Notre Dame coach Charlie Weis has expressed some confusion over the Irish’s placement in recent polls. And since i have a little time to kill, and figure that most Irish fans on this site allready hate me anyway i figured i’d try and help him out by explaining it to him.
“One of the teams [Tennessee] that jumped us had the same game that we had. They’re down, they’re playing at home and they win by a field goal,” Weis said Tuesday. “Another team [Florida] that jumped us wasn’t even playing. They were home eating cheeseburgers and they end up jumping us. That befuddles me.”
First, I can assume that Weis is refering to the Coaches poll here, since the AP Poll and BCS standings both have the Irish ahead of Tennessee last week and this week, and the Harris poll had Tennessee ahead in both weeks.
So lets take a look, here is last weeks situation for 8, 9 and 10 (points recieved in parentheses)
8: Notre Dame (1068)
9: Tennessee (1060)
10: Florida (1045)
And now for the current week
8: Florida (1051)
9: Tennessee (1046)
10: Notre Dame (1019)
The first thing that jumps out at me is that Tennessee didn’t leap-frog Notre Dame. Tennessee stayed in the same spot. Notre Dame dropped. And when you look at the points seperating them, its not like the voters saw much difference between the two teams in the previous week.
The second thing to notice is that Tennessee lost votes too, the Irish just happend to lose more. Why did they lose more? Well i’m going to guess its because they struggled against UCLA, while Tennessee struggled against Alabama. There is a bit of a difference in the quality there. Second, its because Tennessee didn’t have to rely on a miracle comback at the end, the scored the game winning touchdown with 3:28 remaining. It could also be the fact that Tennessee’s only loss is by one point to Florida, and they have beaten Georgia and Cal, both solid teams. Meanwhile the Irish’s biggest win is over an ok Penn State and they have had to rely on a last minute miracle against UCLA and a fourth quarter collapse by Michigan State to hold themselves at one loss. Then there is the trouncing they recieved at Michigan. Sorry Charlie, but Tennessee deserves to be ranked above you, its a team that is 2 points away from being undefeated.
And what about Florida? They didn’t even play! And here we have to remember, as some have tried to point out that the polls are not done by one person, but by a aggregate of votes by many many people. Yes Florida moved up, but i imagine its because the voters, one weak removed from Florida’s loss to (at the time #11 ranked) Auburn, looked at Florida’s resume and decided (and i feel rightly so) that the Gator’s were the better team. The question isn’t why did they jump ahead of you Charlie, its why they got ranked behind you in the first place, and the answer is simple, the Pollsters tend to punish teams more for recent losses than for previous ones. Florida has quality wins over Tennessee, LSU, and Alabama, and have trounced their other opponents as they were expected to. The same just can’t be said about Notre Dame.
Look, if the Irish had thoroughly trounced the Bruins they might have a case. If they had held Michigan to a close game they might have a case. If they hadn’t had to come from behind against a mediocre Michigan State team, they might have a case.
Weis’ argues that the Irish won “a thrilling game, ok, and because we won a thrilling game lets move us down, because one teams not playing and another team had the exact same game”.
The whole point, and all you Irish fans need to understand this before you inundate the comment section below with your flames, is this: IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A THRILLING GAME. As Brendan has pointed out and others as well, if Notre Dame is as good as they claim to be, UCLA should have been a gimmee. Seriously, UCLA is a 4-3 team whose wins are against four teams: Utah, Rice, Arizona, and Stanford. That set of teams has a combined record of 10 - 22. And one of those wins is because Arizona beat Stanford. You really want to tell me thats a team that the Irish should be in a thrilling game against? Ok maybe if it were USC or Michigan and it was a rivalry, but it wasn’t. And as i pointed out above, the only thing that is “the same” about the ND-UCLA game and the Tenneesee-Alabama game is that both were behind and came back to win by 3. Of course Tennessee, again, did it against a much more competative team and did so well before the last 30 seconds like the Irish did.
