2012 Schedule

[EifertPower]

Can someone explain to me why everyone seems to talk about how brutal our 2012 schedule is. I'm a pretty pessimistic person and like to think the worst and be pleasantly surprised if it is doesn't turn out that way, but i just don't understand why everyone talks about this 2012 schedule as if it is so brutal.

I just don't see it. I don't think it's any or much tougher than this year's.

Here's the schedule...

Yes, the Oklahoma addition will be tough especially on the road. What else though is so scary about this schedule or how is it otherwise any different? Is it Miami at Soldier Field that scares everyone? Didn't we beat them soundly in the bowl game last year? Is Miami even doing well this year?

Does the Navy, Purdue, and Boston College games scare you guys?

I don't know much about BYU, Pitt, and Wake Forest will be next year but getting them all at home shouldn't we win?

Also, won't Michigan State and Stanford be much worse than this year and won't both teams lose their elite starting QBs??

Michigan and USC will be tough and always are and we always plays these teams every year. but at least we get Michigan at home and maybe USC will have Barkley turn pro?

2012 Schedule

Sept. 1 Navy (Dublin, Ireland)
Sept. 8 PURDUE
Sept. 15 at Michigan State
Sept. 22 MICHIGAN
Sept. 29 Open Date
Oct. 6 MIAMI (Soldier Field, Chicago)
Oct. 13 STANFORD
Oct. 20 BYU
Oct. 27 at Oklahoma
Nov. 3 PITTSBURGH
Nov. 10 at Boston College
Nov. 17 WAKE FOREST
Nov. 24 at USC


To me the only difference in this schedule vs. past years is playing Oklahoma and Miami and not playing a second service academy team (Air Force and Army).

 

[NDPhilly]

I'll say 8-4

 

[Damion704]

Ive been thinking the same thing.

 

[IrishAlum1997]

While I believe I agree with you that this is not a "killer" schedule as once thought, you could argue that Navy is the "easiest" game on that schedule. You could also argue that there is no team on the schedule that will finish worse than 3rd in their conference next year, with a potential conference champion or 5 (USC, Oklahoma, Pitt, Michigan, even Miami) thrown in for good measure. College football proves year after year that a schedule with this number of roadblocks can rarely be navigated successfully.

With all of the questions in the secondary and at all of our skill positions less TE, it is conceivable that we could be as pedestrian as 7-5 next season, with the talent and potential to win them all. If we truly are the program we believe we are becoming, we need to go 2-1 against Oklahoma, Michigan, and USC. How well this coaching staff maximizes our young talent will tell the tale.

 

[irishff1014]

While I believe I agree with you that this is not a "killer" schedule as once thought, you could argue that Navy is the "easiest" game on that schedule. You could also argue that there is no team on the schedule that will finish worse than 3rd in their conference next year, with a potential conference champion or 5 (USC, Oklahoma, Pitt, Michigan, even Miami) thrown in for good measure. College football proves year after year that a schedule with this number of roadblocks can rarely be navigated successfully.

With all of the questions in the secondary and at all of our skill positions less TE, it is conceivable that we could be as pedestrian as 7-5 next season, with the talent and potential to win them all. If we truly are the program we believe we are becoming, we need to go 2-1 against Oklahoma, Michigan, and USC. How well this coaching staff maximizes our young talent will tell the tale.[/QUOTE

i couldn't agree more.

 

[phork]

We'll be 7-5 at best. Losses to Michigan, MichSt, USC, Stanford, Oklahoma and perhaps the Forehead Slap loser on one of the lesser teams.

 

[Irishman77]

we can beat all those teams if we take care of the football.

 

[NDinL.A.]

To me the only difference in this schedule vs. past years is playing Oklahoma and Miami and not playing a second service academy team (Air Force and Army).

Yeah, well that's pretty big damn difference. Miami will be better if they avoid sanctions, and OK is always loaded.

Also, you talk about what other teams are losing...we're also losing a lot. It'll be tough sledding...

