QB- Based on Book last week against a weak WF team it's closer to a draw. Stanford QB steady makes few mistakes
RB - Not even close
O Line - Not even close
TE's - Not even close and Stanford actually has a game plan that uses their TE's in game planning
Head Coach - I'm clear on that opinion
I'm not attacking ND's capability to win this game but on paper Stanford is better prepared to win this game. Will they? Maybe not, but if I were to bet, Stanford has assets.
Football is all about respective match ups and I believe strongly that ND matches up well with Stanford this year. I’m expecting a performance like the team put up against SC last year.
Coach????? Take Stranford and the points 5.5
Which wins out?
Usually the better coached team wins out.
It's not as though Kelly isn't capable - It's that he's not too trustworthy with the keys to the Ferrari in his hands.
Not one has argued Kelly is better than Shaw. But it's still early for KWIRISH, he sleeps in after working the graveyard shift as a toll collector on the turnpike.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Like, impossible even.
Just because he has comparable academic standards, gets lower ranked recruits, has less of a national following, hasn't gotten like 20 wins vacated on his watch, has won 10+ games 5 of the last 7 years, and beats Kelly like a drum to the tune of 6 to 2..??
Come on...what else you got!?!
(no message)
..has sarcasm lost it's place on this board?
(no message)
Harbaughs program kicking ass
Kelly inherited a mess
Calculate a 15+ years before Kelly with what Kelly has done...
Though their records aren't as important as all that, it remains clear, Shaw out couches Kelly more often than not. And just so it sinks in, so too does the Navy coach out coach Kelly - despite Kelly having better teams
Shaw's record at Stanford 77 - 22
Kelly's record at ND 73 - 34
Kelly has had a tougher schedule but has not done well vs good teams not named LSU and done poorly vs bad teams every year.
Shaw has had success against everyone and he doesn't deliberately make football acumen mistakes during games - and he wins with far less talent across the board.
Easy to say, Kelly is out coached by Shaw and in general - so says the scores this year vs Ball St and Vanderbilt. This isn't to say, Kelly isn't capable, just ask LSU teams.
So, go spoon your Bullshit where your lack of football acumen is heralded - at nursery school.
(no message)
Is that intentional obfuscation or do you just have balls slapping against your chin?
years. Their big WRs know how to "block out" while our DBs annually struggle with finding the ball.
That being said JLove is really good and Pride has impressed me with his ability to turn and find the ball.
it against Wake. Stanford is rolling with the same QB from last year and with the same "identity" as last year. It is well practiced for them. I don't think for a minute that that makes them more talented than ND. I firmly believe ND's talents have been under used and under developed. With Book at the helm we have a chance to see how good the supporting cast really is. We got a glimpse at LSU last year and longer look last week.
It's tough to straight up compare the two offenses with ND basically starting anew with a QB and not run to it's full potential with Wimbush.
It would have been "but Wimbush has so much more upside. He would have greatly improved. He is the only one capable of getting us to the promise land." No, sorry guys, Kelly handled this as well as he could have. He won 3 games and gave Wimbush a fair chance to live up to this "athletic potential" hoping he would play like a QB was meant to play, in addition to his athletic talent.
You might not like to admit this but he got a lot out of the weak armed, slow footed Tommy Rees. And, this is where I disagree once with oldirish, Golson improved a ton in 2012 and was doing well in 2014 until the rob job at Florida State, and the batted down passes that got picked off and returned against Arizona St or Arizona, whoever it was. He also played very well against LSU in the bowl game that year.
As far as blaming coaches goes, I have seen many including Dean Smith(hung in effigy), Jim Boeheim, our own Ara Parseghian(cannot win the big games), lambasted by fans only to become heroic and respected afterword.
(no message)
last year for saying Book was a better WB option. The majority of the board was not ready for Book until this years continued struggles by Wimbush.
(no message)
Everything else you ask about (and don’t ask about ie defense) Notre Dame.
(no message)
It will come down to which team is prepared to rise to the occasion emotionally.... Football on a college level feeds off emotion....
At QB they have a steady guy who doesn't make mistakes and is more experienced, I'd say that gives them the edge at that position.
At RB I'd say it is a push. I think our depth evens it out, Love is exceptional but has durability issues, it's not impossible to imagine him getting put out of the game.
O Line is more difficult for me. I'd say it is a wash as well, I know both teams have a lot of talent there, but I'm not a good judge of line play.
Wimbush was unfortunately not very good at locating and using his tight ends in the passing game. Mack had probably his best game with Book. I would say that we should have the better talent at TE
You forgot receivers for some reason? They have good receivers who are going to be hard to match up with. Ours seemed to wake up a bit with Book similar to Mack. I would give Stanford the edge as their receiving corps is more proven at this time.
I am with you on the coach, I've been ready for him to be fired for quite some time now.
On paper, I'd agree with you that right now they have a better offense with a better coach. But as others have noted, those offenses have to play against the opposing defense, which is what gives me hope. I think the defense can win this game for us, against an offense that is better than ours right now.
