Irish get fresh foes in future openers

[Irish Envy]

Notre Dame will open its 2008 football season Sept. 6 against San Diego State and kick off the 2009 campaign Sept. 5 against Nevada. Both games will be played at Notre Dame Stadium.

Talks with the two schools, neither of whom have ever played Notre Dame, began two years ago when the Irish rearranged their 2004 schedule. Notre Dame had been scheduled to open the 2004 season against Michigan, but instead opened a week earlier at BYU. San Diego State and Nevada were among a handful of teams that rearranged their schedules to allow for the BYU-ND game to be moved.

John Heisler, senior associate athletic director at Notre Dame, said complete schedules for the 2008 and 2009 seasons have not been finalized.

Source: Irish Sports Report

 

[Fighting_Irish9]

ughhhhh....

Not looking forward to SDSU and Nevada.....atleast they are openers as its difficult to Not get excited about an opener but would still prefer opening with Michigan

 

[Fitzgerald]

Eh, it'll be good to see a couple of fresh opponents. SDSU is good sometimes, and may be good when we play them. We'll see.

 

[Fitzgerald]

And besides that, it's nice for the kids at those schools, and the fans, to get to play ND.

 

[Irish Envy]

ughhhhh....

Not looking forward to SDSU and Nevada.....atleast they are openers as its difficult to Not get excited about an opener but would still prefer opening with Michigan

Opening with Michigan is pointless and an unnecessary risk. Michigan would never open with us, nor would any quality National Championship contending program. Too much can happen in your first game and why risk national title aspirations without having a game under your belt.

I'm glad Notre Dame is dropping the schedule down a notch or two, and these teams (Nevada, San Diego State) are not pushovers, either.

 

[rontdtarchala]

I agree, they both could bring it if the conditions were right...1st games of the season can make for scary situations. And I hate it when we play a major team and the previouse week they played bugtussle U while we played a major U or its our first of the season.

 

[KMac151993]

Why not try to go back and pick up a team like Northwestern again rather then going to these none BCS Conferences? Just a thought.

 

[AlbuquerqueIrishFan]

Opening with Michigan is pointless and an unnecessary risk. Michigan would never open with us, nor would any quality National Championship contending program. Too much can happen in your first game and why risk national title aspirations without having a game under your belt.

I'm glad Notre Dame is dropping the schedule down a notch or two, and these teams (Nevada, San Diego State) are not pushovers, either.

I like tune up games. It really helps. But, SDSU is really bad. Michigan has been playing them recently. Weird team to schedule.

 

[Irish Envy]

Why not try to go back and pick up a team like Northwestern again rather then going to these none BCS Conferences? Just a thought.

Do you think any Big Ten school really wants to add us to their non-conference schedule?

 

[LOVEMYIRISH]

It's a good call doing this... Opening with tough teams is a big mistake. The team needs at least one average (or sub-average) opponent to get the juices flowing.

 

[KMac151993]

Do you think any Big Ten school really wants to add us to their non-conference schedule?

Why not Northwestern...national exposure, a chance to knock off a big time team early on to get some credibility in Big Ten play.

 

[Irish Envy]

Why not Northwestern...national exposure, a chance to knock off a big time team early on to get some credibility in Big Ten play.

Because, for all intensive purposes, it is an instant loss on the schedule for Northwestern. Then you figure they have the chance at 4-5 losses in the Big Ten and sitting with 5-6 loses, they miss a bowl.

Bowls = Big paydays.

 

[Domer95]

Opening with Michigan is pointless and an unnecessary risk. Michigan would never open with us, nor would any quality National Championship contending program. Too much can happen in your first game and why risk national title aspirations without having a game under your belt.

I'm glad Notre Dame is dropping the schedule down a notch or two, and these teams (Nevada, San Diego State) are not pushovers, either.

Agreed Svo. After having Lou beatdown Bo and Mo, UM decided they needed a 'warm up' before us, shrew and smart on their behalf. But leave it to them to whine when we do the same. The first game is very good to get the remaining kinks out from practice and to see what happens at "game speed" in a game atmosphere. While I don't like the 'dumbing down' of the schedule (ND is not in the SEC after all), it does show that we are true to our word, as these two school rearranged their scheds so that we could play BYU before scUM in Ty-ger's swan song season, and agreed to give them both a home game in remittance.

Hopefully in the future, we'll be able to schedule teams somewhere between the GaTechs, Nevadas and Idahos of the world.

 

[Fitzgerald]

Why not Northwestern...national exposure, a chance to knock off a big time team early on to get some credibility in Big Ten play.

All right - you've said all that NW gains by that game - now what does ND gain by it? Nothing good can come of playing NW, especially to open the season. They sneak into the top 25 every year, and they have the sort of offense that eats up our D. And if we beat them, it's no big deal. So, it's a pointless game.

