FanDuel - WFBC

January 04, 2007

Notre Dame makes history: and LSU comes away with a big Sugar Bowl win. LSU defeated Notre Dame 41-14 in the Sugar Bowl's return to the Superdome, and handed Notre Dame its ninth straight bowl loss which is the most in NCAA history.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia to football at 04:53 PM - 54 comments

ND fans should be giving [Quinn] a very nice pat on the back on the way out the door, saying honest thanks for a job pretty well done, and praying they find someone better if they want to actually earn their way into the BCS in the future. --me, a couple weeks ago My sports predictions are so rarely right that I feel I need to crow a little here...

posted by tieguy at 04:58 PM on January 04

What is the country's fascination with seeing Notre Dame in the spotlight? That team had no business being in that bowl game, not just because they were destroyed, but because they just weren't that good. And as a Raiders fan, I'm hoping Brady Quinn is not the first pick. That guy reminds me too much of Rex Grossman. Ugh.

posted by forrestv at 05:15 PM on January 04

Curious to see how draft stocks get affected by this game. Russell looked great (though I still think he takes too long to make decisions -- he will half that time in the NFL and probably less if he's an early pick by a team with a woeful line) and his statline blew Quinn's out of the water. Though it is critical to note the defenses that each quarterback faced: Quinn, one of the league's better defenses, while Russell threw against a high school's. While I've seen plenty of Samardzija on the field, I'm not too acquainted with his personality. After this game though, I was left wondering: will Samardzija become a troublemaker for the team that drafts him? It seems that every shot of him had him trash-talking. Emotion is great, but not being able to contain it could spell problems.

posted by PublicUrinal at 05:17 PM on January 04

I agree with forrestv....I certainly haven't understood why in the world Notre Dame is and has been so beloved by the media. All three of the "bluechip" teams that they played this past season, hung a 40 spot on them, not to mention that they needed a furious and luck-filled rally to beat the Michigan State juggernaut this year (and if memory serves...MS put up 37 on them.) Maybe now (but I doubt it!), the media goofs will figure out that a Gold Helmet and a PAST TRADITION of excellance, should mean very little in the determination of whether a team should be considered as top ten team.

posted by R_A_Mason at 06:20 PM on January 04

While I've seen plenty of Samardzija on the field, I'm not too acquainted with his personality. After this game though, I was left wondering: will Samardzija become a troublemaker for the team that drafts him? It seems that every shot of him had him trash-talking. Emotion is great, but not being able to contain it could spell problems. I can't figure out if Samardzija is a very good player or if he is just greatly benefits from Notre Dame's offensive scheme. He doesn't appear to be very fast, but seems to have a nose for the end zone and could be a good possession receiver and red zone target. He has a tough choice to make, though, between the $7MM+ guaranteed by the Cubs if he opts for baseball only, and the potential for more money in the NFL but a lot more risk (no guaranteed money outside of any signing bonus). And sorry to the Domers in our midst, but Notre Dame has just embarrassed itself in every BCS game it has played in thus far. Notre Dame will not break the 9-game bowl losing streak until it starts getting slotted into where it belongs, which is the next level of bowl games down or even the one after that. Of course, a lot of those games have conference tie-ins, so maybe Notre Dame is out of luck for some of them.

posted by holden at 06:41 PM on January 04

Notre Dame had no business in a BCS game considering its ranking and this showed. Wisconsin would have at least given LSU a game. The rule stated in the BCS that no conference can have more than two teams is a sham when an existing rule states ND is eligible if ranked in the top 25. What makes such an ordinary team eligible when a good team is exempt is beyond me!

posted by brownindian at 07:12 PM on January 04

notre dame gets too much credit for beating up on navy,army,air force etc.if not for ucla giving them a game,they couldn't have crawled into a bcs bowl.I think it is such crap that just because they have a huge following,and draw big crowds that they get an automatic bcs bid if they finish in the top 8.they used to be good,but not anymore,they continue to get whacked by really good teams who deserve to be in the major bowls.the people who run the bcs should show some balls,and make notre dame have to be in the top 4 to get an automatic berth.if that happens,they won't make it.clap,clap,clap.clap,clap-OVER-RATED

posted by mars1 at 08:15 PM on January 04

I was embarrassed for the Irish and myself for watching. They have a great past, but you can't play in the past. I thought Weis could really pull the Irish up and into a powerhouse again. I guess I'll just have to wait a couple of years. How long will Charlie last at ND, anyone?

