National Championship Predictions:

[Patience]

Forget about Notre Dame this year, their schedule is just too tough.

 

They will lose to either Ga.Tech, Penn St., or Michigan. Even if they do survive that, there is no way they go into Los Angeles and beat USC.

 

731222[/snapback]

 

Georgia Tech is not an impossible task, we beat Michigan IN THEIR HOUSE last year, and Penn St. we got at home.

 

And the game last year could've went either way, since Leinart got pushed into the endzone.

 

Plus they are without White, Bush, and Leinart.

[Mark Vader]

Georgia Tech is not an impossible task, we beat Michigan IN THEIR HOUSE last year, and Penn St. we got at home.

 

And the game last year could've went either way, since Leinart got pushed into the endzone.

 

Plus they are without White, Bush, and Leinart.

731403[/snapback]

I just do'nt see it happening. Schedule is just too difficult for the Irish.

 

Also do'nt underestimate USC, they may have lost a lot of talent, but Pete Carroll is always prepared for that. Their offense may fall back a bit, but their defense will be better.

[Patience]

I just do'nt see it happening. Schedule is just too difficult for the Irish.

 

Also do'nt underestimate USC, they may have lost a lot of talent, but Pete Carroll is always prepared for that. Their offense may fall back a bit, but their defense will be better.

731657[/snapback]

 

GA Tech - Surprisingly, I'm not too worried about them. We should be 1-0 after this, but being on the road will always make it tougher.

 

Penn St. - Yes, but I am pleased we have them in our place this year. Their last duel at South Bend was a classic, the Snow Bowl in '92 I believe. Should be the best/one of the best games of the year.

 

Michigan - Not as worried as I was last year about them. They didn't show me much, came out very flat, not impressive. They'll get eaten alive at ND Stadium if they come out bad, because ND usually comes firing out of the gates. A pretty challenging schedule so far.

 

Michigan St. - A surprise win last year at Notre Dame Stadium, in overtime. Great, mobile QB in Drew Stanton, who makes plays all over the field. This will be another high-scoring game, with the top 2 QB's in the nation battling it out. Spartan Stadium isn't as intimidating as it used to be, but they should be fired up for this one. This could be the trip-up game for the Irish, really worries me.

 

Purdue - What's to say about the Boilermakers? We've owned them over the years, and I expect more of the same. Final score of about 39-13, in favor of the Irish. Don't see how we can lose against them, in our stadium nonetheless (knock on wood).

 

Stanford - They put up a pretty nice fight against us last year, I'll give them that much. Seems like Stanford usually gives us a challenge, so I'm not making any bold predictions for this one. The middle game of a 3 game homestand for the Irish, with the last being UCLA.

 

UCLA - Lost a lot of valuable players from the decent 2005 squad, their starting QB, RB, and TE. But they have a solid back in 2006 to pick up where Drew left off. A supposed rebuilding year for the Bruins, and the Irish should take advantage of that. Good thing it's at home, I hate playing road games on the West Coast.

 

Navy - Started a bit flat last year against them, but picked it up as the game went on. Like Purdue, I don't see how we can lose this game, but you know they'll play it tough. Offensive firepower is just too much for their defense to handle, and will put the game out of reach, IMO, early.

 

North Carolina - The Tar Heels have a very challenging year ahead of them. VA Tech, @ Clemson, @ Miami, @ Notre Dame, and NC State at home. I watched some of their games in the 2005 season, and their squad never gives up. Must be the right attitude their coach exudes. At least it's at home.

 

Air Force - Much like Navy, we should take care of them early and often. And ALSO like Navy, they'll continue to put up a fight. Air Force, Stanford, and North Carolina we need to put away early.

 

Army - Far and away Army's toughest opponent on their schedule. Like Purdue, not much to say on them, I expect another win, and to be undefeated, or one loss, going into the late season matchup with USC.

 

USC - So fitting it's at the end of the schedule. If this game is HALF of what it was last year, then we're in for a real treat. Like you said, they lost a lot of offense, but USC always keeps bringing in top notch recruits. And their defense is improved from the last couple of years by a considerable amount. Good coaching battle, and game all along the board.

 

 

There's my analysis on the Notre Dame schedule, can't wait for the season.

 

[BuffOrange]

Georgia Tech is not an impossible task, we beat Michigan IN THEIR HOUSE last year, and Penn St. we got at home.

