| |
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Reputation:96
Level:Superstar
Since:Aug 14, 2006
|
You're a 3-9 team with a crappy QB, and a terrible coach. Your program is that bad right now, and it's not going to get better.The first 2 years under Weis(2005 and 2006, a long time ago, i know) ND was a combined 19-6 with 2 BCS appearances. Last year, ND was indeed 3-9. Funny, though, that you are DELUSIONAL enough to look at those stats and say weis is a "terrible coach" based on the one bad year, while ignoring the 2 good ones. And look at ND's football program, fresh of one terrible year, and say its basically dead. Even though they have been to 2 BCS bowls in 3 years(how many has rutgers been in, since your program is obviously doing so much better than ND?). And that doesnt even take into account NDs recruiting over the past few years.
Btw, there have been a lot of stupid things said on both sides of this argument. Im not agreeing with everything the other ND fans have said, but this comment above is insane.
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Dec 30, 2006
|
|
The first 2 years under Weis(2005 and 2006, a long time ago, i know) ND was a combined 19-6 with 2 BCS appearances. Last year, ND was indeed 3-9. Funny, though, that you are DELUSIONAL enough to look at those stats and say weis is a "terrible coach" based on the one bad year
Yea, but Weis was coaching TY WILLINGHAMS recruits those first two years. Weis finally had a QB he had picked up and guess what, he lead them to a great 3-9 season. The equivalent is saying Larry Coker was a good coach because he led the Hurricanes to two straight national championships, but played mostly Butch Davis recruits. So saying Weis was a good coach because he had very good players already under him is absurd.
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Dec 1, 2006
|
Even though they have been to 2 BCS bowls in 3 years(how many has rutgers been in, since your program is obviously doing so much better than ND?).That's apples and oranges, my friend. All Notre Dame has to do is win their military trifecta, and win one out of their three games between USC, Penn State, and Michigan, and they're in, and they get their undeserved BCS spot.
How do I know it was undeserved? Losing by a combined score of 75-34 pointed me in the right direction.
Rutgers (or any other conference team, really) has to win their conference. That means they have to win almost every week, or they have no shot. If you don't win your conference, you basically have to go the entire year with one loss or you won't get an at-large.
Just because you made BCS bowls doesn't mean you should have been there. I think the play on the field showed that they really shouldn't have been there, and wouldn't have been, if they played in a conference.
|
|
|
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Apr 9, 2007
|
|
Keep on playing MEAC and you will remain a bottom feeder.
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Reputation:96
Level:Superstar
Since:Aug 14, 2006
|
Yea, but Weis was coaching TY WILLINGHAMS recruits those first two years.If you are going to use that weak excuse, then how cant you blame 2007 on Willingham, whos recruiting classes left a leadership/talent gap in last years senior class?
Weis finally had a QB he had picked up and guess what, he lead them to a great 3-9 season.He had a true freshman QB that wasnt playing at 100% the entire year. And he was replacing one of the greatest QBs in ND history. With pretty much a brand new offensive unit around him. Weis is awful because his team didnt thrive in these circumstances. Right. And thats all his fault, that Ty didnt recruit well, but he gets no credit for winning with Ty's good recruits. What a joke.
So saying Weis was a good coach because he had very good players already under him is absurd.Almost as absurd as saying he is a bad coach because Ty didnt recruit at the end of his tenure, right?
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Reputation:96
Level:Superstar
Since:Aug 14, 2006
|
That's apples and oranges, my friend. All Notre Dame has to do is win their military trifecta, and win one out of their three games between USC, Penn State, and Michigan, and they're in, and they get their undeserved BCS spot.Yeah, because ND plays all 3 military schools every year. And rutgers has such a strong schedule....
How do I know it was undeserved? Losing by a combined score of 75-34 pointed me in the right direction.So Ohio State didnt deserve to be in the national championship either of the last 2 years, despite only losing 1 regular season game? Not to mention that ND got paired with 2 unfavorable opponents(OSU was in the middle of about an 18 game winning streak, and LSU won the NC the next year).