posted by lil'red at 08:17 PM on January 04

OMFG, we get it. Thanks for the news. This Notre Dame fan went to sleep at halftime, safe in the knowledge that was as good as it would get. Samardzija's no troublemaker; I think the team was a little wound up on the disrespect tip (and now they know why). He's a decent receiver, but I'd be leery of taking him before the 3rd or 4th round, though his tag team partner from last year was drafted fairly high on the basis of one solid season. If anyone in this thread seriously doesn't know why ND has lost 9 straight bowl games and finds themselves in bowl games they don't belong in, here's an answer: $. If that's too subtle: $$$. It has 0 to do with the media's love. How 'bout that QB. LSU's.

posted by yerfatma at 08:19 PM on January 04

Notre Dame had no business in a BCS game considering its ranking and this showed. Wisconsin would have at least given LSU a game. The rule stated in the BCS that no conference can have more than two teams is a sham when an existing rule states ND is eligible if ranked in the top 25. What makes such an ordinary team eligible when a good team is exempt is beyond me! It is beyond me as well! Why doesn't Notre Dame just have their own bowl game every year? They could call it the Corporate Greed Bowl.

posted by danjel at 08:22 PM on January 04

They could call it the Corporate Greed Bowl. Yeah, because all the other bowls are pure as the driven snow. I don't like ND's special treatment either, but Fedex me a Taco Bell break.

posted by tieguy at 08:40 PM on January 04

If anyone in this thread seriously doesn't know why ND has lost 9 straight bowl games and finds themselves in bowl games they don't belong in, here's an answer: $. If that's too subtle: $$$. It has 0 to do with the media's love. This, in spades. (Notre Dame fans) + (Notre Dame haters) >> (People who will watch any other team) Which is why ND has been invited to all of these bowls where they are typically underdogs. However, if you were ND, would you honestly say "No thanks, Sugar Bowl committee- we'd rather go to the Poulan Weed-Eater Bowl and play danjel's Alma Mater: Southwest South Dakota State Beautician's Academy." (I'm terribly sorry, but I couldn't help myself. Sarcasm is balm to my domer wounds.)

posted by avogadro at 10:09 PM on January 04

Notre Dame is the only school in the nation that can create its own set of rules, yet still lose bowl games consistently. The BCS even caters to them. If they finish in the top 12 they get an automatic BCS Bowl bid. Way to go Golden Domers! Nine straight and counting. Imagine if UNC or Duke basketball said they will play as an independent in basketball because they can get a bigger and better TV contract, be seen all the time and not have to share the revenue. Yet they will play in a major conference for all other sports so that they can share the revenue in those sports since they aren't as good in them. Hypocrisy University loses again and I don't care how much money they bring in, even if thats all they care about.

posted by urall cloolis at 10:16 PM on January 04

The only reason ND made a BCS bowl this year was because the BCS added a bowl game, which added two more teams. This put Boise State in (which showed it deserved it) and instead of another deserving team ND. With the current BCS rules, it is not unlikely that ND will make a BCS bowl almost every year that it is bowl eligible. Of course with its undeserved following (the Catholics where I work are ND crazy though they never went to the school), virtually any other bowl would love to have them. I would like to see them go back to the Ara era when they sometimes refused bowl invitations because they simply did not believe they deserved to go to a bowl. But money rules.

posted by graymatters at 11:02 PM on January 04

It's the same reason why tv execs pray for either Boston or the Yankees to have a long playoff run, ideally ending up with a divisional championship between the two. The media alone doesn't allow ND to negotiate its own TV contract and conference status, even if they have a soft schedule and get whipped in bowls. ND's television contract means that its games get shown in your TV region, regardless of where you live. That fact means that the games get watched and written up and coaches pay more attention to them when it's poll time. Perhaps you can point to the media's role in forgetting every bowl shellacking by the start of the next season, or in the pre-season ranking, but there are enough people who have ND as their second-ranked loved or hated team to keep the wheel turning.

