ND Scheduled Georgia (Ironman leaving the Country during 2019)

[Irish#1]

And assuming Stanford is still a top team (debatable) this is what the top end of our schedule is going to look like for the foreseeable future.

It's strong because it needs to be. But it's not insane.

EDIT: Which means, every 2-3 years we're going to be signing a series with a top 30-ish program to solidify the future.

Everyone predicted the downfall of the tree when Harabugh left, but it looks to me like there is no drop off in site.

 

[woolybug25]

I'm not explaining my opinion well I don't think. The 5 marquee games is if we balance them with 7 Purdues. We dont though.

My concern going forward is too many runs of games where we have a Stanford or a USC sandwiched around a Pitt and a UNC.

Even in our most dominant recent year, we were almost done in by a BYU-Oklahoma-Pitt run of games. We have too many "solid" teams on our schedule to play 4-5 big games a year.

I hear ya. But are other teams doing that? I would argue that they aren't. Maybe we could throw in another cupcake, but regardless of reality, the rest of the college football world considers the likes of Navy and Army as big time cupcakes. So other people think we already have those cupcake games on our schedule. They see no difference between Army and North Arkansas.

I just want to deal in the reality of what it will take to consistently get to the playoffs. I'm not necessarily against adding creampuffs if we can still get into the playoffs, but I absolutely am against bringing down the amount of marquee matchups to under 5 a year.

 

[IrishLax]

I hear ya. But are other teams doing that? I would argue that they aren't. Maybe we could throw in another cupcake, but regardless of reality, the rest of the college football world considers the likes of Navy and Army as big time cupcakes. So other people think we already have those cupcake games on our schedule. They see no difference between Army and North Arkansas.

I just want to deal in the reality of what it will take to consistently get to the playoffs. I'm not necessarily against adding creampuffs if we can still get into the playoffs, but I absolutely am against bringing down the amount of marquee matchups to under 5 a year.

They ARE doing that. Again... look at Alabama. They open with WVU followed by two tune-up games. Then Florida followed by a bye. So they isolate one "marquee" opponent as you want to call it. Then they get Ole Miss off that by (low end ranked team), followed by Arkansas (unranked), followed by A&M (low end ranked), followed by Tennessee. This is their "gauntlet" and it falls in the middle of the season sandwiched by byes with the two "strong" opponents being equivalent to a UNC or ASU in pre-season projections. Then after their bye, they get LSU. Then MSSU, then Western Carolina preceding their big game with Auburn. Every single one of their "expected" big games (based on traditional talent, recruiting, past difficulty, etc.) is surrounded by a bye or cream puff or both.

There are three options for ND:
1. Add more "marquee" games like Georgia and fit them in with more pure cupcakes and byes.
2. Fill out the schedule beyond 5 ACC + Stanford + USC with marginal teams like BYU, Northwestern, Purdue, etc. Only have one or two true cupcakes like a UMASS.
3. Inevitably lose some games as the schedule is not navigable.

It's not coincidence that the year our schedule set up best in terms of front loading, byes, and opponent's schedule management is the year we went 12-0. We got both MSU & Michigan on equal footing as both started the year with tough games, then a bye before Miami (smoked them with time to prep), then barely weathered the gauntlet (would've been nice to have a second bye before or after Oklahoma), and walked into USC on the heels of two "easy" games.

It's fine to add Georgia, but not if ND continues to schedule how they do. And they show no signs of adding cupcakes/byes around the "big" games.

 

[philipm31]

1988-1989 ND went 24-1, won 23 in a row, a NC and played the toughest schedule in the country.

That is what ND needs to get back to playing. Playing tough opponents begets tougher games, better recruiting, more TV exposure (not that ND suffers from that, obviously), and possibly better players.

Shying away from that is just sad.

 

[koonja]

1988-1989 ND went 24-1, won 23 in a row, a NC and played the toughest schedule in the country.

That is what ND needs to get back to playing. Playing tough opponents begets tougher games, better recruiting, more TV exposure (not that ND suffers from that, obviously), and possibly better players.

Shying away from that is just sad.

-1 (always wanted to do that).

That'd be great if we won, but I think you create more recruiting buzz going 11-1 vs. an average schedule than going 9-3 vs. a loaded schedule.

I fully expect for USC to be a top 5 team, year in and year out from now until they F-up again. They're not just a 'strong team' on our schedule anymore, IMO.

 

[philipm31]

You think you make MORE buzz winning against a schedule of basically creampuffs than against a legit schedule????

Are you insane? ND has to do things differently just to get into the conversation. 11-1 against ELITE competition will get you into the conversation EVERY year as opposed to an average schedule, where if one of your main games ends up being an absolute turd because the marquee team is having a crap year.

