ND Scheduled Georgia (Ironman leaving the Country during 2019)

[ACamp1900]

Is it? Assuming the rotating schedule stays as currently constructed... ND will play...

FSU
Georgia
USC
Stanford
Michigan State

UNC
Louisville
Syracuse
Wake Forest or BC

Navy + 2.

I'm not a fan. That's stupid hard. Can't project out that far, but as of last year it'd be playing the #1, #3, #11, #15, #19, #21... and that's with Georgia getting crushed by a truly epic amount of injuries to be unranked.

This. We keep talking about needing big wins to make the playoff... how does a team make the playoff with four plus loses..?? Because that's what happens when just about any program in the country plays a schedule like that... it's stupid imo.

 

[Cackalacky]

Is it? Assuming the rotating schedule stays as currently constructed... ND will play...

FSU
Georgia
USC
Stanford
Michigan State

UNC
Louisville
Syracuse
Wake Forest or BC

Navy + 2.

I'm not a fan. That's stupid hard. Can't project out that far, but as of last year it'd be playing the #1, #3, #11, #15, #19, #21... and that's with Georgia getting crushed by a truly epic amount of injuries to be unranked.

I think it will be. I am excited to play all those teams. Plus we do not have a conference championship so IMO we need to play a tougher schedule to account for the one less game if we are ever going to make the playoff. Plus, I think it will be a huge asset to recruiting to show these elite recruits who we play, where we are playing, and why ND needs them.

Maybe its my understanding (or lack of) but I really think the playoff committee will be looking very hard at who played who and head to heads. I really think those teams that play 4 softballs are going get held to fire for it come selection time.

 

[gkIrish]

Texas
Georgia
USC
Stanford
Virginia Tech

Miami (heaven forbid they get good)
Duke
Syracuse
NC State

Navy + 2.

Yeah, this is freaking brilliant.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/NU0PijNCEwo?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[arrowryan]

Agreed. Everyone loves this game until ND goes 10-2 and misses out on the playoffs because they lost to Georgia instead of romping Cincinnati or Air Force or Indiana or whoever.

If Notre dame goes 10-2 with that schedule in 2019, I guarantee they aren't missing the playoffs

 

[Cackalacky]

If Notre dame goes 10-2 with that schedule in 2019, I guarantee they aren't missing the playoffs

Yup. I concur.

 

[Cackalacky]

Ironman8...don't leave. LMAO.

 

[ACamp1900]

I was just about to ask him if I can back pack with him???

 

[arrowryan]

Also we are 5 years away from 2019 lol, that's a long way away. A lot of things can change in 5 years, half of those teams could turn to shit by then for all we know.

 

[greyhammer90]

If Notre dame goes 10-2 with that schedule in 2019, I guarantee they aren't missing the playoffs

How do you know? When's the last time ND lost two games and was considered a top 4 team at the end of the regular season?

 

[ACamp1900]

My assumption is they think it'll be more than four teams by then?? Only way that makes any sense at all to me...

 

[Cackalacky]

500 fights, that's the number I figured when I was a kid. 500 street fights and you could consider yourself a legitimate tough guy. You need them for experience. To develop leather skin. So I got started. Of course along the way you stop thinking about being tough and all that. It stops being the point. You get past the silliness of it all. But then, after, you realize that's what you are.

Y'all need inspiration. And i am the guy to give it to you.

 

[Rocket89]

This is great for college football. We need to schedule like this in order to survive as an independent. That's our lot in life.

 

[arrowryan]

How do you know? When's the last time ND lost two games and was considered a top 4 team at the end of the regular season?

They are rewarding teams that play tougher schedules with the new playoff system, right? As of today, that will be the toughest schedule in the country and it won't be even close. Idk how they could keep ND out of the playoffs if they went 10-2

 

[ACamp1900]

Y'all need inspiration. And i am the guy to give it to you.

I'm a lover, not a fighter... give me Georgia Southern instead.

 

[IrishLax]

I think it will be. I am excited to play all those teams. Plus we do not have conference championship so IMO we need to play a tougher schedule to account for the one less game if we are ever going to make the playoff. Plus, think it will be a huge asset to recruiting to show these elite recruits who we play, where we are playing, and why ND needs them.

The bolded is a logical fallacy. Recruits like wins. They like positive energy, momentum, and stability. They don't care that Ohio State plays no one, they like 12-0 regular seasons and lofty rankings. The way you build a program is a little chicken-and-egg... you need the recruits to win, and you need to win to recruit. So which comes first? Well, you can either go the Clemson route and buy players, or the Stanford route and get a world class to coach to get the A++ out of mediocre talent surrounding a couple elite players, or you can schedule for wins.

If this was another sport like lacrosse or basketball then I'd be all for the beefiest schedule conceivable. Load it up top to bottom with elite teams. Great to watch, and you can earn your way fairly to the postseason despite a mediocre record based on SOS.

Football, on the other hand, is a beauty pageant. It's an exercise in appearances and warped perception. People say they want to play a tough schedule, when what they really mean is that they'd love some big wins. People say they'd rather go 8-4 against an impossible schedule like we're constructing than 12-0 against a MAC schedule... but the truth is there is a middle ground where we play 3 marquee games sandwiched with cupcakes or middling teams like a normal power program.

