Domers are rejoicing today because Jimmy Clausen, a high-school senior rated by many recruiting services as the #1 quarterback prospect in the country, will attend Notre Dame. Specifically, he picked ND over USC, which makes this recruiting coup all the more sweet for Irish fans.
Clausen announced his decision at the College Football Hall of Fame this morning, hours before this afternoon’s Blue-Gold Game.
I don’t blame him. Sitting behind Booty & Sanchez for three years would get frustrating. At ND he could possibly step in as a freshman starter (since Quinn is gone after this coming season)…no waiting on the bench.
Clausen will certainly have the opportunity to play his freshman year, but he’ll have tough competition. Frazier and Jones were highly ranked QB recruits for the class of ‘06, and they will both be competing for the honor of taking over the reigns. Meanwhile, Clausen will still be playing H.S. football.
Nonetheless, this is an ENORMOUS grab for the Irish…particularly considering Southern Cal’s substantial efforts to recruit him. It certainly is nice to hear that the whiz-kid QB from California chose South Bend over LA.
Or, could it be that he recognizes that Weis is a superior coach, as he said in his press conference?
Hmmm, I’m sure that has something to do with it. After all, who would you rather have groom you for a career as an NFL Quarterback: someone with a record of 82-78 in 10 seasons as an NFL head coach or defensive coordinator with only 1 playoff win, or someone with a record of 73-39 in 7 seasons as an offensive coordinator with 12 playoff wins and 3 Super Bowl titles?
Yeah Patrick, cause Weiss is soooo superior. Which of them has won the national championship? Which of them has coached multiple Heisman winners (including two QB’s). Which one won last years competition?
I was going to just let this go and be happy for you guys at getting a great player, but if you are going to start trash talking, I’ll jump right in.
I’m not going to get into any Poodle bashing on this. I don’t like the Poodle, but he wins. And coach Weis will be the first to tell you that winning is the bottom-line.
I agree that Notre Dame was the smart choice for Clausen. It was smart not only because he wont have to wait behind Sanchez, but because he’ll be tutored by Weis.
School partisanship aside, I think there’s little doubt that Coach Weis is THE coach for young aspiring quarterbacks. He turned Tom Brady, a 4th round pick, into a legendary hall-of-famer. (At least, that’s Tom Brady’s story–I’ll take his word for it). And Brady Quinn transformed under Weis–sure, Brady Quinn was bound to do better and improve–but he matured exponentially under Weis. In one year he went from a mediocre talent to one of the top 3 ranked QB’s in the nation.
A lot of people are saying that ND under Weis is going to be the next QB University–and I believe it. So does Clausen…and so will aspiring wideouts (IMHO).
That said–Southern Cal is obviously not a program to sneeze at. The Poodle is the man to beat…he’s made it. He’s bonafide. I think Weis can knock him off his pedistal, but as of right now we’re just trying to catch up–and we’re gaining speed.
I’m just glad we don’t have to endure another four years of a QB with Clausen on the back of the jersey here in Knoxville.
I don’t know if I could stomach another four years of “Iceman-lite” (Top Gun reference for those of you who care). I’m sure they kid’s great, but all the same, I’m glad he chose go elsewhere. Now, if Weis doesn’t ditch him like Nick Saban did with Rick….
First, it’s mathematically impossible for Weis to have coached “multiple Heisman winners.” Need I remind you that he’s only coached one collegiate season? Hopefully not. Regardless, this fact underscores something important - namely, that a comparison of Weis and Carroll’s collegiate coaching record is nonsensical. Clearly, Weis’ first season was unquestionably better than Carroll’s first season, but a career is fare more than one season.
The only viable comparison between Carroll and Weis is between their careers as top level NFL coaches. Fortunately for Notre Dame, the information that can be gleaned from such a comparison was extremely important in Clausen’s college choice. Weis’ notable and “superior” skill in grooming quarterbacks was the determining factor. Read the story and read Clausen’s quotes.
Weis’ career in the NFL and in his first year at Notre Dame demonstrate that he has a keen understanding of the game, makes his players better, and wins where ever he goes. Carroll’s NFL and collegiate record demonstrate that he’s a proven winner on one level (college) and that he can recruit the freakish, once-in-a-generation player. Fortunately for Notre Dame, this generation’s Reggie Bush has come and gone, and now USC can’t even recruit a kid in its own backyard.
Patrick, comparing their Pro careers is absolutely irrelavent. As history has shown time and again the two areas, college and pro are different beasts and a great pro coach can fail at the college level and vice versa.
Weis may or may not turn out to be a great college coach, that doens’t change the fact that Pete Caroll has allready PROVEN he is a great college coach.
But as I can see from this post allready Domer’s are about as good of fans as Yankee fans are, arrogant and rude.
Clausen made the decision that he felt was right, and good luck to the kid at Notre Dame, I honestly hope he does well. Unlike some of the yahoos who post on here who probably never played a down of football in their lives, I know what its like to play the game and I wish any player who gets the chance to play at the college level the best of luck, I wish I had had the chance. And I wish Weis well too (well except 1 game a year), I have nothing against him as a coach or a person, and I respect the good job he did with the Irish last year.
Some people, however, can’t see beyond their own bias to grant respect where respect is due. At least thebeef gets it, too bad none of the other Domer’s here seem to.
Beef, I don’t know why, but I had totally forgotten about Frazier and Jones…(I suspect one will end up transfering at some point when the other takes the lead, especially if Clausen progresses well behind them.) Maybe 2-3 years as the #2 guy at SC would have been a better strategic choice, rather than potentially being the #3 at ND for the same period?
In any case, either school would provide a stellar environment in which to progress.
RE: Carroll vs. Weis — any attempt at comparing the two numerically is pretty stupid. Apples and oranges:
*Carroll had a mediocre pro head coaching record, but 33-31 (1-2 playoffs) isn’t that bad, unless you happen to follow the legendary Bill Parcells at New England and are stuck with Bobby Grier drafting your players
*Until last year Weis hadn’t had a head coaching position since Franklin Township (N.J.) High School in ‘89
*As a DC in the pros Carroll led top defensive units in SF
*No reasonable football fan can ignore Weis’ success as an OC in the pros
*Carroll and his players have had unreal success over the last 4 years, 48-4 with two championships, two Heismans, etc.
*9-3 is the best record the Irish have had in a decade, and Quinn improved dramatically, but it’s seriously too early to tell what the Weis legacy will be like…that enormous contract extension Weis got was waaay early
Let’s all keep the our-coach-is-better-than-yours hyperbole down. I think we can all agree that Carroll is one of the established premiere coaches in college football and Weis seemingly has the upward momentum to join the group. Their pro records are incompatable to meaningful comparison. Their college performances will be comparable with a larger sample size.
Excuse my arrogance and rudeness…seriously. By presenting facts about the careers of two coaches and about the stated reasons that the number one overall recruit in the country chose ND, I’m clearly demonstrating my pronounced, inward-looking hubris. Notre Dame is obviously the divinely ordained deity of college football, and my posts were designed specifically to reflect that.
Give me a frickin’ break, David. Whatever slight arrogance my post contains pales in comparison to your whole “you’re arrogant like a Yankee fan and I’m uber-humble because I wish the kid well.” Remember, David, that self-proclaimed humility is an oxymoron, so please get off your high horse. USC fans are no less arrogant, and your post reminds us of that.
Now, to address your points that are almost reasonable…
Has Carroll demonstrated that he’s a great college coach? Yes, I have no argument there. Has Weis? He took a ragtag group of players that couldn’t win and made them into a top 10 team in one season. That’s coaching. Thus far, he HAS proven himself. He took ND to a BCS bowl in his first season. Has he proven himself, though, to the extent that Carroll has? No, one season is insufficient for such a comparison.
Now, let’s take your argument that “college and pro are different beasts and a great pro coach can fail at the college level and vice versa.” Please provide us some example. When did a “great” NFL coach stink in college? Success as a college coach does not necessarily translate into success as an NFL coach. However, provided that a former great NFL coach can recruit moderately well, he’ll have success at the collegiate level.
A poor football mind can succeed in college with superior recruiting. There is no such luxury in the NFL. Weis’ success has absolutely, positively NOTHING to do with the level at which he’s coaching. Knowledge of the game is knowledge of the game.
I’m not saying that Carroll lacks Weis’ understanding of the game, but Weis’ three Super Bowl rings, his degree from Notre Dame, and his surprising ability to turn ND around in one season would certainly suggest that he’s a step ahead in his football IQ. After all, Carroll went to a community college, was a failure and an NFL coach, and made some of the stupidest coaching decisions in the National Championship game that I’ve ever encountered.
So I guess, yeah, I AM saying that Weis has a better understanding of the game…and I’d take that over a silver-haired, pretty-boy coach who sends his star players at Hollywood U to Victoria Secret parties and movie premiers.
Well Patrick your arrogance is evident in that you assumed my post about Domers was focused only on you. And saying you are just like USC fans? Fine if thats what you want to compare yourself to but I thought Domer’s held themselves to a higher standard.
But I don’t need to prove anything, the fact that people have called me a douche or talked about me fellating myself shows what caliber of Notre Dame fans post on here. As I’ve said before I hope this behavior isn’t typical.
And I think Scientizzle has accurately pointed out that comparing the two coaches at this point is irrelavent. This is Weis’ first head coaching job in how long? I think, like the administration who granted him the extension you are putting the cart before the horse. Its just too soon to tell how good he will be.
As for your question about failed NFL coaches who did great at the college level, um Steve Spurrier ring a bell?
David, settle down and read what Patrick said again. He said that while success as a college coach DIDN’T translate to pro success, that it was difficult to find the opposite to be true. Of course, he said that they had to be “great pro coaches” and able to recruit…I don’t know whether either is true about Paul Hackett, but he came from the same position as Weis and he was a flop. The success of Dave Wannestadt, who was a very successful coordinator and had a great first recruiting class, will test Patrick’s statement.
Wannestadt’s name was certainly running in the back of my mind as I typed, but bear in mind that he was fired in Miami. Was he successful as an NFL coach? Apparently not successful enough. Regardless, he does have a LOT of convincing to do after the abysmal season he had in Pittsburgh.
I think it is dumb to compare Carroll and Weis on the pro level because Pete Carroll was responsible for the entire ship (offense, defense & special teams) while with the NY Jets & NE Patriots while Weis was only responsible for the Offense in NE EXCEPT for that time when he coached in High School.
