Well the Basketball season has now ended in failure to round off a truly depressing 12 months or so for Notre Dame athletics. Bah.

It isn't Weis. Its the athletes/school/hex/curse/etc.

Why not go straight for Jimmy Johnson?

We need to be welcoming Obama to campus. Even if you dislike everything about his politics, it helps recruiting to know that we welcomed him to ND.

Jenkins screwed up enormously by a) inviting him and b) giving him an honorary degree. This isn't the politard (or even religion) forum, but when the most radically pro-abortion President in US History is given an enormous honor at a Catholic University devoted to the cause of Life, it's a tremendous scandal. Our President isn't just casually pro-choice; in his first two months reversed the Mexico City policy (banning Federal funds for abortion overseas) and reversed the ban on Federal Funding for embryonic stem cell research. He also threatens to overturn laws protecting the consciences of Health care providers (forcing people to participate in abortions who don't believe in it).

Some things are more important than recruiting, and if we're depending on a dog and pony show with a guy who holds beliefs fundmantally in opposition to ND's to get the latest 5 star, then we deserve to lose.

Thank goodness you came to a full stop there, rather than placed a comma followed by a but.

Yeah, those words could start a lot of nonsense that no one wants in this thread.

Abortion is one important issue, it has to be balanced against many others. Respect for Life doesn't stop at abortion either, it includes thing like the capital punishment that the Church condemns fully. Yet we still invite pro death penalty people to campus, Obama should be welcome too.

No one wants to hijack this thread, least of all me. I'll post a link here to a new thread on the Obama/ND controversy if I decide to start one (that being my last thoughts on the subject here)

I hate you all, seriously i hate you, go away talking about this

2008 NCAA Graduation Success Rate for BCS Football Programs

As long as they insist on kids going to class and graduating, they will not legitimately contend for the title. I'm not a Wies fan but in todays NCAA, Rockne couldn't win. Most of the kids at Okla., Fla, LSU, USC...etc can't even get in to ND, let alone graduate.



1. Notre Dame 94% <------------------
2. Stanford 93
T3. BC 92
T3. Duke 92
T3. Northwestern 92
6. Vanderbilt 91
7. Wake Forest 83
8. Texas Tech 79
T9. Baylor 78
T9. Nebraska 78
T9. UNC 78
T9. Penn State 78
T13. UConn 77
T13. Indiana 77
T15. Colorado 75
T15. Iowa 75
T15. Syracuse 75
T15. Virginia Tech 75
19. Cincinnati 73
T20. Illinois 70
T20. Michigan 70
T20. Miami 70
T20. Rutgers 70
24. Florida State 69
T25. Clemson 68
T25. Florida 68
T25. Maryland 68
T25. Wash State 68
.........................................
T29. Kansas State 67
T29. Pitt 67
31. Virginia 66
T32. South Carolina 65
T32. Washington 65
T34. Oregon State 64
T34. Ole Miss 63
T34. Miss State 63
T34. Purdue 63
T34. West Virginia 63
T34. Wisconsin 63
T40. Okla State 62
T40. UCLA 62
42. Arizona State 60
T43. N.C. State 59
T43. Missouri 59
45. Louisville 58
46. Auburn 57
T47. Kentucky 56
T47. Texas A&M 56
T47. South Florida 56
T50. Alabama 55
T50. Iowa State 55
T52. LSU 54
T52. Tennessee 54
T52. USC 54
T55. Cal 53
T55. Oregon 53
T55. Kansas 53
58. Ohio State 52
T58. Arkansas 52
T60. Minnesota 51
T60. Michigan State 51
62. Texas 50
T63. Georgia 48
T63. Georgia Tech 48
65. Oklahoma 46
66. Arizona 41

I'm not super interested in graduation rates. I am a tiny bit curious about the deviation between football players vs other athletes and football players vs non athletes in D1.

Can we re-rail this thread and get back to the Weis is fat jokes?

Every year they tell us that scholar atheletes can't really be college students, they'll be proven wrong.

What is scary is how low the bar is to graduate at some of those schools. I need to see data of the graduation rates among the guys who weren't drafted: and if their degrees were seen as legit.

There was an interesting discussion on ND Nation now that ND has made the NIT Final Four, specifically, what is the NCAA tourney equivalent of winning the NIT Title?

Answers so far range from 66th place to somewhere between the Round of 32 but not quite the Sweet 16.

First round loss. That's where the last at large teams in would belong, and the NIT winner might have an argument to be right on the bubble.

Disagree. I think given that many teams that make the NCAA as automatic qualifiers for winning tiny conferences would have little chance to win the whole NIT tournament. The NIT winner usually has to plow through the rest of the bubble teams, many of whom are much stronger than the Metro Atlantic or Big Sky winners, for example. Consequently, I'd say the NIT winner will usually be a Top 40 team, so if an NIT Championship is not as good as a 1st Round NCAA win it's pretty close.

The question I find more interesting is to ask which is of greater benefit to a team:

- final appearance in the NIT;
- one and done in the NCAA;

I think it's the former and it isn't close.

As to the debate you guys are engaged in, if ND, PSU, Bay and SDSU had been selected in the NCAA they would have received similar seeding to the likes of Maryland, Utah St, Dayton, Wisconsin, Minny etc. I think if you put the tournament group into this year's NIT (swapping them for the NIT semi - finalists obv) it is likely they would have been strongly in the mix for a trip to MSG - much as the NIT teams would have been unlikely to do a whole lot better or worse as a group in the tournament. You dig?

