2015 Bye Week Reassessment

[irishfan]

I think it is VERY possible we go 11-1 and don't make the playoffs.. Even if Stanford wins out and we beat them, that could be the only win over a top 25 team we will have at end of the season.. Clem, Big Ten champ, SEC champ, and an undefeated Baylor or TCU. seems like they all get in over us

I agree. We need some luck. In theory the PAC-12 looks like it may take care of itself, especially if Stanford keeps winning and we can knock them off. We very badly need Baylor/TCU to end 11-1 again...I think that is our only realistic chance sadly since we probably need Clemson to finish 13-0 and the SEC/B1G champ seem to be locks....maybe if OSU beats MSU and Michigan beats OSU we can jump past what would be a pretty big mess at the top of the B1G....although if Iowa stays undefeated then that might be trouble also since that would be a marquee win for whoever wins the B1G Championship.

 

[Blaise]

I agree. We need some luck. In theory the PAC-12 looks like it may take care of itself, especially if Stanford keeps winning and we can knock them off. We very badly need Baylor/TCU to end 11-1 again...I think that is our only realistic chance sadly since we probably need Clemson to finish 13-0 and the SEC/B1G champ seem to be locks....maybe if OSU beats MSU and Michigan beats OSU we can jump past what would be a pretty big mess at the top of the B1G.

More likely is Pitt or another ACC team we will have beaten to beat Clemson... Then we can say we lost to them but it was in a hurricane.. maybe we hop them...

If OSU is 11-1 and goes to big ten title game and wins.. 12-1 OSU still gets in over us IMO

 

[gkIrish]

Great thread, Cack.

If you told me before the season started that we would go through Texas, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and USC with one loss, be ranked in the top 10, and cover the spread in six out of seven games, I would've begrudgingly taken it... if you also told me our only loss would be to Clemson on the road by the slimmest of margins, and that would we destroy Texas and Georgia Tech and handle USC by double digits, I would've for sure taken it.

But if you told me we'd lose Zaire, Folston, Jones, Smythe, etc. and we'd do that... I don't think anyone on this board would've turned it down. It is truly remarkable how well this team has played given the hand that they were dealt... with the exception of the trip to UVA, ND has outperformed expectations in every. single. game. ND was pegged as a 9 win team by Vegas BEFORE injuries, so anything at 10+ wins should be considered unmitigated success.

When you consider we spent the entire fall tailoring an offense to Malik Zaire+Folston and lost both of them... and somehow we have the #5 offense in the country with a RS frosh QB who got no reps and might not even know the meaning of the word "progressions" and a converted WR that had never played RB before in his life being asked to carry the ball 20+ times a game, it's truly absurd.

Your points are well-taken. However I don't think using the Vegas spreads as barometer of success is necessarily accurate.

Do you think Clemson should have been favored over us? I don't. Should Georgia Tech have been favored over us at home? Definitely not. In fact it was used as motivation by the staff. etc, etc. Happy to be 6-1 but I think anything less than 10 wins is going to be highly disappointing considering how mediocre our schedule turned out to be. We have 1 win over a team with less than 3 losses.

 

[IrishLax]

Your points are well-taken. However I don't think using the Vegas spreads as barometer of success is necessarily accurate.

Do you think Clemson should have been favored over us? I don't. Should Georgia Tech have been favored over us at home? Definitely not. In fact it was used as motivation by the staff. etc, etc. Happy to be 6-1 but I think anything less than 10 wins is going to be highly disappointing considering how mediocre our schedule turned out to be. We have 1 win over a team with less than 3 losses.

Clemson is the #1 team in the country per F/+... so yes, I definitely do. They're the best team in the country by far looking at advanced stats. Clemson being a 2.5 point favorite at home means they didn't even get the full margin for homefield advantage and that oddsmakers had us as the "stronger" team on a neutral field, which if anything is overselling ND not underselling.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2015 OVERALL COLLEGE FOOTBALL RATINGS

 

[RDU Irish]

I think Martini puts in work second half of the season. I like what he brings for a more physical front against power/run teams.