So if Weis was such a genious it seems that he would have at least INTERVIEWED for a head coaches job at some point during his career. he only became a serious candidate for a job AFTER the 2nd super bowl.
so IMO Carroll has always been seen as a better coaching candidate on both levels. and Carroll has coach his team to 3 National Title games, 2 wins, and he has coached 3 Heisman trophy winners.
Weis has started off on a good note and getting this kid was not all that hard if you really think about it because where else would he go? Miami? no Kyle Wright is only a sophmore and he is THE starter. USC? No, why sit behind Booty and Sanchez? LSU? They already have a log jam at QB where there are three guys that could start including the consensus #1 prospect from 2 years ago in Ryan Perrilloux. Florida? no, they signed Tim Tebow. the only other schools that Clausen could have entertained were UCLA, Ohio State or FSU and non of those schools are that attractive, for obvious reasons. Clausen has his eye on the NFL and FSU is a mess at OC spot and UCLA is second fiddle in LA and OSU is not a QB farm.
The name Notre Dame got that BCS bowl birth and it has been discussed already that ND did not deserve to be there but they travel better than the other candidates.
And Weis was not even the 1st or 2nd choice for ND to fill the vacancy even with HIS 3 super bowl rings….this gets funnier and funnier the more I think about it. now Charlie is being made out to be this coaching savant AFTER the fact! LOL. You were all crying in your green beer when Urban Meyer decided to go to Florida. in affect telling ND and its fans, NO thanks. Jeff Tedford. NO. Kirk Ferentz. NO. John Gruden. NO. know its like Weis was the target all along because he was the OC on a team that won 3 super bowls.
To begin…Carroll was a failure as an NFL headcoach. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. As a coordinator he was successful. True, Weis was never the HC of an NFL team, but we all know how incredibly successful he was as an OC. His career as a coordinator in the NFL, from an objective standpoint, was more impressive than Carroll’s career as a coordinator. But, the man had health problems. The guy actually died. THAT is why he didn’t recieve offers from the NFL the year BEFORE he accepted the ND position. He DID recieve NFL offers the year he chose ND. (Reportedly from two teams…Miami for sure, Weis didn’t name the second). Claiming that Carroll is superior to Weis–as David and Scientizzle have accurately stated–is meaningless until Weis has more years under his belt as an HC. Indications are Weis is going to be a monster of a good coach in the long run.
Now, let’s move on to your second moment of stupidity. Clausen wasn’t a hard kid for ND to pick up? Did you ride the short bus to school? The kid is FROM Southern California. He is sitting in the backyard of the preeminent college football program, and he chose to attend school in Indiana. Not only that, he’s the highest ranked recruit to come out of high school in arguably the past 5 years!! He had offers everywhere! I mean, where do you get off saying Ohio State is not a good looking option? Or that FSU looks bad? And hello, moron, if your argument is: it wasn’t a hard choice for Clausen to pick the Irish because the Irish don’t have any of the problems that other schools have—well that’s the whole point isn’t it? We’re the best pick. We’re the best school. That ain’t easy.
Now, moving on to your third moment of stupidity. In what universe was Charlie Weis the THIRD or FOURTH or FIFTH choice for the job???? I’m not arguing that Meyer was ND’s first choice, but that isn’t hard to figure out. The man coached at Notre Dame in the past and had said on numerous occassions that ND was his dream job. Here’s a lesson in reality for you Nebraska: if an HC publicly says on more than one occassion that his dream job would be at ND, he’s soliciting for the job. He said he wanted it, we were pleased to offer him the position. He changed his mind. We had to go to plan B. Plan B (our SECOND offer) was Weis. You mention Ferentz, Tedford, etc. Here’s another lesson in reality for you Nebraska: if you’re an HC, and you want to leverage your position to get a fatter contract from your school, make a statement that you’re supposedly turning down an offer from Notre Dame, thus inflating your image and increasing your standing. I mean, everyone and their mother “turned down” the Notre Dame job. Are we to believe that Notre Dame went on a binge, offering dozens of coaches the job–with no interview!?!
Now, on to your fourth moment of stupidity. ND didn’t deserve to go to a BCS Bowl? And your evidence to back this assertion is that “it’s been discussed already?” Yeah….riiiiight. Who should’ve gone? Oregon? What happened to them? Give me a break.
You write: “this gets funnier and funnier the more I think about it.” Do us a favor—don’t try to think. You’re not good at it.
I just heard that the great Notre Dame will lowering the entrance requirements so that they can get the marginal “stuent-athlete.” WOW.
The greatest school is turning into all the rest?
Bottom line, did Charlie Weis EVER have an NFL Head Coaching job? NO
Pete Carroll had two, good bad or indifferent he held the position of NFL Head Coach. There is no comparing the two coaches NFL run on that basis alone.
would you compare the careers of a trial lawyer and corporate lawyer?
“he’s the highest ranked recruit to come out of high school in arguably the past 5 years!!”
quite possible the DUMBEST thing I have read in a long while and it proves you know nothing about recruiting. Here is a lesson future Notre Dame graduate. and I use that term loosly. Every year there is one player named the #1 recruit in the country and for 2006 that player was Percy Harvin and he is going to the University of Florida. Check another website and the #1 player is Mitch Mustain who is going to Arkansas.
“the last 5 years” How is this possible? have you ever heard of Ryan Perrilloux? “Arguably, the No. 1 prospect in the nation for 2004 and one of the most elite recruits in recent history … A consensus five-star All-American by every major recruiting publication … A dominating playmaker called by many as the most dangerous offensive weapon in the nation … ”
beef, I find it hard to believe that you are inline to get a diploma from Notre Dame. my, my have the standards fallen!
Although recruiting rankings only take into account the top recruits in a given class, Clausen is the most recruited and most hyped recruit in the last 15 years, let alone the most 5. If you even slightly followed recruiting you would know that Clausen is a much bigger prospect than Harvin, Mustain, Perrilloux, Leak, or whoever has been tabbed as #1 for that year. Lemming even said that Clausen, as a Jr, would have been the #1 player in last year’s senior class. Because you seem to be uniformed about Clausen and recruiting in general here are a few excerpts from various Clausen related stories:
“On ESPN’s Outside The Lines program, Bob Ley reported that NFL quarterback J.P. Losman would not even throw on the same field as the 17 year old Clausen, in fear of being upstaged by the high school phenom.”
Clausen’s individual workouts often draw crowds, and college or NFL players training in the vicinity will sometimes move to avoid comparisons.
“If he is on one field they go to another,” Clarkson said. “You don’t like to have a high school kid out throw you. It’s something about the ego.”
“Clausen’s personal quarterback coach, Steve Clarkson, has tutored the likes of Ben Roethlisberger, Matt Leinart, Gino Torretta and J.P. Losman.
But Clarkson knew the minute he laid eyes on Clausen, the young phenom was in a class of his own.”
“College coaches come to watch thinking he can’t be that good and walk away saying in one form or another he is the best high school quarterback they have ever seen,” Clarkson said.
Entering his junior season, he has scholarship offers from USC and South Carolina and is considered by many experts to be the top quarterback in the nation at any grade level.
“Longtime NFL agent Gary Wichard, who represents Casey Clausen, watched Jimmy at a summer passing tournament and was awed by his skills.”
“This cat is in another league,” he said.
Dean Herrington, who coached Baltimore Raven quarterback Kyle Boller at Newhall Hart, said of Clausen, “He’s the best pure passer I’ve seen in high school football.”
“Jimmy Clausen, the most hyped prep quarterback in over a decade, could be close to a commitment to Notre Dame.”
“Clausen is the most recruited and most hyped recruit in the last 15 years, let alone the most 5.”
Dudes, let it go already please. this kid is not the second coming of…..anyone. I subscribe to Scouts.com, rivals.com and Tom Lemmings service and all of this crap is said about every #1 player every year…..And please correct me DOMER but wasnt RON PAWLUS the most hyped recruit of the last 15 years? Oh you forgot about that Notre Dame flop have’nt you? It was Beno Cook who said that he was going to win 4 Heisman’s and possibly 4 National Titles…How many of each did ND win? ZERO!
“Ron Pawlus - Some said he would win 3 Heismans while playing at ND in his college career. I wonder if he is doing well selling insurance these days?”
“My favorite is Ron Pawlus, the next Joe Montana at Notre Dame. He threw four touchdowns in his first game, and was never heard from again.” -the heights
I can find all the quotes you want but quotes do not beat Michigan and USC great players do! And looking at his family history I can project that the kid is WAY overated.
Nebraska, c’mon, that’s very weak. I’m not denying that recruiting rankings are not always what they’re cracked up to be…but the hype surrounding Clausen is enormous. Obviously there are hyped kids every year, no one is disputing that. I’m not disputing that Perrilloux was hyped and a huge pick-up. But people are already comparing Clausen…a high school junior…to John freaking Elway.
Also, I’m not counting my eggs before they’re in the basket. I’m NOT saying that Clausen will be a success. I am ONLY saying that he was the most sought after recruit this year—that he’s the most hyped in recent memory—and that this was a major coup for Notre Dame.
BTW, how convenient that you shift the focus from your earlier post to my statement that Clausen’s the highest ranked (i.e. hyped, regarded, touted, heralded, etc.) recruit in five years.
What about your absurd comments that:
1) Carroll is an objectively better coach than Weis
2) Clausen was an EASY pick-up for Notre Dame
3) Weis was ND’s fourth or fifth choice for coach
4) ND, at 9-2, ONLY recieved a BCS bid because of its name.
Care to address that stupidity, or are you resigned to the fact that your statements are utterly without merit?
Nebraska, again, you rely on the cheap trick of switching topics. This conversation was never about Ron Powlus. It was never about Clausen being a success.
This began when you claimed that:
1) Carroll is objectively better than Weis because he’s won 3 NC’s and coached two heisman’s–ignoring that Weis has only coached one year
2) Clausen was an easy pick-up for Notre Dame, despite the fact that he was the most sought afer player and the most hyped in years
3) That Weis was ND’s fourth or fifth choice, when there is NO evidence to back up that claim whatsoever
4) That ND didn’t deserve a BCS bid, despite their 9-2 record at the time
1) Carroll is objectively better than Weis because he’s won 3 NC’s and coached two heisman’s–ignoring that Weis has only coached one year
Where is your criticism of your Domer compatriots who are claiming that Weis is superior despite having only coached one year?
