(03-04-2015 02:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 02:00 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  I can see ND joining the ACC as a full member for a couple of reasons:

1. More Money
2. An easier path to the CFP

Currently, ND has to go undefeated for a CFP slot (1 loss may be too many). For them, it's easier to win the ACC, especially if the CFP expands to 6-8 teams.

ND will join a conference when it benefits them - not before.

1) If more TV money were the driving force, ND would be in the Big Ten for some time now;

2) It is not an easier path. Exhibit A: Florida State had to go undefeated as the ACC champ to get a playoff berth.

So....what advantages are there to give up independence, again?

One minor note: FSU "went undefeated as the ACC champ to get a playoff berth" - whether that was "had to" is open to debate.

(03-04-2015 03:51 PM)nert Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 02:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 02:00 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  I can see ND joining the ACC as a full member for a couple of reasons:

1. More Money
2. An easier path to the CFP

Currently, ND has to go undefeated for a CFP slot (1 loss may be too many). For them, it's easier to win the ACC, especially if the CFP expands to 6-8 teams.

ND will join a conference when it benefits them - not before.

1) If more TV money were the driving force, ND would be in the Big Ten for some time now;

2) It is not an easier path. Exhibit A: Florida State had to go undefeated as the ACC champ to get a playoff berth.

So....what advantages are there to give up independence, again?

One minor note: FSU "went undefeated as the ACC champ to get a playoff berth" - whether that was "had to" is open to debate.

True, they likely would have been left out because of previous close calls throughout the season but maybe not.

(03-04-2015 03:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 12:47 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 12:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  I don't think there's any way Texas could make independence in football work. I don't think they have any interest, although its likely they have explored the option. I think it would be very bad for Texas sports, just as I think Notre Dame football has been diminished, and will gradually continue to be, by remaining independent.

We disagree here. I think that ND football, to the extent it was "diminished", was because of a series of bad coaching hires and an administration that was content to cash the football checks but felt guilty about going "all in" as a "football factory".

I don't think that conference membership had a thing to do with it.

There's certainly an argument for that, but it lasted 20 years from Holtz to Kelly. That's a lot of bad decisions for a program of ND's caliber. Davie and Willingham had some success elsewhere. I think the environment changed. And Notre Dame had to face being a key game in everyone's schedule without the motivation of a conference championship themselves.

Yes, ND made a ton of bad coaching hires. There is no doubt. The last people you will have to convince of ND's 14 (not 20) year hiring futility (1996-2010) are ND fans.

Willingham was run out of Washington after an 0-11 record in his third year there.

Bob Davie had no coaching gig until taking the New Mexico job. Have you heard of him since?

Did you know that Urban Meyer, Dan Mullen and Charlie Strong, among others )(Greg Mattison, Joker Phillips, etc..) were on the ND sideline as assistant coaches under Bob Davie?

He still could not consistently win.

(03-04-2015 03:54 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:51 PM)nert Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 02:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 02:00 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  I can see ND joining the ACC as a full member for a couple of reasons:

1. More Money
2. An easier path to the CFP

Currently, ND has to go undefeated for a CFP slot (1 loss may be too many). For them, it's easier to win the ACC, especially if the CFP expands to 6-8 teams.

ND will join a conference when it benefits them - not before.

1) If more TV money were the driving force, ND would be in the Big Ten for some time now;

2) It is not an easier path. Exhibit A: Florida State had to go undefeated as the ACC champ to get a playoff berth.

So....what advantages are there to give up independence, again?

One minor note: FSU "went undefeated as the ACC champ to get a playoff berth" - whether that was "had to" is open to debate.

True, they likely would have been left out because of previous close calls throughout the season but maybe not.

So, an 11-2 FSU ACC champ would have been in the playoffs last year?

(03-04-2015 02:41 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Well, 1 more ACC game shouldn't be that big a of deal for ND. If such move occurs with the deregulation of the champ game than the acc can go to the 4 pods and give ND access to its title game as compromise.