Alabama last year in the mighty SEC only played two top ten teams all year, and they lost both games. They played a total of 4 ranked teams all year... and every single one was sandwiched with a bye week/time off or a cupcake. Every single one. And almighty 'Bama still managed to go 2-2. They also had 3 pure cupcakes... not teams like Navy that finish in the top 40-50 range.

You cannot schedule like we're doing and expect wins. It's idiotic and none of the power teams do it for a reason. Time to wake up.

 

[ACamp1900]

The bolded is a logical fallacy. Recruits like wins. They like positive energy, momentum, and stability. They don't care that Ohio State plays no one, they like 12-0 regular seasons and lofty rankings. The way you build a program is a little chicken-and-egg... you need the recruits to win, and you need to win to recruit. So which comes first? Well, you can either go the Clemson route and buy players, or the Stanford route and get a world class to coach to get the A++ out of mediocre talent surrounding a couple elite players, or you can schedule for wins.

If this was another sport like lacrosse or basketball then I'd be all for the beefiest schedule conceivable. Load it up top to bottom with elite teams. Great to watch, and you can earn your way fairly to the postseason despite a mediocre record based on SOS.

Football, on the other hand, is a beauty pageant. It's an exercise in appearances and warped perception. People say they want to play a tough schedule, when what they really mean is that they'd love some big wins. People say they'd rather go 8-4 against an impossible schedule like we're constructing than 12-0 against a MAC schedule... but the truth is there is a middle ground where we play 3 marquee games sandwiched with cupcakes or middling teams like a normal power program.

Alabama last year in the mighty SEC only played two top ten teams all year, and they lost both games. They played a total of 4 ranked teams all year... and every single one was sandwiched with a bye week/time off or a cupcake. Every single one. And almighty 'Bama still managed to go 2-2. They also had 3 pure cupcakes... not teams like Navy that finish in the top 40-50 range.

You cannot schedule like we're doing and expect wins. It's idiotic and none of the power teams do it for a reason. Time to wake up.

Please read this twice everyone....

 

[greyhammer90]

They are rewarding teams that play tougher schedules with the new playoff system, right? As of today, that will be the toughest schedule in the country and it won't be even close. Idk how they could keep ND out of the playoffs if they went 10-2

That's a hell of an assumption though. SOS was a factor in the BCS too. Let's give the board a year to establish precedent before we start guaranteeing what they'll do.

 

[koonja]

They are rewarding teams that play tougher schedules with the new playoff system, right? As of today, that will be the toughest schedule in the country and it won't be even close. Idk how they could keep ND out of the playoffs if they went 10-2

Yeah, but as soon as you have 2-3 losses, people stop caring about you when there's 12-0 and 11-1 teams.

No one will care nor remember who you played if you're 9-3.

 

[SaltyND24]

At Texas, at Stanford, and at Georgia in 2019...fuuuuuuck but 2017 shouldn't be too bad. Though it doesn't relate, for some reason I believe that 2016 is a very winnable schedule to make it to the playoffs.

 

[gkIrish]

They are rewarding teams that play tougher schedules with the new playoff system, right? As of today, that will be the toughest schedule in the country and it won't be even close. Idk how they could keep ND out of the playoffs if they went 10-2

Those are the key words...

Why are we creating a schedule that no other team comes close to? You take Georgia off the schedule and it is still the toughest schedule in the country. Pure overkill.

 

[IrishLax]

This is great for college football. We need to schedule like this in order to survive as an independent. That's our lot in life.

In 2006 we played 3 academies, and teams ranked #4 (USC), #8 (Michigan), and #24 (Penn State)... a far more manageable schedule. We went 10-2, ranked in the top 10 virtually all year and in borderline title game consideration until the very last game of the season. We sold out every game, drew better ratings than we have any year since save 2012, had tons of program optimism, and reeled in a top recruiting class.

Sure seems like we were doing much more than "surviving" as a program at that time while playing a manageable schedule.

 

[greyhammer90]

Yeah, but as soon as you have 2-3 losses, people stop caring about you when there's 12-0 and 11-1 teams.

No one will care nor remember who you played if you're 9-3.

Bingo.

 

[arrowryan]

That's a hell of an assumption though. SOS was a factor in the BCS too. Let's give the board a year to establish precedent before we start guaranteeing what they'll do.

I just don't get why people are freaking out about the schedule. Like I said earlier, half of those teams probably won't be as good as they are today in 5 years. Hell, some of those teams will probably have different head coaches

 

[ThePiombino]

The more I think about this, the more I hate it. It's times like these that I wish we would join a friggin' conference so we can justify the corresponding cupcake schedule. "Toughest schedule in college" will buy us a .500 season before it buys us a playoff birth. I want to win, not justify our 8-4 record.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

The bolded is a logical fallacy. Recruits like wins. They like positive energy, momentum, and stability. They don't care that Ohio State plays no one, they like 12-0 regular seasons and lofty rankings. The way you build a program is a little chicken-and-egg... you need the recruits to win, and you need to win to recruit. So which comes first? Well, you can either go the Clemson route and buy players, or the Stanford route and get a world class to coach to get the A++ out of mediocre talent surrounding a couple elite players, or you can schedule for wins.