2) Clausen was an easy pick-up for Notre Dame, despite the fact that he was the most sought afer player and the most hyped in years
Don’t know, don’t care…
3) That Weis was ND’s fourth or fifth choice, when there is NO evidence to back up that claim whatsoever
No, but he was at best their third choice. Tedford and Meyer were the top two.
4) That ND didn’t deserve a BCS bid, despite their 9-2 record at the time
Despite the fact that there were a number of other 9-2 teams and some 10-1 teams? Notre Dame got the bid because of their name. If they had had the exact same record and been, say, TCU, no way they would have got the bid. This is, of course, not their fault, its the fault of the BCS system.
David,
I was hoping Nebraska would defend his OWN absurd statements, but whatever.
As for point 1—you made no answer. You simply asked me a question that is totally irrelevant. Besides, I went on record as stating that Carroll has set the standard for the elite of college football.
As for point 2—well, considering how sought after Clausen was, you’ll have to take my word and everyone elses (Nebraska notwithstanding) that Clausen’s verbal was a monumental for ND.
As for point 3—you are full of it. What is your evidence? When was Tedford interviewed for the job? When did Notre Dame reps fly out to California, when did Tedford visit Notre Dame? And if your answer is: Tedford declined to interview–what does that show? How do you know that had Tedford agreed to interview, Weis would not have been offered an interview as well? You’re simply speculating.
As for point 4—You have a one-dimensional mind. You are incapable of understanding that a team can go 10-1 on a weak schedule and not be as good as a team that goes 9-2. Yes, the BCS is flawed. Yes, the best teams should get the bid. No, Oregon, UCLA, TCU, etc. were not any better than Notre Dame.
Also, as for Weis being anything other than Notre Dame’s second choice. Let’s assume, for argument’s sake, that Weis was the third or fourth or fifth choice. That does NOT mean that he still wasn’t the BEST choice.
I have no intention of wading into the heart of this debate, but I do want to correct some factual inaccuracies that are flying around about the BCS bid that Notre Dame got. The FACT is, Notre Dame got the BCS bid not because of its “name” per se, but because of the rule that any team from a non-BCS conference — whether their “name” is Notre Dame, Utah, TCU or whatever — AUTOMATICALLY gets a bid if it finishes in the Top 6 of the final standings. Period.
Now, if you want to argue that the pollsters ranked Notre Dame too high because of its “name,” fine. Of course, you also need to grapple with the reality that Notre Dame’s computer rating was artificially low due to the fact that it had the most close losses of any of the highly ranked teams, and the BCS made an irrational political decision some years back to force the computer pollsters, against their own sound mathematical judgment, to exclude margin of victory, which meant that Oregon’s 31-point loss to USC was identical in the computers’ eyes to Notre Dame’s 3-point loss… but we’ve been over that a million times, and I know David, at least, won’t see reason on it. So for now, all I’m asking David and Nebraska to acknowledge is the FACT that neither the bowls nor the BCS included Notre Dame because of its “name” … the bowls and the BCS were required to include Notre Dame because of its Top 6 ranking and its status as a non-BCS-conference school, not because of its “name.” Period. If anyone boosted Notre Dame because of its “name,” it was the pollsters, not the BCS or the bowls.
THAT SAID… I also want thebeef to acknowledge something that is indisputably true, which he is currently not acknowledging. Even if Notre Dame were NOT guaranteed an automatic BCS bowl bid — and even if it were NOT the most qualified at-large contender for a BCS bowl bid — Notre Dame WOULD still get a bid, because of its name (or more precisely, because of its status as a major crowd and TV ratings draw), provided that it were merely eligible. Put another way: Notre Dame will always get a BCS bid if Notre Dame is eligible for a BCS bid. This is an immutable law of college-football economics.Contra David and Nebraska, 2005 is a bad example of said law. But contra thebeef, said law does, in fact, exist.
Put another way: Imagine that Notre Dame had finished #7 instead of #6 in the final standings, in which case they wouldn’t have been automatic BCS qualifiers (but would have gotten the bid anyway, duh). If that had been the case, the following two statements could potentially BOTH HAVE BEEN TRUE:
1) Notre Dame was, based on its regular-season accomplishments, the most deserving team for the final BCS spot;
2) Notre Dame got the bid based on its name, irrespective of its (coincidentally very deserving) regular-season accomplishments.
David and Nebraska will argue against #1, and they have a valid case, though not an indisputable one, as they seem to believe. If Notre Dame and Oregon had both been eligible for that final spot (instead of ND getting it automatically, as actually happened), each team could have made a strong case for it. Notre Dame’s case is based primarily on the close nature of its losses and the blowout nature of all but one of its wins… but its case is undermined by the fact that it had two losses, one of them to a team that, although they were playing well at the time, ended up being mediocre. On the other hand, Oregon’s case is based primarily on the fact that it only had one loss… but its case is undermined by the fact that its one loss was a embarrassing blowout against a team that Notre Dame lost to by just 3 points in an epic thriller. Neither team had any real “quality wins,” so it’s a tough call.
But my point is: it is not at all contradictory to believe that Notre Dame in fact deserved the BCS bid, and yet also acknowledge that Notre Dame would have gotten it anyway, even if they hadn’t deserved it!
Re: “Notre Dame will always get a BCS bid if Notre Dame is eligible for a BCS bid.”
Lest anyone ignorantly interject that “Notre Dame was only eligible because of some special ‘Notre Dame rule’ based on its name”… that’s simply not true. Notre Dame is eligible if it finishes in the BCS Top 12, just like everybody else. And Notre Dame is automatically in if it finishes in the BCS Top 6, just like every other non-BCS-conference team that doesn’t have an opportunity to play for an automatic bid through its conference; see: Utah in 2004. The ONLY way you can argue that Notre Dame in 2005 was benefited by its “name” is through the allegations that the Irish were “overrated” by the pollsters. You simply cannot argue that the BCS rules or the bowls “favored” Notre Dame because of its name.
Mind you, the bowls would have favored Notre Dame if they’d had the chance, but they didn’t have the chance, because Notre Dame finished in the Top 6, and thus was in automatically, without any volitional act on the part of the bowls whatsoever.
As for the BCS rules, they actually hurt Notre Dame, through their forced exclusion of margin-of-victory from the computer polls, even though most of the computer pollsters believe it is inconsistent to factor strength-of-schedule but not margin-of-victory (because you are unfairly penalizing teams for weak schedules, which are largely out of their control, without giving them any opportunity to “make up for it” by winning big — which Notre Dame did — and you are failing to adequately reward teams that play well against a top-notch opponents, which Notre Dame did, while unfairly rewarding teams for merely playing against quality opponents even if they get humiliated by said opponents, which Oregon did… as I’ve pointed out time and time again, it is obviously absurd that the BCS computers think Arkansas’s and Oregon’s losses to USC are statistically identical to Notre Dame’s and Fresno State’s losses to USC, but that’s the reality of the BCS system as it currently stands, and it undeniably hurt Notre Dame’s BCS standing in 2005… arguably counterbalancing any alleged poll “favoritism”).
1. Carroll was a head coach and Weis was a Offensive Coordinator..there is no way to compare successes when one guy was responsible for the whole ship and the other guy just took orders from the top. two organizations thought that Pete was better than anyone else at the time to have him serves as there HC. no one ever showed interest in charlie and he was a backup plan to Saban.
2. Again, where else was Clausen going to go to school to play qb? south carolina? honestly I named every school that the kid would entertain outside of USC or Texas. was this a great signing yes does it mean anything now? no. And yes Paulus was the biggest recruit of the last 15 years and you got him at ND and he did NOTHING. Am I wrong? and on top of that Clausen only seriously considered two schools: USC and ND. with sanchez and booty already locked in a battle for the qb job his decision was all but made for him. and if spurrier was still with UF this kid would be heading to gainsville in a second as spurrier has sent at least 6 qb’s into the pros and throws the ball more than any college coach.
they are saying he has a body like Elway not the skills.
3. Is it totally out of the realm of possibility that ND floated the names of Meyer, Chucky, Ferentz and the other guy just to get there names out there to see what the receptions would be? come on dude thats basic stuff right out of politics. why come right out and say, “we are interested in talking with Ferentz” only to have him say an hour later “no thanks.” And to close this chapter once and for all did they or did they not all say no thanks? in walks charlie weis to his dream job.
4. I dont think that ND deserved that spot in the fiesta bowl but got it over Oregon on name recognition. all the stats that say all the schools in the top 6 must be considered or offered a spot in a game is hog wash because we all know that if Oregon was 6th and ND 7th the fiesta committee would have found a loop hole to get ND in the game….Ever hear of ratings?
and this is the exact quote:
“Reminds us of John Elway at the high school level when he came out of California”
I dont think that ND deserved that spot in the fiesta bowl but got it over Oregon on name recognition.
This is simply not true, Nebraska. I’ll assume you composed this comment rather than reading what I wrote above, rather than wilfully ignoring the facts that I presented with regard to Notre Dame being an AUTOMATIC QUALIFIER because it finished in the Top 6 as a non-BCS-conference school. The bowls had no choice; they were REQUIRED to pick Ohio State and Notre Dame. End of discussion.
If Notre Dame had finished #7, they WOULD have gotten the BCS bid ahead of #5 Oregon, arguably on the basis of name recognition. But that is not what happened.
P.S. When the bowls admitted #6 Utah because they finished in the EXACT SAME POSITION as Notre Dame a year earlier — excluding #5 Cal, just like #5 Oregon got excluded in 2005 — was that because of “ratings”? Funny how the Fiesta Bowl didn’t find a “loop hole” in that case, to avoid the dreadful Pitt-Utah matchup they were saddled with.
Rules are rules, and the rules made it IMPOSSIBLE to leave Notre Dame out of the BCS in 2005. That you won’t acknowledge this simple truth makes you look incredibly stubborn, ignorant and foolish — especially since you are still free to argue that Notre Dame generally benefits from “name recognition bias”; you simply need to acknowledge that it is NOT the reason the bowls/BCS “picked” them in 2005 (I put “picked” in quotes, since the bowls/BCS actually had no choice in the matter).