Rutgers (or any other conference team, really) has to win their conference. That means they have to win almost every week, or they have no shot.
Even though WVU lost twice last year, and made a BCS bowl? Just like Georgia, USC, Oklahoma, VT and basically every BCS team last year(all conference schools).
If you don't win your conference, you basically have to go the entire year with one loss or you won't get an at-large.Didnt illinois lose 3 and get an at-large? Didnt georgia loss 2 and get an at-large?
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Dec 1, 2006
|
He had a true freshman QB that wasnt playing at 100% the entire year. And he was replacing one of the greatest QBs in ND history. With pretty much a brand new offensive unit around him. Weis is awful because his team didnt thrive in these circumstancesOh boo-hoo. Clausen was supposed to be the second coming. It's might convenient that whenever a Notre Lame QB plays poorly, he's at "less than 100%". What I don't understand is how you can say we have "no QB" when we're returning a 3,000 yard passer, while your QB has proven absolutely nothing on the field. Sounds like a double standard to me.
Don't give me that "brand new offensive unit" crap, either. Your head coach is SUPPOSED to be an "offensive guru". It sure didn't look it last year.
With the offensive recruiting classes he's had over the last couple years, there is no excuse for the offense to be as putrid as it was.
In 2007, you had 1 5-star and 8 4-star offensive players in your class, including the supposed #1 recruit in the country..
In 2006, you had 3 5-star and 7 4-star offensive players in your class.
In 2005, you had 5 4-star offensive players in your class.
Any other coach given that much talent in such a short span would win a title. You barely won a couple games.
With that kind of talent on the field, you'd have to do an absolutely abominable job as an "offensive genius" coach to not make a bowl.
You'd have to be even worse to only win HALF the games you need to become bowl eligible.
I can't even fathom how terrible a job you'd have to be as a coach who makes his money with offense to be SHUT OUT twice, and score 14 points or fewer on FOUR other occasions with that kind of talent on the field.
And don't complain about the "true freshmen at less than 100%" either. Because he wasn't the only QB on the roster. You guys signed a top 20 QB in 2005, and a top 10 QB in 2006 prior to that. Why couldn't they help you either? Depth was not an issue for this team.
That's just an excuse, and a bad one at that. If you didn't feel Clausen gave you the best chance to win, he wouldn't have been in there. The problem is everyone else laid an egg before him.
Almost as absurd as saying he is a bad coach because Ty didnt recruit at the end of his tenure, right?I may be mistaken, but didn't Ty leave you 11 future NFL players who were juniors when he was fired?
You give a 5 year old 11 future NFL players in one class (plus including Tom Zbikowsi and Jeff Samardija), and he could win at least ONE bowl game.
Yeah, because ND plays all 3 military schools every year. And rutgers has such a strong schedule....I sincerely apologize. You guys don't have to beat Army every year. You only have to beat TWO of the service academies to get to the BCS.
Even though WVU lost twice last year, and made a BCS bowl? Just like Georgia, USC, Oklahoma, VT and basically every BCS team last year(all conference schools). West Virginia won their conference. Same thing with Oklahoma, USC, and VT. Thank you for proving my point.
Georgia probably should have been in the national title game. Almost every expert said that they were probably the second best team in the country.
Didnt illinois lose 3 and get an at-large? Didnt georgia loss 2 and get an at-large?Honestly, do you truly believe that Illinois deserved that BCS spot? Who did they beat? Ohio State, who shouldn't have been there either.
Other than that, what did they do? They came in second in arguable the weakest of the BCS conferences last year.
Last year was extraordinary. Historically, how many 2-win teams have made the BCS? Not many (in fact, it was mostly just Notre Dame doing so). There wouldn't have been as many as there were this year either, except for the fact that outside of Hawaii, there weren't very many 1 loss teams to choose from. I don't know if you noticed that with your head so firmly implanted in Charlie Wies' glutes.
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Rutgers says we're rag ball
|
Reputation:96
Level:Superstar
Since:Jun 21, 2007
|
|
