UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

Let's revisit this post after the Ohio State game.

Should be interesting especially if anything happens to Hartman or Estime & if MF does nothing to fix theglaring issues in regards to the interior DL & at safety b/t now & then.

juniors or sophomores transferring out each spring if the writing is on the wall that they won’t be playing. We’ll bring in some transfers to provide support and uplift as needed.

I think the model of recruiting raw recruits and developing them into 5th year/GS players is not what will be happening as much going forward. The recruiting will be much better and the recruits that really turn out will stay. Younger guys will play earlier and much of our depth with be younger (freshman/sophomore) talent and I’m ok with that.

If Gray is one of the top corners, play him and if an older guy leaves, so be it. If Love is better than older backs on the roster, he should play and they can sit or leave. If Greathouse, Flores and James are better than Styles they should play and he can sit or leave. If Bowen, Ausberry, Sneed, etc… are better than Kollie than they should play and he can sit or leave.

That’s the way it should work. It gets your best athletes and talent on the field and is great for recruiting because the kids know they’ll have the chance to play early if they really belong playing. While we’ll never compete with most schools in the portal, we can compete very well in recruiting and this model will also allow us to bring in a larger volume of recruits each year which is advantageous.

I have no problem with what’s going on. We are early in the process but the roster and team are going to be vastly better when it’s all said and done.

I don't begrudge a coach for taking his best players and putting them on the field, even if the player being bumped is a decent player who has put in his time. I just hope that the coach simple does it earlier, instead of giving the older player too many chances.

Heck, I remember in the Lou Holtz era, where that secondary was a big mess in 1990. The starting lineup at the beginning of the year was:

SS: Greg Davis
FS: George Poorman
BCB: Todd Lyght
FCB: Rod Smith

Lyght did everything he could, and did put forth a good season, despite battling a nasty thigh bruise for most of the year.

Smith simply wasn't ready, and didn't "get it" until the next year.

Greg Davis was "consistent," but his talent limits were pretty evident, and 1991, Lou shifted him to nickel.

George Poorman was flat-out terrible. The fact that he was blind in one eye made for terrible depth perception, and during game time, it definitely showed. He did very well in practice, because he knew the tendencies of his teammates, and he was a favorite of Gary Darnell's, but against the opposition, he got burnt on a regular basis. To prevent any further damage, in 1991, Lou shifted him to quarterback (I'm not joking, either), where there was no chance of his playing due to Mirer, Failla, and McDougal all being there.

At the end of the year, Tom Carter had basically taken over the FCB spot, occasionally relieving Lyght at the BCB position, and Jeff Burris had taken over the FS spot, despite being true freshmen, and the improvement to the defense was significant.

I've always pointed out how Ricky Watters and his punt return fumbles gave Stanford the win that year, and I'll always stand by that statement. However, George Poorman constantly getting burnt badly by Ed McCaffery and whiffing on so many attempted tackles of Tommy Vardell didn't exactly help out that defense that made Jason Palumbis look like the second coming of John Elway that day... This is one of those times I wish Lou had simply yanked him right there and then during the game.

Lou should have given Poorman the hook much earlier.

(no message)

(no message)

I could have just said, whine about losing a 3* and whine about signing a 3* and just left off the 'RB".

Everytime Freeman and Co get a commitment from a 3* it's - oh another 3* - but then losing it over Diggs leaving or not remembering Kyle Hamilton was a 3* when he committed.

Excellent post! Well thoughtout.

Crazy people on here sometimes.

If someone said anything remotely similar, it would be that we were happy that we got Diggs, especially since we didn't get Shipley.

Or, that we got Diggs who wanted to be here, instead of Shipley, who wanted to be at Clemson.

Either way, anyone who would have truly wanted Diggs over Shipley would have been ridiculed for sheer silliness, unless he were a friend or family of Diggs', or an enemy of Shipley's.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

For some odd reason, there are always going to be folks who think ND is going to be immune from everyday events.

Somehow some folks think it is all on Freeman. Of course the more logical answer is that all these kids want to play and they decided their chances of playing are better elsewhere.

All of these guys are acting in their own best interest. The guys think they can do better elsewhere. That behavior isn't any different than anyone of this board who sees better opportunity somewhere else and acts accordingly.

My current "boss" just got a new boss and it is pretty clear that her career interests are best served somewhere else. So she's now in her own portal, although she doesn't have to announce it. One day, she'll get a new job and just move one.

No big conspiracy, no big mystery, just life.

(no message)

I too really liked Buchner. The problem is, we liked him more than he liked us.

(no message)

(no message)

I too really liked Buchner. The problem is, we liked him more than he liked us.

(no message)

In the work analogy , we cannot ‘hire’ most people other than freshman with 1 good year of academics or grad transfers unless the other applicants were f sophomore and junior transfer can meet our academic transfer criteria. So getting Guys for 2 years or so is going to be very difficult. So we either get transfers after 1 or 4 years. That would suggest we may not be able to keep up with the depth we thought we had on the entire roster this year is we have a net loss in transfers per year of 2 or 3. While it may mean more scholarships each year for an incoming class that really doesn’t translate for ND since we really don’t have a good Track record of meaningful freshman game time. Let’s hope that changes with great recruiting.

So keeping these guys in the system is likely better than losing a fair amount each season and bringing in more freshman or rent a grad student for a year.

A challenge for sure

(no message)