But again, perhaps you simply didn’t read what I wrote above, in which case I look forward to your correction/clarification…
Brendan is correct that Notre Dame got in because of the top 6 rule. But if you can honestly claim with a straight face that Notre Dame would have been ranked as high if their name had been say, North Texas or University of Central Florida or New Mexico State, I say you are either deluded or the best liar in history. The only time non-BCS schools crack the top-10 these days is with a perfect record, one loss is enough to relegate them to maybe 8-9, and two losses keeps them out entirely. Notre Dame, through no fault of their own, recieves a favorable bias in this country. As I said, to claim otherwise is nuts.
Actually, David, you claimed two different things there. One is that “Notre Dame would [not] have been ranked as high if their name had been say, North Texas or University of Central Florida or New Mexico State.” The other is that “Notre Dame, through no fault of their own, recieves a favorable bias in this country.” These are entirely distinct concepts. It is entirely possible to believe that Statement #1 is true, but Statement #2 is false. I happen to believe that Statement #2 is slightly true, but not nearly as true as Statement #1. Why? Duh, because schools with names like North Texas or University of Central Florida or New Mexico State receive an unfavorable bias. (Of course, they also generally play much weaker schedules than Notre Dame — yes, even Notre Dame last year — so there are actually some legitimate reasons why a 9-2 North Texas team wouldn’t be #6 in the BCS. But even a truly great North Texas team would have a very, very hard time earning the respect it deserves.) Arguing that Notre Dame receives a “favorable bias” because they’re looked on more favorably than North Texas is like arguing that George W. Bush is “popular” because his approval ratings are higher than Dick Cheney’s. :) You’re comparing them to an invalid sample.
If you want to make a colorable argument, you’d need to cite names like Oregon or Auburn — teams which don’t have the alleged pro-ND bias in their favor, but also don’t have any anti-North Texas-type bias running against them — and I would counter that, while you may be right that a team which played the identical schedule and had the identical results as Notre Dame would have been ranked lower if their jerseys had said “Oregon” or “Auburn,” it certainly isn’t as obviously right as you think it is, and thus you are quite incorrect to say that anyone who believes this is “deluded” or a “liar.” It is, in fact, POSSIBLE to defend Notre Dame’s ranking last year purely on the basis of their results on the field. I’m not asking you to accept that this argument is correct, but I sure do wish you’d acknowledge that it exists, and that it is not self-evidently and obviously wrong, instead of dismissing its believers as “deluded” and/or “liars.” I don’t dismiss you as “deluded” for thinking that Oregon was better than ND (despite the Ducks’ humiliating loss to USC, vs. the Irish’s 3-point thriller); I think you have a decent argument, which is neither obviously correct nor obviously incorrect. It’s a shame you’re seemingly unable to afford your opponents the same respect. Again, I’m not asking you to agree — just to avoid straw men (like this North Texas bullcrap) and dismissiveness (”deluded”).
P.S. To clarify, I believe it is “slightly true” that Notre Dame receives a favorable bias from the pollsters. I believe it is overwhelmingly and undeniably true that Notre Dame receives a favorable bias from the bowls (for financial reasons, duh), but that’s not relevant to what happened in 2005, for the reasons we’ve already discussed and you’ve acknowledged (though Nebraska is apparently still in denial).
Brendan, I’ve never denied that the BCS favors Notre Dame for the ratings Notre Dame inevitably brings with it to bowl games. That’s a given.
David, I have nothing to add to Brendan’s response.
Nebraska,
On point 1: you write: “there is no way to compare successes when one guy was responsible for the whole ship and the other guy just took orders from the top.” That’s my point entirely—you can’t compare. Secondly, you’re wrong that Weis never recieved offers from the NFL for a head-coaching job. The reason he wasn’t offered sooner should be obvious—the man DIED—teams didn’t want to risk hiring a man with such health problems.
On point 2: What you fail to recognize is that two years ago, there’s no way in hell Clausen chooses Notre Dame. Why was Notre Dame in the running at all? Why are there such high expectations for Notre Dame’s season next year? Why does Clausen believe he has a chance of winning a NC at ND? And besides, do you really think that Clausen would have picked Florida over Notre Dame if Florida had an open slot like Notre Dame? With Meyer’s underperforming offense? And what about Steve Spurrier? He’s already shown that he’s moving USC in a new direction and he’s a proven recruiter. The fact that Notre Dame seems like the obvious choice is precisely why we’re so elated. Until recently, that status was a thing of the past.
On Point 3: Name me one instance…one…in which Ferentz or Tedford or anyone else (other than Meyer) said: “Although I’m honored by Notre Dame’s interest/offer, I am going to stay at ” You can’t, because it didn’t happen. All Ferentz and Tedford said was: “I’m staying at Iowa/Cal and won’t go to Notre Dame.” You talk about politics?!? Please!!! How about business negotiations? Everyone and their mother publicly said “I’m not taking the position” simply to increase their own standing and raise their own stock for their next contract extension. Show me evidence that Notre Dame actually offered ANY of those coaches the position. And, like I said before: what’s your point? Even had Notre Dame wanted Tedford or Ferentz over Weis (which, again, there’s no indication that was the case), Weis still was the BEST choice and now he’s at Notre Dame.
As for point 4: nothing to add to Brendan’s response
Thanks for the Elway quote—that’s exactly what I’m talking about. They don’t say: “Clausen reminds us of Elway as a HS student because both Clausen and Elway were 18 years old in high school”
They say, and I quote: “Reminds us of John Elway at the high school level when he came out of California.” As in, both were of comparable skill in HS, obviously implying that Clausen has the promise of being just as good as Elway. That’s called hype.
Brendan, my point about mentioning a no-name team like North Texas was to point out that even given the exact same play schedule (or a compareable one atleast) I don’t think you could reasonably claim that they would have been ranked as high as Notre Dame was. And in this case even being ranked one place lower might have made a difference.
Yes, David, and my point is that just because Notre Dame would be ranked higher than a “no-name team like North Texas” does NOT necessarily prove that there is a pro-Notre Dame bias; it could just as easily prove that there is a bias against no-name teams. In reality, I think both biases exist, and I think the latter is more significant than the former. But regardless, North Texas or another “no-name team” is a bad example if you’re trying to prove the existence of a bias that is unique to Notre Dame, for basic scientific-method reasons: you’re not accounting for the variable of anti-no-name bias. It would be much more relevant to compare to Notre Dame to, say, Oregon, or Auburn, or Georgia — the sort of teams it was actually up against in the polls in 2005, not “no-name teams” who would obviously be ranked behind any of those teams, given the identical schedules, records and results, because nobody respects a North Texas unless they really, really, really earn it.
Tom Lemming is a complete tool and is a total ND homer. He has consistently worked to steer recruits to ND and derided/downgraded recruits who spurn ND, or worse, commit to ND and then change their minds. That should be kept in mind when you see a quote such as “This is the biggest announcement in the 25 years I’ve done this,� Lemming said. “The message is that Notre Dame is back.�
As for Clausen, as I said in a previous post, I wish the best of luck for him, and he’s a great get. This is a major recruiting coup for the Irish. USC can’t win them all, and this is as high-profile a recruiting loss as it gets. Fortunately we are plenty stacked at QB for the next 3-4 years so it’s not a truly damaging loss.
As for Patrick, your comments are ridiculous and unbelievable. You’re about as arrogant and assholish homer as I’ve ever seen. Enjoy the pride of the moment and smile that you got this recruit over USC, but you have absolutely no reason to gloat yet. You should get your head out of your ass and learn to have a little class like thebeef.
Lemming has been accused of being an ND homer, although he has had nothing but bad things to say about ND under Davie and Ty. I believe the above Lemming comment was said before Clausen verbaled. And as late as last Wednesday Clausen sat down with Pete Carroll for a long visit. He also went to almost every SC spring practice. Even Clausen himself acknowledged that he didn’t fully make up his mind about ND until a week ago. The point being, Lemming praised Clausen even before it was clear he was going to ND. Even last year JC is all Lemming could talk about.
Nice jab. You already responded to my comments without a return response from me, yet you find it necessary to unleash an onslaught of hostile invectives? Grow up. All you’re doing is proving that I hit a nerve.
What are you talking about Patrick? My last post in reference to you ended with the Steve Spurrier comment, I don’t see hostile invectives, but if thats what ou want to see, ok, your choice.
Ok, I see, so you wait until a thread is almost complete before responding to an early post? It had been almost 2 days since I posted anything even remotely objectionable, so your defense is flimsy. I don’t care, though. People around here are accustomed to your poopooing about the things said to you, so after awhile people just stop paying attention.
You know this is really kind of a simple equation. USC = chance to win a National Championship in College. ND = no chance of winning a National Championship. That’s right, you read it here first, Jimmy Clausen will not win a National Championship in College.
This is an archived post. Comments are closed.
To leave a comment on a newer post, please visit the homepage.
April 22nd, 2006 at 2:15:04 pm
skeet skeet skeet
April 22nd, 2006 at 4:29:48 pm
Fabulous! Such wonderful news!
April 22nd, 2006 at 5:30:54 pm
I don’t blame him. Sitting behind Booty & Sanchez for three years would get frustrating. At ND he could possibly step in as a freshman starter (since Quinn is gone after this coming season)…no waiting on the bench.
April 22nd, 2006 at 6:21:50 pm
Clausen will certainly have the opportunity to play his freshman year, but he’ll have tough competition. Frazier and Jones were highly ranked QB recruits for the class of ‘06, and they will both be competing for the honor of taking over the reigns. Meanwhile, Clausen will still be playing H.S. football.
Nonetheless, this is an ENORMOUS grab for the Irish…particularly considering Southern Cal’s substantial efforts to recruit him. It certainly is nice to hear that the whiz-kid QB from California chose South Bend over LA.
April 22nd, 2006 at 6:27:40 pm
Or, could it be that he recognizes that Weis is a superior coach, as he said in his press conference?
Hmmm, I’m sure that has something to do with it. After all, who would you rather have groom you for a career as an NFL Quarterback: someone with a record of 82-78 in 10 seasons as an NFL head coach or defensive coordinator with only 1 playoff win, or someone with a record of 73-39 in 7 seasons as an offensive coordinator with 12 playoff wins and 3 Super Bowl titles?
This requires LITTLE thought.
April 22nd, 2006 at 8:23:01 pm
Yeah Patrick, cause Weiss is soooo superior. Which of them has won the national championship? Which of them has coached multiple Heisman winners (including two QB’s). Which one won last years competition?
I was going to just let this go and be happy for you guys at getting a great player, but if you are going to start trash talking, I’ll jump right in.
