2015 Pre-Season Coaches Poll (ND #11)

[Irish YJ]

I disagree. Baylor and TCU both had EMBARRASSING out of conference schedules last year. They weren't really 11-1, they were 8-1 with three extra bye weeks. I know Temple and UMass are no world beaters but they're at least FBS. If we finish 11-1 we'll be in.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4 using Tapatalk.

11-1 would be hard with Temple, UMass, and no Conf Championship. IMO we'd have to lose early by only a few points on the road at Clemson to get in at 11-1. A home loss, or a late loss @ Stanford would kill any hope. Maybe a close loss to USC if USC went undefeated would be OK with some help of others not looking so hot + convincing wins late in the season.

 

[Booslum31]

I disagree. Baylor and TCU both had EMBARRASSING out of conference schedules last year. They weren't really 11-1, they were 8-1 with three extra bye weeks. I know Temple and UMass are no world beaters but they're at least FBS. If we finish 11-1 we'll be in.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4 using Tapatalk.

I hope that you are right. I just have this feeling that we slip up against Clemson or USC and without a championship game it makes it hard. Hoping I'm wrong. Anyway, I fully intend to enjoy this season.

 

[Irish Insanity]

IMO the 11-1 debate hinges on what other teams look like with our record in the end. I can see 11-1 in some years, and 11-1 questionable to get in others.

 

[stlnd01]

IMO the 11-1 debate hinges on what other teams look like with our record in the end. I can see 11-1 in some years, and 11-1 questionable to get in others.

Yeah. It's kind of impossible to know at this point. 11-1 certainly puts us in the mix. But there's a lot of football to be played, as they say.

 

[Crazy Balki]

Which teams of Clemson, UCLA, LSU, ASU, Georgia Tech, etc. would you rank over Notre Dame?

Agreed. Clemson has a lot of ?'s on both fronts, LSU has WAY more questions at QB, Tech is replacing practically every skill player and their best offensive lineman, ASU also has questions at QB and lost their top receiver. We've probably got less questions than all of those teams.

 

[Crazy Balki]

Tough to imagine we get in last year at 11-1 sadly (irrelevant now). Ohio State isn't going to draw as much as us, but they still draw extremely well, and they beat some good teams down the stretch. The wins against Michigan State (11-2) and Wisconsin (11-3) would have stood out among any of our presumed victories (those being USC and ASU), and they have a conference title under their belt.

If we finish 11-1, we really need teams like USC, Stanford, Clemson, Texas and Ga Tech to not lay an egg.

 

[NDdomer2]

11-1 still gets u a real solid bowl game and opponent if u miss the playoff and that's still pretty kickass. Win and get the train really rolling.

 

[NCND]

Not to rain on the parade but not sure why everyone is talking Playoff/11-1? Talent is coming back but D is unproven, got sliced up by NC and NW and a 1 game starter at QB. Hopefully they prove me wrong but I can't get those images of two sorry ass teams just going up and down the field. I would be elated with a NY6 bowl WIN.

 

[Fbolt]

Returning 18/19 starters, KR is back, Malik is starting (and has proven to be able to compete and Win in big games), and a coach in BK (with an improved staff IMO) who has shown at multiple jobs that he can stay the course and win the games. Quite truthfully the Irish should be inside the top 10.

MSU, FSU-no way IMO.

 

[NCND]

Returning 18/19 starters, KR is back, Malik is starting (and has proven to be able to compete and Win in big games), and a coach in BK (with an improved staff IMO) who has shown at multiple jobs that he can stay the course and win the games. Quite truthfully the Irish should be inside the top 10.

MSU, FSU-no way IMO.

No way MSU but Irish should be inside the Top 10? OK.

 

[IrishLax]

The way I see it ND could easily shit the bed and lose 4 or 5 games because of the number of up tempo or option teams (Texas, Clemson, USC, GT, Navy, etc.) that could cause serious issues for our defense if Van Gorder hasn't gotten his crap together. Blitzing can get you killed if done wrong against teams that go fast and don't let you sub. On top of that, BC and Pitt are both quintessential trap games.

But on paper, ND has more talent than pretty much everyone ranked behind them. There is top tier NFL talent at multiple positions. Outside of injuries, there should be no excuses this year.

 

[Crazy Balki]

Seems like BVG has gotten his "crap" together. Seems like they're practicing against tempo and the option a lot in fall practice, and the defensive personnel seems to be less reliant on sub-packages like it was last season. It's looking like players are just going to shift over with the nickel coming in as well (Rochell moves inside while Day rolls out on passing situations). Most of the guys that play are every down guys that can be out there for the entire drive, even though we'll more than likely see a lot of different looks (4-3, 4-2-5, 3-4).

