On my list of the 10 worst ND defensive plays in my lifetime. A case could be made for it being number 1, although my own choice is probably Purdue's 97 yard touchdown pass (can't remember the year, but it was either a Davie or Willingham special).

41-16. Kyle Fucking Orton. The game after which Willingham said something along the lines of "Supposedly they beat us by a lot, but when you look at total yards it was pretty even."

And then Purdue went and put the score on their Sun Bowl rings (a game they lost). What a sad sack shit program celebrating a win over a 6-6 team that fired their coach.

ridiculous stiff-arm handoff. The complete lack of a fullback threat. The pitchman always getting blown up. It was unforgettable in the bad sort of way.

ND Nation (or the Pub) folks talked me into going. Good times as I was introduced to the powers of the Margarita.

We thought Carroll was a bum but his only running back was a Byrd...Rick

A beautiful day which made it all the more a surreal experience given the circumstances.

The Poodle would get his revenge in spades.

-- and not always in a good way.

He would have been a hell of a quarterback under a Holtz regime.

must have been because of Urban Meyer

1. Urban had left by then, and was never Davie's OC.

2. Our offense was absolutely abysmal that year and most of Davie's tenure, for that matter. We were 100th out of 117 that year in scoring offense at 19.5 PPG.

Let's not pretend that seeing a few good runs on a short highlight film against a bad opponent is any indication that things were better in 2000 than they are now. This is BK's worst offense in a while, and yet it's still safely better than whatever the hell Davie was running by the end of his regime.

I subscribe to the idea that there are three tiers of coaches at ND and BK is on his own:

Tier 1- All of the national championship coaches

Tier 2- Brian Kelly

Tier 3- Everyone else

The issue is that the gap between tiers 1 and 2 is substantially larger than the gap between tiers 2 and 3.

we've yet to see him beat teams that are comparable or better in talent than ND.

He's VERY fortunate that SC has been down during his entire tenure. OSU will be an interesting series coming up.

SC was down that year...and that was it, they started pummeling ND the following year and did it from 02-09.

(can you tell I can't stand Kelly? It clouds my intellectual honesty, I have to admit)


edit to add: the part about Urban Meyer was a joke

@ #4 Nebraska
#23 MSU
@TA&M
Pitt
WVU
USC
@BC
#7 Tenn
Navy
@ #13 Stanford
@Purdue

This year's team under BK would lose 6 of those games, minimum.

I get it, you hate Kelly. While the 2001 schedule was ok, let's remember we also helped most of those teams out with extra wins, as we were shitty and went 5-6. Let's say, for example, we went 9-2 (losing the two top 10 games against Nebraska and Tennessee as we did that year). Our wins (remember, in this scenario, some of these final records would be one loss worse, as we would have beaten the teams and not lost) would have been against 5-6 MSU, 7-5 A&M, 7-5 Pitt, 3-8 WVU, 6-6 USC, 7-5 BC, 0-10 Navy, 8-4 Stanford, and 6-6 Purdue. Stanford at 8-4 would have been the only team probably ranked, and that would have been right near the bottom. I could just imagine the "we didn't beat anyone good" conversations going on then, too.

Anyway, I think it's absurd to say this year's team loses to 4 of those 9 other teams on the schedule. I'm guessing we could have gone at least 6-3 against them (if you assume we would lose to Nebraska and Tennessee), and probably a ton better.

0-2 against UT/NU and 3 losses against the remaining 9? That's not a real bold challenge to the assertion of 6 losses.

But yes 5-6 losses seems pretty reasonable. In addition to 0-2 against UT/NU:

You seem to assume the reasonable likelihood of ND losing 2 from the remaining slate based on your estimation that ND would go about 6-3 against the non-UT/NU teams from 2001. That's justifiable. We squeaked by on late scores against 2-4 and 3-3 team major conference teams and a 2-4 MAC team so far (effectively going 3-0 in toss ups), and we beat two other 3-3, 4-2 teams that will likely finish around .500. With five games remaining against teams around a .500 quality (and no MAC-level teams), based on our performance thus far and the staggering deficiencies in offensive line play, I'd guess 3-2 is probably the most likely outcome from our 2021 ACC/Pac 12 slate, plus a win against Navy.

Next, there is no Toledo on that schedule. A game like we played against Toledo would've lost to pretty much everyone on that 2001 schedule except for Navy. That's a likelihood of five total losses from these factors.