April 22nd, 2006 at 9:14:17 pm
Or maybe because he didn’t want to play for a man nicknamed “Coach Fredo.”
April 22nd, 2006 at 9:20:38 pm
I’m not going to get into any Poodle bashing on this. I don’t like the Poodle, but he wins. And coach Weis will be the first to tell you that winning is the bottom-line.
I agree that Notre Dame was the smart choice for Clausen. It was smart not only because he wont have to wait behind Sanchez, but because he’ll be tutored by Weis.
School partisanship aside, I think there’s little doubt that Coach Weis is THE coach for young aspiring quarterbacks. He turned Tom Brady, a 4th round pick, into a legendary hall-of-famer. (At least, that’s Tom Brady’s story–I’ll take his word for it). And Brady Quinn transformed under Weis–sure, Brady Quinn was bound to do better and improve–but he matured exponentially under Weis. In one year he went from a mediocre talent to one of the top 3 ranked QB’s in the nation.
A lot of people are saying that ND under Weis is going to be the next QB University–and I believe it. So does Clausen…and so will aspiring wideouts (IMHO).
That said–Southern Cal is obviously not a program to sneeze at. The Poodle is the man to beat…he’s made it. He’s bonafide. I think Weis can knock him off his pedistal, but as of right now we’re just trying to catch up–and we’re gaining speed.
And it’s WEIS….not Weiss
April 22nd, 2006 at 9:44:58 pm
Watch out everyone, here comes David’s sour grapes again!
April 22nd, 2006 at 10:03:06 pm
Sour grapes? What do I have to be sour about?
April 22nd, 2006 at 10:20:58 pm
beef, David was clearly referring to the ingrate who coached the Sonics for 30 games this year.
April 22nd, 2006 at 10:44:17 pm
[…] Clausen has Irish eyes smiling [Daily News] Top QB commits to Notre Dame [Irish Trojan] […]
April 23rd, 2006 at 12:13:59 am
God, David’s USC fellating begins.
April 23rd, 2006 at 12:55:11 am
I’m just glad we don’t have to endure another four years of a QB with Clausen on the back of the jersey here in Knoxville.
I don’t know if I could stomach another four years of “Iceman-lite” (Top Gun reference for those of you who care). I’m sure they kid’s great, but all the same, I’m glad he chose go elsewhere. Now, if Weis doesn’t ditch him like Nick Saban did with Rick….
April 23rd, 2006 at 3:12:03 am
David,
First, it’s mathematically impossible for Weis to have coached “multiple Heisman winners.” Need I remind you that he’s only coached one collegiate season? Hopefully not. Regardless, this fact underscores something important - namely, that a comparison of Weis and Carroll’s collegiate coaching record is nonsensical. Clearly, Weis’ first season was unquestionably better than Carroll’s first season, but a career is fare more than one season.
The only viable comparison between Carroll and Weis is between their careers as top level NFL coaches. Fortunately for Notre Dame, the information that can be gleaned from such a comparison was extremely important in Clausen’s college choice. Weis’ notable and “superior” skill in grooming quarterbacks was the determining factor. Read the story and read Clausen’s quotes.
Weis’ career in the NFL and in his first year at Notre Dame demonstrate that he has a keen understanding of the game, makes his players better, and wins where ever he goes. Carroll’s NFL and collegiate record demonstrate that he’s a proven winner on one level (college) and that he can recruit the freakish, once-in-a-generation player. Fortunately for Notre Dame, this generation’s Reggie Bush has come and gone, and now USC can’t even recruit a kid in its own backyard.
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:31:31 am
Patrick, comparing their Pro careers is absolutely irrelavent. As history has shown time and again the two areas, college and pro are different beasts and a great pro coach can fail at the college level and vice versa.
Weis may or may not turn out to be a great college coach, that doens’t change the fact that Pete Caroll has allready PROVEN he is a great college coach.
But as I can see from this post allready Domer’s are about as good of fans as Yankee fans are, arrogant and rude.
Clausen made the decision that he felt was right, and good luck to the kid at Notre Dame, I honestly hope he does well. Unlike some of the yahoos who post on here who probably never played a down of football in their lives, I know what its like to play the game and I wish any player who gets the chance to play at the college level the best of luck, I wish I had had the chance. And I wish Weis well too (well except 1 game a year), I have nothing against him as a coach or a person, and I respect the good job he did with the Irish last year.
Some people, however, can’t see beyond their own bias to grant respect where respect is due. At least thebeef gets it, too bad none of the other Domer’s here seem to.
April 23rd, 2006 at 10:07:41 am
Has nothing to do with ND, it all has to do with the fact that you are a huge douche.
April 23rd, 2006 at 1:48:08 pm
Beef, I don’t know why, but I had totally forgotten about Frazier and Jones…(I suspect one will end up transfering at some point when the other takes the lead, especially if Clausen progresses well behind them.) Maybe 2-3 years as the #2 guy at SC would have been a better strategic choice, rather than potentially being the #3 at ND for the same period?
In any case, either school would provide a stellar environment in which to progress.
RE: Carroll vs. Weis — any attempt at comparing the two numerically is pretty stupid. Apples and oranges:
*Carroll had a mediocre pro head coaching record, but 33-31 (1-2 playoffs) isn’t that bad, unless you happen to follow the legendary Bill Parcells at New England and are stuck with Bobby Grier drafting your players
*Until last year Weis hadn’t had a head coaching position since Franklin Township (N.J.) High School in ‘89
*As a DC in the pros Carroll led top defensive units in SF
*No reasonable football fan can ignore Weis’ success as an OC in the pros
*Carroll and his players have had unreal success over the last 4 years, 48-4 with two championships, two Heismans, etc.
*9-3 is the best record the Irish have had in a decade, and Quinn improved dramatically, but it’s seriously too early to tell what the Weis legacy will be like…that enormous contract extension Weis got was waaay early
Let’s all keep the our-coach-is-better-than-yours hyperbole down. I think we can all agree that Carroll is one of the established premiere coaches in college football and Weis seemingly has the upward momentum to join the group. Their pro records are incompatable to meaningful comparison. Their college performances will be comparable with a larger sample size.
April 23rd, 2006 at 3:41:21 pm
David,
Excuse my arrogance and rudeness…seriously. By presenting facts about the careers of two coaches and about the stated reasons that the number one overall recruit in the country chose ND, I’m clearly demonstrating my pronounced, inward-looking hubris. Notre Dame is obviously the divinely ordained deity of college football, and my posts were designed specifically to reflect that.
Give me a frickin’ break, David. Whatever slight arrogance my post contains pales in comparison to your whole “you’re arrogant like a Yankee fan and I’m uber-humble because I wish the kid well.” Remember, David, that self-proclaimed humility is an oxymoron, so please get off your high horse. USC fans are no less arrogant, and your post reminds us of that.
Now, to address your points that are almost reasonable…
Has Carroll demonstrated that he’s a great college coach? Yes, I have no argument there. Has Weis? He took a ragtag group of players that couldn’t win and made them into a top 10 team in one season. That’s coaching. Thus far, he HAS proven himself. He took ND to a BCS bowl in his first season. Has he proven himself, though, to the extent that Carroll has? No, one season is insufficient for such a comparison.
Now, let’s take your argument that “college and pro are different beasts and a great pro coach can fail at the college level and vice versa.” Please provide us some example. When did a “great” NFL coach stink in college? Success as a college coach does not necessarily translate into success as an NFL coach. However, provided that a former great NFL coach can recruit moderately well, he’ll have success at the collegiate level.
A poor football mind can succeed in college with superior recruiting. There is no such luxury in the NFL. Weis’ success has absolutely, positively NOTHING to do with the level at which he’s coaching. Knowledge of the game is knowledge of the game.
I’m not saying that Carroll lacks Weis’ understanding of the game, but Weis’ three Super Bowl rings, his degree from Notre Dame, and his surprising ability to turn ND around in one season would certainly suggest that he’s a step ahead in his football IQ. After all, Carroll went to a community college, was a failure and an NFL coach, and made some of the stupidest coaching decisions in the National Championship game that I’ve ever encountered.
So I guess, yeah, I AM saying that Weis has a better understanding of the game…and I’d take that over a silver-haired, pretty-boy coach who sends his star players at Hollywood U to Victoria Secret parties and movie premiers.
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:18:55 pm
Well Patrick your arrogance is evident in that you assumed my post about Domers was focused only on you. And saying you are just like USC fans? Fine if thats what you want to compare yourself to but I thought Domer’s held themselves to a higher standard.
But I don’t need to prove anything, the fact that people have called me a douche or talked about me fellating myself shows what caliber of Notre Dame fans post on here. As I’ve said before I hope this behavior isn’t typical.
And I think Scientizzle has accurately pointed out that comparing the two coaches at this point is irrelavent. This is Weis’ first head coaching job in how long? I think, like the administration who granted him the extension you are putting the cart before the horse. Its just too soon to tell how good he will be.
As for your question about failed NFL coaches who did great at the college level, um Steve Spurrier ring a bell?
April 23rd, 2006 at 8:27:07 pm
David, settle down and read what Patrick said again. He said that while success as a college coach DIDN’T translate to pro success, that it was difficult to find the opposite to be true. Of course, he said that they had to be “great pro coaches” and able to recruit…I don’t know whether either is true about Paul Hackett, but he came from the same position as Weis and he was a flop. The success of Dave Wannestadt, who was a very successful coordinator and had a great first recruiting class, will test Patrick’s statement.
April 23rd, 2006 at 8:36:01 pm
Wobbly,
Wannestadt’s name was certainly running in the back of my mind as I typed, but bear in mind that he was fired in Miami. Was he successful as an NFL coach? Apparently not successful enough. Regardless, he does have a LOT of convincing to do after the abysmal season he had in Pittsburgh.
April 24th, 2006 at 7:03:12 am
I think it is dumb to compare Carroll and Weis on the pro level because Pete Carroll was responsible for the entire ship (offense, defense & special teams) while with the NY Jets & NE Patriots while Weis was only responsible for the Offense in NE EXCEPT for that time when he coached in High School.
So if Weis was such a genious it seems that he would have at least INTERVIEWED for a head coaches job at some point during his career. he only became a serious candidate for a job AFTER the 2nd super bowl.
so IMO Carroll has always been seen as a better coaching candidate on both levels. and Carroll has coach his team to 3 National Title games, 2 wins, and he has coached 3 Heisman trophy winners.
