I totally predicted ND versus Ohio State in the Fiesta... | by Jay

Remember, oh, way back, at the beginning of the season? Do you remember what you thought ND would do this year?

We do. In August we did a survey here, with 1,408 responders. Here's what you said at the time:

What games are we going to win this year?

Pittsburgh	94.32%
Michigan	76.36%
Michigan State	94.68%
Washington	99.42%
Purdue	61.24%
Southern Cal	21.75%
BYU	99.21%
Tennessee	40.76%
Navy	99.42%
Syracuse	97.76%
Stanford	97.83%

Michigan State, an easier game than Pittsburgh. Hmph.

What will ND's regular season record be?

3-8 or worse	6 (0.43%)
4-7	8 (0.58%)
5-6	13 (0.94%)
6-5	47 (3.41%)
7-4	279 (20.22%)
8-3	474 (34.35%)
9-2	377 (27.32%)
10-1	96 (6.96%)
11-0	80 (5.80%)

About 60% said 8-3 or worse, so that means we did pretty well, expectation-wise.


What would be an "acceptable" record for ND this year? (Define "acceptable" any way you wish).

3-8	6 (0.43%)
4-7	6 (0.43%)
5-6	35 (2.51%)
6-5	274 (19.66%)
7-4	756 (54.23%)
8-3	242 (17.36%)
9-2	46 (3.30%)
10-1	12 (0.86%)
11-0	17 (1.22%)

7-4 seems unthinkable now, but fully 75% of us would have been happy with that outcome.

Identify a possible upset game; that is, a game we should lose but may be able to pull off.

Michigan	449 (31.93%)
Southern Cal	429 (30.51%)
Tennessee	528 (37.55%)

We all hit that one right on the head: Tennessee was correctly predicted as the easiest "tough" game.

How about a pitfall game? That is, a game we should win, but might blow.

Pitt	501 (35.63%)
Michigan State	549 (39.05%)
BYU	89 (6.33%)
Navy	38 (2.70%)
Syracuse	95 (6.76%)
Stanford	134 (9.53%)

Nice job for us again, plucking Michigan State out of the hat as the biggest pitfall matchup.

Will ND play in a bowl game, and if so, which one?

Rose Bowl	73 (5.23%)
Other BCS Bowl	239 (17.12%)
a non-BCS Bowl	1038 (74.36%)
No Bowl Game	46 (3.30%)

Bunch of glass-half-empty losers we are.


Collectively, the BGS crew predicted a record of 8-3, with losses to Michigan, Southern Cal, and Tennessee. Two staffers predicted 9-2, Teds (losses to Michigan and Tennessee) and Michael (losses to Purdue and Southern Cal). So, we'll crown Michael the BGS prognosticator of the season based on picking the Southern Cal game correctly in the head-to-head matchup.

Nice job Michael! You've just won two tickets to the Fiesta Bowl.

(Note to readers: can someone send us at least two tickets to the Fiesta Bowl so we can properly reward Michael? Thanks in advance.)

Stevie's Blunder | by Mike

If you had asked me what I thought of Steve Spurrier a week ago, I’d have told you I admired the man's transparency. In a sport filled with people claiming to be something they’re not, Spurrier was remarkably honest. He didn’t pretend to respect Bobby Bowden or Tennessee. He didn’t deny that he enjoyed running up the score. He was successful, he knew it, and he wasn't afraid to tell you. His forthright nature was refreshing.

Yet the release of the coaches’ ballots this week presents an instance where some mystery surrounds Spurrier’s motivations. As you’ve assuredly heard by now, Spurrier gave Notre Dame its lowest ranking in the entire poll at 14. (Two spots below Texas Tech, of all people!) While one normally knows where one stands with Spurrier, I’m not sure why he voted this way. This forces me to resort to the first principle of the internet – when in doubt, resort to baseless speculation. With this axiom in mind, here are a few possible reasons for Spurrier’s vote:

The Man's Own Words. When asked to explain his vote, Spurrier said:

Somebody said we had Notre Dame lower than anybody else. I said, ‘Well, they didn’t even put us in there. So what’s the big deal?’

Of course, Spurrier is not so much attempting to explain his vote here as minimize its significance. Yet his comparison is inapt. Only eleven coaches voted for South Carolina at all, and the only coaches who voted South Carolina above 24 were Spurrier and his former DC Bob Stoops. Weis wasn't exactly an outlier. The question remains why Spurrier did take an outlier position with regard to Notre Dame.

The Sugar Bowl. Following the 1991 season, Spurrier’s third-ranked, SEC champion Gators faced off against Lou Holtz’s 18th-ranked Irish. Jerome Bettis rewrote Notre Dame’s bowl records (150 rushing yards on 16 carries for 3 touchdowns) en route to a 39-28 Irish victory in the heart of SEC country. Thus most remember this game for the performance of the Irish offense and overlook the manner in which Holtz exploited Spurrier’s greatest weakness – his hubris. Holtz’s defensive scheme called for the Irish to drop practically the entire defense into coverage, knowing that Spurrier would not abandon the passing attack on which he prided himself. Although Notre Dame dropped as many as nine defenders into coverage during much of the second half, Spurrier could not bring himself to call running plays. (This despite the presence of the SEC’s leading rusher in the Gator backfield.) Spurrier just had to prove his team could pass against anyone, and this obstinance played right into Holtz’s hands. Does this humbling still haunt Spurrier?