Perhaps instead of worrying about whether he is 8th or 10th in the polls this week, he should focus on getting the Irish back on track. I mean heck, look what happened to the last guy who was complaining about the polls.
|
Categories: Notre Dame, College Football
|
October 25th, 2006 at 3:21:51 pm
I can’t believe that they let you stay at Notre Dame.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:35:57 pm
JG, in fairness it’s a David K. post and not a Brendan post.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:59:52 pm
JG, ND Fan is correct, i am NOT at Notre Dame. Beyond that, whats so bad about my post? Please, if there are errors, or if you have a different interpretation go ahead and provide it, thats what the comment section is for. But i’m sorry, it will have to be a pretty strong case, because its goign to be pretty hard toconvince anyone outside of Domer-nation that Notre Dame deservesto be ranked above Tennesee or Florida.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:21:20 pm
David,
In all fairness this whole story is a non-story. Weis was asked about this during his weekly press conference and he answered the question, nothing more. Aparently this is a slow ESPN news week so they came up with the “story” saying that Weis was outraged so they could talk about it all day on ESPN radio and have columnists like DJ Gallo just rip the school.
In any event, all this stuff will work itself out in the next 5 or so weeks. Whether you like it or not, ND will probably be pretty close to the top 5 when the USC game rolls around.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:23:27 pm
Has everyone forgotten that we almost beat Tennessee? We had a chance to go to overtime, but the Air Force of the United States of America goes for the win and we got unlucky when our 2 point conversion came up short as time expired.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:46:08 pm
most Irish fans on this site allready hate me anyway
So does spellchecker.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:56:54 pm
Rack Em!
October 25th, 2006 at 6:00:53 pm
Let me preface this by saying: I HATE NOTRE DAME
Now onto to business,
Hey Charlie, why not worry more about your team almost having 3 loses on the season instead of polling for BCS votes.
and then you need a last second desperation pass to beat an average UCLA team…face it Notre Dame is a very average team and will probably be embarrased again in the bowl game.
oh yeah, after they lose to SC
October 25th, 2006 at 6:04:09 pm
touche. BUT, if this David guy WAS here, then that is what I would write.
October 25th, 2006 at 6:32:33 pm
Mike Brey - possibly, but Navy is playing as good or better than UCLA this season, i wouldn’t count them out yet.
Fisher - granted you guys almost beat Tennessee, and if the rest of Tennessee’s wins were also close or to weak oponents there would be a better case. But that one close win is more than covered by strong wins against strong opponents, something Notre Dame doesn’t have, and won’t have unless it beats USC
JG - why? Because I am critical of a team that deserves criticizing (which btw includes ALL teams). Blind obedience to your school, is almostas bad as blind obedience to your leaders. I was critical of USC when i was at USC, i was critical of Washignton when i was at Washington, and i’m critical of Notre Dame in this case because, well they deserve it, especially after what Coach Weis said. I was critical of Tommy Tubberville when he said what he did. Now if its unfair critcism,fine, but you’re going to have to explain why its unfair. So far Mike is the only who has even TRIED to dot at.
October 25th, 2006 at 8:24:15 pm
First, I have no real problems that Florida and Tennessee are ranked where they are, they are clearly good teams with solid records against decent competition. But why is Tennessee’s schedule to date deemed so vastly superior to ND’s? First, I don’t understand why Alabama is considered to be so vastly superior to UCLA. UCLA is ranked higher than Bama in both total team offense and defense. Plus, you mentioned UCLA’s record and the teams they beat, but Bama is 5-3 with the five wins coming against teams (Duke, LA-Monroe, Hawaii, Vandy,Ole Miss) with a combined record of 11-26. I guess you could argue that their 3 losses are to slightly higher-quality teams, but to me UCLA and Bama seem to be pretty similar. Also, obviously you have to give credit to Tennessee for handing Cal its only loss, that’s a nice signature W to have on the resume. But why is a 6-1 record with wins against Cal, Air Force (close win), Marshall, Memphis, Georgia (blowout of then-ranked team), and Alabama (close win) so much better than a 6-1 record with wins against Ga. Tech (close on road against now-ranked team), Penn St. (blowout of then-ranked team), Mich.St. (close), Purdue, Stanford, and UCLA (close)? I can accept the argument that Tennessee should be ranked higher based on the team’s respective loss, but to say that Tennessee has beaten tougher competition on the whole is inaccurate. They’ve both beaten one team that is currently ranked, blown out a team that was ranked but isn’t anymore, had a couple of close games against mid-level competition, and cruised to victories against two mid-level/low-level teams.