My take
QB - If Book plays the way he did last week, or even progresses a little with a full, clean game of experience under his belt, then I actually give us the edge here
RB - Ehhh, I'd call it closer to even...with Dex back that Gap between their #1 and our #1 is closed considerably and we have a stable while they are a one trick pony. Now the question is, does Kelly use our RBs as well as they do in this game...does Dex get 8 touches or 20+..??
O Line - "Not even close"...yeah I agree with this if looking at how our line has been for bulk of season, but if only going by last game then the Gap is not that big
TE's - "Not even close and Stanford actually has a game plan that uses their TE's in game planning"
True
Head Coach - Sigh...2 of 8 says all that needs said here.
I think it will come down to which defense does better at getting the other team off the field quickly vs which offense does a better job of possessing the ball.
Reason why is that when our D front gets pressure, our D is borderline elite and when our D is fresh, the D front gets pressure. But when they are on the field a lot, our D becomes very average and I have big concerns about our DBs vs their WRs if their QB gets to stand back there and throw from a clean pocket.
I'm not too concerned with stopping their run game, the question is can we do it without committing extra assets to that which let's their WRs and TEs have a field day. We'll see, the way I look at this one is The Good, Bad and Ugly...don't care how it happens or by how much, just get the W and then the rest of the season shapes up nicely, as long as Kelly doesn't shit to bed in Blacksburg ala Miami.
S&P Offense rank - ND 46, Stanford 56.
Passing YPG - Stanford 264, ND 231
Pass TD - Stanford 10, ND 4
Rushing YPG - ND 184, Stanford 104
Rushing TD - ND 12, Stanford 3
Total Offense Yards - ND 416, Stanford 368,
Total Offense TD - ND 16, Stanford 13
Recent Results
ND vs Wake (#92 S&P ranked defense) - 566 yards, 241 rushing, 56 pts
Stan vs Oregon (#77 S&P ranked defense) - 397 yards, 71 rushing, 31 pts
On paper (what you asked for), the nod goes to ND's offense but it's fairly close.
My gut says that ND wins this by a couple touchdowns. This is based on watching both teams this year and ND is playing a lot better right now. But history would say bet the underdog who has an edge in the recent series.
BTW, your posting style has a defeatist and whiny tone to it. Something maybe to work on.
I asked a serious question and because I asked, you assume I believe the team would lose. I said the team may win even though, ND does not enjoy a competitive advantage on offense. I'm truly sorry I even suggested that Stanford might have an advantage at key positions. I'll try harder to meet your expectations in the future.
What lies in the middle?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
from innocent. I am not trying to start anything with you, just saying.
back in the good old days if someone was acting like a complete moron, they got called a f*#@!ng moron, by everyone, every time they spoke, until they eventually went away and we had way less complete morons on the board.
Some of my fondest memories of this place are nuking some popcorn just to sit back in marvel watching jakers skewer some dipshit who's only purpose here was to troll the board. Now it seems like we have more trolls and retards here than anything else.
I have seen too many people get reamed for nothing more than speaking a different opinion. To me that's a problem.
with people who I know personally, respect and /or value their input, without name calling... because, even though we disagree they don't act like morons.
If someone has an idea or opinion that can be logically supported with at least some semi-relevant valid'ish' points and is willing to rationally listen to your side and points and argue their side with coherent counterpoints, then they might not be a moron and are probably just wrong, unless I'm wrong that time.
But people who just act stupid and spam the board with multiple new posts spewing baseless nonsense, or are not willing to have a logical conversation with points, counterpoints, concessions, or admissions of being wrong, those are morons.
If you can't tell the difference between the two, then you might be one of the morons...or maybe just an out of touch pussy. You know, either or, same same..
It was pointless and added no value.
My general impression of the board is just what I stated. Kudos if that’s not you but generally it is true.
I'm sure if you took a step back, removed emotions from it and just gave an unbiased look at what I said you would agree that in most cases it is accurate...also, typically the ones who just declare moron because you don't agree with them, actually fall into the moron category but don't realize it because they themselves 'can't tell the difference'.
Sorry if I offended you, wasn't my intent, but I'm a little rough around the edges from spending a couple years in the military.
My statement was intended to be more general than directed at you.
(no message)
WTF
I'm sorry but that's a party foul...no self respecting, red meat eating, vagina loving MAN should ever use that word to describe another man.
Voluntary use of that word drags you right down to the subhumanoid level where actual snow [ahhh, puked in mouth a little]..things reside and it's acceptable to call each other faggy little names like that. Please dude, don't let your non-faggotry be degraded by using such terms to describe other men.
Ahhyuckk...I feel dirty from just talking to you about this.
(no message)
Your fragile ego took it that way, but not what I did. I figured you'd probably ignore the substance of my post because of my criticism of your tone, guess I was right. Moving on...
Whiney and a defeatist
But other than that everything is hunky dory right?
(no message)
(no message)
I criticized his posting style in very plainly descriptive terms.
