Tommy Rees is the luckiest man in the world

[idseer]

It's also amazing how some "fans" make rediculous predictions (like 5 losses last year) and try to justify their wisdom by explaining how lucky ND was, and how that situation could never occur again, or maybe only 1 out of 10 times. This, also in an effort to explain how they could be so wrong. Some fans go out of their way to try to make ND look better than they really are, just like others go out of their way to try to make ND look worse than they really are. I remember last year we were told that there were 5 losses chiseled in stone.

true ... most everyone predicted nd would lose 3 to 5 games. predictions comes from available information and they certainly did not look like they had the horses to do what they did. one preseason poll had them at #24 and the other at #26. fans mostly agreed but hoped they were wrong. so what is your stupid point? that we should no longer go by what our senses tell us? we should just predict perfect seasons cause they happen once in a blue moon? 5 losses last year was certainly NOT a ridiculous prediction (fact is they were just 10 points away from 5 losses altogether). it was only on the slightly lower side of expectations ... and i don't recall anyone chiseling anything in stone. just hyperbole to make your point look more valid. well ... it isn't. you're simply pissed that some nd fans dare to see things more realistically than others. well ... tough shit!

 

[Irish7478]

true ... most everyone predicted nd would lose 3 to 5 games. predictions comes from available information and they certainly did not look like they had the horses to do what they did. one preseason poll had them at #24 and the other at #26. fans mostly agreed but hoped they were wrong. so what is your stupid point? that we should no longer go by what our senses tell us? we should just predict perfect seasons cause they happen once in a blue moon? 5 losses last year was certainly NOT a ridiculous prediction (fact is they were just 10 points away from 5 losses altogether). it was only on the slightly lower side of expectations ... and i don't recall anyone chiseling anything in stone. just hyperbole to make your point look more valid. well ... it isn't. you're simply pissed that some nd fans dare to see things more realistically than others. well ... tough shit!

So you weren't wrong, in fact you were just so right that it only seemed like you were wrong. And those people who predicted one or zero losses were so wrong that it just seemed like they were smart. You are a genius. No matter how things end up, you were right, it just that somtimes you are too right.

 

[idseer]

So you weren't wrong, in fact you were just so right that it only seemed like you were wrong. And those people who predicted one or zero losses were so wrong that it just seemed like they were smart. You are a genius. No matter how things end up, you were right, it just that somtimes you are too right.

which of course means ... you're wrong! so wrong! tell you what ... you go with the folks who predict upsets and i'll go with the folks who don't .. and i'll come out on top of you almost every time.

what a nit to suggest predicting against odds is actually smart lol

 

[craigk217]

USC #1!

Still

 

[Irish7478]

which of course means ... you're wrong! so wrong! tell you what ... you go with the folks who predict upsets and i'll go with the folks who don't .. and i'll come out on top of you almost every time.

what a nit to suggest predicting against odds is actually smart lol

So pick the favorites, and call yourself an expert. Good plan.

 

[Lillyliverd]

"Better" is pretty subjective. They've gotten exactly the type of recruits they need for their system. They have track stars on offense, across the board, every one of their skill players have been better than ours, bar none. Guys like DeAnthony Thomas, Also, consistency again shows here. They've had basically three coaches now running the same system. There isn't much differnce between Belotti, Kelly and the new guy (whatever his name is). Not to mention they have a big sugar daddy in Nike.

We had Willingham with no real offensive strategy, to Weis' "decided schematic advantage" to Kelly and the spread. Changing things up with different coaches and styles every few years is going to have an impact on the depth and development of your players.

Weis' teams were notoriously soft, they weren't conditioned, and thats why they blew 4th quarter leads to teams like UConn & Syracuse whereas last year, ND dominated teams in the 4th quarter.

jjc,

"Better" is sometimes subjective and sometimes not. If I said Notre Dame has better uniforms than Oregon, that is a matter of personal taste. But when I say Oregon has been a better football team than ND for the past 5-6 years, that is a fact.