ND already turned down one more ACC game.

The ACC pushed for it and tried to sweeten the pot for one more game by promising annual games against Pitt and BC (long time ND opponents).

ND said no thanks.

(03-04-2015 04:10 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:54 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:51 PM)nert Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 02:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 02:00 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  I can see ND joining the ACC as a full member for a couple of reasons:

1. More Money
2. An easier path to the CFP

Currently, ND has to go undefeated for a CFP slot (1 loss may be too many). For them, it's easier to win the ACC, especially if the CFP expands to 6-8 teams.

ND will join a conference when it benefits them - not before.

1) If more TV money were the driving force, ND would be in the Big Ten for some time now;

2) It is not an easier path. Exhibit A: Florida State had to go undefeated as the ACC champ to get a playoff berth.

So....what advantages are there to give up independence, again?

One minor note: FSU "went undefeated as the ACC champ to get a playoff berth" - whether that was "had to" is open to debate.

True, they likely would have been left out because of previous close calls throughout the season but maybe not.

So, an 11-2 FSU ACC champ would have been in the playoffs last year?

Not a chance, 12-1 is open to debate depending on who/when loss happened(Obviously not in C.C. Game)..

As I said, if the CFP expands to 8 teams. As it stands, a 1 loss ND as ACC champ, I believe, would be in (assuming there aren't 4 undefeated teams).

(03-04-2015 04:37 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 04:10 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:54 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:51 PM)nert Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 02:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  1) If more TV money were the driving force, ND would be in the Big Ten for some time now;

2) It is not an easier path. Exhibit A: Florida State had to go undefeated as the ACC champ to get a playoff berth.

So....what advantages are there to give up independence, again?

One minor note: FSU "went undefeated as the ACC champ to get a playoff berth" - whether that was "had to" is open to debate.

True, they likely would have been left out because of previous close calls throughout the season but maybe not.

So, an 11-2 FSU ACC champ would have been in the playoffs last year?

Not a chance, 12-1 is open to debate depending on who/when loss happened(Obviously not in C.C. Game)..

Plus, don't forget about the fact the ACC schedule is lighter for FSU. They don't get to beat FSU.

If GT goes 12-1 with wins over FSU, Clemson, Georgia, ND and FSU again in the ACC title game...they're almost guaranteed to be in.

FSU's ranking last year was very largely do to their eye test and performance, not their schedule. The fact that they struggled in almost every game, and didn't look good against even some pretty weak teams like Virginia and NC State. That was the constant reason given. A couple 40pt blowouts on the board, and it's not even a discussion.

I didn't like it, but I get it. FSU didn't look anywhere near as good as their record said they were. The advanced metrics that I appreciate didn't show them being a top team. And the committee was trying hard to get over the old set way of ranking teams. In the end, FSU couldn't prove them wrong.

I'm not saying a 12-1 ACC champ is a lock like it is in the SEC, by any means. No one beside the SEC can really say that. But it's foolish to say that they'll never get in either. Every season has it's own dynamic.

And I don't think that's a real good reason for ND to be thinking about giving up independence, at least any time soon. Many more years of data to look at will be required, and how often does ND have 11-1 teams anyway? I don't think it will be a deciding factor for a very long time.

(03-04-2015 05:28 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As I said, if the CFP expands to 8 teams. As it stands, a 1 loss ND as ACC champ, I believe, would be in (assuming there aren't 4 undefeated teams).

If the CFP expands to that size then there will be even less reason for Notre Dame to fully join the ACC so I am sorry but what you said is wrong no matter how many times you say it. ND doesn't need to be ACC champ in order to get into an 8 team tournament therefore they don't need to join the ACC fully in football.

(03-04-2015 06:12 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 05:28 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As I said, if the CFP expands to 8 teams. As it stands, a 1 loss ND as ACC champ, I believe, would be in (assuming there aren't 4 undefeated teams).