posted by etagloh at 12:50 AM on January 05

With the current BCS rules, it is not unlikely that ND will make a BCS bowl almost every year that it is bowl eligible. Of course with its undeserved following (the Catholics where I work are ND crazy though they never went to the school) Given Notre Dame's admission into a BCS bowl is basically written into the rules, it is "not unlikely". Can you explain to me what is wrong with Catholics who didn't go to ND rooting for the team?

posted by yerfatma at 06:51 AM on January 05

So, if I'm a Mormon, I can't root for BYU unless I go to school there? I didn't go to Notre Dame, but I do root for the school, and I am Catholic. Apparently, now I'm violating Greymatters' Laws Regarding Football and Religious Interaction. WTF?

posted by The_Black_Hand at 07:23 AM on January 05

There are other schools that Catholics could root for like BC and Georgetown, you know.

posted by bperk at 07:57 AM on January 05

Holy Cross demands a recount.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 07:59 AM on January 05

Baylor and it's Baptist following, are in an uproar, too. And The Disciples of Christ that did not attend TCU are pissed as well! And lets not mention those troublemakin' Methodists of SMU!

posted by mjkredliner at 08:25 AM on January 05

There are other schools that Catholics could root for like BC and Georgetown, you know. They haven't been as recognizable in sports for as long. I like Georgetown just fine, though for a familial connection, not a religious one: my dad went to PC (a Catholic school!) when John Thompson was there, so he was a fan of the man. I live too close to BC to ever be a fan. I am a fan of Notre Dame for one reason: my grandfather. He didn't go to school there either. But before he ever went to any college, he had to go to public school in Newport, RI back in the days when it was still acceptable for his teacher to say "And all you Papists say the end of the Pledge too." So Notre Dame represented something meaningful and important to him. It's not like that front fist on the mascot is some theoretical thing. They just took the nose of the other guy out of the picture. Or he's already on the floor. So be damned to anyone that wants to pull my alumni card for rooting for a school that now represents the success of the Irish and Catholics in this country. You don't like it, call a cop. Write your local politician. Call a priest. You may well find similar success with any of those options.

posted by yerfatma at 08:29 AM on January 05

Notre Dame, at the very least, should be mandated to join a conference. This independent crap has run it's course. If they can make it through a bonafide conference schedule, then maybe everyone would have a bit more of a handle on how they really stack up. I realize everything Notre Dame does revolves around money, and changing their current schedule, and whatever, is not easily done. But it needs to happen. All these SEC teams having to beat each other's brains in to either rise up the rankings or qualify for the conference championship, while the Irish can still basically name their schedule. It's crap in this BCS era we're living in.

posted by dyams at 09:59 AM on January 05

You should blame the Big East for making it so easy for Notre Dame to not join a conference. Notre Dame would have to join a conference if the Big East didn't let them be in their conference for all other sports. They also let them have Big East tie-ins for bowl games. It's a nice deal they have. They have very little incentive to join and lots of revenue that would have to be shared.

posted by bperk at 10:26 AM on January 05

Rooting for Georgetown football?? Hahahahhaahhaahahahhhaaa..... whew. That was a good one. Thanks for that. Maybe if we can get a handle on the Patriot League competition down in 1-AA we might pick up a few Catholic fans. Until then, I'll be supporting Charlie Weis along with the rest of the Papists.

posted by Venicemenace at 10:50 AM on January 05

the media goofs will figure out that a Gold Helmet Hey, the University of Colorado has that! Why shouldn't they get the same treatment?! and a PAST TRADITION of excellance (sic) Oh, yeah, I guess there is THAT. Ummm, never mind. (I am a CU alum, btw)

posted by cobrajet at 11:10 AM on January 05

They have very little incentive to join and lots of revenue that would have to be shared. It shouldn't be their choice. I can't believe all the other schools, conferences, etc., don't complain about it. Screw N.D.'s money-making enterprise. When they get selected to go into a big-time bowl game, playing as the marquee (only) event of that evening, in a game they had no business whatsoever being in, it's like the rest of the BCS is being manipulated, big time!