John Latina. Last December, Spurrier hired the former Ole Miss offensive coordinator and offensive line coach for his Gamecock staff. In hiring Latina, Spurrier was adding a coach who had sent ten offensive linemen to the NFL at Ole Miss and who sported a truly majestic moustache. Shortly thereafter, however, Latina would leave Spurrier to join Charlie Weis’s staff. Does Spurrier harbor a grudge because Latina valued the opportunity to work with Coach Weis more highly?

Jimmy Clausen. The über-recruit from the class of 2007 is said to be considering both Notre Dame and South Carolina. If Spurrier could land Clausen, he would have the opportunity to run his system with a quarterback who received more high school accolades than either Danny Wuerffel or Rex Grossman. However, Spurrier can’t feel too confident recruiting against the man who transformed Tom Brady from a sixth-round quarterback befouled by what passes for QB coaching at Michigan into a two-time Super Bowl MVP and who has made Brady Quinn the early frontrunner for the 2006 Heisman and a top NFL Draft choice. Did recruiting concerns figure into the man’s calculations?

The Unforgiven Slight. Back in August, Weis was asked whether he thought Spurrier would succeed in his return to college football after his failure in the NFL. Perhaps Weis was a little too blunt in his response for Spurrier’s taste:

Well, first of all Steve's a great coach. I think one thing that's a little different, though, is those defenses in the NFL, they'll figure you out in a hurry now. I mean you're just sitting there, and every time they blitz, you're going to throw a slip screen. That's what he did. Everyone in the league knew it. He was going to throw a slip screen and everyone would be playing the slip screen.

The good folks at EDSBS have described Spurrier’s “long memory and sense of Old Testament justice.” Are we witnessing another of Spurrier's famed grudges?

What was Spurrier thinking? Tell us what you think, but beware the black helicopters and computer viruses.

Pass Right | by Jay

We're a little late in passing this along, but still in time for Christmas. MTIrish and friends have a set up a fundraiser and are selling a T-shirt for the Montana Mazurkiewicz family, with all net profits donated to them.

In the spirit of the season, consider buying a shirt at the link below, and helping out a worthy cause.

Buy a "Pass Right" Tee.

Inside the Coaches Poll | by Jeff

Amid all of the inanity involved in the BCS process, the Coaches Poll has to be the most problematic piece of the structural puzzle. The coaches have a personal, vested interest in the results of the BCS, which can have a huge impact on their careers, as well as the careers of their friends and associates. In addition, a BCS appearance can have a multi-million dollar impact on a coach's school and its conference.

For the Harris pollsters, any effort to rig the ballot is of tangential value; the coaches, however, can directly benefit from their own gamesmanship. It's a wonder that anyone believes a Coaches poll would result in an unbiased ranking of college football teams.

With USA Today releasing the voting breakdown of the coaches poll, we finally get the opportunity to evaluate the numerous biases inherent in the poll.

Conference Bias

On average, each coach rates every team in his own conference about one position higher than the rest of the voters. While this might be somewhat expected, it is not an objective way to determine a national champion, and certainly not an fair way to distribute the 4+ million dollars a conference will receive from an additional BCS bid.

Ranking Boost by Conference Voters
Big East	+1.5
ACC	+1.2
Big Ten	+1.1
SEC	+1.1
PAC 10	+0.9
CUSA	+0.9
WAC	+0.3
Big 12	+0.3
Independent *	-2.2

* One note on the independents: Charlie Weis voted the Irish at #4 while the only other independent coach, Bobby Wallace of Temple, voted the Irish #13. This accounts for the -2.2 among independent schools voting.

Self Gratification

As conflicted as supporting a team from your own conference might be, the poll also allows coaches to vote on their own team. On average, a coach placed his own team 1.7 spots higher than the rest of the voters. Only seven of twenty-two coaches placed his team within one spot of their final ranking, with Bobby Bowden the only coach to drop his own team down a meaningful amount. The five coaches that likely twisted an arm while patting themselves on the back are:

Coach, School	"Bump"
Steve Spurrier, South Carolina	+4.67
Randy Walker, Northwestern	+4.61
Bob Stoops, Oklahoma	+4.27
Tommy Tuberville, Auburn	+3.59
Barry Alvarez, Wisconsin	+3.56

S.O.S. - Save Our Schedule

Actually competing against a team during the season also appears to have a positive impact on a ranking. In general, coaches ranked a team .7 positions higher if they actaully played the team during the regular season.

Excluding conference games, this increase drops to half a spot, but is still significant. Eleven teams got a boost of one place in the polls or more from their non-conference foes (see table), and only two teams (Clemson and Miami) suffered more than a one position drop.

Boost from Non-Conf Opponent Voters
LSU	+2.83
West Virginia	+2.63
Northwestern	+2.61
Louisville	+2.56
Boston College	+2.11
UCLA	+1.93
Auburn	+1.59
Oregon	+1.56
Virginia Tech	+1.09
Boise State	+1.08
Ohio State	+1.01

Bubble Bias

The most crucial result of the Coaches Poll has to do with the teams on the 'bubble' of a BCS appareance, as an inclusion (or exclusion) results in a swing of millions of dollars for the team and its conference. As you might expect, the results for teams on the bubble for inclusion in the BCS are quite peculiar. Not only do you see coaches inflating the rankings of teams in their own conferences, but you also see the coaches penalizing teams competing for the same BCS spot.

