The ND haters are out!!! I love it!!

 

The haters keep fighting the slippery slope, every week it's something different. Oh well...

 

ND has proved every week why they are the best team right now. They get it done with defense--sorry feed the appetite for people wanting to see some gaudy offense. That's not ND, but it is also what keeps them in every single game. That said, I believe Bama's D will force Golson to make quicker decisions. Hopefully ND's stable of running backs can man the load.

 

Go Irish!!!!!

 

I don't believe I've said anything different. And as for above on the number of "bowl teams" each team has played Bama has played 3 top 10 teams this season and Georgia has played 3 top 10 teams this season, ND has played 0 top 10 teams and only 1 top 15 team.

I don't believe I've said anything different. And as for above on the number of "bowl teams" each team has played Bama has played 3 top 10 teams this season and Georgia has played 3 top 10 teams this season, ND has played 0 top 10 teams and only 1 top 15 team.

 

ND beats the teams on their schedule, and that's why they have a 0 in the loss column.

ND has played 9 teams that are bowl eligible. Bama has played 5. Georgia has played 4.

 

SOS ratings I saw had Bama 10, GA 23 and ND 25. Not sure if it was the most recent though.

Pass was low. Still should have been caught. Fullback was wide open. Kiffin cant be blamed for that.

 

Okay, but since it was going to take two scores to win why not make sure that your team has a chance? Sure, they should have completed the pass. However, what is the higher percentage play? The field goal would have been shorter than extra point, what percentage of those are made vs the percentage of passes completed with a backup quarterback? He went with the lower percentage play, got burned, and cost his team any chance of winning the game. If it was an 8 point game sure, go for it. When you need two scores take the easier one first.

Okay, but since it was going to take two scores to win why not make sure that your team has a chance? Sure, they should have completed the pass. However, what is the higher percentage play? The field goal would have been shorter than extra point, what percentage of those are made vs the percentage of passes completed with a backup quarterback? He went with the lower percentage play, got burned, and cost his team any chance of winning the game. If it was an 8 point game sure, go for it. When you need two scores take the easier one first.

 

 

The challenge was as follows:

 

Get a TD and at least a FG in any order.

Recover an onside kick after the first score.

Drive 40 to 60 yards to either score a TD or get in FG range.

 

 

He was 6 inches away from a TD.

 

To me that's an easy call. Go for the TD. I will not have a better chance of getting a TD than I do from 6 inches out - even on 4th down.

 

The 4th down play for a TD offered him a MUCH higher chance of winning than kicking the FG, recovering an onside kick, and driving 60+ yards with very little time and THEN scoring a TD.

 

No brainer for me.

 

Plus it should have been successful. It was wide open.

The challenge was as follows:

 

Get a TD and at least a FG in any order.

Recover an onside kick after the first score.

Drive 40 to 60 yards to either score a TD or get in FG range.

 

 

He was 6 inches away from a TD.

 

To me that's an easy call. Go for the TD. I will not have a better chance of getting a TD than I do from 6 inches out - even on 4th down.

 

The 4th down play for a TD offered him a MUCH higher chance of winning than kicking the FG, recovering an onside kick, and driving 60+ yards with very little time and THEN scoring a TD.

 

No brainer for me.

 

Plus it should have been successful. It was wide open.

 

I completely agree, also add to the fact that it would have had to be a freshman QB having to lead the team all the way back for a touchdown. If you can't score 6 inches out, why do people think they would have had a better chance of driving it possibly 70 yards for a touchdown. And that is if they even got the ball back. It was the right decision.

I don't believe I've said anything different. And as for above on the number of "bowl teams" each team has played Bama has played 3 top 10 teams this season and Georgia has played 3 top 10 teams this season, ND has played 0 top 10 teams and only 1 top 15 team.

 

Georgia has played 2 top 10 teams so far this year and lost one of them and lost BAD 35 to 7. Bama has played 3 top 10 teams this year and lost one of them at HOME. Then you don't even know who Notre Dame played apparently since you only talk about Oklahoma, did you forget they also beat Stanford. A team who beat the unstoppable Oregon Ducks at Oregon, a team people thought couldn't be stopped especially on offense. I mean I understand you have a right to your own opinion, but at least try to back up your opinion better with some true facts. Notre Dame has played Stanford who is in the top 10 and Oklahoma who is #11 in the BCS and might be in top 10 in the polls after this week. So the teams you mentioned played one more basically top 10 game than Notre Dame. Notre Dame played a full schedule of overall tougher opponents apparently since most of the teams Notre Dame played are going to bowls unlike those teams played. So your picking at their schedule is way off base since its not like their schedules are that much greater if greater at all than Notre Dames. Just because they played in the SEC doesn't mean they played all the good SEC teams. In fact Bama and Georgia avoided a lot of the other top teams they could have played.