October 25th, 2006 at 8:45:37 pm
SEC is vastly overrated. As is David.
October 25th, 2006 at 8:53:06 pm
Anonymous -
First, throw out the previously ranked argument, it holds no water, especially when those are early season rankings. If the team is no longer ranked, its clear that they didn’t deserve that ranking to begin with, its why i hate early season rankings.
Second:
They’ve both beaten one team that is ranked
So you are comparing Tennessee’s 35-18 win over currently ranked #12 Cal to Notre Dames 14-10 win over currently ranked #21 Georgia Tech? Even if the rest of their schedule was comparable, that alone should show you that Tennessee has played (and beaten) the better team.
Third:
Look at their losses:
Florida beats Tennessee 21-20
Michigan beats Notre Dame 47-21
Looking closer, going into the 4th quarter:
Tennessee leads Florida 17-14
Michigan leads Notre Dame 40-14
Of the two schools, Michigan and Florida, which do you think was still playing all of its starters in the 4th quarter, and which likely had some backups in when their opponents each scored their last score of the game?
I’ll grant you that the rest of their schedules might be a wash when you compare them, but based on those two key matchups alone, its clear that Tennessee has so far proven to be the better team against as good or better competition.
October 25th, 2006 at 8:54:47 pm
The SEC is overrated, not vastly, but overrated. So is Notre Dame this season.
October 25th, 2006 at 8:54:52 pm
Neutral field, I’d put money down on Tenn or Fla over ND.
But this is such a non-story. ND had a whopping -2.5% change in point total. It’s not like it was a big deal. Tenn just happened to lose fewer votes and moved up by proxy.
ND’s 49 lost points can easily be explained by the +50 gain in total points of teams ranked 1-7, each asserting (collectively) that they are, in fact, better than the Irish.
It just doesn’t matter much.
October 25th, 2006 at 10:21:26 pm
Yeah, none of it really matters that much, in the grand scheme of things, and I think the whole “ESPN making some news when there wasn’t any” reason probably makes as much sense as anything.
Putting it simply, there is a very select group of the uber-top teams this year, and they appear to be OSU, Michigan (and maybe USC, WVU, and Louisville..maybe). I think it’s nigh-on impossible for a national championship team to play out an undefeated string when they play in a tough conference from top to bottom. This year, OSU has, in reality, two big games. They’ve already taken down Texas at Austin, and we’ll see how the Michigan game goes. The rest of the Big Ten schedule is pretty weak (Iowa not nearly as good as might have been thought, same for PSU).
You look at the teams from the SEC, where you have a large number of teams, who, on any given weak can knock off a monster opponent. LSU is a great football team. Not national championship caliber this year, but a great team. Put them into an inferior conference (i.e., the Big East) and they’re certainly contenders in the national championship hunt. Put them in the SEC, and a couple of bad breaks later, they’ve got 2 losses. Same goes for teams like Auburn, Florida, Tennessee, (and teams like Georgia, Arkansas, and Alabama). Putting it simply, the SEC is going through the same thing the Big Ten did in the 80s and 90s (when they didn’t take down a lot of championships). The teams are all very tough, and it’s difficult to go undefeated. That’s why Miami, Nebraska, Colorado, West Virginia, FSU, etc all won championships back then. They were excellent teams, but their conferences blew out loud.
I think that the USC teams in the last years were clearly the best team in the nation, and certainly there’s no dispute that they deserved their championships. However, I also think that my theory above holds pretty well true. The Pac-10 wasn’t a very good conference top to bottom, and as soon as they could fade the couple of tough games on the schedule, it was in the bag for them.
ND has the somewhat unenviable position of being an island in and of itself. There are no conference foes to match themselves against, so in reality they’re getting matched against the entire mass of D-1 teams. When they get tons of hype, and then fail to live up to it by getting blown out at home, and barely squeaking by in games they should win easily on a regular basis, their national reputation suffers. Teams like Tennessee and Florida, etc., get a little more benefit of the doubt, simply due to the conference schedule of opponents.
Ultimately, as I’ve said on a number of previous occasions, none of these stupid rankings mean anything other than some more manufactured news to give sports radio, etc., something to talk about. While I’d really like to see the national championship settled on the field with the conference champs fighting it out in a tournament, (not that that will ever happen in my lifetime), all the rankings are good for from a fan’s perspective is to give you something to bitch and/or brag about.