• Isn't it a little odd that eight out of twelve SEC and PAC-10 coaches had Notre Dame ranked 8th or worse? The actual rankings from the SEC and PAC-10 voters were 5th (twice), 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th x4, 10th, 12th and 14th.

• How about the fact that over half the coaches had Ohio State at 4th, but 8 of the 12 SEC and PAC 10 coaches ranked them worse?

• And what about Oregon? Half of the coaches that ranked them 8th or worse were from the Big Ten and SEC, and 8 of the 13 that ranked them 7th or worse were from these two conferences.

• Auburn, the team furthest from the bubble, fared much better. Only four of the 21 rankings of 9th or worse came from the Big Ten or PAC 10. However, they were the biggest benefactor of inflation as their lone third place vote came from the SEC, as did two of their three fourth place votes (the other being from an in-state team, Troy). Auburn effectively became a pawn, as coaches inserted the Tigers into the rankings above teams they wished to downgrade.

	Voter's Conference
	Big Ten	PAC 10	SEC
Ohio State	+0.87	+0.42	-0.56
Oregon	-1.22	+1.47	-0.51
Notre Dame	+0.48	-2.67	-1.95
Auburn	+0.45	+0.20	+2.31

While every coach of a bubble team placed his own team at the top of the bubble list, I was most impressed with Coach Weis for placing the Irish, Ohio State, Oregon, and Auburn at 4-5-6-7 in the rankings, the only coach of the four to place the four teams in sequence. Belotti and Tuberville dropped the Irish to #9 behind Georgia & Miami, and Tressel did the same to Oregon. Perhaps Charlie fell victim to the old "you vote for me and I'll vote for you" scam that I used to become class president of the third grade.

	Bellotti	Tressel	Tuberville	Weis
Ohio State	+0.02	+1.02	+0.02	+0.02
Oregon	+2.06	-2.94	+0.06	+0.06
Notre Dame	-2.66	+1.34	-2.66	+2.34
Auburn	+1.60	+1.60	+3.60	+0.60

Conclusion

It comes as no surprise that the Coaches Poll is fraught with bias. However, since this is the first year we actually get to see the results, it's still somewhat shocking to see such blatant gamesmanship laid bare. The supposed advantage of the BCS polls, and the Coaches poll in particular, is that you have a body of "football experts" who are ranking the teams; their vast experience and acumen is supposed to lend the poll unquestioned authenticity.

Unfortunately, with so much money at stake, with careers hanging in the balance, and with so much rampant conflict of interest, the Coaches Poll is anything but authentic and honestly considered. Perhaps by revealing the votes this year, egregious voters will check themselves a bit next year, but considering what's at stake (and the absence of censure), I tend to doubt it. As long as it's included in the calculus, the Coaches Poll will remain the most problematic component of the BCS.

Star Chamber | by Jay

The USA Today/Coaches poll was supposed to be revealed after the final vote yesterday, but those dastardly connivers decided at the last second to conceal their collusion, keep the tally secret for another year. The Coaches cabal is quickly approaching Stonecutters-level power and secrecy ("Who keeps Joe Paterno alive? We do!"), and I expect a Dan Brown novel any day now--

Wait a second...they just put it online? Nevermind.

Bill has a good rundown on some of the quackery. You gotta wonder about the ol' ball coach.

Year One | by Pat

Well, it's been one year since Jay put up the first post on BGS. We've had a blast and can't thank all of our readers, fellow bloggers, and commenters enough. From not having a head coach a year ago to officially being invited to the BCS yesterday, ND Football has had an absolutely unforgettable year.

In honor of our birthday, we'll dial it back a few years and offer up a story that explains the famous photo that adorns our blog. Pull up a chair, grab a piece of cake, and enjoy.

The Untold Story of the Four Horsemen Photograph

By Walter “Bud” Stuhldreher

Much has been written about the most famous sports picture ever taken, the one of Notre Dame’s immortal Four Horsemen. This tells the story of how it almost wasn’t made. My uncle, Harry Stuhldreher, was the quarterback on the Four Horsemen Team. He is the little fellow on the right in the picture. He told this story to me while having lunch in the Cleveland Athletic Club in 1958. I later verified the story with Jim Crowley in 1968 when he was visiting my home in Huntsville, Alabama. If it wasn’t the most famous, and reproduced, sports picture of all time it wouldn’t make sense to tell the story now, 81 years after the picture was made. Due to its uniqueness however, I believe the story is worth telling.

In October of 1924, the Notre Dame football team beat Army 13-7. During the half-time George Strickler, a student, was in the press box and commented that the Notre Dame team reminded him of a movie he had just seen, The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Grantland Rice, the famous sports writer, picked up on this idea, and started his column for the New York Herald Tribune as follows:

“Outlined against a blue-gray October sky,
the Four Horsemen rode again. In dramatic
lore they are known as Famine, Pestilence,
Destruction and Death. These are only aliases.
Their real names are Stuhldreher, Miller,
Crowley and Layden.”