I didn't realize Schmidt had a broken thumb. With Schmidt and Redfield both playing with one hand (more or less) gives a new meaning to playing with one hand tied behind your back. That is a big weakness up the middle - do we have any idea how long they are expected to be taped up?

 

[irishfan]

More likely is Pitt or another ACC team we will have beaten to beat Clemson... Then we can say we lost to them but it was in a hurricane.. maybe we hop them...

If OSU is 11-1 and goes to big ten title game and wins.. 12-1 OSU still gets in over us IMO

I just don't think they can justify putting 11-1 ND over 11-1 or 12-1 Clemson if it comes down to that. Even if our schedule is tougher and we out-gained them badly, we still lost head-to-head which IMO is too much to overcome.

 

[Blaise]

I just don't think they can justify putting 11-1 ND over 11-1 or 12-1 Clemson if it comes down to that. Even if our schedule is tougher and we out-gained them badly, we still lost head-to-head which IMO is too much to overcome.

We beat Pitt at Pitt by 17... Clemson loses in neutral site by 10... I think you very much could make that argument.. Esp if Stanford wins Pac, it will mean you beat two power 5 champs

 

[gkIrish]

Clemson is the #1 team in the country per F/+... so yes, I definitely do. They're the best team in the country by far looking at advanced stats. Clemson being a 2.5 point favorite at home means they didn't even get the full margin for homefield advantage and that oddsmakers had us as the "stronger" team on a neutral field, which if anything is overselling ND not underselling.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2015 OVERALL COLLEGE FOOTBALL RATINGS

91% of IE believed that we would do better than lose to Clemson by 2.

Virginia-91% of IE thought we would win by 10+. Expectations not met.

I'm not really making any particular point other than there are at least 2 games where the final score did not meet the expectations of ND fans at all. That being said, there are 5 games where expectations were met so generally a good job.

 

[IrishLax]

91% of IE believed that we would do better than lose to Clemson by 2.

Virginia-91% of IE thought we would win by 10+. Expectations not met.

I'm not really making any particular point other than there are at least 2 games where the final score did not meet the expectations of ND fans at all. That being said, there are 5 games where expectations were met so generally a good job.

Citing idiot fans unreasonable expectations in an online poll is a self-defeating argument. That is not an acceptable barometer on any level.

Especially when you consider that ND was up more than 10 on UVA and then OH HOLY SHIT OUR LEADER JUST BROKE HIS ANKLE. Brian Kelly is drastically outperforming both pre-season, pre-injury long term season expectations, as well as predicted game outcomes. He is the only coach to have his team cover the spread in 6 games this year, and the only game they didn't they WERE covering the spread before Zaire went down.

That's not just good, that's insanely good. Borderline historic levels of over-performance.

 

[wizards8507]

Citing idiot fans unreasonable expectations in an online poll is a self-defeating argument. That is not an acceptable barometer on any level.

Especially when you consider that ND was up more than 10 on UVA and then OH HOLY SHIT OUR LEADER JUST BROKE HIS ANKLE. Brian Kelly is drastically outperforming both pre-season, pre-injury long term season expectations, as well as predicted game outcomes. He is the only coach to have his team cover the spread in 6 games this year, and the only game they didn't they WERE covering the spread before Zaire went down.

That's not just good, that's insanely good. Borderline historic levels of over-performance.

Waaaaait a second. Fan polls are not an acceptable barometer but point spreads are?

 

[IrishLax]

Again... just for emphasis... ND is 6-1 with the #6 offense in the country despite losing all offensive starters save WRs and OL. They have double digit point victories over the #15 and #20 rated teams in terms of strength. Their only loss is to the #1 team in the country by the slimmest of margins on the road.

If you're complaining about that, then you're being unreasonable. This start should be nothing but celebrated.

 

[wizards8507]

Again... just for emphasis... ND is 6-1 with the #6 offense in the country despite losing all offensive starters save WRs and OL. They have double digit point victories over the #15 and #20 rated teams in terms of strength. Their only loss is to the #1 team in the country by the slimmest of margins on the road.