When ND won their last national title, they played the #1, #2, #3 and #9 (MICH ending the year 9-2-1 and ending up #4 after closing with a 9-0-1 record after losing to ND and MIA in the first two weeks of the season, leading to them garnering a preseason #2 ranking the next season!), so yeah, your argument is pretty much against actually scheduling QUALITY competition....which is one thing Irish fans held over Bama fans for a month before Bama destroyed the Irish.


Sorry, I do not but that in the slightest, that scheduling an average schedule is in the Irish's best interests.

In fact, when ND played WVA for the national title, there were TONS of people saying that MIA deserved another shot at ND because they had actually played a tougher schedule than WVA.

I think that ND's opponents were above .500 while WVA's opponents were SUB .500.

So, technically, ND's schedule WAS average, even with four top ten teams on it.

Anything less than that should be frowned upon by ND fans. As they say, to be the best, you have to beat the best.

 

[koonja]

.

 

[koonja]

You think you make MORE buzz winning against a schedule of basically creampuffs than against a legit schedule????

Are you insane? ND has to do things differently just to get into the conversation. 11-1 against ELITE competition will get you into the conversation EVERY year as opposed to an average schedule, where if one of your main games ends up being an absolute turd because the marquee team is having a crap year.

When ND won their last national title, they played the #1, #2, #3 and #9 (MICH ending the year 11-1 and was preseason #2 the next season!), so yeah, your argument is pretty much against actually scheduling QUALITY competition....which is one thing Irish fans held over Bama fans for a month before Bama destroyed the Irish.


Sorry, I do not but that in the slightest, that scheduling an average schedule is in the Irish's best interests.

In fact, when ND played WVA for the national title, there were TONS of people saying that MIA deserved another shot at ND because they had actually played a tougher schedule.

I think that ND's opponents were actually about .500 while WVA's opponents were SUB .500.

So, technically, ND's schedule WAS average, even with four top ten teams on it.

Anything less than that should be frowned upon by ND fans. As they say, to be the best, you have to beat the best.

Yes. LSU and ND both had 9 wins against a much tougher schedule. Did they get more attention than OSU, who played the easiest schedule possible and almost went undefeated? Not even close, IMO. Beating everyone with average schedule > winning most of your games against tough teams. No one cares or remembers who wins 9 games, no matter who you beat.

And yes.

 

[Rocket89]

They ARE doing that. Again... look at Alabama. They open with WVU followed by two tune-up games. Then Florida followed by a bye. So they isolate one "marquee" opponent as you want to call it. Then they get Ole Miss off that by (low end ranked team), followed by Arkansas (unranked), followed by A&M (low end ranked), followed by Tennessee. This is their "gauntlet" and it falls in the middle of the season sandwiched by byes with the two "strong" opponents being equivalent to a UNC or ASU in pre-season projections. Then after their bye, they get LSU. Then MSSU, then Western Carolina preceding their big game with Auburn. Every single one of their "expected" big games (based on traditional talent, recruiting, past difficulty, etc.) is surrounded by a bye or cream puff or both.

There are three options for ND:
1. Add more "marquee" games like Georgia and fit them in with more pure cupcakes and byes.
2. Fill out the schedule beyond 5 ACC + Stanford + USC with marginal teams like BYU, Northwestern, Purdue, etc. Only have one or two true cupcakes like a UMASS.
3. Inevitably lose some games as the schedule is not navigable.

It's not coincidence that the year our schedule set up best in terms of front loading, byes, and opponent's schedule management is the year we went 12-0. We got both MSU & Michigan on equal footing as both started the year with tough games, then a bye before Miami (smoked them with time to prep), then barely weathered the gauntlet (would've been nice to have a second bye before or after Oklahoma), and walked into USC on the heels of two "easy" games.

It's fine to add Georgia, but not if ND continues to schedule how they do. And they show no signs of adding cupcakes/byes around the "big" games.

Lots of wiggle room--and common ground--between options 1 and options 2.

 

[philipm31]

1988 ND Schedule: 73-61-4, but only 5 teams with winning records, even with four Top Five finishers.

Outside of MIA, MICH, USC and WVA (40-6-1), the rest of the schedule was pretty awful (33-55-3). Still, with the wins against the four other best programs in the country, there was NO doubt that ND was the best team in the country.

ND has to play a tough schedule, because that is what it has ALWAYS done. Backsliding does them no good, particularly now that SOS is one thing that ND fans have always touted about ND's schedule being, on average, tougher than their competition.