posted by dyams at 11:13 AM on January 05

Why shouldn't it be their choice if they are in a conference or not? They like to play certain teams every year (U of M, MSU, Navy, USC) and playing in a conference wouldn't allow that. The have traditions to uphold. They also have absolutely no reason to join one. Financial? Ha! They'd lose their lucrative national tv contract with NBC and have to split revenues with everyone else. Nope, Notre Dame football is going to stay independent for the forseeable future. The reason the BCS "coddles" them is because it makes sense to. ND has a huge following, a storied tradition, and every year they are a draw. If you want to say its bad football for them to be in a marquee bowl, fine. But not many other teams would want to play in a bowl competing for airtime against ND because they'd lose.

posted by apoch at 12:54 PM on January 05

I just wonder if anyone knows the graduation rate on the "OTHER" teams, such as FSU, LSU, Alabama etc. I do believe Duke and Notre Dame are right up there in the percentages. I'm talking about the graduation rate of the athletes! And lets not count the degrees in Ceramics and under water basket weaving.

posted by Senior33 at 01:59 PM on January 05

notre dame is bad and we all know it and we also know it had nothing to do with ty willingham but as long as you good ol boys keep standing behind that over rated crap they will continue to get their butts kicked by real talent like LSU, USC, Ohio St., and all the other great teams that employ real coaches and expect believable results

posted by byrdman822 at 02:10 PM on January 05

They like to play certain teams every year (U of M, MSU, Navy, USC) and playing in a conference wouldn't allow that. Oh wouldn't it? USC, MSU & UofM get to play Notre Dame don't they? And the Big Ten had been in negotiations with ND to admit them to the Big Ten, which would have taken care of MSU and UofM. There's four non-conf games available now, so USC, Navy are not a problem. You could probably add Boston College in there too if you really wanted. What I don't understand is why any ND fans would rather see ND stay independent. It'd be better for the team and fans if they dumped their BCS priveleges and joined a conference. They'd end up in better bowl matchups and would probably improve the quality of their football too, not only ending their streak of futility by winning a lower tier bowl, but also improving such that they might actually earn a higher tier bowl shot that they would actually have a chance of winning.

posted by ursus_comiter at 03:25 PM on January 05

Damn, too slow on that edit window of opportunity. privileges.

posted by ursus_comiter at 03:33 PM on January 05

If anyone in this thread seriously doesn't know why ND has lost 9 straight bowl games and finds themselves in bowl games they don't belong in, here's an answer: $. If that's too subtle: $$$. It has 0 to do with the media's love. Thank you yerfatma, simple, eloquent, and accurate. However, i think that it might be possible for Charlie Weiss to make this team a "legitimate" contender. That assuming that a) he stays long enough, and b) he gets a defense. I am curious to see what they look like in a few years. Probably overrated still, but hopefully not. If they are going to be on my screen every week, hopefully they'll be worth watching.

posted by brainofdtrain at 03:34 PM on January 05

If he could get Ty Willingham back as D-coordinator, they might be ok.

posted by yerfatma at 03:40 PM on January 05

I apologize about my "Catholic" comment. It was really a reaction to some of my co-workers. They can root for whomever they want and support whichever school they want. And continue to get drubbed year after year after year.

posted by graymatters at 04:27 PM on January 05

I don't mind ND being in a bowl game, because there is only one bowl game that matters with the current AFU system. And they're not in it. All other bowl games are just background noise to me. Consolation games.