Weis has started off on a good note and getting this kid was not all that hard if you really think about it because where else would he go? Miami? no Kyle Wright is only a sophmore and he is THE starter. USC? No, why sit behind Booty and Sanchez? LSU? They already have a log jam at QB where there are three guys that could start including the consensus #1 prospect from 2 years ago in Ryan Perrilloux. Florida? no, they signed Tim Tebow. the only other schools that Clausen could have entertained were UCLA, Ohio State or FSU and non of those schools are that attractive, for obvious reasons. Clausen has his eye on the NFL and FSU is a mess at OC spot and UCLA is second fiddle in LA and OSU is not a QB farm.
April 24th, 2006 at 7:05:54 am
“He took ND to a BCS bowl in his first season”
The name Notre Dame got that BCS bowl birth and it has been discussed already that ND did not deserve to be there but they travel better than the other candidates.
April 24th, 2006 at 7:48:35 am
And Weis was not even the 1st or 2nd choice for ND to fill the vacancy even with HIS 3 super bowl rings….this gets funnier and funnier the more I think about it. now Charlie is being made out to be this coaching savant AFTER the fact! LOL. You were all crying in your green beer when Urban Meyer decided to go to Florida. in affect telling ND and its fans, NO thanks. Jeff Tedford. NO. Kirk Ferentz. NO. John Gruden. NO. know its like Weis was the target all along because he was the OC on a team that won 3 super bowls.
April 24th, 2006 at 10:25:13 am
Where is the Reggie Bush coverage????? This is a huge story. I want Bush-Gate coverage DAMNIT!
April 24th, 2006 at 10:57:07 am
Nebraska, you’re absolutely full of it.
To begin…Carroll was a failure as an NFL headcoach. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. As a coordinator he was successful. True, Weis was never the HC of an NFL team, but we all know how incredibly successful he was as an OC. His career as a coordinator in the NFL, from an objective standpoint, was more impressive than Carroll’s career as a coordinator. But, the man had health problems. The guy actually died. THAT is why he didn’t recieve offers from the NFL the year BEFORE he accepted the ND position. He DID recieve NFL offers the year he chose ND. (Reportedly from two teams…Miami for sure, Weis didn’t name the second). Claiming that Carroll is superior to Weis–as David and Scientizzle have accurately stated–is meaningless until Weis has more years under his belt as an HC. Indications are Weis is going to be a monster of a good coach in the long run.
Now, let’s move on to your second moment of stupidity. Clausen wasn’t a hard kid for ND to pick up? Did you ride the short bus to school? The kid is FROM Southern California. He is sitting in the backyard of the preeminent college football program, and he chose to attend school in Indiana. Not only that, he’s the highest ranked recruit to come out of high school in arguably the past 5 years!! He had offers everywhere! I mean, where do you get off saying Ohio State is not a good looking option? Or that FSU looks bad? And hello, moron, if your argument is: it wasn’t a hard choice for Clausen to pick the Irish because the Irish don’t have any of the problems that other schools have—well that’s the whole point isn’t it? We’re the best pick. We’re the best school. That ain’t easy.
Now, moving on to your third moment of stupidity. In what universe was Charlie Weis the THIRD or FOURTH or FIFTH choice for the job???? I’m not arguing that Meyer was ND’s first choice, but that isn’t hard to figure out. The man coached at Notre Dame in the past and had said on numerous occassions that ND was his dream job. Here’s a lesson in reality for you Nebraska: if an HC publicly says on more than one occassion that his dream job would be at ND, he’s soliciting for the job. He said he wanted it, we were pleased to offer him the position. He changed his mind. We had to go to plan B. Plan B (our SECOND offer) was Weis. You mention Ferentz, Tedford, etc. Here’s another lesson in reality for you Nebraska: if you’re an HC, and you want to leverage your position to get a fatter contract from your school, make a statement that you’re supposedly turning down an offer from Notre Dame, thus inflating your image and increasing your standing. I mean, everyone and their mother “turned down” the Notre Dame job. Are we to believe that Notre Dame went on a binge, offering dozens of coaches the job–with no interview!?!
Now, on to your fourth moment of stupidity. ND didn’t deserve to go to a BCS Bowl? And your evidence to back this assertion is that “it’s been discussed already?” Yeah….riiiiight. Who should’ve gone? Oregon? What happened to them? Give me a break.
You write: “this gets funnier and funnier the more I think about it.” Do us a favor—don’t try to think. You’re not good at it.
April 24th, 2006 at 12:12:30 pm
Beef,
I just heard that the great Notre Dame will lowering the entrance requirements so that they can get the marginal “stuent-athlete.” WOW.
The greatest school is turning into all the rest?
Bottom line, did Charlie Weis EVER have an NFL Head Coaching job? NO
Pete Carroll had two, good bad or indifferent he held the position of NFL Head Coach. There is no comparing the two coaches NFL run on that basis alone.
would you compare the careers of a trial lawyer and corporate lawyer?
April 24th, 2006 at 12:35:46 pm
“he’s the highest ranked recruit to come out of high school in arguably the past 5 years!!”
quite possible the DUMBEST thing I have read in a long while and it proves you know nothing about recruiting. Here is a lesson future Notre Dame graduate. and I use that term loosly. Every year there is one player named the #1 recruit in the country and for 2006 that player was Percy Harvin and he is going to the University of Florida. Check another website and the #1 player is Mitch Mustain who is going to Arkansas.
“the last 5 years” How is this possible? have you ever heard of Ryan Perrilloux? “Arguably, the No. 1 prospect in the nation for 2004 and one of the most elite recruits in recent history … A consensus five-star All-American by every major recruiting publication … A dominating playmaker called by many as the most dangerous offensive weapon in the nation … ”
beef, I find it hard to believe that you are inline to get a diploma from Notre Dame. my, my have the standards fallen!
April 24th, 2006 at 1:46:42 pm
Nebraska,
Although recruiting rankings only take into account the top recruits in a given class, Clausen is the most recruited and most hyped recruit in the last 15 years, let alone the most 5. If you even slightly followed recruiting you would know that Clausen is a much bigger prospect than Harvin, Mustain, Perrilloux, Leak, or whoever has been tabbed as #1 for that year. Lemming even said that Clausen, as a Jr, would have been the #1 player in last year’s senior class. Because you seem to be uniformed about Clausen and recruiting in general here are a few excerpts from various Clausen related stories:
“On ESPN’s Outside The Lines program, Bob Ley reported that NFL quarterback J.P. Losman would not even throw on the same field as the 17 year old Clausen, in fear of being upstaged by the high school phenom.”
Clausen’s individual workouts often draw crowds, and college or NFL players training in the vicinity will sometimes move to avoid comparisons.
“If he is on one field they go to another,” Clarkson said. “You don’t like to have a high school kid out throw you. It’s something about the ego.”
“Clausen’s personal quarterback coach, Steve Clarkson, has tutored the likes of Ben Roethlisberger, Matt Leinart, Gino Torretta and J.P. Losman.
But Clarkson knew the minute he laid eyes on Clausen, the young phenom was in a class of his own.”
“College coaches come to watch thinking he can’t be that good and walk away saying in one form or another he is the best high school quarterback they have ever seen,” Clarkson said.
Entering his junior season, he has scholarship offers from USC and South Carolina and is considered by many experts to be the top quarterback in the nation at any grade level.
“Longtime NFL agent Gary Wichard, who represents Casey Clausen, watched Jimmy at a summer passing tournament and was awed by his skills.”
“This cat is in another league,” he said.
Dean Herrington, who coached Baltimore Raven quarterback Kyle Boller at Newhall Hart, said of Clausen, “He’s the best pure passer I’ve seen in high school football.”
“Jimmy Clausen, the most hyped prep quarterback in over a decade, could be close to a commitment to Notre Dame.”
April 24th, 2006 at 2:19:06 pm
“Clausen is the most recruited and most hyped recruit in the last 15 years, let alone the most 5.”
Dudes, let it go already please. this kid is not the second coming of…..anyone. I subscribe to Scouts.com, rivals.com and Tom Lemmings service and all of this crap is said about every #1 player every year…..And please correct me DOMER but wasnt RON PAWLUS the most hyped recruit of the last 15 years? Oh you forgot about that Notre Dame flop have’nt you? It was Beno Cook who said that he was going to win 4 Heisman’s and possibly 4 National Titles…How many of each did ND win? ZERO!
“Ron Pawlus - Some said he would win 3 Heismans while playing at ND in his college career. I wonder if he is doing well selling insurance these days?”
“My favorite is Ron Pawlus, the next Joe Montana at Notre Dame. He threw four touchdowns in his first game, and was never heard from again.” -the heights
I can find all the quotes you want but quotes do not beat Michigan and USC great players do! And looking at his family history I can project that the kid is WAY overated.
April 24th, 2006 at 2:33:09 pm
the truth, you beat me to it.
Nebraska, c’mon, that’s very weak. I’m not denying that recruiting rankings are not always what they’re cracked up to be…but the hype surrounding Clausen is enormous. Obviously there are hyped kids every year, no one is disputing that. I’m not disputing that Perrilloux was hyped and a huge pick-up. But people are already comparing Clausen…a high school junior…to John freaking Elway.
Also, I’m not counting my eggs before they’re in the basket. I’m NOT saying that Clausen will be a success. I am ONLY saying that he was the most sought after recruit this year—that he’s the most hyped in recent memory—and that this was a major coup for Notre Dame.
The experts agree:
http://www.sportingnews.com/experts/mike-farrell/blog/
BTW, how convenient that you shift the focus from your earlier post to my statement that Clausen’s the highest ranked (i.e. hyped, regarded, touted, heralded, etc.) recruit in five years.
What about your absurd comments that:
1) Carroll is an objectively better coach than Weis
2) Clausen was an EASY pick-up for Notre Dame
3) Weis was ND’s fourth or fifth choice for coach
4) ND, at 9-2, ONLY recieved a BCS bid because of its name.
Care to address that stupidity, or are you resigned to the fact that your statements are utterly without merit?
April 24th, 2006 at 2:38:46 pm
Nebraska, again, you rely on the cheap trick of switching topics. This conversation was never about Ron Powlus. It was never about Clausen being a success.
