Sep 4 | Texas

[zelezo vlk]

Texas was shut out at Iowa State last year. And that happened after the OU game. That is all.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[BobbyMac]

What has Texas shown? Rationally picking against us requires that Texas be the stronger team, with favorable match-ups against our various units. Even in light of everything we lost, I don't see how one can objectively argue that Texas is a better team than ND.

I think there is an element of singularity in this... meaning who we are playing doesn't matter as much as We Are ND... lol

These two posts added together = the answer.

ND will not lose if they lean on the OL, proven RB's, occasional dink and dunk which better include the TE's and Folston out of the backfield. The only way Texas has more points at the end of the game is if ND turns it over in Golson '14 fashion. ND can beat UT. ND can beat itself. UT's ability to win is not in its own hands.

Hopefully CBK waits until Nevada to experiment with his passing game and green WR's.

Control TOP and FP and this will be an easy game. Get cute and air it out and you open yourself up to problems... or you blow them out again and go up 10-2 all time.

 

[ACamp1900]

Agreed, which is why I've been stressing "rational" and "objective" this whole time.

 

[IrishBroker]

Our last impressive win was game one last year. Our "signature game" was a loss to Clemson. Since then, Texas has beaten Oklahoma and Baylor. I think we're going to win, but I don't think we're a very good team.

You have a good point. I don't think we're as good as people on here say. Of course, this is a Notre Dame fan board. LOL

But Texas vs OU is a huge game for both teams and anything can happen. And Baylor played that game with their FOURTH QB, a converted RB....And they were still in that game. The guy had 150 yards rushing and Texas knew the run was coming the entire game, still couldn't stop it.

Texas was terrible last year. Their D is awful. Their QB situation involves one guy who just flat out sucks, and a freshman.

I think a bunch of "experts" are picking them because it's the easiest upset to pick, and they'll look like brainiacs if Texas wins.

Sure, they can beat us. Anyone can. But It's not like they are a much better team

 

[ACamp1900]

I don't think we're as good as people on here say.

 

[IrishBroker]

My bad.

But I still think we are better than Texas, if that helps

 

[arrowryan]

Besides linebacker, safety, and maybe receiver does Texas have an advantage over ND at any position? And ND might have better receivers than they do.

 

[tussin]

I don't think we're as good as people on here say.

I do. Everyone on here thinks 10-2. That's the most likely outcome for the season.

ND will likely be favored in every game they play. They are clearly in the second tier of national programs right now. Tiered behind Clemson, Bama, Ohio State, FSU, and Oklahoma and in the same tier as LSU, Michigan, Stanford.

 

[IrishBroker]

Besides linebacker, safety, and maybe receiver does Texas have an advantage over ND at any position? And ND might have better receivers than they do.

Ehhh...John Burt is probably better than anyone we got at WR (talent wise). But you may be right about overall.

Problem is, you don't know what they got because their passing offense was so bad last year.

 

[wizards8507]

That's still not a rational case for 2016 UT > 2016 ND.

Agreed, which is why I've been stressing "rational" and "objective" this whole time.

This is college footbaw, not the Lincoln-Douglas debates.

They did not fucking "beat Baylor"... they barely hung on against a team that literally had no QB and had to play a WR at quarterback and was physically incapable of making even routine, easy throws. Please stop with this equivocating bullshit.

Congrats to them on pulling one miracle upset while getting beat by a host of average teams? Why does that matter?

Your post just reeks of trollish, contrarian BS.

I said I thought we were going to win. But I don't think we're an 11-1 team that's going to roll. I think we're an 8-4 team that's going to beat Texas in a game that's far closer than it should be.

 

[ACamp1900]

My bad.

But I still think we are better than Texas, if that helps

Just being a goof ball... you'll catch on to that... I love to point out how like half the board always has us winning the natty every year...

 

[IrishBroker]

I do. Everyone on here thinks 10-2. That's the most likely outcome for the season.

ND will likely be favored in every game they play. They are clearly in the second tier of national programs right now. Tiered behind Clemson, Bama, Ohio State, FSU, and Oklahoma and in the same tier as LSU, Michigan, Stanford.

10-2 doesn't mean we are a "good" team, most people are attributing that to the schedule and other teams deficiencies, Not how good we are.

And do you think if we make a major bowl game, we are beating a tier one?

If we go 10-2, and get smoked by a OSU, or FSU, or Bama (one left out of the playoff) is that a good season?