posted by smithnyiu at 06:18 PM on January 05

Notre Dame, at the very least, should be mandated to join a conference. It shouldn't be their choice. *stares* Anyways, there is no fiscal reason for Notre Dame to drop its independent status. Notre Dame is one of the very few schools where football revenues are a net positive contributor to the general fund. Most Div 1-A schools lose money on football (with the false assumption that increased alumni giving will make football programs pay for themselves.) Because ND makes money through the football team, she's able to field a full complement of varsity sports, despite having fewer than 10,000 undergraduates. I was there when the NBC contract was signed, and one could immediately see "Olympic sport" facility improvements that came about because of the influx of cash. That contract is probably the biggest reason that the men's and women's soccer and basketball programs increased their competitiveness, the hockey program went from a club sport to the CCHA, interhall sports became more robust, etc. An independent ND football team is good for ND athletics overall. This doesn't negate the fact that the current BCS system is irredeemably broken, but it does explain why ND has no reason to lobby for the system to be changed. And, as long as the other BCS conferences remain satisfied with the status quo (as evidenced by the profound silence from the Big Ten, Southeast Conference, etc.), nothing is going to change.

posted by avogadro at 10:57 PM on January 05

Anyways, there is no fiscal reason for Notre Dame to drop its independent status. There's absolutely no fiscal reason for them to drop their independent status, because their followers will blindly support them until the end of time. The fans will have to allow themselves to continue to be duped, though, because their football talent is poor, overall. They will continue beating weak teams on their schedule that they should beat, and losing to the decent teams. Maybe if Boise State would have been forunate enough to draw the Irish in a bowl game (and hammer them), it would have proven once and for all Notre Dame should never again have the opportunity to play for the national championship. Boise, yes; Notre Dame, no.

posted by dyams at 06:33 PM on January 06

their followers will blindly support them until the end of time And, what, exactly, are a team's fans supposed to do? I have no illusions about what this year's squad was capable of, and their performance against good teams was embarrassing, but I support them because I always have and always will. Do you just decide to stop supporting the Nittany Lions because they suck once in a while, or because the Irish handed them their asses earlier this year? If you've got any loyalty at all, no, you don't. Notre Dame should never again have the opportunity to play for the national championship. Yeah, and until he can get the hell out of the way of the players, Joe Paterno should never again be allowed to coach. What do both of these statements have in common? They're both completely asinine.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 09:24 AM on January 07

Paterno can still get his team, even in years when his talent is inferior, to show up during a bowl game a beat a better team, like they did against Tennessee several days ago. And what I said regarding the fans blindly supporting them wasn't a knock against the fans. It's more a knock against Notre Dame being satisfied with the status quo, and the BCS being concerned with money, period, and not the fact they're assuming all football fans are idiots and can't see through them shoving a poor team down our throats in one of the bigger bowl games.

posted by dyams at 12:05 PM on January 07

because their football talent is poor, overall. Definitely, at least compared to less than 10 other schools in the country. And not the same ten every year. would have proven once and for all Notre Dame should never again have the opportunity to play for the national championship The question we need to ask here is, are you blinded by your dislike or just poorly informed?

posted by yerfatma at 01:55 PM on January 07

I'm not blinded by my dislike, but I'm capable of looking at it impartially. The problem is I'm now speaking to two Notre Dame fans. The longest bowl drought in NCAA history seems to be pointing at something. Losing the most prolific passer (statistically) in the school's history, their top receiver, and looking terribly slow against LSU, means aiming to be a top-10 program might wind up being a reach again.

posted by dyams at 02:38 PM on January 07

Regardless of my allegiance, what exactly could prove a team never again belongs in a championship?

posted by yerfatma at 02:42 PM on January 07

it would have proven once and for all Notre Dame should never again have the opportunity to play for the national championship Did you realize that the Michigan Wolverines didn't win a National Championship for 49 years (1948-1997), after winning 10 times the previous 48 years? So by your logic, Michigan should never have been given a chance to win the national title because they were so inept at doing so for so long.

posted by grum@work at 04:39 PM on January 07

Maybe that was a bit of a strong statement, but regardless of how much cash the program generates, on the field they're not an elite program anymore (on the field). The only thing that really bothers me about Irish football is their being independent, and being their own little island in the entire BCS only adds to the joke the system has become. I think the other teams the schools field being aligned with the Big East is wrong, and the Irish should be part of the Big Ten. If they continually dominate a particular division, year in year out, I think that gives them a legitimacy they've sort of lacked the past several years. As for Michigan, if they can't get through the Big 10 (as well as their non-conference schedule), then of course they shouldn't compete for the championship. I can't comment on that, though, because I honesty can't stand Michigan.