 

And the game last year could've went either way, since Leinart got pushed into the endzone.

 

Plus they are without White, Bush, and Leinart.

731403[/snapback]

 

 

I agree that each individual game is winnable. That's the case for almost any top 15 team as long as they don't have multiple brutal road games against top 5 teams. The point is though, it's going to require quite an unlikely parlay to run the table.

[smokinandjokin]

Navy - Started a bit flat last year against them, but picked it up as the game went on. Like Purdue, I don't see how we can lose this game, but you know they'll play it tough. Offensive firepower is just too much for their defense to handle, and will put the game out of reach, IMO, early.

 

Air Force - Much like Navy, we should take care of them early and often. And ALSO like Navy, they'll continue to put up a fight. Air Force, Stanford, and North Carolina we need to put away early.

 

Army - Far and away Army's toughest opponent on their schedule. Like Purdue, not much to say on them, I expect another win, and to be undefeated, or one loss, going into the late season matchup with USC.

731776[/snapback]

 

I understand ND's situation as an independent. If they were in a conference, they would no doubt have some cupcake games against the bottom feeder teams. But when is the last time a favorite for the national title had Army, Navy, and Air Force on the schedule in the same season?

[H2o]

The main thing is injuries. If the core group stays healthy they should win every game. We need Quinn, Samardzija, McKnight, Walker, Wooden, Abiamiri, Richardson, and Zbikowski all to play every game. We also don't have too much depth at OL either. And about Dame's schedule, take a look at WVU's schedule and they're a favorite for the title as well? C'mon now. Our strength of schedule is easily a B+ if not an A because of all the teams we will play. We can't have but so much of a murderous schedule.

[smokinandjokin]

The main thing is injuries. If the core group stays healthy they should win every game. We need Quinn, Samardzija, McKnight, Walker, Wooden, Abiamiri, Richardson, and Zbikowski all to play every game. We also don't have too much depth at OL either. And about Dame's schedule, take a look at WVU's schedule and they're a favorite for the title as well? C'mon now. Our strength of schedule is easily a B+ if not an A because of all the teams we will play. We can't have but so much of a murderous schedule.

732075[/snapback]

 

I think WVU is a favorite because of their schedule. When Louisville and Pitt are your toughest games, you have a good shot at going undefeated.

 

I'm not dogging ND's schedule, they do have some toughies in there and there are games they will lose if they don't play their best. You can't blame them for middle-of-the-road teams like GT, Purdue, and UNC, because like I said, if they were a member of a conference they would have 3-4 'easy' wins every year from the lower tier teams. Just because they're independent doesn't mean they have to schedule all 11 games from the top-25.

 

I also understand their long-standing agreement with Navy. But adding Army and Air Force this year creates a trifecta that probably hasn't been seen in many, many years from a title contender.

[BuffOrange]

I think WVU is a favorite because of their schedule.  When Louisville and Pitt are your toughest games, you have a good shot at going undefeated.

 

I'm not dogging ND's schedule, they do have some toughies in there and there are games they will lose if they don't play their best.  You can't blame them for middle-of-the-road teams like GT, Purdue, and UNC, because like I said, if they were a member of a conference they would have 3-4 'easy' wins every year from the lower tier teams.  Just because they're independent doesn't mean they have to schedule all 11 games from the top-25.

 

I also understand their long-standing agreement with Navy.  But adding Army and Air Force this year creates a trifecta that probably hasn't been seen in many, many years from a title contender.

732086[/snapback]

 

As you pointed out, every team has that many cupcakes and most have many more (Texas last year? LOL). The fact that all 3 teams are service acadamies is pretty arbitrary, don't ya think?

[bartshan-83]

I understand ND's situation as an independent.  If they were in a conference, they would no doubt have some cupcake games against the bottom feeder teams.  But when is the last time a favorite for the national title had Army, Navy, and Air Force on the schedule in the same season?

732037[/snapback]

Well when you think about when the schedule was actually devised (at least 5 years ago), it actually makes a lot more sense. Late 90s - early 2000s, ND was not having a very easy time. I think they tried to make a less brutal schedule, while still keeping some big time opponents and rivalvries on the roster. A NATL title run, while hoped for, was not expected.