Finally, you nonsensically downgrade the 2001 schedule. You can't just assume an ND win against all those opponents to downgrade their record. We know those 2001 teams had the record they had. A&M and BC went 8-4, including beating a bad ND team, and Stanford went 9-3, including a beating a bad ND. The question here is whether the 2021 ND team would likely beat those team. You can't just call A&M a 7-5 team and then decide whether the 2021 ND team would beat that team. That's nonsense. Given that the 2001 schedule had 3 teams at 8-4 or better, that's likely going to be tougher than what ND is facing this year, even if you remove ND's 2021 game from their record. I'd guess there's an extra loss in their somewhere based on schedule strength.

All in all, this team looks like a 5 or 6 loss team against the 2001 schedule.

And would be much better than 5-6 against that slate. You can toss out the Toledo win this year if you want, so you can make the schedules even with number of games.

When you lose to a team, they have a better resume overall. So, for example, if we lost to 7-4 BC, you'll say "This is a fairly solid 8-4 team". But if we beat them, then they're "just another 7-5 team". If Wisconsin ends up 7-5 this year (which is probably the most likely outcome), you're discounting that win. But if we lost that game, they theoretically would finish 8-4, then you call them a pretty good team. You're basically assuming a harder SOS when we are shittier. And the fact is Sagarin has us rated as the 6th best schedule so far (yes, I know that will drop a lot), and we are 5-1 against it and ranked #13. Not a stellar season or one to get too excited about. But to say that this team would be worse than the 5-6 2001 squad. Their SOS was 14 according to Sagarin, so I'm not saying they played a terrible slate. But I don't think 2021 ND would be 5-6 against the 14th ranked schedule this year.

and say it doesn't count. It's a relevant data point. We are capable of playing like shit against a shit opponent. It reflects 1/6 of our performances to date.

And I understand what you were trying to do with the records. There are some circumstance in which the point you make should be kept in mind. This is not one of those circumstances. Those games were played and have an additional data point for the quality of the 2001 opponent that we're now comparing the 2021 ND squad to. The point you make is inapplicable to this exercise.

I understand your point. But you do need to keep in mind the quality of opponent that we beat this year (and their record reflecting a loss against us) then if you’re comparing 2001 opponents to 2021 opponents.

Also of note….I only was throwing out the Toledo buy game for our 12th game (that’s basically what every larger program has to do with the 12th game) to compare against an 11 game 2001 schedule. But yes, you should keep it in to compare data. And remember….that bad 2001 WVU team had a Sagarin rating of 83, while Toledo currently sits at 73 (2001 Navy was an ungodly 166, while 2021 Navy - as crappy as they are - are 118). I’m sure that if there was a 12th game back then, it would be another Group of 5 buy game as well.

Obviously there is no way to win a hypothetical argument. But I am guessing most computer models would say that 2021 ND would fare better than 5-6 against the 2001 schedule.

is the start; we played Nebraska in our first game when it was their third. They just came out and blew the doors off of us. Then we went into a qb change, and there were predictable struggles. Do I think that schedule was overall tougher than what we've seen the last few years? Yeah, but we made it harder on ourselves. That was a poorly coached team for sure, but those were some strange scheduling decisions.

I don't think there is any real question that we've made the schedule easier for Kelly. I also think that he is a better coach than Davie. I do not think that he is as good of a coach as Lou was. Since we're going on feelings and thinking here, I would also add that if we had made the same concessions for Weis with the schedule, admissions, etc. that we have for Kelly, Weis would have done a lot better. I also think that Weis is a giant fat POS.

When comparing prior schedules to what Kelly faces or faced - people have a tendency to use the rankings of the teams at the time of the games for the old schedules but don't afford Kelly that same courtesy.

I'm not here to argue the 2001 schedule and the overall point that Kelly has faced 'easier' schedules than his predecessors - which he has but there should be some consistency in the comparisons when it comes to the AP rankings of their opponents.

For example, Kelly would never get the credit here for beating the absolute dog shit out of the #7 and #12 teams in the nation in 2018 - which he did.

This is not a defense of Kelly either - so save the pelting with empties.

• Click here for link at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Notre_Dame_Fighting_Ir

Admittedly, I sort of ignored anyone pre-Leahy unless their name is Rockne.

We put up 346 yards of offense in that game with three turnovers, for 5.2 yards per play in that game.

Meanwhile, against Virginia Tech last week, we put up 401 yards with 2 turnovers, at 5.8 yards per play.

This isn't to say that our current offense is any great shakes. It's not. In fact, it's pretty garbage. But the 2001 offense was absolute dogshit, and retroactively saying otherwise is just nonsense. That team went 5-6 for a reason. Any game we scored more than 20 points, we won.