 

[Yes]

We'll be 7-5 at best. Losses to Michigan, MichSt, USC, Stanford, Oklahoma and perhaps the Forehead Slap loser on one of the lesser teams.

Michigan State and Stanford lose a lot of their weapons. Not saying they will suck, just saying they won't be the same team as this year. USC will depend on Barkley staying, but either way they'll be loaded.

 

[IrishLax]

Compare this schedule to, say, Virginia Tech's schedule for this year and you understand why it is "killer."

I agree with what you're saying though... in 2005 we were supposed to go 0-6 to start the year under Charlie and instead went 10-2 and on to a BCS game. Anything can happen. The real question is just how good will Michigan, Michigan State, BYU, Stanford, Miami, Oklahoma, and USC all be? Those teams could all end up being top 25... and if that happens at absolute best we lose 3 of those games.

On the other hand, with the exception of Michigan and USC, all of those teams could be very down. And even USC has to replace a ridiculously talented QB. So... who knows... but right now I'd set the O/U at 7.5 wins for next year.

 

[GreatGolson]

If this team is BCS caliber next year it wont matter who we play. In the words of Al Davis (god rest
his soul) JUST WIN BABY!

 

[mick2]

I think a lot of the teams will be vastly different next year and so will the Irish.

I believe we can go toe to toe with all the teams on that schedule but it's definitely not going to be an easy road.

I don't thnk 7-5 like a previous poster but I do think we could have a very similar year to the year we are having right now,even if we are much improved.

The progress may not show in our final w/l record but I think year 3 we'll start to see a monster program starting to take it's shape.

 

[tommyIRISH23]

I think well hit the 10 win mark in the regular season.

So Ill say 10-2 and a trip to the BCS

 

[notredomer23]

Some of the pessimism in this thread is amazing.

 

[GreatGolson]

lets not forget were a few turnovers away from being 10-1 or maybe even 11-0 this year. idk who our qb will be, our D will continue to improve, younger guys will develope. honestly though, can we at least wait until THIS season is over??

 

[phork]

Some of the pessimism in this thread is amazing.

Realism bro.

Share your thoughts on how we go 12-0..

 

[NDPhilly]

Our D line will be great. Our LB if Manti returns will be good. Our Safeties will be ok. Corners are a big question.

O Line returns 3 but I think Golic gets another year so 4 returning if We move golic or cave to RG which means little or no drop off. I expect Kelly to use Koyack and Eifert more next year along with Daniels and Greenberry and possibly Agholor stepping up. Will be interesting to see how our #2 RB is used.

 

[CarrollVermin]

Some of the pessimism in this thread is amazing.

^^THIS^^

 

[koonja]

lets not forget were a few turnovers away from being 10-1 or maybe even 11-0 this year. idk who our qb will be, our D will continue to improve, younger guys will develope. honestly though, can we at least wait until THIS season is over??

1) Our defense will be worse. We're graduating 4 starting Dbacks, and will probably lose Teo.

2) Just cause it's not over the top optimism doesn't make it pessimist. It's called being a realist.

2012 could get ugly. Let's just pray we have a better QB. As long as we beat Michigan, I'll be content.

 

[military_irish]

1) Our defense will be worse. We're graduating 4 starting Dbacks, and will probably lose Teo.

2) Just cause it's not over the top optimism doesn't make it pessimist. It's called being a realist.

2012 could get ugly. Let's just pray we have a better QB. As long as we beat Michigan, I'll be content.

ND only loses 3 starting DB's. Slaughter should be back for his 5th year.

 

[koonja]

ND only loses 3 starting DB's. Slaughter should be back for his 5th year.

Touche. But Zeke is most likely going to end up being the other safety and he's going to get burned 2,542,652,456 times next year.