 

Then when you want to talk about Notre Dame being just an average team is just silly. I could have at least bought your argument if you admit that Notre Dame is one of the best teams in the country, but you just think there are a few other teams out there who would win. However you whole thing that they are just average, yet they are in the title game is just funny. Do they look pretty when they do it? Not at all. Did LSU last year look good doing it? Nope. Did the 2002 Ohio State look good doing it? Nope. Did the LSU team who won the title 5 years ago and lost to UK look good in most of their wins? Nope. It does not matter who pretty you look when you win, all the matters is that you win. If it was about how good you look winning, then Oregon should be crowned the National Champs right now. Because they sure look better than anyone when they are winning.

Your ignoring the fact the pass was low and the offense struggled gaining 2 yards. Which ended all hope of the come back. I agree that you should be able to move 6 inches. I think play calling was awful from the beginning.

 

As well as time management.

Lamar Dawson finished with 10 tackles for the game. It's been a tough season for him with nagging injuries but it's a good way to end up on a personal level but I'm certain he'd rather have had a better team record.

Georgia has played 2 top 10 teams so far this year and lost one of them and lost BAD 35 to 7. Bama has played 3 top 10 teams this year and lost one of them at HOME. Then you don't even know who Notre Dame played apparently since you only talk about Oklahoma, did you forget they also beat Stanford. A team who beat the unstoppable Oregon Ducks at Oregon, a team people thought couldn't be stopped especially on offense. I mean I understand you have a right to your own opinion, but at least try to back up your opinion better with some true facts. Notre Dame has played Stanford who is in the top 10 and Oklahoma who is #11 in the BCS and might be in top 10 in the polls after this week. So the teams you mentioned played one more basically top 10 game than Notre Dame. Notre Dame played a full schedule of overall tougher opponents apparently since most of the teams Notre Dame played are going to bowls unlike those teams played. So your picking at their schedule is way off base since its not like their schedules are that much greater if greater at all than Notre Dames. Just because they played in the SEC doesn't mean they played all the good SEC teams. In fact Bama and Georgia avoided a lot of the other top teams they could have played.

 

Then when you want to talk about Notre Dame being just an average team is just silly. I could have at least bought your argument if you admit that Notre Dame is one of the best teams in the country, but you just think there are a few other teams out there who would win. However you whole thing that they are just average, yet they are in the title game is just funny. Do they look pretty when they do it? Not at all. Did LSU last year look good doing it? Nope. Did the 2002 Ohio State look good doing it? Nope. Did the LSU team who won the title 5 years ago and lost to UK look good in most of their wins? Nope. It does not matter who pretty you look when you win, all the matters is that you win. If it was about how good you look winning, then Oregon should be crowned the National Champs right now. Because they sure look better than anyone when they are winning.

If you consider a team somewhere between 8 and 15 in the polls "one of the best teams in the country" then I will admit Notre Dame is, that's just where I see them all things being equal, which they aren't in college football or life for that matter. But if we are just ranking teams on who would win what I would put Notre Dame somewhere in the 8/9 spot at a high and absolute low of probably 12/13.

If you consider a team somewhere between 8 and 15 in the polls "one of the best teams in the country" then I will admit Notre Dame is, that's just where I see them all things being equal, which they aren't in college football or life for that matter. But if we are just ranking teams on who would win what I would put Notre Dame somewhere in the 8/9 spot at a high and absolute low of probably 12/13.

 

So the 8/9 spot in the polls is "average"?

If you consider a team somewhere between 8 and 15 in the polls "one of the best teams in the country" then I will admit Notre Dame is, that's just where I see them all things being equal, which they aren't in college football or life for that matter. But if we are just ranking teams on who would win what I would put Notre Dame somewhere in the 8/9 spot at a high and absolute low of probably 12/13.

 

Dude, you can't be serious when you say things like this..

If you consider a team somewhere between 8 and 15 in the polls "one of the best teams in the country" then I will admit Notre Dame is, that's just where I see them all things being equal, which they aren't in college football or life for that matter. But if we are just ranking teams on who would win what I would put Notre Dame somewhere in the 8/9 spot at a high and absolute low of probably 12/13.

 

Mike and Mike had a good discussion on this today. Obviously Mike Golic is a huge Notre Dame fan, but the other one can't stand Notre Dame. However even admits that if someone actually tries to say Notre Dame is not one of the best teams in football this year, then they don't know football or they clearly are letting their bias for hating Notre Dame get in the way. Which from what I can tell you are a very knowledgeable about football, however in this case you clearly let your bias get in the way. Shoot I am a Notre Dame fan and admit I probably am bias, however even I can admit that Notre Dame very well could lose in the title game. Which would show they are not the best team in the country. I am someone who is completely in favor of a playoff so we can determine who truly is the best. However to this point Notre Dame has shown without a doubt that they truly are one of the best teams in the country and deserve to be where they are. Are they the best? We shall see. However even if they lose they still were one of the best this year. Your whole theory on them has already been proven wrong.