 

[Riddickulous]

1988-1989 ND went 24-1, won 23 in a row, a NC and played the toughest schedule in the country.

That is what ND needs to get back to playing. Playing tough opponents begets tougher games, better recruiting, more TV exposure (not that ND suffers from that, obviously), and possibly better players.

Shying away from that is just sad.

Those two teams were STACKED.

 

[philipm31]

1989: Opponents Record was 87-52-3. ND was 12-1 and finished #2 in the nation. EIGHT teams with 8 or more wins.

So over those two years alone, ND opponents were 160-113-7, which had to be one of the hardest schedules in the country, during which time the teams was 24-1 and easily considered a legit powerhouse. Playing tough games gets you that respect, and it something that even ND haters have had to respect about the Irish, even in the years when they had mediocre to terrible campaigns.

Year after that, they were preseason #1. There is a difference between BUZZ about a program and GRIPING about one (as EVERY non Buckeye fan was saying before MSU ended the conversation).

BUZZ is POSITIVE.

What people were saying about OSU's terrible schedule was NEVER posiitve.

 

[philipm31]

Those two teams were STACKED.

Yeah, they were.

But they also remained stacked because players KNEW they would be playing at least three if not more marquee games per year....because ND always scheduled that way.

Playing marquee schedules begets marquee games and marquee talent willing to come play for you.

 

[NDohio]

College football is incredibly different today when comparing it to 1988. It's a completely different world. ESPN, social networking, conference differences, etc. There is no reason to compare that team to what teams receive in BUZZ today.

By 2018 there may even be 8 teams in the playoff system. And Wooly is right - who knows how good any of the teams currently on our schedule will be by then.

I like the idea of GA from the standpoint of recruiting. As long as the schedule isn't too top heavy I am all for it.

 

[no.1IrishFan]

I've seen this statement pop up a few times in this thread and it's one of those cliche statements that I don't think applies to college football.

"To be the best you have to beat the best."

When the CURRENT scheduling model already puts us ahead of a considerable amount of big name schools regarding SOS, you don't have to beat the best, you just have to beat who you already play.

No need to make it harder than it already is.

 

[philipm31]

Seeing as how we don't know what the future schedules will undoubtedly be like, I do not see how adding UGA is bad in any way.

And sure things are much different than they were in 88-89, BUT ND's emphasis on playing marquee teams has always been one of the bedrock principles of the program, which they have never shied away from and I don't see them doing that now, either. Nor should they.

 

[woolybug25]

They ARE doing that. Again... look at Alabama. They open with WVU followed by two tune-up games. Then Florida followed by a bye. So they isolate one "marquee" opponent as you want to call it. Then they get Ole Miss off that by (low end ranked team), followed by Arkansas (unranked), followed by A&M (low end ranked), followed by Tennessee. This is their "gauntlet" and it falls in the middle of the season sandwiched by byes with the two "strong" opponents being equivalent to a UNC or ASU in pre-season projections. Then after their bye, they get LSU. Then MSSU, then Western Carolina preceding their big game with Auburn. Every single one of their "expected" big games (based on traditional talent, recruiting, past difficulty, etc.) is surrounded by a bye or cream puff or both.

There are three options for ND:
1. Add more "marquee" games like Georgia and fit them in with more pure cupcakes and byes.
2. Fill out the schedule beyond 5 ACC + Stanford + USC with marginal teams like BYU, Northwestern, Purdue, etc. Only have one or two true cupcakes like a UMASS.
3. Inevitably lose some games as the schedule is not navigable.

It's not coincidence that the year our schedule set up best in terms of front loading, byes, and opponent's schedule management is the year we went 12-0. We got both MSU & Michigan on equal footing as both started the year with tough games, then a bye before Miami (smoked them with time to prep), then barely weathered the gauntlet (would've been nice to have a second bye before or after Oklahoma), and walked into USC on the heels of two "easy" games.

It's fine to add Georgia, but not if ND continues to schedule how they do. And they show no signs of adding cupcakes/byes around the "big" games.

I'm confused on how we got here? Our original debate was that many wanted us not to play Georgia because we already play too many top end teams? As I said before, I think especially considering a) lack of conference championship and b) 4 team playoff, that we need to have 3 defining wins against ranked teams (end of season ranked) to get voted into the playoffs with an 11-1 record.

Beyond that, you all have made some good points about playing teams like Pitt, BYU, etc as "cupcakes" and how that might not make sense. My major point isn't that though. Mine lies directly with my belief that if we don't schedule 5 Tier One programs a year, then we simply wont get enough opportunities for defining wins a season. If we don't win them, then we weren't good enough for the playoffs. If we do, then we know that we have a strong enough schedule to get in with an 11-1 record as long as the loss is a good one.