 

[Fighting_Irish9]

Notre Dame didn't have a problem avoiding the SDSU and Nevada's of the world before (including when we were on top) we shouldn't have a problem keeping teams like that off the schedule...

BTW if the Tulane deal goes through...have you seen the vaunted ND schedule that year

Nevada
Navy
Tulane
Army
Stanford
Pitt
Washington
Purdue
MSU
BC
Michigan
USC

 

[jiggafini19]

(Preface: Don't let the memories of 1995 scare you. If Notre Dame played Northwestern at Soldier Field during a 2-4 year deal, I'd have zero problem with it. They're legit enough that the win would count. And I say win because there is no way a Weis led offense would lose to NU)

I don't care who they play, as long as they win.

We thirst for a National Championship, yet we want to play 12 games against the Top 12 teams in America. Good luck going unbeaten that way.

How the hell are we supposed to know how tough the schedule will be? I don't even know how tough 2006 is, let alone 2008 or 2009.

This barnstorming schedule helps with recruiting and exposure to an entire generation that doesn't know about Notre Dame. They know USC, Miami, Florida State and have been watching ESPN since kindergarten. Welcome to the purification process.

We can't control the business/atheltic administration portion of this. Play who you play each Saturday and win. I refuse to apologize for a "weak" schedule when these other teams load up on I-AA schools and out of conference crap. Notre Dame has played the gauntlet schedule long enough.

Don't worry about "haters" and what they say or getting a lack of "respect" from the National media. Those people are all assholes anyway.

 

[Fitzgerald]

Notre Dame didn't have a problem avoiding the SDSU and Nevada's of the world before (including when we were on top) we shouldn't have a problem keeping teams like that off the schedule...

BTW if the Tulane deal goes through...have you seen the vaunted ND schedule that year

Nevada
Navy
Tulane
Army
Stanford
Pitt
Washington
Purdue
MSU
BC
Michigan
USC

So - probably 6, perhaps 7, maybe even 8 (Navy) ranked opponents? That's not too bad.

You people who act like ND has never played bad teams are fooling yourselves. Rockne BUILT ND on beating cupcakes. He'd beat the major schools but the majority of the wins were against teacher's colleges and the like. If Rockne isn't "traditional ND" then nothing is.

 

[dman_000]

I find the additions of SDSU and Nevada to be interesting choices, always nice to see the Irish beat up on new opponents. Just wonder how many haters are going to claim that we don't play quality opponents since I already hear this claim with the brutal gauntlet we play now.

GO IRISH 2007 NATIONAL CHAMPS

 

[mlcspinner]

I think ND should have tune up games but with teams like Texas AM , Colorado St., or Washington St. Play teams that will show you were you are at. SDSU and Nevada show you nothing.

 

[ArmyVet80]

Anyone remember the 1988 team that plastered Rice and Purdue wasn't all that good back then. So.. We have always had some of the lower teams on the schedule. The only bad thing that is in 2004 when ND played BYU to get a game under their belt before Michigan. ND loses to BYU but still beats Michigan. That's the whole reason ND is having to play SDSU and Nevada.

 

[LOVEMYIRISH]

ughhhhh....

Not looking forward to SDSU and Nevada.....atleast they are openers as its difficult to Not get excited about an opener but would still prefer opening with Michigan

It's fun to open with Michigan when you don't want to win the National Championship. However, the first game of the year should be used to work out the kinks in the system. No good team would ever want to OPEN with us.

The last time a good team opened with us was Michigan in 1998.

 

[TNirishfan83]

SDSU and Nevada?.. kinda weak if u ask me

 

[jiggafini19]

The 1988 team beat some serious Monsters, dude. Michigan, Miami, USC and West Virginia that year. That's no joke.

Notre Dame is getting with the times here. Look at the guys they're recruiting this year. These kids are not Ivy League material, I assure you. Never has Notre Dame given out a "conditional" scholarship offer. No grades, no thanks. Samardzija, Zbikowski, "Meet Brady Quinn" Happy Hour, Clausen....

The schedule doesn't have to be 10 games deep. 6-7 is fine. There is no playoff here boys. And until there is, you pretty much have to go unbeaten to win this thing. One loss MIGHT get you a shot, but you'd better lose early. Or be Florida State. As long as they stay out of the Sun Belt and I-AA, I honestly don't care who they play. The more BCS teams, the better, but Mountain West and WAC work just as well. Time to even the playing field a little bit.

Welcome to the Revolution.

 

[punishment]

I agree with jiggafini. Our schedule will be no different than anybody else, and in fact, it will still be tougher.

Besides, for all the complaining about "dumbing" the schedule, I will bet my life savings that we would all be partying like crazy if ND won the championship while beating Michigan, USC, and OSU in the fiesta bowl, and the other 8 games were against teams from the WAC and MWC. None of us would then say "I don't think we should be National Champions because we played a weak schedule."