If you're complaining about that, then you're being unreasonable. This start should be nothing but celebrated.

Your official position is that 3-3 USC and NAVY are the 15th and 20th strongest teams in the country?

I'm happy with 6-1 and it looks like we'll go 10-2. That's satisfactory on its face. But let's not act like our schedule to-date has been anything better than hot garbage. My problem is that we always accept losses against tough competition like they're to be expected. A program like Notre Dame should expect to be 6-0 against UMass, Navy, Georgia Tech, Virginia, and this year's versions of Texas and USC. That shouldn't be a pleasant surprise, it should be a baseline performance. Then, we need to win at least half of the Clemson / Stanford type games.

What Expectations Are
Bad opponents - Win all games
Mediocre opponents - Win most games, possibly with a WTF loss
Pretty good opponents - Win half of the games
Very good opponents - Lose

What Expectations Should Be
Bad opponents - Win all games
Mediocre opponents - Win all games
Pretty good opponents - Win most games, possibly with a WTF loss
Very good opponents - Win half of the games

Alabama Expectations
Bad opponents - Win all games
Mediocre opponents - Win all games
Pretty good opponents - Win all games
Very good opponents - Win most games, possibly with at WTF loss

I understand that "Alabama expectations" are never going to be a reality at Notre Dame. But if we play up to the "What Expectations Should Be" model, we can be a playoff team every few years.

 

[IrishLax]

Your official position is that 3-3 USC and NAVY are the 15th and 20th strongest teams in the country?

That's not "my position"... that's what advanced stats say. That's also why USC is a favorite over Utah this weekend, because they have a lot of talent that produces at a high level. That's why Navy is undefeated and stomping teams outside of their single loss to ND.

I'm happy with 6-1 and it looks like we'll go 10-2. That's satisfactory on its face. But let's not act like our schedule to-date has been anything better than hot garbage. My problem is that we always accept losses against tough competition like they're to be expected. A program like Notre Dame should expect to be 6-0 against UMass, Navy, Georgia Tech, Virginia, and this year's versions of Texas and USC. That shouldn't be a pleasant surprise, it should be a baseline performance. Then, we need to win at least half of the Clemson / Stanford type games.

What the hell are you talking about? Schedule to date has been #23 (per Sagarin) in the country... harder than EVERY SINGLE TOP 25 TEAM besides Utah, Bama, and Stanford.

 

[ACamp1900]

I'm convinced wizards lives in another dimension at times... a place where ND plays a garbage schedule and the patriots aren't a bunch of d bag cheaters... surely such a place doesn't actually exist...

 

[kmoose]

That's also why USC is a favorite over Utah this weekend,

I'm with you on the positive aspects of the season. But let's be honest about this one thing........ USC is favored because the money is coming in lopsided for USC, so Vegas needs to give Utah points in an effort to even the money out. It really has little to do with the talent of either team, this close to game day.

 

[Irish Insanity]

I'm convinced wizards lives in another dimension at times... a place where ND plays a garbage schedule and the patriots are a bunch of d bag cheaters... surely such a place doesn't actually exist...

Pretty much the world we live in currently. Outside of Clemson of course.

 

[phgreek]

In terms of things to work on over the bye week...

Defense
Dbacks need to keep working hard...made some plays on the ball against usc...nice to see
Entire defense needs a remedial tackling seminar...
Need to find ways to generate more pressure on QB

Offense
I'm not sure how you fix execution except practice. The team's problems are not a "lack" of much of anything, beyond consistency....and oddly the freshman QB is not the problem. This team was well on their way to hanging 70 on Southern Cal, but failed to execute when there was blood in the water. That is actually a mental toughness thing too. I've seen the never say die kind, now this team needs to show the kind that provides precision execution when there is blood in the water.