But the team wouldn’t be remembered today if George Strickler, who made the original comparison between the Notre Dame quartet and the title of Vincente Blasco Ibanez’s novel, The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, hadn’t followed up on the story when the ream returned to South Bend. Strickler, a junior at Notre Dame at the time, and Knute Rockne’s student publicist, told how the picture came to be made.

At midnight at the Belmont Hotel, where the team was staying, there were stacks of the early editions of the New York papers. That’s when Strickler first read Rice’s epic. On Sunday morning, just before the team entrained for South Bend, he got the idea for the picture of the Four Horsemen on horseback. “I wired my father. My dad was working at Notre Dame, worked for them for years. I asked him to see if he could round up four horses. The next afternoon (Monday), as soon as we got into the depot, I called my father. He had the horses lined up at a coal and ice house. They weren’t very well taken care of, but they were saddled up and ready to go.”

“I got on one and started pulling the other three. I got pulled off that horse three or four times and I had a hell of a time getting back on. Then, when I got to the football field I had to talk the guard into letting me get into practice. I broke up Rock’s practice to get the picture. My photographer was already there. I led the horses onto the field, put the Horsemen on them, and took the picture.

“Later in the day, Rock gave me a little hell. He didn’t like the idea of me breaking up his practice. He said he only had a couple of practices before the Princeton game, and that I should have made other arrangements. I said, ‘I didn’t have a chance.’ He kept giving me hell, but he wound up saying it was a good idea.”

It certainly was a good idea. It made the Four Horsemen famous for life – and beyond. But, according to Harry, and later verified by Crowley, the above wasn’t the whole story. Here’s what actually happened.

When Strickler motioned for the Four Horsemen to get on the nags they refused and no amount of Strickler’s cajoling could get them to change their minds. Rockne, already mad at having the practice interrupted, angrily asked what was the holdup. Crowley told Rockne they didn’t want to get on the horses for three reasons: Polo was played on horses, football on a field; the photographer wanted them each to hold a football but there was only one football at a time in a game; and hey had their practice uniforms on which were dirty, full of holes, and didn’t look very good.

Rockne looked at Crowley suspiciously. A couple of weeks earlier, distressed at a bad play, Rockne had yelled at Crowley, “What’s dumber than a dumb Irishman?” Crowley, never at loss for words, unwisely fired right back, “A smart Swede?” (Never mind that Rockne had been born in Voss, Norway; the point had been made.) So Rockne didn’t believe Crowley’s tale and asked him for the real reason they weren’t getting on the horses. Crowley admitted they were all scared of horses.

Rockne then told them George had gone to a lot of trouble to get the horses out there, that he was sick and tired at having his practice held up so get on the horses and be damn quick about it. As usual, Rockne had the last word, and the picture was made.

This explains two aspects of the picture. In spite of photography being a very inexact science in 1924, only one picture was made, instead of the usual three or four to ensure a good picture. There’s only been one picture of the Four Horsemen ever shown simply because there weren’t any others. In addition, It explains the glum expressions on their faces: they were scared to death!

There you have it, the story of how the picture that changed their lives, that made them famous, almost didn’t get taken. I asked Harry, during that lunch in 1958, how they felt about the picture, and the ensuing notoriety. He replied that they didn’t understand the continuing interest by the public in them, but they appreciated it and enjoyed it very much. They all felt it had been simply an accident which caused them to be remembered by the public when so many other backfields had long been forgotten.

He went on to illustrate this being remembered so many years after they played. During the Battle of the Bulge, near the end of WWII in Europe, German soldiers had infiltrated the Allied lines and, wearing American uniforms taken from prisoners, had wreaked havoc by misdirecting traffic. The disguised Germans would direct the Americans down the wrong roads, either away from the battle or into ambushes where scores of American soldiers were killed, injured or taken prisoner. After the Americans realized this was happening they solved the problem by refusing to follow instructions unless the traffic soldiers could respond to a simple question: What college did the Four Horsemen play for? And this, Harry stated with some pride, happened 20 years after they had played. He was, understandably, quite pleased with that recollection. (Years later I came across this story in a military history of the Battle of the Bulge so I know it’s true.)

There you have it, an addition to the story of how the most famous sports picture ever came to be made. Yeah, it’s some picture. Imagine: 20 years later a screwy picture of four unhappy football players in ratty uniforms sitting on four nags saved the lives of hundreds of American soldiers in one of the closing battles of WWII in Europe. And even today, if you so choose, you can buy a tee shirt or a sweater at Notre Dame with the picture on it. The Four Horsemen continue to ride into glory!

that night I had a dream... | by Jay

I dreamt I was as light as the ether

a floating spirit visiting things to come

the shades and spirits of two football teams

wrestled their way into my slumber

and I dreamed on,

into the future

to a day in January

the Irish and the Buckeyes

and it seemed real

like it was meant to be

in a land, not too far away

where the players are strong

and the coaches are wise and capable

I dunno...

maybe it was Arizona.

final Harris Poll | by Jay

The Harris Poll went public today. ND at #5 overall.

The individual ballots are interesting to sift through. Blaine Bishiop and Pat Haden gave us our best ranking at #3; professional moron Mike Grace, listed as a "media" voter, and who runs something called the College Football Radio Network out of Alabama, was the low outlier, placing us at #13.