That's all. The "who should fill the space between big games" argument isn't one I really have strong feelings about outside of Navy.

 

[ickythump1225]

Of course as I move from the state of Georgia this happens. I love it though as I loathe UGA with all of my heart. I hope we stomp them.

 

[ResLife Hero]

Georgia moves closer to scheduling Notre Dame | Bulldogs Beat with Seth Emerson | Macon.com

DESTIN, Fla. - Georgia and Notre Dame are moving closer to a football series "later this decade," Georgia athletics director Greg McGarity said Tuesday. And while no deal is done, and McGarity cautioned that there could be snags, he made clear that he would be eager for it to happen.

"I think it's an opponent we've played, what, one time? 1980? For our fans to be able to go up to South Bend, and for our fans to see Notre Dame play between the hedges, I think from a national perspective it'd be off the charts, as far as interest, as far as intrigue," McGarity said. "That would be something out of the ordinary that our fans would be very, very excited about."

The two schools haven't nailed down which years it would be, but McGarity said it would be in the range of 2017-20. Notre Dame would visit Sanford Stadium, and Georgia would visit Notre Dame Stadium.

"I think we're just waiting to work through some verbal communications before we have anything in writing," McGarity said.

McGarity spoke on the first day of SEC meetings in Destin, Florida, where non-conference scheduling for football has been a major topic. Figures in the new four-team playoff have been in attendance, including selection committee member Archie Manning, and playoff chairman Bill Hancock.

Georgia, after proceeding cautiously on scheduling for awhile, now appears ready to line up more high-profile games. If the series with Notre Dame did fall through, McGarity said there are two other high-profile teams from the eastern half of the U.S. that are on the radar screen.

"Other opponents that people would say, Holy cow, that's a great opportunity," McGarity said.

This year Georgia completes a two-game series with Clemson, and the Bulldogs have played several other major-conference teams in recent years.

"Next year's the first year since 2012 we haven't played two tough out-of-conference opponents. So we've done our fair share of the heavy lifting," McGarity said. "The strength of schedule is something we talked about today: What does that mean? There is no metric. I can't go to Sagarin, and the committee's not going to use Sagarin as a strength of schedule. It's gonna be in the eye of the beholder."

Notre Dame has been fairly eager to schedule Georgia, with head coach Brian Kelly reiterating the desire last week in an interview with USA Today. Kelly's eagerness to schedule Georgia has been about recruiting, and trying to get into the Peach State. Georgia, on the other hand, has been a bit more cautious, with McGarity downplaying it about a month ago.

But on Tuesday McGarity said talks have progressed. He still cautioned that a snag could happen, pointing to the team's 2010 agreement to play a series with Ohio State, only to have it canceled by the Buckeyes. So McGarity is moving forward in "guarded" fashion about the series with Notre Dame coming to fruition.

"But intent, absolutely," McGarity said.

Mark Richt is in agreement with the Notre Dame game, as well as the two other possibilities, according to McGarity, but the head coach also doesn't want to do it every season. Still, Georgia's philosophy moving forward seems to be to schedule major opponents periodically. McGarity is even open to a return to the Georgia Dome, and has told Gary Stokan, head of the Peach Bowl. Stokan put together the 2011 season opener between Georgia and Boise State.

"I don't want to close the door on any opportunity," McGarity said. "But it's gotta really make sense, to something that is a no-brainer."

Read more here: Georgia moves closer to scheduling Notre Dame | Bulldogs Beat with Seth Emerson | Macon.com

 

[phork]

Sweeeeet.

 

[JughedJones]

Yeah, let's play a schedule that can realistically have Miami, FSU, Georgia, USC, and Stanford on it. That's smart.

+1

 

[GoldenToTheGrave]

AFA the argument about playing a hard schedule or not:

I ultimately don't care about big bowl games. I watch football because I like watching good games. I don't find blowing out community colleges fun. That is all.

 

[ND NYC]

i'm in the "play em all camp"
lets put faith in jack here and enjoy the journey and take it day by day week by week and year by year.

past performance no guarantee of future results when comes to ANY program or conference. its all cyclical.
we could be starting the next great ND era-you never know!!
nothng gold can stay. so savor the flavor now bama, your one nick saban retirement away from moving from top 3 to a top 25 team. i remember those days--and they werent that long ago.

 

[Black Irish]

I like that Coach Kelly is knocking on the SEC's door and challenging one of their top programs. I don't know that any other top tier CFB tram is actively trying to schedule a series with the SEC. I admire Kelly's brass, and can appreciate the benefits that it can bring the program.