When I say ND has recruited better than Oregon for the past 5-6 years, it is a fact that ND has had higher ranked recruiting classes than Oregon. You bring up a good point that Oregon has recruited "better" skill position players, but I wonder how many of them were actually higher ranked recruits than the ND skill recruits. It is possible that Oregon developed lesser recruits into "better" players.

The consistency argument is nonsensical. BK is in his 4th year. Most of the players are BK's recruits and most of the players have only played for BK. I don't see this as an excuse for substandard player development or a lack of depth.

 

[whywork2]

idseer,
Do you also go by buzzkill?

 

[purguy12]

the month off argument never works. bama had a month off too. it's a sorry excuse. and the reason we looked better in the second half is because bama took its foot off the throttle.
it's amazing the degree to which fans will go to make themselves feel better about their teams. nd last year was not in bama'a league

Yes but they have been there before.

 

[idseer]

idseer,
Do you also go by buzzkill?

yes, yes i understand. but is it really considered being a buzzkill facing facts? this all started because i pointed out the fact that notre dame was extremely fortunate to go 12 - 0 and play bama in the championship. i stand by that and if it makes me a buzz kill then so be it.
i pull for a win every time they play just as you do. i just don't carry on like everyone knew it was going to happen as some here would like to believe.

 

[jjc2009]

The consistency argument is nonsensical. BK is in his 4th year. Most of the players are BK's recruits and most of the players have only played for BK. I don't see this as an excuse for substandard player development or a lack of depth.

I'll grant you that there has been some regression and that the majority of the roster for the first time this year are Kelly's recruits, but to suggest that there hasn't been player development is a little myopic. Would you agree or disagree that Louis Nix is one of the best, if not the best NT in the country (at least top 5?). He barely played as a freshman and was raw, undisciplined and unconditioned. He is inarguably a better player (and projected first rounder) now than he was 4 years ago.

Mathias Farley is not a safety, but they made him one. He's made a lot of mistakes, but he's made some huge plays too.

TJ Jones was pretty quiet his first 3 years here, but is a very reliable go-to guy this year. Daniels is a better player now than he was when he first arrived.

I'll reiterate that the conditioning on this team is light years ahead of where it was during Weis' tenure and thats paid dividends late in games (see Stanford last year, Pitt last year, USC this year).

I think the big gripe is the failure to develop a consistent QB, and, again, at the risk of being redundant, the circumstances of losing two of your better QBs has hindered that development and forced us to rely on a guy who just doesn't quite have the physical ability.

Year one was a big transition year and it showed, year two had a lot of mental mistakes that were pretty much wiped away and have to a certain extent carried over this year. Year 3 had us in the NC game. A lot of the mistakes from 2011 haven't carried over to this season, and, given the loss of some key personnel, its not unreasonable to expect some drop off. We're poised to finish right about where most expected (9-3) with an outside shot at going 10-2 which would have exceeded most people's expectations.

 

[jjc2009]

yes, yes i understand. but is it really considered being a buzzkill facing facts? this all started because i pointed out the fact that notre dame was extremely fortunate to go 12 - 0 and play bama in the championship.

You're claiming your assertion that ND was "extremely fortunate" is rooted in "facts". Sounds like your opinion bro. 12-0 doesn't happen very often. By that measure, any team that does it is "extremely fortunate".

 

[idseer]

You're claiming your assertion that ND was "extremely fortunate" is rooted in "facts". Sounds like your opinion bro. 12-0 doesn't happen very often. By that measure, any team that does it is "extremely fortunate".

my 'facts' are nd was 48th in total offense. the fact they're in the top 5 in defense is what puts them in the top ten.

 

[Irish7478]

my 'facts' are nd was 48th in total offense. the fact they're in the top 5 in defense is what puts them in the top ten.