For short bios (and biases) on all the voters, check out this post on Gunslingers.

If it looks like a Duck... | by Jay

Coaches Poll nonsense. Last week:

1. Southern Cal
2. Texas
3. LSU
4. Penn State
5. Virginia Tech
6. Ohio State
7. Notre Dame - 1,153
8. Oregon - 1,127

Today:

1. Southern Cal
2. Texas
3. Penn State
4. Ohio State
5. Oregon - 1,234
6. Notre Dame - 1,219

Did Oregon win a game yesterday that we didn't know about? Can't wait to see the coaches' ballots revealed this week, especially those from the Pac-10.

Bowl Selection Sunday | by Jay

There's been so much griping over the past couple of weeks by media and fans of other schools about Notre Dame getting "special" treatment by the BCS (reaching a fever pitch after ND's cardiac comeback last Saturday). We largely ignored the discussion here, as it seemed premature: there were a raft of important games left to play, and the picture hadn't been sorted out yet.

After the Virginia Tech implosion yesterday we can finally take out the earplugs. Everyone with a gripe about ND can now refocus their ire towards a flawed system that would give a four-loss Florida State team a guaranteed slot in the Orange Bowl. With the at-large selections, the bowls at least have some freedom to weigh the merits of the eligible teams and make their own selection; with the automatic conference berths, you're stuck with a 8-3, #21 Pittsburgh (2004 Fiesta), a 9-4, #14 Florida State (2002 Sugar), a 8-3, #14 Purdue (2000 Rose), or this year's Seminole entry.

Some worthy team, one of the best eight in the country, is going to be playing in a crummy, second-tier bowl game this year, and there's nothing we can do about it.

Roundball | by Dylan

Last year, I waited until after the fourteenth game to weigh in on the basketball team. Looking back at what I wrote then, I think that the season's trends were visible at that point and even earlier. Here's what I wrote at the time:

I have to say that, despite the gaudy 11-3 record, I am not terribly high on the Irish right now. At the end of last year, I was terrifically optimistic about the returning team, particularly with the addition of Latimore. I had visions of a top 10 squad and a return to the Sweet 16. But when I look at the schedule and the dearth of RPI-bouncing wins, I see a ten-loss Irish squad (potentially 9-7 in the BE) once again bubbling down the stretch to an eventual date with East Tennessee State or somesuch in the NIT.

It sucks to be right sometimes. As it stands right now, after today's home loss to Big 10 middle-of-the-roader Michigan, I'm afraid the trends are equally predictable. The Irish are 2-2 and heading into their last real test (at Alabama on Wednesday) before a month-long stretch of also-rans prior to getting into conference play on January 4th. By that time, the Irish may have the same type of "nice on paper" record as last year, likely 9-2 or 8-3. Unfortunately, my gut tells me that it's going to be a struggle for this year's squad to achieve even last year's mediocre results.

First of all, a couple of caveats. Number one, I've seen exactly one-and-a-half games (N.C. State and Michigan). Not exactly a scientific sample. Second, there are players getting their first real chance (Russell Carter, Zeller, Kurz) who may grow as the season progresses, making this kind of early-season prognostication as valuable and insightful as the Harris Poll. In other words, salt grains are available, cheap.

I have been a consistent defender of Mike Brey since he's been the coach. The sweet sixteen run and the team that did it pointed to a bright future. After all, we were competing at that level with 2nd tier talent. Our guys played over their heads and, the thinking went, when Brey capitalized on that run with similarly successful recruiting, the program would make strides toward becoming a perennial top-20, NCAA tournament caliber team. The reasons why it hasn't happened are numerous, and many of them have nothing to do with Brey (injuries, deteriorating team chemistry, facilities). But rebuilding Notre Dame into a solid winning program cannot be a ten year project, and Brey is in his sixth year. Unless things turn around this year, I see next year as Brey's swan song, although it's possible (and would be understandable, should we finish the way I think we will) that he won't make it to the summer.

Looking at the schedule, I'm having a hard time finding more than seven Big East wins. Among the nine losses, I see some truly epic blowouts (at Villanova, at UConn, at Louisville) looming. I think we're going to end up 15-12, give or take a game, prior to hitting the road for an NIT date. Needless to say, this scenario doesn't bode well for Brey.

Here's my take on what I've seen so far:

The Good

Torin Francis is playing very well. He seems healthy, strong, and motivated. He's always been a funny player around the basket, opting for up-and-under moves over more powerful drives to the basket, but he seems to have refined his footwork a bit. I'd guess this is due to the lack of pain in his back.

Quinn is managing the point pretty effectively. He's not as flashy as Thomas, obviously, but he's doing a good job of beating his man to the lane. He's also moving really well without the ball, setting up back-door cuts for layups. He's only going to get better in this role.

The Bad

The three guard lineups continue. All last year, I felt that we were forced by circumstance to run out small, three guard lineups. This year, it seems to be a choice. In my opinion, it's a bad one. My complaint last year was that we were too "guardable", and that was with Chris Thomas in the backcourt. This year, it's even worse, with Quinn, Carter, and Falls. Carter is a solid, athletic player, but he is not the offensive threat that Thomas was. What we end up with is a lazy, high-low game in which no one demands a double-team. No double-team means no rotation which means no open jumpers for Falls which means there's no point in the three guard offense. Falls took three shots today and made none. That's a failure of coaching.