Special Teams
CJ Sanders is a really nice asset
Yoon is doing well
Would like to see better blocking on Kick off returns, but it isn't as awful as it has been...may have something to do with having Sanders.
Punting has been good
kickoffs have been good
Kick coverage has been good for the most part, although SC got some yards on kickoffs.


I am happy with where the team ended up based on injuries. However to see how close they came to being perfect, despite the game they played at Clemson...my expectations are much higher, especially from a defense that should, in no way, be the liability, but has been at times.

No let downs, and a clean game against Stanford, and they are knocking on the playoff door...I still think they are a new years 6, even if they run the table the rest of the way.

 

[gkIrish]

That's not "my position"... that's what advanced stats say. That's also why USC is a favorite over Utah this weekend, because they have a lot of talent that produces at a high level. That's why Navy is undefeated and stomping teams outside of their single loss to ND.



What the hell are you talking about? Schedule to date has been #23 (per Sagarin) in the country... harder than EVERY SINGLE TOP 25 TEAM besides Utah, Bama, and Stanford.

You know that's because we don't play any FBS teams and other factors like that. I'd rather play Clemson than Bama, LSU, Florida, Michigan St., Michigan, Ole Miss, or Utah. Clemson isn't as good as those teams other than maybe Ole Miss. Which is the task at least 8 of the other top 25 teams had to face besides the 3 you mentioned.

We have one win over a team with less than 3 losses. And Navy's best win is over East Carolina Do you really think our schedule has been challenging besides Clemson?

 

[IrishLax]

I'm with you on the positive aspects of the season. But let's be honest about this one thing........ USC is favored because the money is coming in lopsided for USC, so Vegas needs to give Utah points in an effort to even the money out. It really has little to do with the talent of either team, this close to game day.

Actually about 80% of the public money is on Utah. USC opened as a 3 point favorite because they think USC has more talent and are expecting lots of late "shark" money on the Trojans.

 

[Free Manera]

I'm with you on the positive aspects of the season. But let's be honest about this one thing........ USC is favored because the money is coming in lopsided for USC, so Vegas needs to give Utah points in an effort to even the money out. It really has little to do with the talent of either team, this close to game day.

I thought this too until very recently when I was educated on the subject by someone much more knowledgeable than me. What I learned is that the betting is almost never even. In fact, Vegas doesn't necessarily shoot for that. They much prefer to win by having people bet on losers. If they can entice 55% of the people to make a bad bet, they clean up. That is a far superior option to just collecting the vig.

If they truly wanted even betting, it would happen. Instead though, what you usually see is uneven betting and very accurate lines, with the house usually winning more often than not.

 

[gkIrish]

Lax---on a scale of one to ten how tough is a schedule that features teams with the following records:

2-4
2-4
2-5
1-5
6-0
4-1
3-3

That's a combined record of 20-22.

Let's compare to Texas A&M (who has not played an FBS team btw): 22-19

Iowa: 26-18 (and that even includes a game vs. an 0-6 opponent.

 

[wizards8507]

That's not "my position"... that's what advanced stats say. That's also why USC is a favorite over Utah this weekend, because they have a lot of talent that produces at a high level. That's why Navy is undefeated and stomping teams outside of their single loss to ND.

F+ is about as useless as FPI, which currently has USC at number 6.

What the hell are you talking about? Schedule to date has been #23 (per Sagarin) in the country... harder than EVERY SINGLE TOP 25 TEAM besides Utah, Bama, and Stanford.

Florida has played the 12th toughest schedule per Sagarin.

Regardless, our SOS is skewed high because we don't play many (any?) teams that are truly terrible. Georgia Tech and Virginia have an average Sagarin ranking of 61. Eastern Kentucky and LSU have an average Sagarin ranking of 65. So in a hypothetical two-game season, the team that plays Georgia Tech and Virginia has a stronger SOS than the team that plays Eastern Kentucky and LSU. But let me ask you, which team is more likely to lose a game? Which set of games is tougher to get through undefeated? It would be much better for Notre Dame to have a marquee win or two and then some "filler" wins against crap competition than to consistently beat mediocre teams.