 

We may catch sh-- for the service academy tri-fecta, but our schedule is straight. This very thread supports that. Everyone pretty much seems to be in agreement that ND is a top 5 team, and pretty much everyone would not bet on ND running the table.

[smokinandjokin]

As you pointed out, every team has that many cupcakes and most have many more (Texas last year?  LOL).  The fact that all 3 teams are service acadamies is pretty arbitrary, don't ya think?

732098[/snapback]

 

I see and respect your point, but no, I don't think that lumping the academies in with cupcakes is arbitrary.

 

The players at the service academies meet 100 other requirements just to be admitted to the school, and also happen to be decent football players. In contrast, at schools like Arizona and Maryland and Iowa State, which wouldn't be considered 'tough' games for a team like Notre Dame, the players are outstanding athletes who were recruited to play football, and match up against some of the top teams in the country (even if they get blown out.) Army, Navy, and (to a lesser extent) Air Force do not play ANY teams comparable to Notre Dame. At least a team like Illinois will have stepped on the same field as a team like Ohio State or Michigan, and know what it takes to compete at that level. The service academies do not, with the exception of Air Force, who has Tennessee on the schedule this year.

[smokinandjokin]

We may catch sh-- for the service academy tri-fecta, but our schedule is straight.  This very thread supports that.  Everyone pretty much seems to be in agreement that ND is a top 5 team, and pretty much everyone would not bet on ND running the table.

732124[/snapback]

 

Totally agreed. I have definitely tried to mention several times that their schedule is by no means easy. And you are correct, schedules are made 5 years in advance. Looking at Texas' and USC's schedule's from last year, neither of those squads is in position to complain about the softies. But it is odd to see one academy on a BCS team's schedule, much less all three.

 

I suppose the main difference is that at the academies, they are football players third, behind being soldiers and students. Basically, they are grooming themselves for a different life from most 20-year olds. At BCS schools, they are football players first and then students when they have time. I think we all know that most blue-chip athletes are going to go where they'll be coddled and fawned over, where football is your job, rather than a place where football is a bonus.

[BuffOrange]

I see and respect your point, but no, I don't think that lumping the academies in with cupcakes is arbitrary.

 

The players at the service academies meet 100 other requirements just to be admitted to the school, and also happen to be decent football players.  In contrast, at schools like Arizona and Maryland and Iowa State, which wouldn't be considered 'tough' games for a team like Notre Dame, the players are outstanding athletes who were recruited to play football, and match up against some of the top teams in the country (even if they get blown out.)  Army, Navy, and (to a lesser extent) Air Force do not play ANY teams comparable to Notre Dame.  At least a team like Illinois will have stepped on the same field as a team like Ohio State or Michigan, and know what it takes to compete at that level.  The service academies do not, with the exception of Air Force, who has Tennessee on the schedule this year.

732126[/snapback]

This is pretty sound in theory but it just doesn't carry a ton of weight in practice IMO. These teams from the MAAC or whatever beat Big 10 type teams or "teams that played Duke tough twice" every March in basketball and when you look at the point spreads a lot of them aren't even considered upsets by the experts.

That's not to say Army wouldn't lose to Ohio St. by 50 points, because they would. But when you compare apples to apples I don't think Illinois would've beaten Navy last year had they played on a neutral field. Perhaps I'm wrong about that, but Air Force did beat Washinton.

[smokinandjokin]

This is pretty sound in theory but it just doesn't carry a ton of weight in practice IMO.  These teams from the MAAC or whatever beat Big 10 type teams or "teams that played Duke tough twice" every March in basketball and when you look at the point spreads a lot of them aren't even considered upsets by the experts. 

That's not to say Army wouldn't lose to Ohio St. by 50 points, because they would.  But when you compare apples to apples I don't think Illinois would've beaten Navy last year had they played on a neutral field.  Perhaps I'm wrong about that, but Air Force did beat Washinton.

732158[/snapback]

 

NCAA hoops is MUCH different from NCAA football. No question the mid-majors have had a big impact on the national scene in basketball. But I wouldn't use that argument to make your point. First, there are only 12 players on a basketball roster. That leaves MANY, MANY talented players without a scholarship to UNC or UCLA or UConn. So they end up at Southern Illinois or sometimes even Niagara. And they know that if they perform, they will get the recognition, and a chance to play in the big tourney. There's no 1-A and 1-AA in hoops.