I'd like to see Kurz, Francis, and Zeller on the floor at the same time with Francis and Zeller sharing time at center and with Kurz and Zeller pulling their larger defenders out to the wings on occasion. Quinn and Falls would be the guards, with Carter (at 2 or 3) and Cornett (3) rotating in frequently. We have to face up to what we are. We are not going to make Louisville pay on ball reversal, nor are we going to extend our defense to the half-court line. We simply can't do it. We need to work the middle. We need to rebound. We need to collapse the other guys' defense. That's how Falls will get his shots, not on skip passes.

The Ugly

We were a solid defensive team last year. This year, four games in, we're atrocious. We can't stop penetration and we can't cover the wings. We play a very compact 2-3 zone a lot of the time which, when you compare it to what Syracuse or Louisville do, looks amateurish. It's rare that we cover beyond the 3-point line. We are not physical inside, despite the presence of a healthy Francis.

Worst of all, and this goes back to Brey, we don't appear to be in good shape. Falls, McAlarney, Kurz, and Quinn all seem to be, I don't know, a little bit doughy. Francis, Cornett, and Zeller are the only guys who look like they spend time on conditioning. These guys play in the best league in the country, and they don't look physically prepared. Maybe this one will work itself out through the season. But we look sloooooow, and that doesn't bode well for us.

This is going to be an interesting year, the first in which we'll get a really good look as to what kind of coach Mike Brey is. He's going to need to do a good job, because we're not going to win by just throwing guys out there. Seasons like this one are where you earn the right to coach at a program like Notre Dame. Here's hoping we read this post next year and it's as wrong as last year's was right.

Walk-On, Kick-Off | by Pat

You may remember this paragraph, written here in September, about ND's newest recruit Ryan Burkhart.

This summer, Burkhart participated in the Ray Guy/Prokicker.com kicking academy, which held 30 camps across the country. Not only did Burkhart place as the top kicker at the Indianapolis camp (ahead of the melodiously-named Tamba Samba), he finished as the top kicker nationally when all of the camp performances were lumped together. Keeping with the kickoff theme, Burkhart broke the kicking academy record for longest kickoff when he booted a 75-yarder during the camp. And while Notre Dame coaches told him he was coming in as a kicker only, it doesn't hurt that Burkhart also rated out as the top punter nationally at the same camp.

The funny thing is, Ryan might not be the only ND kicker mentioned in that paragraph. The runner-up to Burkhart in the Indianapolis kicking camp, Tamba Samba from Ben Davis High School, has accepted a scholarship offer to play soccer for Notre Dame. The connection to the football program comes from quotes from Samba that he might try to walk on to the football team once up in South Bend.

"I love to play football," he said. "After we lost to Decatur Central (in the sectional on Friday night), I really realized I'm going to miss it. So I'm considering walking on at Notre Dame at some point and kicking. I think I have a decent leg. I don't want to throw that talent away. So I should leave that door open.

It sounds like it's far from a sure thing that he will be donning a gold helmet, but it's always nice to have options. With the graduation of D.J. Fitzpatrick, the job for kicker is going to be wide open. Both the offense and defense will be full of experience and ready to build off of this year's success, but having a dependable kicker can mean the difference between a good season and a great one. So when it comes to tryouts for that spot, the more the merrier in my mind. If anything, Tamba Samba will make a great addition to the Notre Dame All-Moniker Team.

the Banquet | by Jay

The ND football banquet was last night, with Brady and Jeff winning co-MVP awards for their outstanding seasons this year. Plenty of other awards as well; check out the entire rundown of the evening from UND.com.

Great stuff from Lou last night too, as the featured speaker. Here's some of what he had to say (I think it works best if you try and read it in Lou's voice):

Charlie, that introduction means a lot to me, especially coming from the outstanding college football coach of year, 2005. He talked about some of the confidence that I shared with him, but I want you to understand this, Charlie: I was not smart enough to get into Notre Dame. They rejected my application. And I never could understand why they thought I was smart enough to coach here, if I wasn’t good enough to go to school here. I’m probably the only person in the world who’s written more books than he’s read.

I want to congratulate the administration, I want to congratulate the coaches, the players, the fans, the band, the cheerleaders. Certainly I want to thank Father Riehle for all you did for me when I was here. Congratulations to everyone here; it was just an incredible year. You captivated the country not just by your accomplishments but by the way you played and the way you did things. It’s more than what’s in the stat book; you’re as good as any in the country. Somebody here might win the Biletnikoff award, but I don’t want to start singling out people, because where would you stop? Let me just say this: it was a pleasure to watch you play. The love and the feeling you had for one another was very inspirational. I saw every single game you played from the studio, and I just can’t begin to tell you how impressed I was, and how proud I was.

See, it’s really important that Notre Dame be on top in college football. I say this fairly and I say it honestly. This is why it’s such a great football season: because of the interest you all generated. You’re probably the lead story of this entire season.

And it’s not just the atmosphere you generated: you set an example for other schools to emulate. You can be well-educated, you can be unselfish, and you CAN win.