This began when you claimed that:
1) Carroll is objectively better than Weis because he’s won 3 NC’s and coached two heisman’s–ignoring that Weis has only coached one year
2) Clausen was an easy pick-up for Notre Dame, despite the fact that he was the most sought afer player and the most hyped in years
3) That Weis was ND’s fourth or fifth choice, when there is NO evidence to back up that claim whatsoever
4) That ND didn’t deserve a BCS bid, despite their 9-2 record at the time
April 24th, 2006 at 3:15:05 pm
1) Carroll is objectively better than Weis because he’s won 3 NC’s and coached two heisman’s–ignoring that Weis has only coached one year
Where is your criticism of your Domer compatriots who are claiming that Weis is superior despite having only coached one year?
2) Clausen was an easy pick-up for Notre Dame, despite the fact that he was the most sought afer player and the most hyped in years
Don’t know, don’t care…
3) That Weis was ND’s fourth or fifth choice, when there is NO evidence to back up that claim whatsoever
No, but he was at best their third choice. Tedford and Meyer were the top two.
4) That ND didn’t deserve a BCS bid, despite their 9-2 record at the time
Despite the fact that there were a number of other 9-2 teams and some 10-1 teams? Notre Dame got the bid because of their name. If they had had the exact same record and been, say, TCU, no way they would have got the bid. This is, of course, not their fault, its the fault of the BCS system.
April 24th, 2006 at 3:49:37 pm
David,
I was hoping Nebraska would defend his OWN absurd statements, but whatever.
As for point 1—you made no answer. You simply asked me a question that is totally irrelevant. Besides, I went on record as stating that Carroll has set the standard for the elite of college football.
As for point 2—well, considering how sought after Clausen was, you’ll have to take my word and everyone elses (Nebraska notwithstanding) that Clausen’s verbal was a monumental for ND.
As for point 3—you are full of it. What is your evidence? When was Tedford interviewed for the job? When did Notre Dame reps fly out to California, when did Tedford visit Notre Dame? And if your answer is: Tedford declined to interview–what does that show? How do you know that had Tedford agreed to interview, Weis would not have been offered an interview as well? You’re simply speculating.
As for point 4—You have a one-dimensional mind. You are incapable of understanding that a team can go 10-1 on a weak schedule and not be as good as a team that goes 9-2. Yes, the BCS is flawed. Yes, the best teams should get the bid. No, Oregon, UCLA, TCU, etc. were not any better than Notre Dame.
April 24th, 2006 at 3:52:29 pm
Also, as for Weis being anything other than Notre Dame’s second choice. Let’s assume, for argument’s sake, that Weis was the third or fourth or fifth choice. That does NOT mean that he still wasn’t the BEST choice.
April 24th, 2006 at 4:05:34 pm
I have no intention of wading into the heart of this debate, but I do want to correct some factual inaccuracies that are flying around about the BCS bid that Notre Dame got. The FACT is, Notre Dame got the BCS bid not because of its “name” per se, but because of the rule that any team from a non-BCS conference — whether their “name” is Notre Dame, Utah, TCU or whatever — AUTOMATICALLY gets a bid if it finishes in the Top 6 of the final standings. Period.
Now, if you want to argue that the pollsters ranked Notre Dame too high because of its “name,” fine. Of course, you also need to grapple with the reality that Notre Dame’s computer rating was artificially low due to the fact that it had the most close losses of any of the highly ranked teams, and the BCS made an irrational political decision some years back to force the computer pollsters, against their own sound mathematical judgment, to exclude margin of victory, which meant that Oregon’s 31-point loss to USC was identical in the computers’ eyes to Notre Dame’s 3-point loss… but we’ve been over that a million times, and I know David, at least, won’t see reason on it. So for now, all I’m asking David and Nebraska to acknowledge is the FACT that neither the bowls nor the BCS included Notre Dame because of its “name” … the bowls and the BCS were required to include Notre Dame because of its Top 6 ranking and its status as a non-BCS-conference school, not because of its “name.” Period. If anyone boosted Notre Dame because of its “name,” it was the pollsters, not the BCS or the bowls.
THAT SAID… I also want thebeef to acknowledge something that is indisputably true, which he is currently not acknowledging. Even if Notre Dame were NOT guaranteed an automatic BCS bowl bid — and even if it were NOT the most qualified at-large contender for a BCS bowl bid — Notre Dame WOULD still get a bid, because of its name (or more precisely, because of its status as a major crowd and TV ratings draw), provided that it were merely eligible. Put another way: Notre Dame will always get a BCS bid if Notre Dame is eligible for a BCS bid. This is an immutable law of college-football economics. Contra David and Nebraska, 2005 is a bad example of said law. But contra thebeef, said law does, in fact, exist.
Put another way: Imagine that Notre Dame had finished #7 instead of #6 in the final standings, in which case they wouldn’t have been automatic BCS qualifiers (but would have gotten the bid anyway, duh). If that had been the case, the following two statements could potentially BOTH HAVE BEEN TRUE:
1) Notre Dame was, based on its regular-season accomplishments, the most deserving team for the final BCS spot;
2) Notre Dame got the bid based on its name, irrespective of its (coincidentally very deserving) regular-season accomplishments.
David and Nebraska will argue against #1, and they have a valid case, though not an indisputable one, as they seem to believe. If Notre Dame and Oregon had both been eligible for that final spot (instead of ND getting it automatically, as actually happened), each team could have made a strong case for it. Notre Dame’s case is based primarily on the close nature of its losses and the blowout nature of all but one of its wins… but its case is undermined by the fact that it had two losses, one of them to a team that, although they were playing well at the time, ended up being mediocre. On the other hand, Oregon’s case is based primarily on the fact that it only had one loss… but its case is undermined by the fact that its one loss was a embarrassing blowout against a team that Notre Dame lost to by just 3 points in an epic thriller. Neither team had any real “quality wins,” so it’s a tough call.
But my point is: it is not at all contradictory to believe that Notre Dame in fact deserved the BCS bid, and yet also acknowledge that Notre Dame would have gotten it anyway, even if they hadn’t deserved it!
April 24th, 2006 at 4:23:17 pm
P.S.
Re: “Notre Dame will always get a BCS bid if Notre Dame is eligible for a BCS bid.”
Lest anyone ignorantly interject that “Notre Dame was only eligible because of some special ‘Notre Dame rule’ based on its name”… that’s simply not true. Notre Dame is eligible if it finishes in the BCS Top 12, just like everybody else. And Notre Dame is automatically in if it finishes in the BCS Top 6, just like every other non-BCS-conference team that doesn’t have an opportunity to play for an automatic bid through its conference; see: Utah in 2004. The ONLY way you can argue that Notre Dame in 2005 was benefited by its “name” is through the allegations that the Irish were “overrated” by the pollsters. You simply cannot argue that the BCS rules or the bowls “favored” Notre Dame because of its name.
Mind you, the bowls would have favored Notre Dame if they’d had the chance, but they didn’t have the chance, because Notre Dame finished in the Top 6, and thus was in automatically, without any volitional act on the part of the bowls whatsoever.
As for the BCS rules, they actually hurt Notre Dame, through their forced exclusion of margin-of-victory from the computer polls, even though most of the computer pollsters believe it is inconsistent to factor strength-of-schedule but not margin-of-victory (because you are unfairly penalizing teams for weak schedules, which are largely out of their control, without giving them any opportunity to “make up for it” by winning big — which Notre Dame did — and you are failing to adequately reward teams that play well against a top-notch opponents, which Notre Dame did, while unfairly rewarding teams for merely playing against quality opponents even if they get humiliated by said opponents, which Oregon did… as I’ve pointed out time and time again, it is obviously absurd that the BCS computers think Arkansas’s and Oregon’s losses to USC are statistically identical to Notre Dame’s and Fresno State’s losses to USC, but that’s the reality of the BCS system as it currently stands, and it undeniably hurt Notre Dame’s BCS standing in 2005… arguably counterbalancing any alleged poll “favoritism”).
April 24th, 2006 at 4:43:41 pm
1. Carroll was a head coach and Weis was a Offensive Coordinator..there is no way to compare successes when one guy was responsible for the whole ship and the other guy just took orders from the top. two organizations thought that Pete was better than anyone else at the time to have him serves as there HC. no one ever showed interest in charlie and he was a backup plan to Saban.
2. Again, where else was Clausen going to go to school to play qb? south carolina? honestly I named every school that the kid would entertain outside of USC or Texas. was this a great signing yes does it mean anything now? no. And yes Paulus was the biggest recruit of the last 15 years and you got him at ND and he did NOTHING. Am I wrong? and on top of that Clausen only seriously considered two schools: USC and ND. with sanchez and booty already locked in a battle for the qb job his decision was all but made for him. and if spurrier was still with UF this kid would be heading to gainsville in a second as spurrier has sent at least 6 qb’s into the pros and throws the ball more than any college coach.
they are saying he has a body like Elway not the skills.
3. Is it totally out of the realm of possibility that ND floated the names of Meyer, Chucky, Ferentz and the other guy just to get there names out there to see what the receptions would be? come on dude thats basic stuff right out of politics. why come right out and say, “we are interested in talking with Ferentz” only to have him say an hour later “no thanks.” And to close this chapter once and for all did they or did they not all say no thanks? in walks charlie weis to his dream job.
4. I dont think that ND deserved that spot in the fiesta bowl but got it over Oregon on name recognition. all the stats that say all the schools in the top 6 must be considered or offered a spot in a game is hog wash because we all know that if Oregon was 6th and ND 7th the fiesta committee would have found a loop hole to get ND in the game….Ever hear of ratings?
and this is the exact quote:
“Reminds us of John Elway at the high school level when he came out of California”
April 24th, 2006 at 4:47:55 pm
I dont think that ND deserved that spot in the fiesta bowl but got it over Oregon on name recognition.
This is simply not true, Nebraska. I’ll assume you composed this comment rather than reading what I wrote above, rather than wilfully ignoring the facts that I presented with regard to Notre Dame being an AUTOMATIC QUALIFIER because it finished in the Top 6 as a non-BCS-conference school. The bowls had no choice; they were REQUIRED to pick Ohio State and Notre Dame. End of discussion.
If Notre Dame had finished #7, they WOULD have gotten the BCS bid ahead of #5 Oregon, arguably on the basis of name recognition. But that is not what happened.
April 24th, 2006 at 4:50:33 pm
P.S. When the bowls admitted #6 Utah because they finished in the EXACT SAME POSITION as Notre Dame a year earlier — excluding #5 Cal, just like #5 Oregon got excluded in 2005 — was that because of “ratings”? Funny how the Fiesta Bowl didn’t find a “loop hole” in that case, to avoid the dreadful Pitt-Utah matchup they were saddled with.
