ESPN way too early 2015 poll: ND #12

[wizards8507]

It's not....What's your point?

Are you talking about "how it is" or "how it should be, in gkIrish's opinion"?

 

[gkIrish]

Are you talking about "how it is" or "how it should be, in gkIrish's opinion"?

I'm just commenting on how the poll will look at the beginning of next year. And it's not just an SEC and Notre Dame thing. Oregon, Ohio St., Florida St., USC, etc.. get bumps in the preseason poll due to name recognition.

And even without that, I think we deserve to be in the top 15 based on our bowl performance and returning starters.

 

[wizards8507]

I'm just commenting on how the poll will look at the beginning of next year. And it's not just an SEC and Notre Dame thing. Oregon, Ohio St., Florida St., USC, etc.. get bumps in the preseason poll due to name recognition.

And even without that, I think we deserve to be in the top 15 based on our bowl performance and returning starters.

Then we agree. I think the poll WILL look as you describe, but I don't think it should. I said 15-20 so we're not that far apart.

 

[Irish#1]

Getting a little testy in here and the topic is about stupid stupid stupid preseason polls.

Just remember guys. Opinions are like a$$holes. Everyone has one and they think theirs doesn't stink.

 

[Wild Bill]

After watching the bowl game, I actually feel a lot better about the QB position.

When EG was going through his disastrous end of the year breakdown, I didn't have confidence in MZ coming in and performing well. Now that I have seen MZ, I am not as concerned to go to him if EG falls apart again.

I don't disagree, both of them played well against LSU. I just think there is still a bit too much uncertainty at the position to rank them in the top ten right now.

 

[IrishLax]

Assuming Stanley is back, we stay health, and we commit to the run I think we're a top 10 team.

Stanley-Nelson-Martin-Elmer-McGlinchey = destruction.

The only "weak" position group we have is safety. The only "thin" position groups we have are CB and possibly DT/TE/RB/LB depending on how you want to look at it.

We flat out have more talent than 10/12 teams we play, and the other two are debatable. I'm a pessimist so I think something will fuck it up like an offseason scandal or bad luck or injuries or Kelly disappears like Gone Girl or whatever... but I firmly believe this is the most talented team Kelly has had since he's been at ND and is primed for success.

 

[arrowryan]

Assuming Stanley is back, we stay health, and we commit to the run I think we're a top 10 team.

Stanley-Nelson-Martin-Elmer-McGlinchey = destruction.

The only "weak" position group we have is safety. The only "thin" position groups we have are CB and possibly DT/TE/RB/LB depending on how you want to look at it.

We flat out have more talent than 10/12 teams we play, and the other two are debatable. I'm a pessimist so I think something will fuck it up like an offseason scandal or bad luck or injuries or Kelly disappears like Gone Girl or whatever... but I firmly believe this is the most talented team Kelly has had since he's been at ND and is primed for success.

I'm curious to see why you think we're thin at CB

 

[Nick Setta]

Assuming Stanley is back, we stay health, and we commit to the run I think we're a top 10 team.

Stanley-Nelson-Martin-Elmer-McGlinchey = destruction.

The only "weak" position group we have is safety. The only "thin" position groups we have are CB and possibly DT/TE/RB/LB depending on how you want to look at it.

We flat out have more talent than 10/12 teams we play, and the other two are debatable. I'm a pessimist so I think something will fuck it up like an offseason scandal or bad luck or injuries or Kelly disappears like Gone Girl or whatever... but I firmly believe this is the most talented team Kelly has had since he's been at ND and is primed for success.

We'll manage too piss it all away ,

 

[BeauBenken]

We'll manage too piss it all away ,

I'm seriously about to suspend you because at this point you're just being really fucking annoying.

 

[IrishLax]

I'm curious to see why you think we're thin at CB

For starters, because I don't know if KVR will be back. I think he will, but I don't know.

Second, I think Butler gets moved to safety.

Crawford/Coleman/White are all going to be freshman unknowns.

So right now... you basically have Cole Luke, and Nick Watkins (who may or may not be any good at man coverage) on the roster. That's it. Two players, and only one has real game experience.

If KVR comes back, then you likely have Luke/KVR with Crawford in slot... which still isn't deep when you consider "next man in" has seen no live bullets.

 

[Wild Bill]

For starters, because I don't know if KVR will be back. I think he will, but I don't know.

Second, I think Butler gets moved to safety.

Crawford/Coleman/White are all going to be freshman unknowns.

So right now... you basically have Cole Luke, and Nick Watkins (who may or may not be any good at man coverage) on the roster. That's it. Two players, and only one has real game experience.

If KVR comes back, then you likely have Luke/KVR with Crawford in slot... which still isn't deep when you consider "next man in" has seen no live bullets.

Farley can provide some depth at corner, assuming he's back for a fifth year.

 

[BeauBenken]

For starters, because I don't know if KVR will be back. I think he will, but I don't know.

Second, I think Butler gets moved to safety.

Crawford/Coleman/White are all going to be freshman unknowns.

