Just in case you were wondering, over the last 10 years (1999 thru 2008) the domers are the 30th best team of the 66 BCS teams. (based on their W/L record).
this week in unintentionally grim-sounding recruiting headlines
I would assume that it's similar...
but 2000-2009, M is 81-43, ND is 70-52.
Which isn't that much better than 30th or whatever ND is...
Honestly people get off your high horse don't cast stones from a glass house and all that jazz...
or 10-2 would be one of the top 5 jobs for a coach in college football, and get more pub and respect than any other program at that level. People are kidding themselves if they don't see huge potential for the right coach to make that program great. They now have first class facilities, still recruit well--better than we do--and get more press than anyone else. There is huge potential at ND.
No, its more like the Olympics. Its not really that interesting, but it occurs, whether you want it to or not, every four years. And they both get a lot of hype from NBC.
Three coaches in the decade
High Acedemic standards
Poor defensive recruiting
There is four reasons. Pick your favorite. My choice is #2.
We aren't really in any position to cast that stone. ND is a team that has fallen far from its former glory and that often justifies in national relevance based upon its former national championships and accomplishments. Sounds familiar (although our "irrelevance" has been far shorter than ND's).
I cringe every time I hear this comparison. the parallels drive a metaphorical hot iron into my urethra. hopefully rich rod turns it around so i do not have endure this torture.
Out of curiosity, why is ND a BCS team? They're not in a conference, why should they be considered a BCS team? What other schools get this special consideration?
PS, no knock on you (obviously) but holy hell, how many Notre Dame threads do we need about this job search? Should there be a temporary section for that?
With that record only a team of ND's stature could still rate so much attention from fans and media. I hate 'em, but they're far from irrelevant. They could turn it around very soon if they make the right choice for head coach this time.
Notre Dame is relevant as long as...
a) They're getting top recruits
b) They're talked about frequently by the national media
c) They have the money to pay for elite coaches
d) They're playing Michigan every year
e) Their QB is being talked about as a Heisman contender
Check, check, check, check, and check.
They may not be good, but they're relevant. That program has the talent and ability to win 10, 11, or 12 games if it's used correctly. The fact that so many people on this board are saying "PLEASE GOD NO I DON'T WANT BRIAN KELLY TO COACH NOTRE DAME" is pretty good indication that they're not far away.
The fact that there are so many posts on this blog (and the blogs of Cincy, Stanford, Ok., and a whole host of other "relevant" programs) about ND's coaching search would in and of itself demonstrate their relevance. How many other schools could pull in the talent that they have pulled in after some pretty bad seasons?
f) By contract, every home game is nationally televised
"irrelevant" and "unsuccessful"
Stop. This argument is ridiculous. You are posting about them. Anytime you make this argument about a topic, you have lost already. Start posting about whether Bowling Green is irrelevant, and then we'll talk.
By the way, from 1999-2008, Notre Dame has the #42 winning percentage of FBS schools.
Michigan is tied for #14.
good one, whatever helps you sleep at night
Who sees Irony in this post.
Its like posting, "Why do people keep talking about Tiger Woods banging chicks that aren't his wife?"
is a complete idiot. Anyone who thinks they are irrelevant is probably just trying to prove something to themselves, seeing as how the sports media and a Michigan football blog are both blowing up with speculation about their new coach.
We play ND through 2031 and until then they're going to be our only serious non-conference contender, thus if you're a fan of Michigan football you should want Notre Dame to have a strong program every year to test our program early and improve our SOS. If you disagree with this then you have to argue that it wasn't wise for OSU to play Texas and USC the past few years; arguments which I don't think I'll entertain. If you're in the "death to rivals" camp then pick on a conference rival that we fight for Rose Bowl and at-large BCS bids like PSU and OSU.
I'm excited about the prospect of Kelly at ND and I'm hoping that 15 years from now we're looking back at a modern Ten Year War between RR and BK.
By far the most intelligent comment in this entire thread. I agree completely.
I hate ND with the white-hot intensity of 1,000 suns, but I do agree--like OSU--that there is a somewhat symbiotic relationship between us and ND
To say ND is irrelevant ignores the fact that currently 6 out of 10 new threads on the side bar are about this very school and their coaching search. That will of course change in a couple of seconds when the next "ND to hire______" is inevitably posted......Well that or K06 posting another f'ing depth chart just so he can neg everyone who responds.
Sorry, but even when ND sucks for fifteen years, they are still more relevant on a national scale than the teams that are winning National Championships. There has probably been more written about the ND coaching situation the last week than any other sports story, even the attempted dismantling of the formerly "squeaky clean" Tiger Woods.
That is why I beileve UM fans should want ND to be good enough to be perennially overrated, but not quite good enough to beat UM on a regular basis.