The committee is asked to make very difficult judgement calls when it comes to the last five or so at large bids awarded. In the end, they try and put in the best 'bodies of work'. But while the resume of the fifth last at large team may have been clearly better than what ND (or PSU, or SDSU) achieved over the year - the difference in talent level is going to be much less clear cut. As long as you are talking about teams that play vastly different schedule strengths, you have to accept that you won't know with any certainty who the 'best' team is in many cases (though ofc, UNC >>>>> ND ldo).

We had only one drafter player but the following are going to NFL teams. from NDnation.

David Grimes, * Denver Broncos
Terrail Lambert, * San Francisco 49ers
Asaph Schwapp, * Dallas Cowboys

in addition to:
Pat Kuntz, * Indianapolis Colts
Mike Turkovich, * Dallas Cowboys
David Grimes, * Denver Broncos
Terrail Lambert, * San Francisco 49ers
Asaph Schwapp, * Dallas Cowboys

Between those and Maurice Crum, I think the draft missed quite a few good players.

I am having a tough time doing my Notre Dame season preview because love ND or hate them, no one agrees on much. We're good, we're bad, schedule is hard, schedule is soft. Weis is an offensive genious, Weis is an offensive Jersey guy.

Last year was pretty easy: Our Father who art in Heaven, not another 2007. The only thing I got right was calling 6-6 when the others were having delusions of top 10 finishes. But I didn't think it could come after a 4-1 start.

What went wrong: I can only guess like everyone else. After the unexpected losses by UNC and Pitt, part of the team appeared to quit. We weren't the same team early on that failed to show up against BC, Syracuse and USC. Yes we would have lost to USC anyway and BC 50% but at least there would be a game.

Why could that have happened? I don't know. One NDNation poster posited that other teams "solved" the Weis O by changing from blitzing, which crushed us in 2007, to a drop back and blanket the WRs one, which Butch Davis used in the 2nd half @ UNC. I am a fan, not a CFB researcher, so I can only ask why no one solved the Pats in the NFL.

Or: Others said that Weis was to busy with schemes and didn't develop players, who desperately need it at Notre Dame where they have to go to actual college classes. Posters cite a general lack of toughness and hitting a bility (no power running) along with youth and lack of depth?

but: The improvement over 2007 which we needed, we got. The defense suddenly was capable of guarding deep passes. The mal-O-line learned to protect Clausen in pass plays. Little Jimmy himself now looks like a quarterback instead of a lost kid.

and then: The Hawaii bowl burst out of the clouds when the Irish started hitting big plays as though they had been playing great football all year. The highlights are still a blast, and left us scratching our heads all off-season whether it was ND's improvement or the Warrior's ineptitude that led to that blow out.

and so: I spent the entire post, oops, reviewing last year instead of guessing about this one. I'll form some questions next time. Meanwhile, Lou has made his.

New thread in sub forum please, don't just move over this abortion.

what? could we please lock the thread in that instance?

edit: Or just rename this one

waffled, I pondered, I flipped and I flopped. I read ndnation and flamed 4. I went one way and the next.

Like everyone else, I have no idea what to expect this year.

Predicting 6-6 last year wasn't as great as it seemed. I couldn't see that we do that after a 4-1 start. Nor how we left Stanford in 2007 longing for San Diego St. I am not sure if we left Hawaii eager for Nevada.

So this year is a fog. We are good or we aren't. Weis is brilliant, Weis is not.

Pessmists: Notre Dame has just not played tough on the line, and teams like BC and Stanford push us around. The qb is named Clausen with the usual shortcomings. The defensive front 7 are new and teams can bludgeon them into submission with runs up the middle. ND can't run and Weis will call the wrong plays. The haters agree.

Optomists: ND is emerging out of a major black hole of talent in 2007-8 having no one one year and young players the next. Now they are back with experience. The WR corps is as good as 2005 and the running backs are better. The D line is young but talented, and the problem of a slow secondary seems to have vanished. Many opponents are having off years and even USC is starting a brand new quarterback. This year the emregence of Jimmy Clausen and a favorable schedule launches Notre Dame into the BCS and perhaps a title game.

Schedule: Is littered with BCS teams that are supposed to be good but not this year. Specifically hopes are down for Michigan, Purdue, Washington, Washington St, Stanford, and BC. All oft hem have two things in common: you've actually heard of them, and they are rebuilding this year.

Take your pick. The only thing constant is that pre-season predictions of Notre Dame have been proven to be wrong the vast majority of the time. 2004 being only the correct one in recent memory.

Weis: is not the new coach anymore. He's led ND to 2 BCS bowls and 2 of the worst seasons. It's time for him to produce some wins. As in

9 - 3 plus a Jan 1 bowl win over a jaded Florida.

Go Irish

Nice summary man. A couple of bounces here and there and last season is 9-3, a couple more and it's 3-9. Like a lot of people, I'm flummoxed. 8-4 would be very acceptable imo. But aside from the end wins and losses, what I'm really hoping to see is a bit of ****ing fight in the inevitable losses against the likes of USC. If every game is competitive and the team show a bit of grit up and down the schedule I'll be delighted. It's the blowouts that hurt more than anything.