You realize PBHC is the poster who recently claimed "the board was better when you could call someone an asshole, shit head or dumb fuck". I didn't do any of that, maybe I should have.
I mean I didn't actually know that we "officially" couldn't do that any more [guess I didn't get the memo] but I kinda figured it by the scent of pussy mist this place exudes nowadays.
of underachieving athletes or should I say non athletes in their high school playing days.
.. because they are too stupid for such alien science to have any impact on them, so they just need a plethora of bad language.
You do a nice job of straddling the fence in this area.
I am not the one crying foul here. And I wouldn't criticize another for calling me names. It's ineffective, but it wouldn't bother me.
It was meant as an example that they won't tolerate obscenities but allows KWIRSIH to spew his ridiculous comments about blow jobs, etc. You noticed that the board moderator deleted my post, and probably this one, but allows this child to continue to post. Do you get this?
But I did notice your post.
(no message)
(no message)
Lie in the middle but much like politics if you dont predict ND will go 13-0, blow everyone out and predict 49-7 for the winning school you are negative
There are several true homers/pollyanas on this board
It is conceivable we will run the table this year. Equally possible we could lose as many as 3-4 games.
Based on the last 30 years I have gotten tired of thinking we are going to win an NC.
I agree 100% with PBC....honest questions.....two very evenly matched teams.....17-14 ND......
(no message)
Just asking?
Is either team overrated?
Who is more likely to be in the Top 8 at the end of November?
If our offense is better as you suggest, and hands down we have the better defense as everyone on here suggests
Why in the hell are they ranked ahead of us?
Why does Sagarin think we are #20?
Stanford is ranked higher because they beat a good team on the road....
I am basing my opinion on how both teams looked last Saturday. The polls/rankings are based on a lot more than that.
Here's an interesting site to check out.
Link: https://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm
(no message)
That is the constant
We were jumped by them after a second weak performance against a weak team in Vanderbilt. The showing against Wake was not a reason to be ranked ahead of them again, especially since we are going to play each other. Whoever wins will be the higher ranked team, and will be the more likely to be in the top 8 at the end of November.
I was pretty sure we were overrated at 8 with the shit show offense that we were putting on the field. I'm holding back the high hopes of Book right now because there is little film for defenses to look at on him. Once there is more, they will start to take advantage of the tendencies that we seem unable to self scout as a coaching staff, at least that is my fear.
Sagarin ranks us at 20 because we had two weeks of a shit show offense, and as I understand it, they take things like that into account. I could be wrong on that. But 20 sounds right for the team that was playing Ball State and Vandy, no offense, great defense that won the game.
Just as a note, I do blame the shit offense on the coaches, not Wimbush. Ever since last season when Kelly took offense to saying that Wimbush couldn't throw, he's been trying to make it happen, and he can't. So the offense that Wimbush ran up to that point, which is what he should have been running, went away, which led to a shit show. Also just my opinion.
(no message)
(no message)
...which means, "I have an agenda and I need a hug."
Point out where you think I'm wrong. Stop dodging the question
Logic tells me it must be closer to a draw there. I think we are better in defense. We also have home field advantage. I guess we'll see on Saturday.
Where am I wrong and at which position?
We get Dex back too.
(no message)
high-end TE talent but they haven't had a QB to get them the ball.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
in the NFL, not sure any of ours will
Adams barely made a team.
They have a significant advantage at RB; assuming he doesn't get injured but hell the same is true for us
It's a pro style offense set up to pound the ball. And Stanford runs it really well. Sure the NFL is going love Love. And he is talented.
With the evidence we have of Dex, I could argue that if he was used properly he would have the same type of production. Sure "shoulda, coulda, woulda" but the truth is that Kelly has misused a lot of talented kids and I think you would have a time disagreeing with that.
Love with get drafted but he wont last.
Potentially the best offensive line in college football last year
And yet we still dont have elite RBs to speak of.....
We arent getting the elite RBs and we arent coaching up the ones we do get
But what the hell, we are 4-0 and ranked 8th!
(no message)
You may not think so but most experts do
(no message)
He may have a uniform on.....that isnt playing
Made a game changing impact against us the last 2 years. I think you really need to evaluate the position group as a whole. For instance, which team is better positioned to run the ball 40 times and still be fresh late in the 4th? Not Stanford.
Love is really good but isn't durable.
Durable against us....you all are saying we are better at the RB position than Stanford
The question isnt who has more running backs
I will take Love over any of ours any day of the week.....enough with the woulda coulda's.....
And I love the Dexter stuff....he has limited playing time.....yet he is the second coming of Gayle Sayers.....
He has proven nothing this season so dont try to tell me he lines up with Love
Three mediocre to slightly better than average RBs doesnt mean we are better at the position
Once again, we dont put RBs into the NFL....
This is also how the thread was started.
But we can discuss Love singularly if you'd like. You are right, he only has to be healthy against us. But you can't discount the fact that he has been banged for the majority of last year and this year. You can't discount his lack of production this year. These are things you would look at when evaluating an opponent or comparing two different running backs.