I'm convinced wizards lives in another dimension at times... a place where ND plays a garbage schedule and the patriots are a bunch of d bag cheaters... surely such a place doesn't actually exist...

We absolutely build a strong schedule. It's just that, this year, that schedule has failed to perform as we thought it would.

 

[gkIrish]

To echo wizards point, it's absolutely not our fault that our schedule is mediocre at best. It's just bad luck.

While 6-1 has definitely met my expectations (predicted 10-2 preseason with losses to Georgia Tech and USC), let's pump the breaks on how amazing it's been.

 

[wizards8507]

Lax---on a scale of one to ten how tough is a schedule that features teams with the following records:

2-4
2-4
2-5
1-5
6-0
4-1
3-3

That's a combined record of 20-22.

And if we only look at teams we beat, that's 14-22. Everyone wants to keep hanging our hats on our "good loss" but we aren't getting into the playoff based on a "good loss" and a bunch of mediocre wins.

 

[IrishLax]

F+ is about as useless as FPI, which currently has USC at number 6.

You're calling the best advanced metrics/rating system in existence... one that has been routinely lauded since its inception... "useless"? Honestly, what the fuck are you even talking about right now?

Florida has played the 12th toughest schedule per Sagarin.

Regardless, our SOS is skewed high because we don't play many (any?) teams that are truly terrible. Georgia Tech and Virginia have an average Sagarin ranking of 61. Eastern Kentucky and LSU have an average Sagarin ranking of 65. So in a hypothetical two-game season, the team that plays Georgia Tech and Virginia has a stronger SOS than the team that plays Eastern Kentucky and LSU. But let me ask you, which team is more likely to lose a game? Which set of games is tougher to get through undefeated? It would be much better for Notre Dame to have a marquee win or two and then some "filler" wins against crap competition than to consistently beat mediocre teams.

We absolutely build a strong schedule. It's just that, this year, that schedule has failed to perform as we thought it would.

You're an accountant, right? I'm remembering that correct? The following is truncated under the assumption that you know probability and statistics well.

Statistically, playing 7 games against teams where you have a 90% chance of winning is every bit as hard as playing 6 games where you have a 99% chance of winning + one elite team that you consider a "toss up" game. While the "eye test" might say the latter schedule is better because of one quality win and all cream puffs are created equal... that's factually inaccurate. Your odds of going undefeated are equivalent against those two slates of teams when you crunch the numbers (give or take 47% if you consider elite-vs-elite game a 50% chance of victory).

So to your bolded... the "who is more likely to lose a game"... the answer is to do the math over the entire stretch of games, and between a bunch of "meh" teams can be every bit as difficult as beating one elite team + a bunch of pushovers. That's not opinion, that's fact and math.

It's my opinion that ND has performed admirably so far this season. It is not opinion that ND has played a relatively difficult schedule compared to the rest of the top 25 and drastically out-performed the expected outcomes. That is just objective fact.

 

[IrishLax]

Look, if you guys want to argue against math and statistics then I'm out. This is one of the dumbest discussions I've ever had on this board. Your waving your hands at the schedule and it being "not hard" and all other kinds of bullsh*t.

If you're not willing to accept F/+, SOS ratings, expected win probabilities, etc. then it is completely pointless to continue this discussion.

 

[Blaise]

And if we only look at teams we beat, that's 14-22. Everyone wants to keep hanging our hats on our "good loss" but we aren't getting into the playoff based on a "good loss" and a bunch of mediocre wins.

Exactly what I have been saying since Clemson... no one cares that you beat a bunch of 6-6 teams "Hey we didn't play a 1-11 team or a FCS school!"

It comes down to how many Top 25 teams you beat at the end of the year.. Right now that will be zero

 

[wizards8507]

You're an accountant, right? I'm remembering that correct? The following is truncated under the assumption that you know probability and statistics well.

