Started By
Message
re: Notre Dame's defense/special teams: A detailed look
Posted on 12/19/12 at 9:35 pm to Buckeye Fan 19
Posted on 12/19/12 at 9:35 pm to Buckeye Fan 19
quote:
1) Calling Stanford and Oklahoma "decent" is wrong.
2) You say ND's record is a product of the schedule, yet it's better than Bama's, according to most rankings. That's my main point. I just think you underrate the strength of ND's schedule (or, perhaps, overrate Bama's a little).
Oklahoma is over rated. What was their best win? Texas? Texas Tech? Oklahoma State? It's a good win for ND but don't act like they were better than good. Their 10-2 record is just as much a product of their schedule as ND's record.
Stanford was a quality win. I don't think they're as strong as they were the last couple of years, but to me, that was your best win.
ND wouldn't be playing in a BCS bowl much less in the BCSCG if they had to play the rigors of an SEC schedule. Bama had to play numbers 7, 8 and 9 just within the conference and that number 9 will show just how over rated Oklahoma is.
I can tell you, there is a huge difference between Alabama, Georgia and A&M (and I would presume LSU but we didn't play them)and a soft 10-2 Oklahoma team. So yes, your strength of schedule is going to get bumped from playing a soft 10-2 team when in reality Oklahoma probably would have been the 5th, maybe 4th, toughest opponent on Bama's schedule, and that's being generous.
2
Posted on 12/20/12 at 12:25 pm to reedus23
quote:
Oklahoma is over rated. What was their best win? Texas? Texas Tech? Oklahoma State? It's a good win for ND but don't act like they were better than good. Their 10-2 record is just as much a product of their schedule as ND's record.
Stanford was a quality win. I don't think they're as strong as they were the last couple of years, but to me, that was your best win.
ND wouldn't be playing in a BCS bowl much less in the BCSCG if they had to play the rigors of an SEC schedule. Bama had to play numbers 7, 8 and 9 just within the conference and that number 9 will show just how over rated Oklahoma is.
I can tell you, there is a huge difference between Alabama, Georgia and A&M (and I would presume LSU but we didn't play them)and a soft 10-2 Oklahoma team. So yes, your strength of schedule is going to get bumped from playing a soft 10-2 team when in reality Oklahoma probably would have been the 5th, maybe 4th, toughest opponent on Bama's schedule, and that's being generous.
How do you know there's a difference between LSU and A&M and UGA and a team like Oklahoma? I don't mean that sarcastically. It's basically your opinion. Again, their schedule is more highly regarded overall than those teams.
Look at how A&M did throughout their schedule. They beat ONE top 25 team (Alabama). Lost to the other top 25 teams they played. Struggled mightily with La Tech, could have easily lost to Ole Miss. A two-loss team that beat ZERO other top-25 teams and struggled with two average at best teams won AT Alabama. But ND, who went undefeated and beat two top-11 teams can't win at a neutral site? What if OU just so happens to beat A&M in the Cotton? LSU also LOST two games, and struggled against Towson, Ole Miss, Auburn and Arkansas. How do we know that team is great? All I'm saying is you're using your opinion and putting it as fact. You have no clue ND wouldn't be in a BCS bowl if they were in the SEC.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 3:25 pm to reedus23
quote:
ND wouldn't be playing in a BCS bowl much less in the BCSCG if they had to play the rigors of an SEC schedule
this
:NDYGGR:
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News