 

In football, there are ~75 scholarships per team. All of the big schools get all of the big time athletes. Guys like Rothlisberger that go to a smaller school can maybe catch lightning in a bottle for one season and get ranked near the top-10, but they will never be national title contenders. An 18-year old with NFL aspirations will probably not end up at Army or Navy.

 

The only reason I mention the service academies on ND's schedule is because we know right now that they will not beat the Irish this year, and probably not any year. Navy has not beaten ND in ~50 years, and they play every season. At least with a team like Illinois, there is a chance that they have the athletes who can get the job done. Notre Dame would probably win 90% of the time, but you never know. Stanford gave the Irish all they could handle last year. Those teams play the power teams in their respective conferences, and are not necessarily intimidated by a top-5 team. It's tough to picture Army getting reps for the Notre Dame game after going against Temple.

 

No question the academies have had good seasons. Navy, especially in recent years. And no question that in an "up" year for the academies, they could beat a BCS-conference team in a "down" year. There will be various seasons where Army would be a tougher test than Indiana, but scheduling for five years away, I think you would bet money that Army will be an easier game.

[bartshan-83]

I guess I kind of saw it the other way around. I would give a service academy a better shot knock off a BCS team than a school like Appalachian St. (or a bottom feeding big conference cupcake).

 

But you are kind of changing my mind. This:

Stanford gave the Irish all they could handle last year.  Those teams play the power teams in their respective conferences, and are not necessarily intimidated by a top-5 team.

732175[/snapback]

....is an excellent point. Exposure to and "practice" against other big time schools in a tough conference does better prepare a low grade team for a big time showdown.

 

I guess I'm only wary because both Navy and Air Force have enjoyed a considerable about of success the last few years and both employ a very unique style of play (goofy ass triple option and such) that are hard to prepare for. It can give them an edge.

 

I'd rather play a team with C- talent, that plays the game straight up and predictable, than team with D talent that switches everything up.

[BuffOrange]

NCAA hoops is MUCH different from NCAA football.  No question the mid-majors have had a big impact on the national scene in basketball.  But I wouldn't use that argument to make your point.  First, there are only 12 players on a basketball roster.  That leaves MANY, MANY talented players without a scholarship to UNC or UCLA or UConn.  So they end up at Southern Illinois or sometimes even Niagara.  And they know that if they perform, they will get the recognition, and a chance to play in the big tourney.  There's no 1-A and 1-AA in hoops.

 

In football, there are ~75 scholarships per team.  All of the big schools get all of the big time athletes.  Guys like Rothlisberger that go to a smaller school can maybe catch lightning in a bottle for one season and get ranked near the top-10, but they will never be national title contenders.  An 18-year old with NFL aspirations will probably not end up at Army or Navy.

 

The only reason I mention the service academies on ND's schedule is because we know right now that they will not beat the Irish this year, and probably not any year.  Navy has not beaten ND in ~50 years, and they play every season.  At least with a team like Illinois, there is a chance that they have the athletes who can get the job done.  Notre Dame would probably win 90% of the time, but you never know.  Stanford gave the Irish all they could handle last year.  Those teams play the power teams in their respective conferences, and are not necessarily intimidated by a top-5 team.  It's tough to picture Army getting reps for the Notre Dame game after going against Temple.

 

No question the academies have had good seasons.  Navy, especially in recent years.  And no question that in an "up" year for the academies, they could beat a BCS-conference team in a "down" year.  There will be various seasons where Army would be a tougher test than Indiana, but scheduling for five years away, I think you would bet money that Army will be an easier game.

732175[/snapback]

Smokin,

I think the problem is that you're picturing 2 teams in a vacuum. Compare Illinois to Army for 10 seasons and yes - Illinois is likely to be the superior team more often than not.

 

The problem is that you can't compare these teams in a vacuum because ND isn't in a conference. Ohio St. is in a conference and they will always play an "Illinois" who can't beat Navy. It won't be Illinois every year; it might be Indiana, Northwestern, or whoever. This is even more true about the Pac-10 and Big 12. Navy's chances against ND are no worse than Baylor's vs. Texas - and that's not an anomoly, it's typical. Not to mention, you don't see the Irish playing Division II intrastate "rivals" like Fla A&M or Southwest Texas St. Tech. Anyway, I've argued too much about something I don't care about.