Statistically, playing 7 games against teams where you have a 90% chance of winning is every bit as hard as playing 6 games where you have a 99% chance of winning + one elite team that you consider a "toss up" game. While the "eye test" might say the latter schedule is better because of one quality win and all cream puffs are created equal... that's factually inaccurate. Your odds of going undefeated are equivalent against those two slates of teams when you crunch the numbers (give or take 47% if you consider elite-vs-elite game a 50% chance of victory).

So to your bolded... the "who is more likely to lose a game"... the answer is to do the math over the entire stretch of games, and between a bunch of "meh" teams can be every bit as difficult as beating one elite team + a bunch of pushovers. That's not opinion, that's fact and math.

It's my opinion that ND has performed admirably so far this season. It is not opinion that ND has played a relatively difficult schedule compared to the rest of the top 25 and drastically out-performed the expected outcomes. That is just objective fact.

I don't doubt your understanding of probability and statistics. Your model is fine if we're talking about long-term expected outcomes over a statistically sufficient sample size. I don't believe a twelve-game season is sufficient grounds to for such models to have much use, as an early outlier or two can greatly skew expected outcomes without enough time for win-loss records to regress to the mean. In my opinion, strength of schedule is far less important than strength of victory. A purely statistical strength of schedule model would conclude that beating a 4-8 team and losing to an 11-1 team is equivalent to beating the 11-1 team and losing to the 4-8 team. It is my opinion that the latter is far better. Quality of victory, in my opinion, is far more important than quality of defeat. Our high quality of defeat (i.e. Clemson's undefeated record) is masking the fact that our quality of victory is very poor by keeping our overall strength of schedule artificially high.

Look, if you guys want to argue against math and statistics then I'm out. This is one of the dumbest discussions I've ever had on this board. Your waving your hands at the schedule and it being "not hard" and all other kinds of bullsh*t.

If you're not willing to accept F/+, SOS ratings, expected win probabilities, etc. then it is completely pointless to continue this discussion.

This isn't a 162-game Major League Baseball season. 12 games. Not statistically sufficient.

Exactly what I have been saying since Clemson... no one cares that you beat a bunch of 6-6 teams "Hey we didn't play a 1-11 team or a FCS school!"

It comes down to how many Top 25 teams you beat at the end of the year.. Right now that will be zero

We had the same argument after FSU last year. But it didn't end up mattering for obvious reasons.

 

[pumpdog20]

Lax---on a scale of one to ten how tough is a schedule that features teams with the following records:

2-4
2-4
2-5
1-5
6-0
4-1
3-3

That's a combined record of 20-22.

Let's compare to Texas A&M (who has not played an FBS team btw): 22-19

Iowa: 26-18 (and that even includes a game vs. an 0-6 opponent.

2-4 (all losses to currently ranked teams, combined losses of teams they lost to, 2, with those two losses being to top 6 teams)
2-4 (only 1 loss to non ranked team, 6, UCLA has lost to a decent ASU and Stanford, Boise St meh, and Pitt's only loss is to undefeated Iowa)
2-5 (only loss to a non ranked team is North Carolina, combined losses of those teams, 4)
1-5 (yeah, hot garbage)
6-0
4-1 (hard to tell, but in the non ND games, they've handled pretty easy)
3-3 (combined losses is 5, with 3 coming from Washington. Other than that they've lost to two top 10/11 teams.


You're combined W/L comparision is misleading by a lot. Of those combined 22 losses, there's maybe two or three bad ones in there.

 

[gkIrish]

Look, if you guys want to argue against math and statistics then I'm out. This is one of the dumbest discussions I've ever had on this board. Your waving your hands at the schedule and it being "not hard" and all other kinds of bullsh*t.

If you're not willing to accept F/+, SOS ratings, expected win probabilities, etc. then it is completely pointless to continue this discussion.

Answer this question honestly. Would you rather play Florida's schedule or ND's schedule if the goal is to win every game?

For reference:

vs. New Mexico St.
vs. East Carolina (the best win of our best win)
@ Kentucky
vs. Tennessee
vs. Ole Miss
@ Missouri
@ LSU

If your answer is *Florida then I agree there is no point to discussing this further.

*Edit