If the CFP expands to that size then there will be even less reason for Notre Dame to fully join the ACC so I am sorry but what you said is wrong no matter how many times you say it. ND doesn't need to be ACC champ in order to get into an 8 team tournament therefore they don't need to join the ACC fully in football.

As an independent, ND will never play 13 games. A 1-loss conference champ will get the nod over a 1-loss independent if for no other reason than the extra game.

(03-04-2015 08:26 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 06:12 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 05:28 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As I said, if the CFP expands to 8 teams. As it stands, a 1 loss ND as ACC champ, I believe, would be in (assuming there aren't 4 undefeated teams).

If the CFP expands to that size then there will be even less reason for Notre Dame to fully join the ACC so I am sorry but what you said is wrong no matter how many times you say it. ND doesn't need to be ACC champ in order to get into an 8 team tournament therefore they don't need to join the ACC fully in football.

As an independent, ND will never play 13 games. A 1-loss conference champ will get the nod over a 1-loss independent if for no other reason than the extra game.

And that is fine. Try again next year. Don't lose any games.

(03-04-2015 08:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 08:26 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 06:12 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 05:28 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As I said, if the CFP expands to 8 teams. As it stands, a 1 loss ND as ACC champ, I believe, would be in (assuming there aren't 4 undefeated teams).

If the CFP expands to that size then there will be even less reason for Notre Dame to fully join the ACC so I am sorry but what you said is wrong no matter how many times you say it. ND doesn't need to be ACC champ in order to get into an 8 team tournament therefore they don't need to join the ACC fully in football.

As an independent, ND will never play 13 games. A 1-loss conference champ will get the nod over a 1-loss independent if for no other reason than the extra game.

And that is fine. Try again next year. Don't lose any games.

I was going to respond directly to him, no disrespect to him, but I do believe you have explained the Notre Dame position perfectly.

The problem with his argument is that he talks about the playoff going to 8 teams while at the same time talking as if an 8 team playoff would ever have eight teams with only 1 loss and all of them having 13 games played. That is a logical fallacy for the 8 team future version that some people feel will happen. They are wrong of course, six teams is happening for this very same reason. There is more control in it.

(03-04-2015 03:49 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 12:47 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 12:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  I don't think there's any way Texas could make independence in football work. I don't think they have any interest, although its likely they have explored the option. I think it would be very bad for Texas sports, just as I think Notre Dame football has been diminished, and will gradually continue to be, by remaining independent.

We disagree here. I think that ND football, to the extent it was "diminished", was because of a series of bad coaching hires and an administration that was content to cash the football checks but felt guilty about going "all in" as a "football factory".

I don't think that conference membership had a thing to do with it.

There's certainly an argument for that, but it lasted 20 years from Holtz to Kelly. That's a lot of bad decisions for a program of ND's caliber. Davie and Willingham had some success elsewhere. I think the environment changed. And Notre Dame had to face being a key game in everyone's schedule without the motivation of a conference championship themselves.

Willingham was medicore at Stanford then went on to castrate Washington, Davie was so successful that he didn't get a job till New Mexico went after him a couple years ago, Weis was so awesome that he did worse then Turner Gill which is quite the accomplishment. ND failed so miserably at finding a coach that the law of averages has to come into play at sometime.

It's a shame that ND let O'leary go after the resume fiasco because that may have saved us from the abyss.

Yeah, thanks for that btw.

(03-04-2015 09:34 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:49 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 12:47 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 12:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  I don't think there's any way Texas could make independence in football work. I don't think they have any interest, although its likely they have explored the option. I think it would be very bad for Texas sports, just as I think Notre Dame football has been diminished, and will gradually continue to be, by remaining independent.

We disagree here. I think that ND football, to the extent it was "diminished", was because of a series of bad coaching hires and an administration that was content to cash the football checks but felt guilty about going "all in" as a "football factory".

I don't think that conference membership had a thing to do with it.