So right now... you basically have Cole Luke, and Nick Watkins (who may or may not be any good at man coverage) on the roster. That's it. Two players, and only one has real game experience.

If KVR comes back, then you likely have Luke/KVR with Crawford in slot... which still isn't deep when you consider "next man in" has seen no live bullets.

If we don't think Nick can play man, I'd think the smarter move would be putting him at safety and not Butler.

 

[IrishLax]

Farley can provide some depth at corner, assuming he's back for a fifth year.

I'd guess he gets moved to safety too. Right now I'm operating under the assumption that Farley provides depth "everywhere" and Butler gets moved to safety as we only sign Williams in this class and butler has shown he's not really built for man coverage. I could be wrong on literally all of this.

 

[arrowryan]

For starters, because I don't know if KVR will be back. I think he will, but I don't know.

Second, I think Butler gets moved to safety.

Crawford/Coleman/White are all going to be freshman unknowns.

So right now... you basically have Cole Luke, and Nick Watkins (who may or may not be any good at man coverage) on the roster. That's it. Two players, and only one has real game experience.

If KVR comes back, then you likely have Luke/KVR with Crawford in slot... which still isn't deep when you consider "next man in" has seen no live bullets.

That's all true but I wouldn't consider it a "thin" position, I would label it as an inexperienced position. Not many programs have 4-5 guys at one position loaded with experience (besides the linemen of course), so they have to earn their stripes some how. Cooks has done a great job at getting guys ready to play and they do a good job when they are called upon. So I have all the confidence in the world that guys like Watkins and Crawford will be able to hold their own when that time comes.

And with KVR, I'd be surprised is he doesn't come back

 

[koonja]

I think out schedule is a nightmare next year.

GT is going to be really tough. Charlie Strong isn't going to have a flame out year in his 2nd year, USC is finally stacked, Stanford is away, Navy is freaking Navy. @Clemson? Their defense and QB are great.

I think we'll be a really good to great team and have 9-10 wins.

 

[Wild Bill]

I'd guess he gets moved to safety too. Right now I'm operating under the assumption that Farley provides depth "everywhere" and Butler gets moved to safety as we only sign Williams in this class and butler has shown he's not really built for man coverage. I could be wrong on literally all of this.

I think Farley has to cross train at both positions. He's a smart kid and has experience playing both so I doubt he'll have much trouble being ready to play either position. KVR is the key. If he's in AA form, we're going to have an above average secondary. I hate counting on freshman for contributions but Crawford could be a difference maker. He has the hips and athleticism to step in and be the starting nickel back. That would solve some depth problems and the starting unit would be really athletic - KVR, Redfield, Shumate, Crawford, Luke. Shumate is the question mark in coverage but it's easier to hide him when everyone else in the unit has ridiculous range.

 

[IrishinSyria]

I think out schedule is a nightmare next year.

GT is going to be really tough. Charlie Strong isn't going to have a flame out year in his 2nd year, USC is finally stacked, Stanford is away, Navy is freaking Navy. @Clemson? Their defense and QB are great.

I think we'll be a really good to great team and have 9-10 wins.

That's about where I'm at. A great ND team next year could have anything from 9-12 wins. A very good ND team should have 8-10.

 

[Buster Bluth]

I think out schedule is a nightmare next year.

GT is going to be really tough. Charlie Strong isn't going to have a flame out year in his 2nd year, USC is finally stacked, Stanford is away, Navy is freaking Navy. @Clemson? Their defense and QB are great.

I think we'll be a really good to great team and have 9-10 wins.

Phil Steele has Clemson only returning four starters on defense. The same thing with Stanford, and they lost a CB to the draft so it's likely three.

Ranking the games in order of difficulty, IMO:

1) vs Southern Cal
2) at Clemson
3) vs Georgia Tech
4) vs Texas
5) at Stanford
6) vs Navy
7) vs Boston College
8) at Virginia
9) at Pittsburgh
10) vs Wake Forest
11) at Temple
12) vs UMASS

If they finish anything worse than 9-3 Brian Kelly's seat should be awfully warm.

Also, it's complete bullshit that the two scheduled cupcakes, UMASS and Temple, return 20 and 19 starters, respectively. There is no excuse for losing to them obviously, but WTF I want to see as little resistance as possible so the young guys can play a half of football.

 

[NDdomer2]

Phil Steele has Clemson only returning four starters on defense. The same thing with Stanford, and they lost a CB to the draft so it's likely three.

Ranking the game in order of difficulty, IMO:

1) vs Southern Cal
2) at Clemson
3) vs Georgia Tech
4) vs Texas
5) at Stanford
6) vs Navy
7) vs Boston College
8) at Virginia
9) at Pittsburgh
10) vs Wake Forest
11) at Temple
12) vs UMASS

If they finish anything worse than 9-3 Brian Kelly's seat should be awfully warm.

Pitt is a tough match up for us and its on the road. I think they deserve a bump, at least above Virginia. I may put in front of BC.