 

[BeauBenken]

We could go .500 or 1.000

We lose Floyd, right? Seems awful, but maybe losing Floyd makes Tommy a lot better at reading the field and spreading the ball. We lose our starting corners and our starting safeties, but maybe Zeke gets better in coverage, Slaughter kills it, and some young CBs really step up.

There's no way we know how this ends up, but the odds are more in favor of an 8-4 season as opposed to an 11-1 or undefeated season.

 

[koonja]

We could go .500 or 1.000

We lose Floyd, right? Seems awful, but maybe losing Floyd makes Tommy a lot better at reading the field and spreading the ball. We lose our starting corners and our starting safeties, but maybe Zeke gets better in coverage, Slaughter kills it, and some young CBs really step up.

There's no way we know how this ends up, but the odds are more in favor of an 8-4 season as opposed to an 11-1 or undefeated season.

No way Rees is better without Michael Floyd. You don't become a better passing team by losing an all-american. Floyd draws double teams which gives the other WRs an advantage.

Zeke's problem isn't that he's bad at coverage, it's that he's painfully slow. On top of that, he takes the worst angles you can possibly take while still remaining within the out of bounds lines.

 

[military_irish]

No way Rees is better without Michael Floyd. You don't become a better passing team by losing an all-american. Floyd draws double teams which gives the other WRs an advantage.

Zeke's problem isn't that he's bad at coverage, it's that he's painfully slow. On top of that, he takes the worst angles you can possibly take while still remaining within the out of bounds lines.

I used this in another thread a week or so ago but I made an analogy to the ND mens basketball team.

When ND had Luke Harangody their whole offensive was run through him. They constantly looked for him. The team was destined for the NIT tourney then Harangody got hurt. The whole philosophy changed, they created the burn offense. Next thing you know they make the tourney. The next year they wondered if anyone could step up to fill his void, after he graduated. They then registered one of the best regular season's they have had in quite some time.

I am not saying the same will happen with the ND football team. But it will FORCE Rees to spread the ball to other options.

 

[mick2]

No way Rees is better without Michael Floyd. You don't become a better passing team by losing an all-american. Floyd draws double teams which gives the other WRs an advantage.

Zeke's problem isn't that he's bad at coverage, it's that he's painfully slow. On top of that, he takes the worst angles you can possibly take while still remaining within the out of bounds lines.

Haha I wish I was that painfully slow. Not arguing just pointing out my athletic inabilities. Lol

Like the analogy with the basketball team. Although there are a lot more moving parts in football we could see a very wide open look, but I think another parallel with the basketball team is that there was a dedication to defense. That is what is going to keep us together. And a bad secondary can be somewhat masked with a great pass rush which we are developing.

 

[NDPhilly]

Does anyone else think GAIII is better suited at WR? I think he has great strait line speed but I don't think he has the wiggle a RB needs. I could see him as a great slot guy though.

 

[NDinL.A.]

No way Rees is better without Michael Floyd. You don't become a better passing team by losing an all-american. Floyd draws double teams which gives the other WRs an advantage.

Actually, you're dead wrong here. That scenario you just called out happens all the time. In fact, it happens so much, Bill Simmons has a name for it: The Patrick Ewing Theory. He talks about how when a team loses a star player, many times the team actually plays better. The thinking is that others are required to step up in the absence of a star, and many, many times they do. This applies to many sports, not just basketball.

Not saying this will happen with ND (losing Floyd is definitely huge), but I am saying it absolutely could happen and has happened many times in the past...

 

[NDinL.A.]

Does anyone else think GAIII is better suited at WR? I think he has great strait line speed but I don't think he has the wiggle a RB needs. I could see him as a great slot guy though.

This has already been discussed, but the coaches have already said he's better suited for RB, and they see him every day. You've never seen him play collegiate WR, neither have any of us, so we can't possibly know...

 

[Anchorman]

Didn't Kelly also reference some concerns about ball skills? Got to trust the coaches on this one.

 

[DomerInHappyValley]

NDinLA I believe Simmons changed the name to the Tiki Barber theory.