Notre Dame coaching job

[Alaska Darin]

Randy Edsall seems to be getting attention now as well. What would you ND fans think of him?

I think he's done a great job at UConn but I don't know all that much about him.

[KD in CA]

Looks like it's done.

 

 

Now, get out there and save that recruiting class!

[H2o]

http://www.comcast.net/articles/sports-gen...tre.Dame.Kelly/

 

Irish Hire Kelly!!! I second that KD! Now hit the campaign trail and bring quality football back to ND!

[KD in CA]

http://www.comcast.net/articles/sports-gen...tre.Dame.Kelly/

 

Irish Hire Kelly!!! I second that KD! Now hit the campaign trail and bring quality football back to ND!

 

 

Now, I only have one request. Don't give Kelly an eight year extension if ND starts 4-0 next year.

[bartshan-83]

Kelly's press conference is on right now....watching during lunch. The guy sounds very impressive, very real. (yeah yeah....easy to get excited now).

 

http://assets.espn.go.com/livenow/chicago/

 

If that link doesn't work, just go to www.espnchicago.com and follow the link there.

[el Tigre]

I think it's going to turn out to be a good hire.

[Cynical]

Good one, that cracks me up. Maybe the Royals will sign Roy Halladay for $120 million to show the Yankees that they have every intention of becoming an elite team, rather than just a farm system for the big boys.

 

How do you become an elite program when you go undefeated, have multiple quality wins, and are still an afterthought for any type of championship potential?[1] How do you become an elite program when none of the so-called elite programs (other than maybe USC, Ohio State, or Texas) would ever consider playing you?[2]

 

1. How about achieving similar results over numerous years.

2. Quite a quandary. When the elites play a 'weaker' out of conference opponent, people B word about the elites 'soft' schedules.

 

Let's face it...If Alabama lost to Auburn 22-21, and then dominated UF in the SEC title game 32-13, it's highly likely that Bama would still be playing for the national championship. But every game is a playoff game, right?

 

The "every game counts" argument is so off base. It turns out that none of Cincinnati's games really counted, along with 99% of all the other games this season. Didn't we know on October 1st that the final would be FL/Bama vs. Texas?

 

We did? So, if Texas had lost to Nebraska, Texas would have still been in the title game?

IMO, I seriously doubt it. Bama would have been playing TCU or Cincy.

 

With Boise State, they could always hide behind the "mid-major" argument. Now the system is nitpicking through the hierarchy of their own BCS conferences.

 

Maybe I missed something. I do not remember this kind of "outrage" when Auburn went 13-0 back in 2004, and was not selected for the BCS title game.

 

Kelly staying at Cincy to "build a national power" is a ridiculous notion. His stock will never be higher, and now is the time to jump. The Big East is a launching pad for coaches, because the system forces it to be that way.

 

It's the system's fault Syracuse has become irrelevant? Or WVU (especially before Rich Rod's appearance)?

What does it say about the conference in general when one of the "better" programs started playing football a mere 12 years ago?

 

It's not that Texas and Bama are un-derserving, with Alabama especially posting several convincing quality wins. They both had excellent seasons. But so did 3-4 other schools. Coaches want to be in a position where:

 

-the best season is school history results in a shot at the national title

 

Not...

 

-the best season in school history, PLUS some losses by other teams with better exposure/perception/history, PLUS ability to actually schedule OOC games and win them on the road, PLUS favorable results from polls and computers, MIGHT result in a chance to play for the national title.

 

You can't blame any Big East coach going somewhere where option 1 is the case, because under the current arrangements, it is not.

[LongLiveRalph]

1. How about achieving similar results over numerous years.

2. Quite a quandary. When the elites play a 'weaker' out of conference opponent, people B word about the elites 'soft' schedules.

 

1. Similar results to "the best season ever in the school's history?" For what? A chance to break into the top-5 and a possible shot at Virginia Tech in the Orange Bowl? Coaches want to win championships too, bud.

2. So Cincinnatti is supposed to come off of a 13-0 season, and then engage Alabama in discussions to play each other. Here's how that conversation would go:

 

Cincinnatti: "Let's play a home and home series."

 

Alabama: "Sounds great. Let's make it a four-year deal. The first two in Tuscaloosa. The third in Cincinnatti, but we'll play at the Bengals stadium, not at your field, because we'd like some fans there too. Then back to Tuscaloosa for year 4. Sound good?"

 

We did? So, if Texas had lost to Nebraska, Texas would have still been in the title game?

IMO, I seriously doubt it. Bama would have been playing TCU or Cincy.

 

Sweet. So out of roughly 1500 NCAA games this fall, we've found 14 that actually mattered. All 13 of Texas's, and the SEC title game for Alabama. Every game is a playoff game!! (Disclaimer: Actually, only two games are playoff games.)

 

Maybe I missed something. I do not remember this kind of "outrage" when Auburn went 13-0 back in 2004, and was not selected for the BCS title game.

 

Probably because the 2004 Auburn team had a schedule right out of the SEC handbook. Non-conference "opponents" were all home games versus Louisiana-Monroe, the Citadel, and Louisiana Tech. Plus they got smoked by USC in each of the previous two seasons.

 

Compare that with USC's non-conference schedule of at Virginia Tech, at BYU, Colorado State, and Notre Dame. Oklahoma had at least one BCS school in their non-conference games, they played Bowling Green, Houston, and Oregon.

 

Plus, there was plenty of outrage, about how because Auburn's preseason ranking was so low, compared to the #1-2 USC-Oklahoma, that they never had a chance to vault into the title game. But every game counts!! (disclaimer: Every game counts only if you're #1 or #2 in the preseason poll)

 

It's the system's fault Syracuse has become irrelevant? Or WVU (especially before Rich Rod's appearance)?

What does it say about the conference in general when one of the "better" programs started playing football a mere 12 years ago?

 

It's the system's fault that Cincinnati can go undefeated in a BCS conference and not get a whiff of a championship opportunity, but if preseason unranked Kentucky (a basketball school, just like Cincy) ran the table, they'd play for the national championship.

 

And what does 12 years ago have to do with anything? That thinking is precisely the problem, and the prejudice that keeps the "little guys" from becoming elite. The championship is supposed to be an award for one season, for one team. Not for the team which dominated college football in the 1970's, who had a pretty good team this year.

 

It's a good thing George Mason was allowed to play against Connecticut in the Elite Eight in basketball a few years ago. Football probably would've just ruled that Connecticut had a better history, they've won titles before, and their fans travel better, so we'll let them go to the Final Four.