 

[irishff1014]

Do you all remember our defense at all? The games they played good in those teams weren't good and the it was down hill from there. I am not sold that our defense will be much better. I believe the offense it still very effective.

 

[KPENN]

Do you all remember our defense at all? The games they played good in those teams weren't good and the it was down hill from there. I am not sold that our defense will be much better. I believe the offense it still very effective.

Because they won't get better at all?

 

[Buster Bluth]

Do you all remember our defense at all? The games they played good in those teams weren't good and the it was down hill from there. I am not sold that our defense will be much better. I believe the offense it still very effective.

Do you remember the defense at all? It was a freshman squad by the end of the year, and freshman generally get better. Returning 11 starters on defense creates an indisputable expectation of improvement.

The defense doesn't even need to be elite. They need to be top ~35 and the offense should be able to take care of the rest, at least that's the expectation when a team returns 10 starters there.

 

[irishff1014]

You all have your opinions and i have mine. The defense averaged 44.5 points in the last 4 regular season games. And you can say what you want that northwestern game was inexcusable.

 

[NDdomer2]

You all have your opinions and i have mine. The defense averaged 44.5 points in the last 4 regular season games. And you can say what you want that northwestern game was inexcusable.

How is this an indicator for future progression?

 

[NDohio]

I am not getting the G Tech love. I know, the option...

But, they lose 65% of their rushing yards and 90% of their receiving yards. They get Thomas back and no one else of significance in the skill positions. I think it will be a tough game because of the option, but it shouldn't be one of our toughest games. Maybe I am crazy.

 

[irishff1014]

How is this an indicator for future progression?

Most of those playing in those games will be the same ones playing this year. I hope they get better but a lot has to change though.

 

[kmoose]

You guys are some of the biggest sandbaggers in the world. I just got done having this discussion with a group of friends of FB that know the game as well as you all and not one of them had ND out of the top 10. I'm talking 20+ non-ND fans too. How anyone can come up with next year's team being outside the top 10 with who's returning to South Bend vs. what's returning for other teams and the their schedules is beyond me.

15-20? Come on man.

.

Regardless of everyone else coming back, we do not, at this time, have a starting QB. So ND could be ranked anywhere from 4-5ish, to 20-25, depending on who you think the starter will be and how much faith you have in that individual. It's not our fault if you hang around with a bunch of mental midgets.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Most of those playing in those games will be the same ones playing this year. I hope they get better but a lot has to change though.

You mean year to year, things have to change for teams to play better? Like 2011 to 2012?

The reason most people are ranking us higher is because we were so young. Our talent is really good. We just beat LSU in a bowl game with many freshman and sophomore contributors. I think the odds of our team improving is very high.

I'm skeptical as well that we will be **that** good, far too early to predict playoffs with our schedule but we may just find that synergy that all good teams have.

 

[NOLAIrish]

Do you all remember our defense at all? The games they played good in those teams weren't good and the it was down hill from there. I am not sold that our defense will be much better. I believe the offense it still very effective.

I've heard this line from various sources and I kind of suspected it wasn't true. My impression from watching the games was that the defense: a) got substantially worse in concert with attrition, not with competition; and b) actually wasn't that different game-over-game, it was just put in far worse positions by offensive turnovers in some of our biggest games and didn't have the skill to bail the team out. I decided to run the numbers.

The "good" teams on my list were: FSU, UNC, Stanford, ASU, Louisville, USC and LSU. I think UNC is debatable based on its performance, but I decided to include them on the "good" list based on their talent level.

The bad teams on my list were: Navy, NW, Syracuse, Purdue, Michigan and Rice.

Here are our per-game averages against good and bad teams:

As you can see, we actually didn't play significantly worse against good teams this season in overall defense, we just gave up substantially more points (which looks to me like a defense that was victimized by its offense's turnovers). We gave up an average of 16 more passing yards, one fewer rushing yard and 15 more total yards. The primary issue that the defense developed when facing good opponents was a substantial drop in its ability to turn opponents over (dropping from 2.5 TOs per game to just 1.1). I would expect that against good competition.

If you move UNC into the "bad" list (the bottom two rows), the numbers disfavor the "exposed by good opponents" narrative slightly more. Our defense performed better against good opponents than against bad in every total yardage category there.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I am not getting the G Tech love. I know, the option...

But, they lose 65% of their rushing yards and 90% of their receiving yards. They get Thomas back and no one else of significance in the skill positions. I think it will be a tough game because of the option, but it shouldn't be one of our toughest games. Maybe I am crazy.

Georgia Tech fielded the nation's #1 offense this season. Yes, Johnson will have to figure out how to replace virtually all of his RB and WR production, but he returns Thomas (the most important ingredient in making his offense work) along with the entire OL. I have little doubt that GT is going to be a nightmare to defend next year as well.

More importantly, I'm not sure how BvG's gameplan against Navy this year could be inspiring confidence in anyone. Based on that alone, you could make a compelling case that GT is going to be one of our toughest games.