 

[Fbolt]

Well, I still can't help but wonder if BVG is the same as Tenuta. Evil thought that continues to raise it's head. Nothing some stiff drinks can't solve.

 

[Hammer Of The Gods]

Well, I still can't help but wonder if BVG is the same as Tenuta. Evil thought that continues to raise it's head. Nothing some stiff drinks can't solve.

I've been thinking this exact same thing. Gives me the cold sweats.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Apparently I'm the only one who thinks MSU is overrated, so I'm probably very wrong.

I can't comment on this year's team (haven't done much research outside of ND yet), but MSU were victims of my soapbox rants all season last year for being ranked too high. They have won some good games in the past, but they've also been absolutely destroyed in others. For me, the jury is still out on them. I'm withholding judgement until they play Oregon. (MSU seriously only plays two real games this season. OSU has an absolute shit schedule as well. I hate the B1G.)

 

[wizards8507]

Returning 18/19 starters.

That doesn't mean anything. We're returning 18 starters from a mediocre team. Is that really an argument in favor of being ranked high? We're returning a bunch of dudes from a team that lost to Northwestern?

 

[dublinirish]

I can't comment on this year's team (haven't done much research outside of ND yet), but MSU were victims of my soapbox rants all season last year for being ranked too high. They have won some good games in the past, but they've also been absolutely destroyed in others. For me, the jury is still out on them. I'm withholding judgement until they play Oregon. (MSU seriously only plays two real games this season. OSU has an absolute shit schedule as well. I hate the B1G.)

check out Penn State's too, particularly their non conference slate

 

[IrishLax]

That doesn't mean anything. We're returning 18 starters from a mediocre team. Is that really an argument in favor of being ranked high? We're returning a bunch of dudes from a team that lost to Northwestern?

Returning starters actually has one of the highest correlations to success of any stat. But keep beating your drum.

And the bigger key is we're returning a "bunch of dudes" who didn't lose to Northwestern. Schmidt, Russell, Redfield, Day, Cage... there are a lot of guys who either got hurt in or otherwise didn't play in that Northwestern game. Our safeties were Drue Tranquill on a torn ACL, and Austin Collinsworth on one shoulder.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

That doesn't mean anything. We're returning 18 starters from a mediocre team. Is that really an argument in favor of being ranked high? We're returning a bunch of dudes from a team that lost to Northwestern?

This is a bad argument, imo. ND's starters were 7-1 (should've been 8-0) before the injuries mounted (and that was with losing the 5 players before the season started). Without those suspensions/injuries, you're looking at a team that's probably 11-1 (USC had their number). And btw, that's including EG turning the ball over every two seconds. This is a very deep and talented football team. Anyone who has followed ND over the last 4 seasons can point out that 1) BK's teams keep getting deeper and 2) Only once has something bizarre and season-crippling NOT happened. (ie. massive amounts of injuries/turnovers, suspensions). I've said this numerous times, BK's floor with even the worst of luck has been 8 wins. The one time things actually went according to plan, he went 12-1 and played in the NCG. Preseason rankings are based on potential...and ND has all the potential in the world right now. The problem has been living up to it (but that's not what is being discussed at the moment.)

 

[IrishLion]

Agreed. Clemson has a lot of ?'s on both fronts, LSU has WAY more questions at QB, Tech is replacing practically every skill player and their best offensive lineman, ASU also has questions at QB and lost their top receiver. We've probably got less questions than all of those teams.

Post nitpicking time! ASU does NOT have questions at QB. Mike Bercovici is a stud, and could end up being the best in the Pac12 this year. In fact, you might make the argument that he already is, but a better argument could probably be made for Kessler at USC. However, Bercovici also has an insanely hot girlfriend that can run routes and catch a pass over her shoulder, so I still say Bercovici wins.

FURTHER EDIT: Jared Goff at Cal and Anu Solomon at Arizona can get in this argument as well, also probably with stronger cases than Bercovici.

Our safeties were Drue Tranquill on a torn ACL, and Austin Collinsworth on one shoulder.

Shumate and Redfield were both available for that game though, right?

Of the gripes to be made against BVG last season, my biggest was that they put Tranquill and Collinsworth out there over Redfield and Shumate. I understand the coaches were trying to make a point to these guys, but that point is lost when your "intelligent guys that have learned the system" are getting beat like drums on the field. Sometimes you just have to let the talent play and learn on the fly... but BVG did NOT do that with Redfield and Shumate last year (until the bowl game).

 

[ClausentoTate]

That's actually not what you just said, you just said we should be ranked behind every. single. team. that finished ahead of us last year.

