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

The stumpy turd that spoke out a week ago on behalf of the committee clearly explained that there was no significant debate between Miami and Notre Dame. Miami lost to 2 unranked teams, we lost to 2 in the Top Ten. They beat us in Week 1 when we were clearly not anywhere near as good as we have been the last 10 weeks. He was clear as could be in this explanation.

On Sunday, after the A.C.C. lost its chance to have an automatic bid, it was clear that they were at risk of having zero representation. Then -- and only then -- did there somehow arise a need to start debating these two teams. It reeks of posturing and potentially worse between the network that airs the playoff games and their financial ties to the conference in danger of being excluded to the committee that is supposed to make these calls independently.

Additionally, the parameter of "not punishing teams for having conference championship games" suddenly came into play. These games and their inherent risk aren't a problem for the committee to help resolve. The conferences have them at this point simply to make money, and the burden of that risk falls on to them. A team on the bubble shouldn't be able to fail to show up (-3 yards rushing and a 3-touchdown loss) and feel secure that they're given due consideration with 3 losses on their resume, especially when B.Y.U. was quite clearly punished for their loss in their respective championship game.

Committee members change and year-over-year slights are forgotten. I favor action in the near term to take advantage of the situation.

And even if ND passes on the committee issue, it needs to address the ACC.

And if it were up to me, losing to two unranked teams is disqualifying. Us losing to two ranked teams by a hair and then rattling off ten impressive wins is qualifying.

(no message)

(no message)

Everyone knew the reason Alabama moved above ND despite a lackluster performance vs Auburn, yes a huge rivalry, but still a weak team with an interim coach. And when the nightmare scenario played out exactly as it had to to get Miami in, and they got in, to act like people are crazy for calling it corrupt is a new low in a sport already reaching FIFA-levels of corruption.

(no message)

To say it’s one thing and then say and do another is frustrating. We had two debates going against us: one made sense (the head-to-head with Miami) the other was moving us below Alabama when we crushed Stanford and they struggled against Auburn. Then Alabama got dog walked, no pun intended in the SEC championship. I agree there should only be two polls. One poll at mid-season and one at the end after conference championships. Putting on the head of the committee every week and then trying to decipher what committee is and is not thinking is a fool’s errand.

And I'd bet they found ND the better team despite it.
But who knows, maybe they're just collectively incompetent.

Alabama lost to Florida St., should they be behind Florida St.? No, of course not. Alabama's record is far superior to Florida Sr. But by the committee's logic yes they should.

ND's and Miami's losses are not similar so that a head to head comparison is not appropriate regardless of how close they were in the poll. Miami lost to two unranked teams. ND lost to two top 12 teams.

This year, however, I strongly believe that we could have won the whole damn thing. It's my belief that we could have run the table, and that opportunity just doesn't come around that often for anyone, let alone one with as many obstacles as we have to field an elite roster.

(no message)