What are three things you're absolutely sure of going into the year?

[NDAlumSon]

CollegeFootballNews.com's latest "Tuesday Question"
Some ND thoughts

 

[scooper]

CFN...You'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany.


Well, outside of profootballtalk.com, that is.

 

[jiggafini19]

I can agree with just about all of this.

 

[NDAlumSon]

Biased?

Biased?

CFN...You'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany.

Is that true? I don't follow their writing religiously. Just check in now and again.
Are they biased? Idiots?
I frankly don't know, but they seem to be pretty fair regarding their analysis
of ND's team and their 2006 prospects.

 

[NDAlumSon]

Tuesday's Question

Tuesday's Question

I actually thinks Matthew Zemek's third point is pretty insightful and anything but unfair.

 

[scooper]

Is that true? I don't follow their writing religiously. Just check in now and again.
Are they biased? Idiots?
I frankly don't know, but they seem to be pretty fair regarding their analysis
of ND's team and their 2006 prospects.

This stuff wasn't too bad. The crap about The Shark was, but it was definately an attempt to reach for something negative about ND. The writers on that site are no big fans of ND. There's not much they can say now, but when there is blood in the water, they will attack.

 

[NDAlumSon]

Copy that. I'll keep my bias antenna up on them.

 

[jiggafini19]

I didn't see the Samardzija thing as a knock on him, but a knock on media types who would print that kind of crap.

If he doesn't have as good of a year as last year, it will be because of baseball.

That's how I read it.

 

[NDAlumSon]

It is not a knock on the Shark !

It is not a knock on the Shark !

That's not only how I read it, That's what it said !
Reading can be fun, especially if you can.

 

[scooper]

That's not only how I read it, That's what it said !
Reading can be fun, especially if you can.

I can read just fine, thank you. Yes, I realize it was not a direct knock on the Shark. And I believe you read it correctly. But it does plant a negative seed to even mention it. On another site, I wouldn't think as much. I wrote off CFN's opinion of Irish football last year. So anything I read now will come out as tainted in my mind.

 

[scooper]

I'm going to amend my opinion and pinpoint Fiutak as the lead hater of that group. The others in this column aren't bad. But you can read back on the site and find a long list of some subtle and some not so subtle attempts to get under Irish fans' skin.

 

[jiggafini19]

I'm not quite familiar with that site.

Samardzija has the negative Cub aura hanging over him now. It scares me to death.

 

[NDAlumSon]

I can read just fine, thank you.

I can read just fine, thank you.

Sorry Scooper. Didn't mean to sound so, well, mean.
I'm fairly new to blogging, forums, chats. I'm especially new to the intensity
of 21st century recruiting and all the attention paid to these young kids who are
touted as being one programs or anothers future savior. The modern day
plethora of prognosticators, whether they be journalists or die hard fans, is quite
staggering. It's especially hard to know who has an agenda, who's objective and who
really knows what the hell they are talking about.
In that sense, it reminds a lot of the political dialogue we engage in this country.
Too many take the approach that you're either 'wit me or agin me' and all objectivity is lost.
Let it be known that I am a life long Notre Dame fan. I am absolutley thrilled to see
Charlie bring the program and especially its offense into the modern day game.
While I loved him as a coach, a motivator, a leader and an example of integrity and honesty, I sometimes could not bring myself to watch Lou Holtz's unimaginative offense and constant nervous pacing of the sidelines while he incessantly dined on ND's grass.
Charlie is the man. ND is the team. And I'm behind them.
Just not blindly or stubbornly subjective.

 

[NDAlumSon]

By the Way

By the Way

I forget to mention.........it's great being on this site with fellow fans and
would like to thank Svoboda, Jigga, Scooper, et. al. for their contributions
to what seems like a truley dedicated forum for those who love Notre Dame.

 

[scooper]

Sorry Scooper. Didn't mean to sound so, well, mean.
I'm fairly new to blogging, forums, chats. I'm especially new to the intensity
of 21st century recruiting and all the attention paid to these young kids who are
touted as being one programs or anothers future savior. The modern day
plethora of prognosticators, whether they be journalists or die hard fans, is quite
staggering. It's especially hard to know who has an agenda, who's objective and who
really knows what the hell they are talking about.
In that sense, it reminds a lot of the political dialogue we engage in this country.
Too many take the approach that you're either 'wit me or agin me' and all objectivity is lost.
Let it be known that I am a life long Notre Dame fan. I am absolutley thrilled to see
Charlie bring the program and especially its offense into the modern day game.
While I loved him as a coach, a motivator, a leader and an example of integrity and honesty, I sometimes could not bring myself to watch Lou Holtz's unimaginative offense and constant nervous pacing of the sidelines while he incessantly dined on ND's grass.
Charlie is the man. ND is the team. And I'm behind them.
Just not blindly or stubbornly subjective.

Heh. It's a rule of mine to not discuss politics on internet forums for exactly the reasons you described above. There is usually no civil way to go about it and things get ugly. While sports can be passionate, it's not life and death like politics can be so I'm more willing to disagree with others. After all, as much as we love it-it's only a game.

Thanks for the reply. I was certainly not upset about the link to CFN. My criticism was of them, not of you putting it here. It's good to read up on everybody's opinions, even the negative one.

You'll find on this forum that we are far from blind or stubbornly subjective. Especially when it comes to defense. Heck, I still think Charlie had a poor game plan for the Fiesta Bowl. Walker had 90 something yards and a few touchdowns. I thought he was good for 50-60 more yards but they seemed to take the ball out of his hands. Sometimes, being flashier or proving you can throw up and down the field is not the best way to win a game. Especially when your defense is undermanned and sucking wind.

So stubbornly subjective, I'm not. However, it's an in-family thing, I guess. Irish fans will be critics, but I defend our team against outsiders.

As for Lou's offense, I'll admit to loving those days when we could simply line up and plow teams off the line and know our stable of tailbacks or bruiser of a fullback could eat up yards and clock will muscling into the endzone. I loved the attitude of "this is where we are going. Stop us." And most teams couldn't. However, that was when our horses were almost always bigger and faster. These days, it seems to require some more imagination. And it looks like we have the guy to do it.

 

[NDAlumSon]

All good to hear. Thanks.
I agree with you, as I think Charlie does, regarding Fiesta game plan.
You're right about Lou too. We had the horses for 'four yards a cloud of dust'
and that philosophy won us a national championship. Can't argue with that.
I just thought the offensive philosophy of major college football changed
during the later years of his tenure, borrowed no doubt from the transformation
that Bill Walsh and his disciples developed at the pro level, and Lou was a little slow
on the uptake. I think if he had adopted a more wide open style of offense earlier
we would not have had to endure all those down years and our recruiting would
have thrived as result instead of suffering the way it did. As it was, the skill players
looked elsewhere and we took a huge talent hit.
Keep on keepin' on.

 

[scooper]

Yeah. I'll buy that it hurt recruiting late in his tenur.

 

[ShivaIrish]

I think that CFN can be a mixed bag, probably largely depending on the specific writer.

However, can anybody who follows ND take this analysis seriously (within the context of CFN's preseason rankings, in which ND was listed as a BCS contender, but not having a legitimate shot at the Championship):

" Pass defense. The Irish got torched by everyone allowing 265 yards per game. Considering the front seven had few problems getting into the backfield and was great at getting pressure on the quarterback, the corners had a really rough season." ---CFN

They may have some good comments, but what the?