This is actually a very interesting approach -- I wonder how the BCS would have played out over the last decade or so if we didn't start with ridiculous polls in the preseason based on how soft a team's schedule is, how many starters return, new coaches, etc.

 

[wizards8507]

Returning starters actually has one of the highest correlations to success of any stat. But keep beating your drum.

Beating what drum? I fully believe we'll finish the season top-15 and play in a New Year's bowl. I just don't think we've done anything to earn #11 yet.

 

[IrishLion]

Beating what drum? I fully believe we'll finish the season top-15 and play in a New Year's bowl. I just don't think we've done anything to earn #11 yet.

I always thought preseason rankings were a projection of how the season would play out....

So "what have you done so far?" doesn't seem to really matter at all.

Also, preseason polls are dumb in general. They are the reason the SEC is able to consume itself every year and still get massive credit for wins that actually aren't impressive.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Beating what drum? I fully believe we'll finish the season top-15 and play in a New Year's bowl. I just don't think we've done anything to earn #11 yet.

It's a preseason poll. No one has done anything "yet."

 

[Cackalacky]

That doesn't mean anything. We're returning 18 starters from a mediocre team. Is that really an argument in favor of being ranked high? We're returning a bunch of dudes from a team that lost to Northwestern?

False. Fully. It means a great deal.

Returning starters actually has one of the highest correlations to success of any stat. But keep beating your drum.

And the bigger key is we're returning a "bunch of dudes" who didn't lose to Northwestern. Schmidt, Russell, Redfield, Day, Cage... there are a lot of guys who either got hurt in or otherwise didn't play in that Northwestern game. Our safeties were Drue Tranquill on a torn ACL, and Austin Collinsworth on one shoulder.

Total Returning Starters: The number you want to see is 16 or more total returning starters (out of the 24 total in the Matrix). Anything less and team average more losses and the odds of the same or improved record next year starts to dip under 50%. Returning 17 or more total starters and your odds jump to nearly 71% for having as good or better win total in 2012. 75% that return 19 or more starters the last 4 years win more games the following season. Say hello to Kansas, Oklahoma, Auburn, USC, South Carolina, Mississippi, Ohio State, Maryland and Florida. Odds say 6-7 of these teams gets more Ws in 2012.
How important are returning starters to college football? - CFB Matrix

Preseason College Football: How Important are Returning Starters?

Some Positions are More Important than Others

Some positions are usually easier to replace than others. In our example above, not only was it easier for a program like Alabama to replace a Heisman Trophy winner than it will be for Baylor, but the running back position is typically an easier position to replace than the quarterback position.

From the same ESPN article I cited earlier:

Certain positions matter more than others when it comes to the correlation between returning starters and next-year success in college football.
The positions your returning starters play matters, and it starts at QB. We looked at BCS teams since 2000 to determine which positions were most important to the most successful teams in college football, and discovered that 80 percent of all quarterbacks who have led their teams to a BCS bowl game were returning starters.

Besides quarterback, BCS teams have the highest return rate at offensive tackle (71 percent of tackles on BCS teams are returning starters), cornerback (71 percent) and free safety (72 percent).

We return both safeties, both cornerbacks, and our tackles.

 

[Irish Insanity]

That doesn't mean anything. We're returning 18 starters from a mediocre team. Is that really an argument in favor of being ranked high? We're returning a bunch of dudes from a team that lost to Northwestern?

You shut the fuck up. That was the one game unattended last year. It still hurts.

 

[koonja]

You shut the fuck up. That was the one game unattended last year. It still hurts.

You were at Northwestern? Why didn't you tell me you idiot. I was also there.

 

[Irish Insanity]

You were at Northwestern? Why didn't you tell me you idiot. I was also there.

I think you texted me but I got in late and never responded.

 

[wizards8507]

I always thought preseason rankings were a projection of how the season would play out....

I agree that's how voters seem to use them, but I don't think that's how they should be used for the reason you outline below.

So "what have you done so far?" doesn't seem to really matter at all.

Sure. But the media insists on putting these polls out, so here we are. As crappy a standard as last year's performance is, I still think it's a stronger standard than whatever convoluted machinations voters come up with to project the upcoming season.

Also, preseason polls are dumb in general. They are the reason the SEC is able to consume itself every year and still get massive credit for wins that actually aren't impressive.

Yes.

 

[NCND]

Everyone is arguing with this Wizards guy but he's right they lost to NW.. lets not forget that while we all drown in the Kool-aid. I really hope I'm wrong but I anit seeing this "dark-horse CFP team" everyone is seeing.