I think a football team has a personality just like any individual does, and the unselfishness with which this team played was impressive. The attitude of so many players and so many teams today is one of selfishness, their attitude is “hey, here I am.” The minute they do something they turn to the camera and say, “look at me”. What was really great in watching this football team was that anytime you accomplished something, the attitude was “there you are.” Whether it be bumping chests with one another, congratulating one another, celebrating with one another – that’s the way college football should be.

I know that everybody you played gave you their best effort – you’ve figured that out by now. You’re Notre Dame. You’re going to get the very best effort that anybody can give you. I used to hear other players say, “boy what an honor it is to play against Notre Dame. I came to this school so I could play against Notre Dame.” I can’t think of much that would motivate an individual more than playing against Notre Dame, other than one thing: it’s much, much better to be able to play FOR Notre Dame than it is to play against them.

Notre Dame is very special. When I came here it was under Father Hesburgh and Father Joyce, under Gene Corrigan and Dick Rosenthal, and now it’s Father Jenkins. But Notre Dame stays the same. It’s a very special place. Father Hesburgh said to me one time, “You don’t come to Notre Dame to learn to do something. You come to Notre Dame to learn to be somebody.”

People ask me why Notre Dame is so special, Mark May asked me – now Mark May is a beautiful individual and I love him dearly, and if he didn’t get a good education at Pittsburgh it’s not his fault. Mark asked me, and I said, Mark, if you’ve been to Notre Dame you don’t need an explanation. And if you’re not part of the Notre Dame family, no explanation will do. There’s no way you can possibly explain it.

I think of the tradition that you have built upon. And at Notre Dame, tradition is always under construction. You can talk about all the All-Americans over the years, but I can tell you no team represented Our Lady’s University better than you did this past year.

There’s four things you need in your life. Number one, you need something to do. Number two, you need someone to love. (My lovely wife is here. We’ve been married eighty-eight years. Forty-four apiece.) Number three, you certainly need something to hope for. And four, you need something to believe in. Something to do, someone to love, something to hope for, and something to believe in.

And you’ve had tremendous success. But I see a lot of people that reach success and then say, that’s pretty good, let’s keep it here, let’s maintain it. That’s not what greatness is all about, and that’s not what life is all about. You have to keep dreaming.

Let me just tell you a couple stories. With our football team here in 1989, we were going up to the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. They had a good football team coached by Bo Schembechler, and we were getting ready for them. But during the week, and Charlie and I’m sure you’re familiar with this, after a few days you’re tired, you’re worn out, you’re sore, and you don’t care about Michigan anymore. So I gathered everyone one day and said, “Men, I called Bo Schembechler” – now, I didn’t call Bo, but I said I called Bo. I asked Bo, Bo, are your guys tired? And he said, yes, and I said, we’re tired too, Bo. I’ll tell you what, Bo: you give your Michigan players a day off and I’ll give Notre Dame a day off. And the team starts high-fiving with each other and cheering until I said, “Bo said no.” If they’re practicing two hours, we’re gonna practice two hours, and if we want to beat them, we better practice two-and-a-half. Of course it took three hours before we had two-and-a-half good hours.

I gathered everyone the next day and said, “Men, I called Bo again.” And they looked at me suspiciously: “What’d Bo say?” I said I made him a deal that we’d practice in shorts today if Michigan would too. And I said, men, you’re not going to believe this, but Bo said no. Bo said he wasn’t going to practice in shorts, in fact, he was going to scrimmage. Now I don’t want to scrimmage either, but if we want to beat Michigan, we have to scrimmage. Don’t get mad at me. Just remember this when you see Bo on that sideline on Saturday.

I did that four straight days, true story. Every day I came in and said, “I called Bo today.” On that fifth day one of our players cut me off: “Hey coach, I called Bo today.” And I said, “Oh, what’d Bo say?” “Bo said his players eat steak and lobster.”

The great teams are the ones that truly care about each other. Just a true feeling and a genuine caring. I had one of the great experiences in my life here in Notre Dame stadium and it wasn’t a football game. 1987, August. I worked the Special Olympics. I was a ‘hugger’. I had lane number 3, and it didn’t matter if my runner finished first, last, or in between, my only job was to run up and hug ‘em. All anybody wants is to be loved. People have every reason to be bitter, and every reason to be down – I see people with ability and talent and all kinds of opportunities complaining about some little thing that’s irrelevant in the whole picture of life.

People say, well what do great teams have? In 1988 we were fortunate enough to be successful. We went to the White House to meet with the president on January 19th, Father Riehle, you were there, and I was asked to stay over to meet some more with the president the next day. I got a phone call at one o’clock in the morning saying one of our players, Bobby Satterfield, had died. I flew home immediately and we had a team meeting at eight o’clock in the morning. When I told them Bobby Satterfield had died, you couldn’t tell if Bobby Satterfield was white or black, you couldn’t tell if he was Catholic or Protestant, freshman or senior, first team or third team. But the one thing you could tell is that the players mourned the loss of Bobby Satterfield. Bobby happened to be a defensive back, a senior, a walk-on, a third teamer.

It’s just a love and a feeling that you have about Notre Dame. Gentlemen, when you come back years from now, you’ll have that same feeling too. The friends that you have in this world are those you eat with, you sleep with, played with, laughed with, and cried with. Above all, a team is a family.