Rules are rules, and the rules made it IMPOSSIBLE to leave Notre Dame out of the BCS in 2005. That you won’t acknowledge this simple truth makes you look incredibly stubborn, ignorant and foolish — especially since you are still free to argue that Notre Dame generally benefits from “name recognition bias”; you simply need to acknowledge that it is NOT the reason the bowls/BCS “picked” them in 2005 (I put “picked” in quotes, since the bowls/BCS actually had no choice in the matter).
But again, perhaps you simply didn’t read what I wrote above, in which case I look forward to your correction/clarification…
April 24th, 2006 at 4:55:12 pm
Brendan is correct that Notre Dame got in because of the top 6 rule. But if you can honestly claim with a straight face that Notre Dame would have been ranked as high if their name had been say, North Texas or University of Central Florida or New Mexico State, I say you are either deluded or the best liar in history. The only time non-BCS schools crack the top-10 these days is with a perfect record, one loss is enough to relegate them to maybe 8-9, and two losses keeps them out entirely. Notre Dame, through no fault of their own, recieves a favorable bias in this country. As I said, to claim otherwise is nuts.
April 24th, 2006 at 5:14:47 pm
Actually, David, you claimed two different things there. One is that “Notre Dame would [not] have been ranked as high if their name had been say, North Texas or University of Central Florida or New Mexico State.” The other is that “Notre Dame, through no fault of their own, recieves a favorable bias in this country.” These are entirely distinct concepts. It is entirely possible to believe that Statement #1 is true, but Statement #2 is false. I happen to believe that Statement #2 is slightly true, but not nearly as true as Statement #1. Why? Duh, because schools with names like North Texas or University of Central Florida or New Mexico State receive an unfavorable bias. (Of course, they also generally play much weaker schedules than Notre Dame — yes, even Notre Dame last year — so there are actually some legitimate reasons why a 9-2 North Texas team wouldn’t be #6 in the BCS. But even a truly great North Texas team would have a very, very hard time earning the respect it deserves.) Arguing that Notre Dame receives a “favorable bias” because they’re looked on more favorably than North Texas is like arguing that George W. Bush is “popular” because his approval ratings are higher than Dick Cheney’s. :) You’re comparing them to an invalid sample.
If you want to make a colorable argument, you’d need to cite names like Oregon or Auburn — teams which don’t have the alleged pro-ND bias in their favor, but also don’t have any anti-North Texas-type bias running against them — and I would counter that, while you may be right that a team which played the identical schedule and had the identical results as Notre Dame would have been ranked lower if their jerseys had said “Oregon” or “Auburn,” it certainly isn’t as obviously right as you think it is, and thus you are quite incorrect to say that anyone who believes this is “deluded” or a “liar.” It is, in fact, POSSIBLE to defend Notre Dame’s ranking last year purely on the basis of their results on the field. I’m not asking you to accept that this argument is correct, but I sure do wish you’d acknowledge that it exists, and that it is not self-evidently and obviously wrong, instead of dismissing its believers as “deluded” and/or “liars.” I don’t dismiss you as “deluded” for thinking that Oregon was better than ND (despite the Ducks’ humiliating loss to USC, vs. the Irish’s 3-point thriller); I think you have a decent argument, which is neither obviously correct nor obviously incorrect. It’s a shame you’re seemingly unable to afford your opponents the same respect. Again, I’m not asking you to agree — just to avoid straw men (like this North Texas bullcrap) and dismissiveness (”deluded”).
April 24th, 2006 at 5:20:35 pm
P.S. To clarify, I believe it is “slightly true” that Notre Dame receives a favorable bias from the pollsters. I believe it is overwhelmingly and undeniably true that Notre Dame receives a favorable bias from the bowls (for financial reasons, duh), but that’s not relevant to what happened in 2005, for the reasons we’ve already discussed and you’ve acknowledged (though Nebraska is apparently still in denial).
April 24th, 2006 at 5:56:46 pm
Brendan, I’ve never denied that the BCS favors Notre Dame for the ratings Notre Dame inevitably brings with it to bowl games. That’s a given.
David, I have nothing to add to Brendan’s response.
Nebraska,
On point 1: you write: “there is no way to compare successes when one guy was responsible for the whole ship and the other guy just took orders from the top.” That’s my point entirely—you can’t compare. Secondly, you’re wrong that Weis never recieved offers from the NFL for a head-coaching job. The reason he wasn’t offered sooner should be obvious—the man DIED—teams didn’t want to risk hiring a man with such health problems.
On point 2: What you fail to recognize is that two years ago, there’s no way in hell Clausen chooses Notre Dame. Why was Notre Dame in the running at all? Why are there such high expectations for Notre Dame’s season next year? Why does Clausen believe he has a chance of winning a NC at ND? And besides, do you really think that Clausen would have picked Florida over Notre Dame if Florida had an open slot like Notre Dame? With Meyer’s underperforming offense? And what about Steve Spurrier? He’s already shown that he’s moving USC in a new direction and he’s a proven recruiter. The fact that Notre Dame seems like the obvious choice is precisely why we’re so elated. Until recently, that status was a thing of the past.
On Point 3: Name me one instance…one…in which Ferentz or Tedford or anyone else (other than Meyer) said: “Although I’m honored by Notre Dame’s interest/offer, I am going to stay at ” You can’t, because it didn’t happen. All Ferentz and Tedford said was: “I’m staying at Iowa/Cal and won’t go to Notre Dame.” You talk about politics?!? Please!!! How about business negotiations? Everyone and their mother publicly said “I’m not taking the position” simply to increase their own standing and raise their own stock for their next contract extension. Show me evidence that Notre Dame actually offered ANY of those coaches the position. And, like I said before: what’s your point? Even had Notre Dame wanted Tedford or Ferentz over Weis (which, again, there’s no indication that was the case), Weis still was the BEST choice and now he’s at Notre Dame.
As for point 4: nothing to add to Brendan’s response
Thanks for the Elway quote—that’s exactly what I’m talking about. They don’t say: “Clausen reminds us of Elway as a HS student because both Clausen and Elway were 18 years old in high school”
They say, and I quote: “Reminds us of John Elway at the high school level when he came out of California.” As in, both were of comparable skill in HS, obviously implying that Clausen has the promise of being just as good as Elway. That’s called hype.
April 24th, 2006 at 6:56:45 pm
“This is the biggest announcement in the 25 years I’ve done this,” Lemming said. “The message is that Notre Dame is back.”
CSTV recruiting analyst Tom Lemming
April 24th, 2006 at 7:04:00 pm
Brendan, my point about mentioning a no-name team like North Texas was to point out that even given the exact same play schedule (or a compareable one atleast) I don’t think you could reasonably claim that they would have been ranked as high as Notre Dame was. And in this case even being ranked one place lower might have made a difference.
April 24th, 2006 at 7:19:05 pm
Yes, David, and my point is that just because Notre Dame would be ranked higher than a “no-name team like North Texas” does NOT necessarily prove that there is a pro-Notre Dame bias; it could just as easily prove that there is a bias against no-name teams. In reality, I think both biases exist, and I think the latter is more significant than the former. But regardless, North Texas or another “no-name team” is a bad example if you’re trying to prove the existence of a bias that is unique to Notre Dame, for basic scientific-method reasons: you’re not accounting for the variable of anti-no-name bias. It would be much more relevant to compare to Notre Dame to, say, Oregon, or Auburn, or Georgia — the sort of teams it was actually up against in the polls in 2005, not “no-name teams” who would obviously be ranked behind any of those teams, given the identical schedules, records and results, because nobody respects a North Texas unless they really, really, really earn it.
April 24th, 2006 at 10:06:04 pm
Tom Lemming is a complete tool and is a total ND homer. He has consistently worked to steer recruits to ND and derided/downgraded recruits who spurn ND, or worse, commit to ND and then change their minds. That should be kept in mind when you see a quote such as “This is the biggest announcement in the 25 years I’ve done this,� Lemming said. “The message is that Notre Dame is back.�
As for Clausen, as I said in a previous post, I wish the best of luck for him, and he’s a great get. This is a major recruiting coup for the Irish. USC can’t win them all, and this is as high-profile a recruiting loss as it gets. Fortunately we are plenty stacked at QB for the next 3-4 years so it’s not a truly damaging loss.
As for Patrick, your comments are ridiculous and unbelievable. You’re about as arrogant and assholish homer as I’ve ever seen. Enjoy the pride of the moment and smile that you got this recruit over USC, but you have absolutely no reason to gloat yet. You should get your head out of your ass and learn to have a little class like thebeef.
April 24th, 2006 at 11:34:43 pm
Lemming has been accused of being an ND homer, although he has had nothing but bad things to say about ND under Davie and Ty. I believe the above Lemming comment was said before Clausen verbaled. And as late as last Wednesday Clausen sat down with Pete Carroll for a long visit. He also went to almost every SC spring practice. Even Clausen himself acknowledged that he didn’t fully make up his mind about ND until a week ago. The point being, Lemming praised Clausen even before it was clear he was going to ND. Even last year JC is all Lemming could talk about.
April 25th, 2006 at 1:54:49 am
David,
Nice jab. You already responded to my comments without a return response from me, yet you find it necessary to unleash an onslaught of hostile invectives? Grow up. All you’re doing is proving that I hit a nerve.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:35:23 am
What are you talking about Patrick? My last post in reference to you ended with the Steve Spurrier comment, I don’t see hostile invectives, but if thats what ou want to see, ok, your choice.
April 25th, 2006 at 1:28:28 pm
Ok, I see, so you wait until a thread is almost complete before responding to an early post? It had been almost 2 days since I posted anything even remotely objectionable, so your defense is flimsy. I don’t care, though. People around here are accustomed to your poopooing about the things said to you, so after awhile people just stop paying attention.
April 25th, 2006 at 2:03:40 pm
Patrick, if you are going to accuse me of something can you atleast tell me which post you are referring to?
February 20th, 2007 at 9:34:38 pm
great!!! Going to the #1 school and has a good coach to work with. He will be just like Brady Quinn.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:51:28 pm
You know this is really kind of a simple equation. USC = chance to win a National Championship in College. ND = no chance of winning a National Championship. That’s right, you read it here first, Jimmy Clausen will not win a National Championship in College.