[smokinandjokin]

I guess I'm only wary because both Navy and Air Force have enjoyed a considerable about of success the last few years and both employ a very unique style of play (goofy ass triple option and such) that are hard to prepare for.  It can give them an edge.

 

I'd rather play a team with C- talent, that plays the game straight up and predictable, than team with D talent that switches everything up.

732203[/snapback]

 

True that Bart, it is always tough to have to change your schemes to adjust to a completely different style. I think Navy has led the NCAA in rushing several times over the past few years because of their triple option wishbone. Typically, the athleticism of the better team wins out, but the gimmicks can keep a game closer than it should be.

 

Smokin,

I think the problem is that you're picturing 2 teams in a vacuum. Compare Illinois to Army for 10 seasons and yes - Illinois is likely to be the superior team more often than not.

The problem is that you can't compare these teams in a vacuum because ND isn't in a conference. Ohio St. is in a conference and they will always play an "Illinois" who can't beat Navy. It won't be Illinois every year; it might be Indiana, Northwestern, or whoever. This is even more true about the Pac-10 and Big 12. Navy's chances against ND are no worse than Baylor's vs. Texas - and that's not an anomoly, it's typical. Not to mention, you don't see the Irish playing Division II intrastate "rivals" like Fla A&M or Southwest Texas St. Tech.

732203[/snapback]

 

Buff, you make a good point. A team in a conference will always have 2-3 cupcakes to play against, and they will be constantly rotating. Teams who are not in the upper echelon of the conference (like you mentioned, Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, etc) will have up years and down years. Sometimes they will play better against Ohio State and Michigan, and sometimes those games will be blowouts, depending on the season. They could finish 10-2 or 2-10, who knows?

 

What you said is exactly the point I'm making...Those schools (even the Indiana's and Baylor's of the world) have the ability to recruit players who can play at a national championship level. The service academies do not recruit those types of players, and frankly, it's probably because most of those players don't meet the extensive requirements necessary to be a student at one of the prestigous academies.

 

That said, the stars will occasionally allign where Army or Navy has a class of well-coached, supremely conditioned athletes who can win more often than not. They will beat the bottom teams from BCS leagues. But they will not compete for a national title. Therefore, if you were making Notre Dame's schedule for the 2011 football season, scheduling Washington (2-9 in '05) or Kentucky (3-8 in '05) is uncertain, because those teams have the potential to recruit and turn things around quickly. On the other hand, scheduling Navy, Army, and Air Force is basically scheduling three automatic wins, no matter if they are in an "up" year or a "down" year, because the types of athletes at those schools are drastically different from the athletes at ND. That's why I was surprised ND scheduled all three in the same season. But the way it shakes out, they end up with a pretty fair schedule overall- 4 tough, 4 middle of the road, and 4 "locks."

 

Anyway, I've argued too much about something I don't care about.

732203[/snapback]

 

No doubt! Can't wait for CFB- start playing some damn games soon or we're going to go crazy! We're here talking Army football for gosh sakes!

[BuffOrange]

No doubt!  Can't wait for CFB- start playing some damn games soon or we're going to go crazy!  We're here talking Army football for gosh sakes!

732315[/snapback]

 

Hopefully my college/pro teams win more than a combined 6 games this year

When does SU hoops start?

[Guest Guest]

Go Army, Beat Navy!

[Chilly]

As you pointed out, every team has that many cupcakes and most have many more (Texas last year?  LOL).  The fact that all 3 teams are service acadamies is pretty arbitrary, don't ya think?

732098[/snapback]

 

Oh no you didn't.

 

Texas beat 3 teams that finished the season in the top 10, 4 teams in the top 25.

 

Texas beat opponents in 9 games that were in a bowl game.

 

USC beat 6 teams that were in a bowl game.

 

USC beat 5 top 25 teams, with 1 being in the top 10.

 

That means that Texas only played in 4 games against non bowl opponents, whereas your runners up, USC, played in 7, which is greater then 50% of their schedule.

 

Take your bull sh-- about the National Champs someplace else.

[Guest Guest]

I still think it's funny how Vince forward lateralled the ball after he was down to your transferring drug runner for a TD. That was awesome!!! I loved every second of the second half USC collapse!!! That's what they get for Reggie pushing Matt into the endzone against ND.