I congratulate you once again, and I leave you with this last question: if you didn’t show up, who would miss you, and why? I ask myself if I didn’t show up at home would my wife miss me, and would my children miss me. We’re blessed to have four children, three of them graduated from Notre Dame. And my wife and I have our cemetary plots – we will be buried here at Notre Dame. The alumni buried me every weekend, so I thought I’d make it permanent. The plot has a nice view of the dome, but it is a better view when you’re sitting up than when you’re lying down.

But if you didn’t show up, who would miss you, and why? If you don’t show up to a game, would your teammates miss you? If Notre Dame ceased to exist – why would you miss Notre Dame? Because there’s no place like it. It cannot be duplicated. It’s special. It’s unique.

After dinner tonight I will fly back to Hartford and I will be on the air tomorrow. And I will be on the air on Sunday congratulating you on a bowl selection and sharing in your enjoyment. When I went to work up there, they said, “we don’t want you to be partial.” There is no way I cannot be partial about Notre Dame or this football team.

If I have any advice for your opponent in the bowl game, it would be this: bring your lunch, because it’s gonna be a full day’s work. Thank you.

the Chicken or the Egg | by Jay

One of the classic bar-room football arguments concerns the heyday of the San Francisco 49ers, and it goes like this:

Did Jerry Rice make Joe Montana, or did Joe Montana make Jerry Rice?

The argument goes 'round and 'round among Niners fans. Montana, of course, Hall of Fame quarterback, was a passer with pinpoint precision and a deft touch who made even John Taylor and Roger Craig look like all-world receivers. Rice, on the other hand, Hall of Fame receiver, best of all time, who ran better routes than anyone in the NFL and simply caught everything thrown his way. Without Rice, whither Montana? Without Montana, whither Rice?

Let's apply this frame to our '05 Irish team.

Point: Brady Quinn makes his receivers look good. His pocket presence buys enough time for the receivers to shake a pesky defender, he's got excellent vision to find the open man, and he's accurate enough to put the ball where only his guys can make a play at it. Most of all, he instills confidence in his receivers, often checking from runs into passes and making great decisions. Without Quinn, his receivers wouldn't have nearly the years that they're having.

Counterpoint: The receivers make Brady look good. First things first: Samardzija and Stovall are the best pair of wideouts the Irish have had in what seems like forever. Quinn, while a mostly accurate passer, has put up a lot of throws that can best be described as "jump balls". Sure, you can say that he's putting it only where his 6'5 trees can grab it, but that doesn't mean they're precise throws -- that speaks to the quality of his receivers more than his own talent. And on bad throws, check the highlight reel: how many circus catches by #21 and #83 have bailed out Quinn on something that was basically up-for-grabs? And how many short passes were turned into long rambles by the excellent downfield blocking by the receivers?

How much credit for the offensive explosion does each unit deserve? Feel free to take up either banner and make your case. Or if you'd like, factor in a third ingredient: Charlie Weis. In the pie chart of the Irish offense, how big is everyone's slice?

Haywood Accolades | by Jay

Mike Haywood won the AFCA Assistant Coach of the Year. Per the description, "The Assistant Coach of the Year award...was created to honor assistant coaches who excel in community service, commitment to the student-athlete, on-field coaching success and AFCA professional organization involvement." In other words, it's not strictly an on-the-field performance award. Here's what the AFCA had to say about Haywood:

Haywood has been an assistant coach for 17 years and is in his first season at Notre Dame ... For the past couple of years, Haywood pays and hosts a Thanksgiving dinner for a different underprivileged family each year that he is personally acquainted with ... He also picks a local family to pay for all Christmas expenses for gifts for the entire family, particularly fulfilling the wishes and needs of the family's children ... Haywood is a long-time volunteer for Big Brothers & Big Sisters of America, acting as a positive male role model to underprivileged or orphaned African-American males ... In addition to earning a reputation as one of college football's brightest young coaches, Haywood also makes an impact on the student-athletes as a mentor, motivator and role model...

That's a nice feather in the cap for coach Haywood.

Haywood's in an interesting spot: along with being the running backs coach, he's listed as the titular "offensive coordinator" -- but we all know Charlie creates the gameplan and calls the plays (per an August presser: "I'm calling the plays...that's the end of that question"). As an up-and-coming coach, where does Haywood's career go from here?

There was another quote I'm failing to find (perhaps it was excised from the official presser transcripts -- they do that sometimes -- or maybe it was a newspaper quote), where Charlie waxes about the future of Irish playcalling, and saying something to the effect of "perhaps someday down the road I'll relinquish playcalling, but not until I feel comfortable handing it over."

We know Haywood would like to be a head coach someday, and upon taking the Irish job said that it was a golden opportunity to "work with Charlie Weis and learn a new offense under him." To become a head coach, you usually have to be an established OC or a DC for a while. In a couple of years, will we see Mike Haywood calling the plays for the Irish, in preparation for a head coaching gig somewhere else? I wouldn't be surprised.

Everyday Reading | by Jay

You're hitting EDSBS every day, right? Then I'm sure you saw their 52 Reasons ESPN/ABC Sucks -- possibly the greatest collection of criticisms and witticisms (and truth) ever levied at the sports leviathan.

Today they may have topped themselves with Phil Fulmer's letter of apology to Vol Nation.