 

[IrishLion]

I would love to see Georgia playing in a harsh South Bend winter environment... but I doubt they ultimately agree to the home-and-home unless the game in South Bend is guaranteed in September or early October.

 

[Ndaccountant]

I would love to see Georgia playing in a harsh South Bend winter environment... but I doubt they ultimately agree to the home-and-home unless the game in South Bend is guaranteed in September or early October.

It's interesting to think about the potential schedule. They usually play South Carolina early, Florida in late Oct or early Nov (it's Nov 1 this year) and Auburn in November. I would probably imagine UGA would want to play in early October, which still can provide some interesting weather.

 

[kmoose]

1988-1989 ND went 24-1, won 23 in a row, a NC and played the toughest schedule in the country.

That is what ND needs to get back to playing. Playing tough opponents begets tougher games, better recruiting, more TV exposure (not that ND suffers from that, obviously), and possibly better players.

Shying away from that is just sad.

Beating tough opponents gets you all of those things. Or, at least, it used to. I think that today's athletes have evolved to the point where the top guys are looking for what they have always had: a nice easy ride where they can focus solely on football, without having to worry about no history, or math, or English. They came to college to punch their ticket to the NFL, not to become an educated man.

So playing the hardest schedule you can possibly find doesn't really have the same benefit that it used to. It used to be that, if you wanted to be on TV, you had to play the best schedule you could. There were only 4 or 5 games a week that were televised. These days, there are that many NAIA games on TV, every week. Satellite TV, and the dearth of TV channels, has really changed the landscape. The internet has had a huge impact, as well. 20 years ago, if you went to Slippery Rock, or Mount Union, or Gardner-Webb, it was unlikely that anyone knew who you were, because they had not seen any tape on you. Now, you can play for Our Lady of Blessed Acceleration (in Calumet City, Ill), and be a youtube sensation to the point where every NFL scout has taken the time to look at your film.

It's just not as easy as it used to be, for ND. There isn't a "magic bullet" that can bring back the glory. It will have to be a combination of factors coming together, to make that happen.

 

[philipm31]

Beating tough opponents gets you all of those things. Or, at least, it used to. I think that today's athletes have evolved to the point where the top guys are looking for what they have always had: a nice easy ride where they can focus solely on football, without having to worry about no history, or math, or English. They came to college to punch their ticket to the NFL, not to become an educated man.

So playing the hardest schedule you can possibly find doesn't really have the same benefit that it used to. It used to be that, if you wanted to be on TV, you had to play the best schedule you could. There were only 4 or 5 games a week that were televised. These days, there are that many NAIA games on TV, every week. Satellite TV, and the dearth of TV channels, has really changed the landscape. The internet has had a huge impact, as well. 20 years ago, if you went to Slippery Rock, or Mount Union, or Gardner-Webb, it was unlikely that anyone knew who you were, because they had not seen any tape on you. Now, you can play for Our Lady of Blessed Acceleration (in Calumet City, Ill), and be a youtube sensation to the point where every NFL scout has taken the time to look at your film.

It's just not as easy as it used to be, for ND. There isn't a "magic bullet" that can bring back the glory. It will have to be a combination of factors coming together, to make that happen.

Actually, it still does, otherwise ND would not be the one doing this, IMO.

And if you want to say that you played as tough a schedule as anyone in the country, littering it with mediocre teams, which the ACC really is outside of FSU and Clemson (MIA and VT are meh, and the rest of the conference is basically irrelevant nationally), then you need to throw in one of the SEC schools, at least occasionally.

I do not see any reason why ND cannot play UGA two times in the next five to ten years and it would not be a boon to our schedule, especially considering how inconsistent the ACC is and has been for the last decade.

ND is right to want to flex its football muscles in the Deep South. If you want to gauge your program, then playing one of the top five SEC teams is a fine way to do so. I applaud both ADs for exploring this possibility.

 

[philipm31]

The only reason that ND does not have it as easy as other teams is because they are an independent and finding teams to schedule is not as easy as it used to be. But it does not mean that ND should not at least TRY to schedule consistently good schedules every year. There are plenty of opportunities out there for ND if they take advantage of them, and I think that Swarbrick is doing that.

 

[gkIrish]

The only reason that ND does not have it as easy as other teams is because they are an independent and finding teams to schedule is not as easy as it used to be. But it does not mean that ND should not at least TRY to schedule consistently good schedules every year. There are plenty of opportunities out there for ND if they take advantage of them, and I think that Swarbrick is doing that.

We already schedule consistently good schedules