I'm sincerely asking.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Ehhh...John Burt is probably better than anyone we got at WR (talent wise). But you may be right about overall.

Problem is, you don't know what they got because their passing offense was so bad last year.

And the Dueverny (sp) transfer from Baylor. They said he's uber athletic. I'm guessing the WRs are a wash between the two teams, and that's probably me being a little generous to us.

 

[tussin]

10-2 doesn't mean we are a "good" team, most people are attributing that to the schedule and other teams deficiencies, Not how good we are.

And do you think if we make a major bowl game, we are beating a tier one?

If we go 10-2, and get smoked by a OSU, or FSU, or Bama (one left out of the playoff) is that a good season?

I'm sincerely asking.

OK, the discussion was if we a "good team." The clear answer is yes. If you go 10-2 with a Power 5 schedule then you are good. We have more talent and are objectively as good or better than all but the clear elites.

Going 10-2 and losing to Bama in a NY6 bowl is an average season given our talent level. A "good season" (i.e. one where we exceed expectations) means playoff.

 

[IrishBroker]

And the Dueverny (sp) transfer from Baylor. They said he's uber athletic. I'm guessing the WRs are a wash between the two teams, and that's probably me being a little generous to us.

He's a corner.

But what scares me is their size at WR...they average around 6'3 215..insane overall size

 

[Shamrock Theories]

10-2 doesn't mean we are a "good" team, most people are attributing that to the schedule and other teams deficiencies, Not how good we are.

And do you think if we make a major bowl game, we are beating a tier one?

If we go 10-2, and get smoked by a OSU, or FSU, or Bama (one left out of the playoff) is that a good season?

I'm sincerely asking.

ND actually matches up ok against those teams - all run-heavy.

But I hear what you are saying. It's year 7 of the Kelly era. At this point a good season should be making the playoffs, and anything else is a failure.

Right?

 

[IrishBroker]

OK, the discussion was if we a "good team." The clear answer is yes. If you go 10-2 with a Power 5 schedule then you are good. We have more talent and are objectively as good or better than all but the clear elites.

Going 10-2 and losing to Bama in a NY6 bowl is an average season given our talent level. A "good season" (i.e. one where we exceed expectations) means playoff.

I think we are ok. I don't think we can call ourselves a "good" team just yet.

Playoffs would be amazing given our projected D issues and inexperience at WR and TE. I agree there.

 

[IrishBroker]

ND actually matches up ok against those teams - all run-heavy.

But I hear what you are saying. It's year 7 of the Kelly era. At this point a good season should be making the playoffs, and anything else is a failure.

Right?

Failure? Ehh...depends on how we look. What if we have a great season and just get "left out" of the playoffs?

But what we can't have, is a step back.

 

[ACamp1900]

Failure? Ehh...depends on how we look. What if we have a great season and just get "left out" of the playoffs?

But what we can't have, is a step back.

Realistically though, with the amount of talent we are replacing... if ND takes a step back this year and re-tools for next... it won't be some major catastrophic scenario imo...

 

[Wild Bill]

He's a corner.

But what scares me is their size at WR...they average around 6'3 215..insane overall size

The biggest kid is the freshman who is 6'6'', right? Burt is 6'3'' which isn't small but nothing out of the ordinary for a cornerback at this level. Maybe they try to pick on Crawford with the height but I doubt they get much separation from him and I don't think Swoopes is accurate enough to take advantage of him.

I doubt they'll do much in the passing game without being able to run the ball. If they get it going on the ground it could be a looong night for the safeties.

 

[IrishBroker]

Realistically though, with the amount of talent we are replacing... if ND takes a step back this year and re-tools for next... it won't be some major catastrophic scenario imo...

I guess it's going to depend on how good/bad we look.

If we are just awful on D, I think BVG is gone.

 

[IrishBroker]

The biggest kid is the freshman who is 6'6'', right? Burt is 6'3'' which isn't small but nothing out of the ordinary for a cornerback at this level. Maybe they try to pick on Crawford with the height but I doubt they get much separation from him and I don't think Swoopes is accurate enough to take advantage of him.

I doubt they'll do much in the passing game without being able to run the ball. If they get it going on the ground it could be a looong night for the safeties.

I'm saying the average of their entire WR core is 6'3 215. That's some size.

