downhill ever since!
so forgive me if i don't look upon kelly's .585 record (plus a 4-8 season) as something to be happy about. hell ... weis was only .020 worse!
i don't know when you came along but i'm thinking our perspectives are somewhat different. your brand of logic means ZERO to me.
you root your way and let me root mine! OK?
did you ever think that pitt just played well?i don't care! they played like crap on saturday and i am disappointed with them .. O freaking K?
nope.did you ever think that pitt just played well?
you are comparing different era's, where environments were different. the scholastic requirements at notre dame are more demanding now than most other big time football programs.
not sure what you mean by 'written them off'. i haven't written them off either. i just think they stunk against pitt and i suspect they are nowhere near the 4th best team in the nation. i'll be surprised if they win out and amazed if they do well in the post season.
different eras have nothing to do with it. all schools are in a different era. we've had many excellent recruiting classes and have made damn little good of them. notre dame has always had tougher requirements than most other schools. it's a piss poor excuse. it's poor coaching. we all see the stupid on field moves every week! kelly takes an extra half season to deduce what the average football fan has already figured out. why defend this guy?
and you're comparing kelly to davie, willingham and weis and doing your case no good at all.
academics requirements are greater at ND than in previous eras, making recruiting more difficult. notre dame has only had 2 consensus all american since 2010, compare that to 14 from alabama.
like i said here 2 years ago, nd would be stupid to change coaches. criticizing is the easiest thing in the world to do. kelly made a bold move and started book even though the team was 3-0, and its paid off.
actually, as i recheck my eyes, he was 6-5-1 in '94 .... also 5-6 in '86 AND 8 - 4 in '87. don't know what i was looking at. doesn't change my point tho.Holtz went 9-4 in 1994.