There's certainly an argument for that, but it lasted 20 years from Holtz to Kelly. That's a lot of bad decisions for a program of ND's caliber. Davie and Willingham had some success elsewhere. I think the environment changed. And Notre Dame had to face being a key game in everyone's schedule without the motivation of a conference championship themselves.

Willingham was medicore at Stanford then went on to castrate Washington, Davie was so successful that he didn't get a job till New Mexico went after him a couple years ago, Weis was so awesome that he did worse then Turner Gill which is quite the accomplishment. ND failed so miserably at finding a coach that the law of averages has to come into play at sometime.

It's a shame that ND let O'leary go after the resume fiasco because that may have saved us from the abyss.

Yeah, thanks for that btw.

Willingham was the hottest commodity out there after Stanford. It was 8 years before they had another winning season. Davie was very successful as DC. Hard to take another gig after a job like ND.

(03-04-2015 10:17 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 09:34 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:49 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 12:47 PM)TerryD Wrote:  We disagree here. I think that ND football, to the extent it was "diminished", was because of a series of bad coaching hires and an administration that was content to cash the football checks but felt guilty about going "all in" as a "football factory".

I don't think that conference membership had a thing to do with it.

There's certainly an argument for that, but it lasted 20 years from Holtz to Kelly. That's a lot of bad decisions for a program of ND's caliber. Davie and Willingham had some success elsewhere. I think the environment changed. And Notre Dame had to face being a key game in everyone's schedule without the motivation of a conference championship themselves.

Willingham was medicore at Stanford then went on to castrate Washington, Davie was so successful that he didn't get a job till New Mexico went after him a couple years ago, Weis was so awesome that he did worse then Turner Gill which is quite the accomplishment. ND failed so miserably at finding a coach that the law of averages has to come into play at sometime.

It's a shame that ND let O'leary go after the resume fiasco because that may have saved us from the abyss.

Yeah, thanks for that btw.

Willingham was the hottest commodity out there after Stanford. It was 8 years before they had another winning season. Davie was very successful as DC. Hard to take another gig after a job like ND.

Weis got a job easily, Willingham got a job andboth failed miserably . Hot commodity, whatever. So hot he was a desperation hire, the main didn't recruit while here, look at his rankings. He is/was legendry for his golf game while here.

Thoughts on 1 loss teams in playoff:

1. I agree with the logic that if you lose, don't complain. Ohio State could have been left out this year and they would have had nothing to complain about as they lost to Virginia Tech which meant they left themselves open to the splitting hairs arguments at the end of the season. If you lose a game, you are lucky if you get a second chance.

2. The notation that 12-1 is a much bigger deal than 11-1 is something I don't agree with at all. The committee had undefeated Florida State at #3. They will have no issue at all in putting an 11-1 team over a 12-1 team if they think the 11-1 team is better. This year if Baylor had lost one more game and it had been 11-1 TCU vs. 12-1 Ohio State, I think TCU would have gotten the nod (although it's debatable). Baylor had the tie breaker over TCU though and the committee liked Ohio State better than Baylor.

(03-04-2015 10:17 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 09:34 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:49 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 12:47 PM)TerryD Wrote:  We disagree here. I think that ND football, to the extent it was "diminished", was because of a series of bad coaching hires and an administration that was content to cash the football checks but felt guilty about going "all in" as a "football factory".

I don't think that conference membership had a thing to do with it.

There's certainly an argument for that, but it lasted 20 years from Holtz to Kelly. That's a lot of bad decisions for a program of ND's caliber. Davie and Willingham had some success elsewhere. I think the environment changed. And Notre Dame had to face being a key game in everyone's schedule without the motivation of a conference championship themselves.

Willingham was medicore at Stanford then went on to castrate Washington, Davie was so successful that he didn't get a job till New Mexico went after him a couple years ago, Weis was so awesome that he did worse then Turner Gill which is quite the accomplishment. ND failed so miserably at finding a coach that the law of averages has to come into play at sometime.

It's a shame that ND let O'leary go after the resume fiasco because that may have saved us from the abyss.

Yeah, thanks for that btw.