posted by dyams at 04:46 PM on January 07

they're not an elite program anymore (on the field). What's an "elite" program by your standards then?

posted by yerfatma at 04:58 PM on January 07

Winning a bowl game since 1993 would be one of the initial criteria.

posted by dyams at 05:35 PM on January 07

Argue with smart man, can't win. Argue with stupid man, can't stop. I leave it to the reader to decide which one dyams is.

posted by avogadro at 09:48 PM on January 07

I suggest the NCAA or the BCS have Notre Dame and Michigan play each other in the Losers Bowl so that one of them is assured a bowl victory. It would end in a tie.

posted by NoSpin at 10:07 PM on January 07

Winning a bowl game since 1993 would be one of the initial criteria. So no team without a bowl victory since 1993 should ever again be eligible for a title? And are we accepting any bowl victory or just BCS ones? It seems a shame that Notre Dame could have avoided your Death Penalty by just signing up for the Weed Eater Bowl one of those years.

posted by yerfatma at 06:15 AM on January 08

I admitted above the "Never be eligible for a national championship" comment was too harsh. Whether it's the Gator Bowl, the Independence Bowl, the Insight Bowl, or one of the bigger ones, they've found a way to lose them, often by a large margin. With a recent history of coaching changes (and failures), padding their winning percentage against mediocre teams (and yes, Penn State this year was mediocre, at best), and losing bowl games so many straight seasons, the evidence seems to be mainly on the side of what I'm saying. For a team that brings in money in a Brinks truck, and has NBC in it's pocket, I just expected more. As for avogadro's comment, I guess I can pretty much decide which part of his post he aligns himself with. He's apparently another Golden Domer. I appreciate the Notre Dame fans' loyalty. Also, "Rudy" is honestly one of my all-time favorite movies. Their tradition is unmatched, so it would be good to see them enjoy future success (in the Big Ten, if I had my way). It wasn't too long ago when I posted that Charley Weis should be Sportsman of the Year for going from helping the Pats win another championship, to experiencing some initial success with the Irish. It's not a personal attack on the program, just my own higher expectations for them. I don't have to be a die-hard Domer to feel that way.

posted by dyams at 07:15 AM on January 08

I suggest the NCAA or the BCS have Notre Dame and Michigan play each other in the Losers Bowl so that one of them is assured a bowl victory. It would end in a tie. You obviously missed this game back in September. padding their winning percentage against mediocre teams (and yes, Penn State this year was mediocre, at best) All of the top programs in college football pad their winning percentage against mediocre teams. Michigan played Ball State and Florida played Western Carolina. Scheduling three or four top tier teams doesn't make sense if a team wishes to make the championship game.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 09:50 AM on January 08

All of the top programs in college football pad their winning percentage against mediocre teams. Absolutely. But you expect the top teams to be able to beat at least one (or more) of the really good teams on the schedule, too.

posted by dyams at 11:35 AM on January 08

Of course. They aren't a top team if they can't.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 05:24 PM on January 08

dyams, I'm not at all "blinded" by my own affiliation. If you paid any attention to what I said in this thread and in the past, you would see that I am in favor of a playoff system and for the abolishment of the BCS system as we know it. Also, you would understand why any college in ND's position would be absolutely negligent if they passed up opportunities to bring additional funding to their athletics programs. I doubt that if Penn State were in ND's position that you would support passing up on the lucrative contracts. My frustration with you is that all of your arguments are either based in fictions (Notre Dame plays such an easy schedule compared to other teams) or are contradictory to your own assertions, namely that teams like Boise State should have a greater chance to play in prestigious bowl games than Notre Dame and... uh... Notre Dame. If the BCS partners followed your recommendations, namely that teams that have recently lost numerous bowl games, play inferior schedules, and have a record of losing to top-ranked teams , then we would end up with... the exact same system we had before mid-major conferences could compete in BCS bowls.

posted by avogadro at 07:02 AM on January 09

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.