And that's redzone trouble more than anything. It helps a young QB to have big targets

But I agree on Swoopes. It's if that Freshman comes out chunking and gets hot, that scares me. I don't think Swoopes is going to be relied on to throw the ball

 

[Irish Insanity]

Almost everyone who will see the field on offense has experience with the exception of three players, Mustipher St. Brown and McGovern.

QB - two starters come back
RB - two guys who have started before and a third who has played (not significant experience) and could be the most talented of the three.
WR - Torii Hunter was third on the team in receiving yards last year and played significant minutes. CJ Sanders has played on special teams, and has contributed when healthy.
TE - Two starters return with Durham and Luatua. Weisher has another year of experience.
Offensive line - Mike and Q are obvious and Bars has experience too.

Maybe I'm overly optimistic but I think St Brown could easily be more productive than either Brown or Robinson, and McGovern will be just as good as Elmer. Mustipher is the only clear downgrade, IMO. I think he's going to have a really good year, it's just tough to replace a guy like Martin at center.

The offense rolls.



Baylor played without a QB. Throw that game out.

QB - Really? One started all of 2 games and hasn't played in close to a calender year. The other, who has experience, is forced to share his roll and at this point nobody outside of the staff knows what those roles will be. And absolutely nobody knows what it will look like on the field or how the team will react to the revolving door.

RB - One who missed a chunk of last year with injury, and one who's got minimal experience.

WR- Hunter, after that nobody has really any experience playing WR in the field for us.

TE - Lost our starter.

OL - I love em, but half of them are new starters.

I think our O should be phenomenal this year. But as I said, nothings been shown yet. Which is why I'm in the 'wait and see' camp and why I don't have an issue of someone else pick Texas.

 

[BobbyMac]

I think we are ok. I don't think we can call ourselves a "good" team just yet.

Playoffs would be amazing given our projected D issues and inexperience at WR and TE. I agree there.

So when a large group of college coaches say ND's the 9th best team in the country, out of 128, you think that means they are just "ok"?

Words have meanings. When you make a Top 10 list, you are good at something. That's the premise behind a Top 10 list. Now, you can have your opinion but it doesn't seem to jive with very many individuals who get paid millions of dollars to do it as a profession.

ND is Good.

Someone rep me!

In honor of Gene. RIP

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/M5QGkOGZubQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[calvegas04]

I remember just months ago how everyone was saying how deep we are at WR

 

[Irish Insanity]

So when a large group of college coaches say ND's the 9th best team in the country, out of 128, you think that means they are just "ok"?

Then what does it say when a large part of the media, who watch more ND film than most of the coaches who won't play us this year do, picks us to lose to an unranked Texas team?

 

[arrowryan]

Then what does it say when a large part of the media, who watch more ND film than most of the coaches who won't play us this year do, picks us to lose to an unranked Texas team?

You really think most of the media actually watches film? They're probably making their prediction because of the arrests. If they do actually watch film, they must watch it with their eyes closed because there isn't anything on film that suggests Texas will win.

 

[NorthDakota]

Then what does it say when a large part of the media, who watch more ND film than most of the coaches who won't play us this year do, picks us to lose to an unranked Texas team?

That the media wants Texas to be relevant and win a marquee game.

 

[ACamp1900]

You really think most of the media actually watches film? They're probably making their prediction because of the arrests. If they do actually watch film, they must watch it with their eyes closed because there isn't anything on film that suggests Texas will win.

IN fairness:

What film?? We don't really have any relevant film on our current Irish squad... and Texas was seriously jekyll and hyde last year, I watched them numerous times, I often thought, 'this is the same team I saw play against __" ?? In year three, teams tend to sort that stuff out...

 

[ScooterIrish]

QB - Really? One started all of 2 games and hasn't played in close to a calender year. The other, who has experience, is forced to share his roll and at this point nobody outside of the staff knows what those roles will be. And absolutely nobody knows what it will look like on the field or how the team will react to the revolving door.

RB - One who missed a chunk of last year with injury, and one who's got minimal experience.

WR- Hunter, after that nobody has really any experience playing WR in the field for us.

TE - Lost our starter.

OL - I love em, but half of them are new starters.

I think our O should be phenomenal this year. But as I said, nothings been shown yet. Which is why I'm in the 'wait and see' camp and why I don't have an issue of someone else pick Texas.

You are putting way too much emphasis on starting. It's all about minutes played. Folston and Adams may not have started any games last year but Folston has a ton of playing time (and from all accounts looks great) and Adams had 117 attempts, which doesn't include non-rush snaps.