Willingham was the hottest commodity out there after Stanford. It was 8 years before they had another winning season. Davie was very successful as DC. Hard to take another gig after a job like ND.

Davie and Weis were never head coaches prior to the ND job, which is about the worst place to try to get OJT.

It reminds me of when ND (after Dan Devine and an NC three years earlier) hired a high school coach.....grrrrrrr.

Willingham was a mediocre 44-36-1 at Stanford. His best season was in 1999 when Stanford went 9-3 during a down Southern Cal period.

He hardly set the world on fire in the Pac 10.

At Washington, he went 11-37, including an 0-12 season. He almost single handedly destroyed Washington Husky football.

The ND job requires lots of previous head coaching experience. Ara Parseghian said that he needed every moment of his previous head coaching experience to prepare him for the demands of the ND job.

How did Charlie Weis do at Kansas, you ask? He went 6-22.

Bob Davie is 11-26 at New Mexico......

Ask yourself if you would be thrilled if the school you root for hired Weis, Davie or Willingham today as its next head coach.

I think that those would be considered the three worst head coaching hires in a row at any major university, much less at Notre Dame.

(03-04-2015 08:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 08:26 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 06:12 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 05:28 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As I said, if the CFP expands to 8 teams. As it stands, a 1 loss ND as ACC champ, I believe, would be in (assuming there aren't 4 undefeated teams).

If the CFP expands to that size then there will be even less reason for Notre Dame to fully join the ACC so I am sorry but what you said is wrong no matter how many times you say it. ND doesn't need to be ACC champ in order to get into an 8 team tournament therefore they don't need to join the ACC fully in football.

As an independent, ND will never play 13 games. A 1-loss conference champ will get the nod over a 1-loss independent if for no other reason than the extra game.

And that is fine. Try again next year. Don't lose any games.

Didn't mean to ruffle anyone's feathers - just trying to see if there's any logical reason ND would join the ACC. Apparently there isn't, but that doesn't mean it won't happen - we've seen stranger things.

(03-05-2015 08:31 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 10:17 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 09:34 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:49 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 03:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  There's certainly an argument for that, but it lasted 20 years from Holtz to Kelly. That's a lot of bad decisions for a program of ND's caliber. Davie and Willingham had some success elsewhere. I think the environment changed. And Notre Dame had to face being a key game in everyone's schedule without the motivation of a conference championship themselves.

Willingham was medicore at Stanford then went on to castrate Washington, Davie was so successful that he didn't get a job till New Mexico went after him a couple years ago, Weis was so awesome that he did worse then Turner Gill which is quite the accomplishment. ND failed so miserably at finding a coach that the law of averages has to come into play at sometime.

It's a shame that ND let O'leary go after the resume fiasco because that may have saved us from the abyss.

Yeah, thanks for that btw.

Willingham was the hottest commodity out there after Stanford. It was 8 years before they had another winning season. Davie was very successful as DC. Hard to take another gig after a job like ND.

Davie and Weis were never head coaches prior to the ND job, which is about the worst place to try to get OJT.

It reminds me of when ND (after Dan Devine and an NC three years earlier) hired a high school coach.....grrrrrrr.

Willingham was a mediocre 44-36-1 at Stanford. His best season was in 1999 when Stanford went 9-3 during a down Southern Cal period.

He hardly set the world on fire in the Pac 10.

At Washington, he went 11-37, including an 0-12 season. He almost single handedly destroyed Washington Husky football.

The ND job requires lots of previous head coaching experience. Ara Parseghian said that he needed every moment of his previous head coaching experience to prepare him for the demands of the ND job.

How did Charlie Weis do at Kansas, you ask? He went 6-22.

Bob Davie is 11-26 at New Mexico......

Ask yourself if you would be thrilled if the school you root for hired Weis, Davie or Willingham today as its next head coach.

I think that those would be considered the three worst head coaching hires in a row at any major university, much less at Notre Dame.

You broke it down much then I did. :)