Those "facts" also treat Stanford and Oklahoma as equal to Jackson State and Florida Atlantic. Stats don't always tell the whole story, which is why a team that some thought would lose 5 games in the regular season could go undefeated.

 

[idseer]

Those "facts" also treat Stanford and Oklahoma as equal to Jackson State and Florida Atlantic. Stats don't always tell the whole story, which is why a team that some thought would lose 5 games in the regular season could go undefeated.

ok .... 15th out of the top 25. anyway you look at it nd was not much of an offensive power. as i said .. it was their defense that puts them in my top 10

 

[jjc2009]

my 'facts' are nd was 48th in total offense. the fact they're in the top 5 in defense is what puts them in the top ten.

First of all, you didn't cite those stats. You based your opinion on their performance in the Pitt game. How does your referencing their offensive and defensive rankings at all validate your argument that ND was "very fortunate" to be in the NC game? If you had said Oregon and K-State losing the same weekend, I might have bought it, but the fact that they were in the upper 50% of total offense (in fact top 50), and a top 5 defense does no more than confirm that it was more skill than luck that landed us in the NC game. What's the old saying on what wins championships again?

 

[purguy12]

bama is lucky they made it at 11-1.

 

[idseer]

First of all, you didn't cite those stats. You based your opinion on their performance in the Pitt game. How does your referencing their offensive and defensive rankings at all validate your argument that ND was "very fortunate" to be in the NC game? If you had said Oregon and K-State losing the same weekend, I might have bought it, but the fact that they were in the upper 50% of total offense (in fact top 50), and a top 5 defense does no more than confirm that it was more skill than luck that landed us in the NC game. What's the old saying on what wins championships again?

i certainly did NOT base my opinion on one game. i only pointed that one out as an example.

and you ASKED for facts! so i gave you some, but even that is not all that went into my forming my opinion. i watched every game last year and i KNOW what a lucky year it was. this was not a strong team .. as attested to by the fact that the only way they got into the position they got into was by better teams having the misfortune of losing a game. there was still some question as to whether they'd choose 2 teams with one loss for that game. you know as well as i do that nd was considered a big underdog even tho they were undefeated. there was a reason for that.

 

[Irish7478]

i certainly did NOT base my opinion on one game. i only pointed that one out as an example.

and you ASKED for facts! so i gave you some, but even that is not all that went into my forming my opinion. i watched every game last year and i KNOW what a lucky year it was. this was not a strong team .. as attested to by the fact that the only way they got into the position they got into was by better teams having the misfortune of losing a game. there was still some question as to whether they'd choose 2 teams with one loss for that game. you know as well as i do that nd was considered a big underdog even tho they were undefeated. there was a reason for that.

So there was a question as to whether they would take two one loss teams over an undefeated Notre Dame team? Wow, I must have missed that conversation. But luckily the better teams all lost, like just think how lucky we were that that great USC team was unlucky enough to lose six games. Otherwise they would have been in the NC game against who the hell knows. Your logic is flawless.

 

[idseer]

So there was a question as to whether they would take two one loss teams over an undefeated Notre Dame team? Wow, I must have missed that conversation. But luckily the better teams all lost, like just think how lucky we were that that great USC team was unlucky enough to lose six games. Otherwise they would have been in the NC game against who the hell knows. Your logic is flawless.

and you are a waste of everyone's time.

 

[Irish7478]

and you are a waste of everyone's time.

So you actually say that there was a question as to whether ND would make it into the BCS championship game or if it would be two one loss teams. Lets see, ND was ranked #1 in the Coaches poll, #1 in the Harris poll, #1 in every computer ranking. Alabama was #2 in the BCS ranking and Florida was #3 in the BCS poll.

I think you are probably the only one in the country who thought that it would be two one loss teams in the championship game. But that is pretty consistent with every post you have made about ND. So while I may a waste of everyone's time, it's pretty clear that you are definately a waste of every ND fan's time.