Screw it, if USC can win the NC by playing only 2 decent teams a year, then so can we. You prove how good you are in the BCS.

 

[rattfink]

The thing that always gets me about most of the conference schools is the whole "we can't schedule tough non-conference games because our conference is sooo tough". Don't get me wrong I can't blame a school for having a couple of cupcake non-conference games but apparently the new 12th game means ALL the non-conf games have to be auto-wins. I think the administrations approach to getting a few of these games is a good one.

I look at the computer rankings for a true measure of strength of schedule. SC didn't get to play Oklahoma in the '04 NC because LSU had a better SOS. You reap what you sow so if a weaker SOS doesn't get ND into the title game, it doesn't. But a truly doubt that will happen with a weaker schedule. You just have to get into position for a title game.

SOS is great and all but it doesn't get you into the title game. I looked at Sagarin's SOS ratings that were put out at the end of this year's bowl season.

#1 - Oklahoma 8-4
#2 - Ohio St 10-2
#3 - Michigan 7-5
#4 - Northwestern 7-5
#5 - North Carolina 5-6

I see 1 BCS bowl team in that group and they weren't even a conference champ. Where'd the title teams rank after the bowl season?

#13 - Texas 13-0
#8 - So Cal 12-1

And the Irish? A very respectable #14.

 

[Irish Envy]

The thing that always gets me about most of the conference schools is the whole "we can't schedule tough non-conference games because our conference is sooo tough". Don't get me wrong I can't blame a school for having a couple of cupcake non-conference games but apparently the new 12th game means ALL the non-conf games have to be auto-wins. I think the administrations approach to getting a few of these games is a good one.

I look at the computer rankings for a true measure of strength of schedule. SC didn't get to play Oklahoma in the '04 NC because LSU had a better SOS. You reap what you sow so if a weaker SOS doesn't get ND into the title game, it doesn't. But a truly doubt that will happen with a weaker schedule. You just have to get into position for a title game.

SOS is great and all but it doesn't get you into the title game. I looked at Sagarin's SOS ratings that were put out at the end of this year's bowl season.

#1 - Oklahoma 8-4
#2 - Ohio St 10-2
#3 - Michigan 7-5
#4 - Northwestern 7-5
#5 - North Carolina 5-6

I see 1 BCS bowl team in that group and they weren't even a conference champ. Where'd the title teams rank after the bowl season?

#13 - Texas 13-0
#8 - So Cal 12-1

And the Irish? A very respectable #14.

Very nice. Rep for you!

 

[Irish Envy]

I see 1 BCS bowl team in that group and they weren't even a conference champ. Where'd the title teams rank after the bowl season?

#13 - Texas 13-0
#8 - So Cal 12-1

And the Irish? A very respectable #14.

Another thing to keep in mind is this was also with a "watered down" schedule according to media, fans and college football experts.

 

[punishment]

SC didn't get to play Oklahoma in the '04 NC because LSU had a better SOS. You reap what you sow so if a weaker SOS doesn't get ND into the title game, it doesn't. But a truly doubt that will happen with a weaker schedule. You just have to get into position for a title game.

I think 2004 was the last year that strength of schedule was factored into the BCS rankings. Wasn't the strength of schedule taken out of the equation this past year in 2005?

 

[rattfink]

Another thing to keep in mind is this was also with a "watered down" schedule according to media, fans and college football experts.

Exactly. A sportwriter in Manhattan can see ND beat Syracuse and Navy and say that their schedule is weak. The computer doesn't lie about SOS. You can say that the programmer weighed a certain factor greater than it should have, but at least all the schools are on equal footing.

I'm a big proponent of the computer having a say in the title game. Some complained about SC not being able to play Oklahoma in '04, but the computer also said that LSU had a better SOS. Would SC have beaten Oklahoma? Maybe, but I believe LSU earned the right to play in the game more than SC did based on SOS. If you're going to go with the "better team at the end of the season" line you could just pick the 2 teams with the longest winning streaks to play in the title game. You have to look at the season as a whole and the computer does a much better job of that than almost any sportswriter.

 

[rattfink]

I think 2004 was the last year that strength of schedule was factored into the BCS rankings. Wasn't the strength of schedule taken out of the equation this past year in 2005?

Yes and no. There is no longer a separate SOS factor for the BCS. But the computer rankings are still used and all of them use some form of SOS to determine the rankings. If they didn't it would only consider teams' records like the NFL.

The BCS uses several (I forgot how many) computer rankings because each ranking depends on how each programmer setup up his formulas. I'd like to see the BCS create a standard computer rankings with the formulas open to the public so everyone could understand a win by U of X means more then a blow by Y Tech.