If this was another sport like lacrosse or basketball then I'd be all for the beefiest schedule conceivable. Load it up top to bottom with elite teams. Great to watch, and you can earn your way fairly to the postseason despite a mediocre record based on SOS.

Football, on the other hand, is a beauty pageant. It's an exercise in appearances and warped perception. People say they want to play a tough schedule, when what they really mean is that they'd love some big wins. People say they'd rather go 8-4 against an impossible schedule like we're constructing than 12-0 against a MAC schedule... but the truth is there is a middle ground where we play 3 marquee games sandwiched with cupcakes or middling teams like a normal power program.

Alabama last year in the mighty SEC only played two top ten teams all year, and they lost both games. They played a total of 4 ranked teams all year... and every single one was sandwiched with a bye week/time off or a cupcake. Every single one. And almighty 'Bama still managed to go 2-2. They also had 3 pure cupcakes... not teams like Navy that finish in the top 40-50 range.

You cannot schedule like we're doing and expect wins. It's idiotic and none of the power teams do it for a reason. Time to wake up.

QFT.

 

[ACamp1900]

I just don't get why people are freaking out about the schedule. Like I said earlier, half of those teams probably won't be as good as they are today in 5 years. Hell, some of those teams will probably have different head coaches

I want to see ND win National Titles and be a year in year out contender like they were when I was a kid... they will most likely never obtain that level again when they play schedules like this as every other 'name' program, at the same time, schedules themselves 9 or so wins before the season even starts... LAX's post I highlighted (and whiskey did again just above) on the past page hit on this perfectly...

I'm not against adding UGA... I'm against adding UGA to this schedule design without dropping someone else for an easy win... or three or four.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I just don't get why people are freaking out about the schedule. Like I said earlier, half of those teams probably won't be as good as they are today in 5 years. Hell, some of those teams will probably have different head coaches

ND could have a new coach as well if BK were to bolt for the League. Then what?

Your logic is, well, illogical.

Stanford, USC, Georgia, and TX are perennial power house programs. You can argue that teams will ebb and flow, but all 4 of those teams are on a positive trajectory and recruit really really well.

 

[Rocket89]

In 2006 we played 3 academies, and teams ranked #4 (USC), #8 (Michigan), and #24 (Penn State)... a far more manageable schedule. We went 10-2, ranked in the top 10 virtually all year and in borderline title game consideration until the very last game of the season. We sold out every game, drew better ratings than we have any year since save 2012, had tons of program optimism, and reeled in a top recruiting class.

Sure seems like we were doing much more than "surviving" as a program at that time while playing a manageable schedule.

You're complaining about one year for a schedule that isn't even finalized yet and is 6 years away. This isn't the end of the world.

Not that your points are all without merit, but as an independent we need to remain safely on the difficult side of the SoS spectrum when it comes to scheduling future games and series. I think you're living in a fantasy world if you think we can try and skate by in the future playing 2 or 3 ranked teams per year and that's it.

 

[Cackalacky]

The bolded is a logical fallacy. Recruits like wins. They like positive energy, momentum, and stability. They don't care that Ohio State plays no one, they like 12-0 regular seasons and lofty rankings. The way you build a program is a little chicken-and-egg... you need the recruits to win, and you need to win to recruit. So which comes first? Well, you can either go the Clemson route and buy players, or the Stanford route and get a world class to coach to get the A++ out of mediocre talent surrounding a couple elite players, or you can schedule for wins.

If this was another sport like lacrosse or basketball then I'd be all for the beefiest schedule conceivable. Load it up top to bottom with elite teams. Great to watch, and you can earn your way fairly to the postseason despite a mediocre record based on SOS.

Football, on the other hand, is a beauty pageant. It's an exercise in appearances and warped perception. People say they want to play a tough schedule, when what they really mean is that they'd love some big wins. People say they'd rather go 8-4 against an impossible schedule like we're constructing than 12-0 against a MAC schedule... but the truth is there is a middle ground where we play 3 marquee games sandwiched with cupcakes or middling teams like a normal power program.

Alabama last year in the mighty SEC only played two top ten teams all year, and they lost both games. They played a total of 4 ranked teams all year... and every single one was sandwiched with a bye week/time off or a cupcake. Every single one. And almighty 'Bama still managed to go 2-2. They also had 3 pure cupcakes... not teams like Navy that finish in the top 40-50 range.

You cannot schedule like we're doing and expect wins. It's idiotic and none of the power teams do it for a reason. Time to wake up.

I keep getting Internal server error. I hope to respond

 

[greyhammer90]

ND could have a new coach as well if BK were to bolt for the League. Then what?

Your logic is, well, illogical.

Stanford, USC, Georgia, and TX are perennial power house programs. You can argue that teams will ebb and flow, but all 4 of those teams are on a positive trajectory and recruit really really well.

No I'm sure it'll be fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine.