NDVirginia19
Rally
- Messages
- 4,420
- Reaction score
- 5,129
Has a roster been released with everyone's updated numbers and such?
K
koonja
Guest
Not that I know of, but since you mentioned, I saw that Malik is going to be #9 this year. Sorry if that's common knowledge.
calvegas04
Well-known member
- Messages
- 11,860
- Reaction score
- 8,439
Is the water they are training in safe? lol every time I have been around them they look a little toxic
dshans
They call me The Dribbler
- Messages
- 9,624
- Reaction score
- 1,181
What?
What??
What???
What did I do wrong?
So I'm old, wrinkled, wear glasses and have a smart mouth ... I've been that way since I was 5.
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
I don't know which lake they were in (there are two: St Joseph Lake & St Mary's Lake), but I would swim in either. Not sure why they looked toxic to you, must have caught them on off days. They are both clean, spring fed lakes perfect for swimming.
dshans
They call me The Dribbler
- Messages
- 9,624
- Reaction score
- 1,181
Well, FWIW, I took dips in St. Mary's Lake twice my freshman and sophomore years at ND when I lived in the now defunct Holy Cross Hall.
Neither was exactly voluntary.
My first was as a frosh when I returned one night from a tutorial held at my Spanish instructor's home. I was in charge of refreshments. The Sangria was potent. It was late October and the water was cold. Some sophomores and juniors in the dorm felt I could use a sobering experience.
Sophomore year I trusted the waning ice in Spring to support my 135 pound frame. Alcohol was involved. That I was not an Engineering student was also involved. Fortunately I was only a yard or two from shore and the water was shallow.
I'm still here.
In these cases, what didn't kill me made me stronger?
Last edited:
Spent many summers swimming in those lakes...clean, sandy bottom. Good fishin', too.
N
ND Fan Vancouver
Guest
2016 Notre Dame Football Position Preseason Grades // UHND.com
Nothing here we don't all ready know, really, and a few non-mentions player wise but a decent read.
Nothing here we don't all ready know, really, and a few non-mentions player wise but a decent read.
- Messages
- 33,950
- Reaction score
- 9,294
Impossible. The Glaciers did not retreat until your junior year!
dshans
They call me The Dribbler
- Messages
- 9,624
- Reaction score
- 1,181
NDgradstudent
Banned
- Messages
- 2,414
- Reaction score
- 165
For some silly reason I came across this piece from last year by Clay Travis, who as many of you may know relishes in insulting various CFB fan bases. His attack on ND repeats the common trope that ND is consistently overrated.
As far as I am aware, nobody has tried to judge the truth of this claim, even though it can be measured in various ways. We would expect, for example, that ND's pre-season AP poll ranking would be consistently relatively higher than ND's post-season AP poll ranking, reflecting the supposed "hype" we do not live up to.
So I looked at the pre- and post-season AP poll rankings of ND and several other major programs and found that not only are we not consistently overrated -in fact slightly underrated- but that we are among the least overrated of the CFB programs I looked at.
As far as I am aware, nobody has tried to judge the truth of this claim, even though it can be measured in various ways. We would expect, for example, that ND's pre-season AP poll ranking would be consistently relatively higher than ND's post-season AP poll ranking, reflecting the supposed "hype" we do not live up to.
So I looked at the pre- and post-season AP poll rankings of ND and several other major programs and found that not only are we not consistently overrated -in fact slightly underrated- but that we are among the least overrated of the CFB programs I looked at.
Last edited:
B
Buster Bluth
Guest
He couldn't do it. The British have a "splendid isolation" from Europe thanks to the English Channel, their naval and air superiority made Hitler's plans to force Britain into submission an exercise in futility. It's important to remember that German industrial capacity never even reached World War I levels, we build up their World War II abilities too much due to Cold War propaganda needs. Germany simply couldn't conduct a sustained war effort against any of the major powers. France was unlucky if only because they ran out of real estate.
It's really rather moot though, Hitler didn't even want to fight Britain as he saw them as a natural Anglo-Saxon ally. Everything Hitler did was to attempt to kick the door in on the USSR and then proceed to murder 40+ million innocent civilians in an effort to establish a Germany that stretched from the Rhine through the Ukraine, in part modeled after the good ol' USA.
edit: ima edit this because 1) a poster I respect gave me mad props for this and 2) I like history and you should too.
On German industrial capacity: take a look at the only recording we have of Hitler speaking in his normal voice, he's talking to a Finnish general and speaks plainly about the fact that everyone completely underestimated the Soviet production levels. Hitler's plan on taking out the USSR quickly was built on a) racial bias thinking Slavic people were inferior, and b) the Soviet performance in the Winter War with Finland the year before, in which Finland held their own against a vastly superior foe.
Not everyone signed off on the idea though, specifically many in the logistics department of the German army. Logistics and industry win wars (Eisenhower was in logistics and it's one of the reasons he was picked to run the show). Anyway the Germans, unable to produce enough trucks to move their war materials, were commandeering trucks from conquered nations. So basically the logistics guys were saying "you're going to make it X km into Russia and then trucks will start to break down and you'll find yourself in the middle of Russia trying to find a spare part for a French truck..." And that's what happened, German armor would outrun their supplies and have to stop. Over and over, while fighting a foe who is making more tanks than you can dream of... and better tanks too. The T-34 or whatever is a marvel, whereas the Germans over-engineered things. Basically, Germany was toast the moment they stepped foot in the USSR and they never had a chance to take London either because of the English navy.
So why do we have a general misconception about the Germans being close to victory and only losing due to Soviet numbers? The Cold War. We didn't want to admit that the Soviets beat the Germans in every facet of the war, from industrial design to strategy. We didn't want to admit that Soviet generals were brilliant (by the end, after the purge did decimate middle ranks). So we basically created a story that the Germans, now our allies, were superior but the Soviets just threw waves and waves of men at them and won with numbers and winter. It's simply not true and we can confirm it now that archives are opened up after the Cold War.
On how the goal of the Nazis has an American influence: Germany didn't become a country until 1871 or so, too late in the game to build any noteworthy colonies. While they were instantly the #1 continental power, they looked at how Spain, France, and Britain ruled the world in their time and realize they weren't going to be able to repeat their model of being a colonial empire. On the flip side, they saw how Russia and the United States had become players because they expanded over basically a whole continent. Fast forward to World War I and the flaws that became apparent within the Austria-Hungary Empire: it's really a half-dozen countries within one, domestically it crumbled. Hitler and the Nazis, seeing everything through an absurd racial lens, said France, Britain, US, and Germany were the stronger nations because they were of one race. In fairness, he has a point considering the nationalism within the A-H empire.
So anyhow some German thinkers put the two together (a massive land-grab and one ethnicity) and theorized a Lebensraum ("living space") of one Germany that stretched from Belgium/Rhine through the bread basket of Ukraine. They looked at the natural riches of the USA and how we kicked the Indians off of their land (and in some cases straight up genocide..) and they basically thought that was a good idea to do to the inferior Slavic peoples of Eastern Europe. So when we think of the six million Jews who died in the holocaust, that's small potatoes compared to what was planned. For instance when the German Army arrived to Leningrad (St. Petersburg), they didn't try to take the city by force, they sieged it and starved it out. They were going to work and starve the natives to death and repopulate the whole place with Germans and by the end of the century be an economic force on par with the US in the middle of Europe. Good thing he lost haha
That clip from Hitler is also important because it helps explain our role in the Middle East. The aforementioned logistical guru Eisenhower knew how important oil was to a war machine, and you can hear Hitler saying (paraphrasing) "if the Soviets would have taken Romania's oil we would have been toast." Not having oil is an enormous vulnerability (ask Japan). Basically Eisenhower in the 1950s said that since Britain and France are withdrawing from the Middle East the US is going to sit right down on that oil and make sure no other superpower could ever have its boot on the throat of the world's most important resource. We can shut the world's oil off in a moment's notice, that's a huge advantage in geopolitics. Also yes I've been drinking.
Last edited:
Graybeard52
New member
- Messages
- 185
- Reaction score
- 14
I believe either Zaire or Kizer could successfully lead this team, they just have different physical attributes and skills. Both can pass but I think Kizer edges Zaire out in that department. Both can run but I believe Zaire edges Kizer in that department because he's more agile. I prefer Kizer's stature in the pocket over Zaire. Both seem to be good leaders but they have different styles of leadership. Kizer seems to be generally more calm, cool and collected, while Zaire is a more emotional leader type.
I think it comes down to how BK decides he wants the offense to operate. If he wants run/pass balance, I think it's Kizer. If he wants to go pass heavy, I think it's Kizer. If he wants to go run heavy, I think it's Zaire. Personally, I prefer a run first mentality and while I personally think that Kizer is the better overall QB, Zaire is probably a better fit for that type of offense.
I think it comes down to how BK decides he wants the offense to operate. If he wants run/pass balance, I think it's Kizer. If he wants to go pass heavy, I think it's Kizer. If he wants to go run heavy, I think it's Zaire. Personally, I prefer a run first mentality and while I personally think that Kizer is the better overall QB, Zaire is probably a better fit for that type of offense.
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
I suppose it depends on "how" you run the ball. Zaire may be better for the zone read, but if we ran out of a pro set, then I would prefer Kizer.
ResLife Hero
Well-known member
- Messages
- 6,737
- Reaction score
- 190
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Notre Dame's signees arrived in South Bend on Saturday. That's a good thing for the offense. <a href="https://t.co/H7KY0IP694">https://t.co/H7KY0IP694</a> <a href="https://t.co/HdbMzz7O5v">pic.twitter.com/HdbMzz7O5v</a></p>— BlueandGold.com (@BGInews) <a href="https://twitter.com/BGInews/status/741723619882078211">June 11, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
N
ND Fan Vancouver
Guest
I'm soooo full of thoughts regarding our QB issue. I have plenty of knowledge of the situation of our team as a whole, our coaching staff, our QB's and the game of football in general, but I still can't quite decide what the better move is. Kizer has prototypical size and an above average arm and had a great year. The thing about him that I like so much is his poise. He has a calm, quiet, confident way of leading. He also , as Brian Kelly said, "rises to the occasion." He doesn't get rattled. When the stakes are high, he plays to the level needed of him to help us win. He did all of this as a redshirt freshman who wasn't expected to take a snap all year unless garbage time allowed it. People talk about how Zaire is the better runner, which I agree with, but I've also went back and watched most of our games from last season recently and saw him make many great runs that just flat out surprised the defense. I think a lot of those runs were made BECAUSE the defenses didn't look at him as a rushing threat thus didn't spy him as much as they should have resulting in Kizer scoring 10 TD's with his legs. This year Kizer might not have the numbers rushing as he did last year as teams will prepare to a dual-threat game. All-in-all, Kizer would be a choice that not many would argue.
Zaire is a great QB. He would start for A LOT of solid teams. People question his arm talent, but I watched the Texas game recently and he threw a lot of great passes. NFL passes. As a lefty with an unorthodox stature and style, his throwing style/motion etc seems a little suspect to some but I really think it isn't that flawed. I think he is a great passer and has probably improved some. I was thinking, i wonder how Zaire would've done if he hadn't gotten injured and played the whole season?? Would he have run for 10 TD's? He certainly might've....Would he have thrown the ball as effectively as Kizer had? He certainly might have. But there's not a whole lot of separation between the two, and there's a lot of "what if's" when talking about Zaire. One thing I think that Zaire has over Kizer is his yards after first contact factor. He shakes more tackles and gains more yards after contact. He is a very impactful and fierce runner as a QB.
With the WR's we have and TE talent, not to mention maybe the best OL in the country, I wouldn't really like to see us go into a run heavy/QB option type O as I think we wouldn't be maximizing our talent and potential and production. If we start Zaire, we'd be doing that. At the same time, I'd still be happy with our offensive potential with Zaire. Very Happy. But I think that Kizer proved himself as the QB we need to be the best offense we can be. I have a feeling he has gotten a lot better in the off-season and going forward i think that starting Kizer is the way to go. Plugging in Zaire in the red-zone and when Kizer is injured or struggling heavy is what I would do if i was Brian Kelly. This is only MY thoughts and ideas. I personally think we couldn't go wrong either way which in some ways makes it SUCH a hard decision.
Zaire is a great QB. He would start for A LOT of solid teams. People question his arm talent, but I watched the Texas game recently and he threw a lot of great passes. NFL passes. As a lefty with an unorthodox stature and style, his throwing style/motion etc seems a little suspect to some but I really think it isn't that flawed. I think he is a great passer and has probably improved some. I was thinking, i wonder how Zaire would've done if he hadn't gotten injured and played the whole season?? Would he have run for 10 TD's? He certainly might've....Would he have thrown the ball as effectively as Kizer had? He certainly might have. But there's not a whole lot of separation between the two, and there's a lot of "what if's" when talking about Zaire. One thing I think that Zaire has over Kizer is his yards after first contact factor. He shakes more tackles and gains more yards after contact. He is a very impactful and fierce runner as a QB.
With the WR's we have and TE talent, not to mention maybe the best OL in the country, I wouldn't really like to see us go into a run heavy/QB option type O as I think we wouldn't be maximizing our talent and potential and production. If we start Zaire, we'd be doing that. At the same time, I'd still be happy with our offensive potential with Zaire. Very Happy. But I think that Kizer proved himself as the QB we need to be the best offense we can be. I have a feeling he has gotten a lot better in the off-season and going forward i think that starting Kizer is the way to go. Plugging in Zaire in the red-zone and when Kizer is injured or struggling heavy is what I would do if i was Brian Kelly. This is only MY thoughts and ideas. I personally think we couldn't go wrong either way which in some ways makes it SUCH a hard decision.
N
ND Fan Vancouver
Guest
Hahah. Yeah...sorry man. I got a little carried away. Our QB situation is complicated and I guess my post also followed suit......I'm a passionate fan.
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
Graybeard52
New member
- Messages
- 185
- Reaction score
- 14
Fair point, I agree. I think you will primarily see ND running pro set with all of the weapons on offense because for the most part, these kids weren't recruited or committed to become blockers in an option offense. I can see some zone read mixed in but I don't believe it will be the base offense by any stretch of the imagination.
It's a little difficult to predict because ND hasn't had this kind of offensive depth across the roster for awhile, although it is less stable then it has been in the past. A lot of the depth and projected starters are unproven but Kelly and the coaching staff do seem to be good at recognizing who is prepared to step in and contribute.
B
Bogtrotter07
Guest
Talked to my Yoda, yesterday. Or was it the day before. Anyway, he couldn't remember the last time we talked, but he gave up some new information to me.
On a speaking engagement (and my sense is this is not a one time thing) when Mike Sanford was asked about Ian Book, he replied, "think Joe Montana, with a bit better arm, and more speed." Floored some of the people that heard it, but apparently he was dead serious.
Also heard that the qb job was DK's to lose.
The plan about DK having a good year, and going to the NFL didn't sound too far off. Then the team would be Zaire's for a year, than Wimbush's.
Are quarterback recruits being sold on the idea of redshirting with development in mind, because if you are a good college quarterback you aren't going to be around for four years anyhow?
On a speaking engagement (and my sense is this is not a one time thing) when Mike Sanford was asked about Ian Book, he replied, "think Joe Montana, with a bit better arm, and more speed." Floored some of the people that heard it, but apparently he was dead serious.
Also heard that the qb job was DK's to lose.
The plan about DK having a good year, and going to the NFL didn't sound too far off. Then the team would be Zaire's for a year, than Wimbush's.
Are quarterback recruits being sold on the idea of redshirting with development in mind, because if you are a good college quarterback you aren't going to be around for four years anyhow?
PANDFAN
Look Down
- Messages
- 16,770
- Reaction score
- 2,278
NEW NUMBERS OF PLAYERS
NEW NUMBERS OF PLAYERS
https://notredame.n.rivals.com/news/notre-dame-s-numbers-game
NEW NUMBERS OF PLAYERS
https://notredame.n.rivals.com/news/notre-dame-s-numbers-game
K
koonja
Guest
Surprised no one is wearing a #1 this year for GB.
wizards8507
Well-known member
- Messages
- 20,660
- Reaction score
- 2,661
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
zelezo vlk
Well-known member
- Messages
- 18,009
- Reaction score
- 5,047
PREACH!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
B
Bogtrotter07
Guest
woolybug25
#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
- Messages
- 17,677
- Reaction score
- 3,018
I get what the author is implying. Even if Kizer wasn't the starting QB, he still isn't going to be on special teams. That's a given.
NDdomer2
Local Sports vBookie
- Messages
- 17,050
- Reaction score
- 3,875
Agree, I actually wouldnt mind seeing Book take that job of holder. I know this would mean a burnt red-shirt. But is Book really needing a red-shirt? With what is in front of him and coming behind, a career back-up projection, it may not make much difference 4/5 years in the end.