Cheers. GO VOLS! BEAT THE COCKS!
October 26th, 2006 at 12:50:52 am
when they play in a tough conference from top to bottom.
Ok, fine, but give me a conference that is tough from top to bottom? Pac-10, Big-10, Big East, Big 12, and SEC all have some tough teams, some average teams, and some weak teams. Yes the SEC has 3-5 strong teams, they also have 12 teams total. The Pac-10 has 2-3 strong teams out of ten, so there you go, about the same ratio. Big 10? Again 2-3 depending on who you ask. Big-12? 3-4.
Sorry but i am getting sick and tired of hearing how the SEC is a tough conference top to bottom and the Pac-10 is weak except for a coupel of teams each year, its bull shit. You mean to tell me that Mississippi State, with their two wins over Jacksonville State and UAB is a “strong” team? Or Mississipi with their wins over Vanderbilt and Missouri?
Yes its tough to win out, and yes it would be better if there were a playoff system, but maybe the Auburns of the world should stop whining and start winning.
October 26th, 2006 at 12:56:42 am
a large number of teams, who, on any given weak can knock off a monster opponent
You mean like Washington State stunning Oregon?
Or Washington almost beating both USC and Cal?
Or Oregon State, during the week in between those inspired UW performances, knocking off the Huskies?
Or Arizona State almost beating USC?
Or UCLA almost beating Notre Dame?
Oh… yo were talking about the SEC, not the Pac-10. Nevermind. ;)
October 26th, 2006 at 1:06:06 am
The Pac-10 wasn’t a very good conference top to bottom, and as soon as they could fade the couple of tough games on the schedule, it was in the bag for them.
“In the bag”? Hmm… can you say “revisionist history”?
In 2004, USC had close Pac-10 games against Stanford (31-28), Cal (23-17), Oregon State (28-20) and UCLA (29-24). In 2005, the Oregon game was close until late, in spite of what the final score says (45-13), and the Arizona State game (38-28) was also close.
Take out Cal and Oregon if you like, since those might qualify as among the “couple of tough games on the schedule.” You’re still left with four conference games in the last two years where the Trojans faced tough, inspired competition from middle-of-the-pack conference opponents — among the “large number of teams, who, on any given [week] can knock off a monster opponent.” They proved they could play with the “monster opponent,” the Trojans… and then the Trojans beat them anyway. A lesser team would have lost one or two of those games. A lesser team like… LSU, perhaps? Or some other SEC team that likes to make excuses instead of winning games? ;)
Of course “it’s difficult to go undefeated.” It’s supposed to be difficult. I remain unconvinced that the SEC schedule is leaps-and-bounds more difficult to survive unscathed than the Pac-10 schedule. A little bit more difficult, maybe… but then, USC isn’t playing Buffalo in its non-conference schedule, so that kinda evens out in the end. Seems to me, the main difference between USC’s schedule and the schedule of the various SEC not-quite-contenders is simply that USC has ultimately won all of the tough games where it’s been challenged. That’s a credit to USC, not a sign of weakness in the Pac-10.
October 26th, 2006 at 1:16:30 am
P.S. LSU this year plays Mississippi State, Kentucky and Ole Miss. Those teams are probably less capable of pulling an upset than anyone USC faces except Stanford and arguably Arizona.
LSU also plays Alabama, which is the rough equivalent of maybe a UCLA. In addition to the Bruins, USC plays a couple other teams of this relative level of upset-pulling ability, like Oregon State and Arizona State. So, if we look at the 4-5 “easiest” games on the teams’ conference slates, I’d say LSU’s (the Mississippis, Kentucky, and Alabama) are certainly easier than USC’s (UCLA, the Arizonas, Stanford and Oregon State).
Finally, of course, LSU plays Auburn, Florida, Tennessee and Arkansas. I’ll admit that’s a significantly more daunting quartet than Cal, Oregon, Washington and Washington State. But is it more daunting by a sufficient margin to make up for the stronger “bottom half” of the Trojans’ schedule, as well as the difference between Louisiana-Lafayette/Arizona/Tulane/Fresno, on the one hand, and Arkansas/Nebraska/Notre Dame on the other?
I think the two schedules are pretty darn close to equivalent, frankly. The strength at the “top” of LSU’s nonconference schedule balances out the weakness at the “bottom” and in non-conference play, whereas the relative weakness at the “top” of USC’s conference schedule balances out the strength of the non-conference schedule and the relative lack of true “gimme” games at “bottom” of the conference slate.
October 26th, 2006 at 1:22:40 am
P.P.S. No disrespect intended, or at least, not too much disrespect, to LSU’s non-conference schedule, which is fairly decent for an SEC team. :) Tulane and Louisiana-Lafayette are gimmes, but it’s not their fault Arizona still sucks and Fresno is having an awful year. Certainly, though, no one would deny that USC’s is stronger… considering it’s entirely possible all three of those teams will go to BCS bowls…
October 26th, 2006 at 2:24:56 am
David K., I agree with much of your assessment except the relative strengths of UCLA and Alabama. What makes Alabama a higher quality opponent than the Bruins? Is it their crushing victory over the 1-6 Louisiana-Monroe? Or the thrilling 13-10 squeaker over perennial doormat Vanderbilt? Maybe it’s the overtime win over hapless Ole Miss? Next up for ‘Bama: the mighty 0-7 Florida International Golden Panthers! Talk about a squishy out-of-conference schedule: the Tide’s toughest non-SEC opponent was Hawaii currently at 5-2 (whom they beat by a mere touchdown — at home). The rest are a combined 1-20!!!
Say what you will about UCLA, but their out-of-conference opponents are 13-10 combined. Sure, the Bruins lost a heartbreaker to Notre Dame, but at least they had the guts to take on a powerhouse non-conference team.
I’m convinced this is why the SEC, ACC and Big East can’t win the championship of late. They pad their schedules with cupcake out-of-conference games. (There are exceptions: my hat’s off to Tennessee this season for taking on, and whipping, Cal. It probably contributed to their surprising success since.) When it comes time to play a top-rated non-conference team, they tend to choke. Just compare USC’s out-of-conference schedule in the last four years to any SEC team’s, and you see where the confidence and seasoning come from.
October 26th, 2006 at 10:48:53 am
Weis seems confused also when a weak team is winning against ND. For a leader of his quad to make such lame excuses speaks loud about his lack of confidence for his overrated Irish. The politics at hand: If your team can’t produce value then debate about the corrupt ranking system in the hopes that someone will listen and give them a bit of compassion. Leadership at its worst, IMHO.
October 26th, 2006 at 11:52:45 am
How the major players stack up this year:
SEC
Florida 6-1
Tennessee 6-1
Arkansas 6-1 (avg. QB play)
Auburn 7-1 (avg. QB play)
LSU 6-2
Georgia 6-2 (weak QB play will doom this team)
BIG 12:
Mizzou 7-1
Nebraska 6-2
Texas 7-1
Texas A&M 7-1
PAC 10:
California 7-1
USC 6-0
Oregon 5-2
BIG 10:
Ohio State 8-0
Michigan 8-0
Wisconsin 7-1
Balance across the board but I believe that Ohio State is the lone super power this year and they get Michigan at home!
Notre Dame, my Nebraska Cornhuskers and I think USC and Florida would all lose to OSU in a bowl game.
October 26th, 2006 at 11:56:35 am
“That’s why Miami, Nebraska, Colorado, West Virginia, FSU, etc all won championships back then. They were excellent teams, but their conferences blew out loud.”
So how do you explain 1997 for Nebraska vs. Tennessee? was that just luck on our part, luck of the corn maybe, that we made Peyton look like a High School QB left him shaking his head at the end of the game like he just got off a train wreck.
October 26th, 2006 at 1:28:51 pm
Not the last time we saw that from archies boy
October 26th, 2006 at 1:48:09 pm
“That’s why Miami, Nebraska, Colorado, West Virginia, FSU, etc all won championships back then. They were excellent teams, but their conferences blew out loud.�
You do realize that Nebraska and Colorado came from the same conference right? That they are in fact in the same division in that conference?
October 27th, 2006 at 11:28:00 pm
David, not that I disagree with the intent of your post, but Stewart Mandel simply did a much better job of rebutting Charlie Weis than you did.
October 28th, 2006 at 11:41:43 am
eh, he gets paid to do it