Freaking ghosts are everywhere!
This is NOT an excuse. Seriously. We recognize and have recognized time and again how much improvement has been needed (and thank Touchdown Jesus that we've seen some recently). We know it should be better. But, the fact of the matter is that this program has been hit with 3 factors that have made success this year very difficult. Most programs suffer big time when one of these is the case - this year ND has all 3.
1) Serious lack of talent in the upper classes. This has been addressed ad nauseum.
2) Serious lack of experience in the younger classes. A lot of frosh playing, and a lot of new starters in the sophomore/junior classes. Also addressed.
And 3) Brutal Schedule.
There are other factors as well, obviously: leadership, coaching decisions, scheme, new D, etc. etc. But I think we agree these 3 are the big ones.
I just thought I'd shed some light on Number 3, since we've addressed 1 and 2 in some way shape or form over the weeks.
ND is facing a Gauntlet of a schedule. So far in the year, ND has faced the 11th toughest schedule in the nation, according Sagrin's strength of schedule ratings. 11th. A team with little upper class talent, and almost no experience in the younger classes, and starting a new QB, 2 new receivers, new RB's, 3 new Olinemen and an entirely new Defense is playing the 11th toughest in the nation. What about that situation spells W's? Nothin'.
A few quick tidbits on other SOS bits and pieces:
- The only team in the Top 25 that has faced anywhere near the SOS of ND? Nebraska, playing the 16th most difficult so far. No other team in the Top 25 has faced a schedule in the Top 20 in terms of difficulty. Congrats Cornhuskers.
- Average SOS in the Top 10? 74. Playing easy teams makes winning easier.
- In the Top 25? Average SOS rank is 86. Yes, yes, much easier.
- The 10 teams with schedules more difficult than ND are a combined 10-26.
ND opponents this year have faced fairly light competition (including ND unfortunately):
- Michigan: 51st most difficult schedule
- Ga Tech: 92
- MSU: 102
- Purdue: 132
- PSU: 135
What's this mean? These teams are very likely well rested and well-prepared for ND. Just another mountain to climb.
It's important to keep in mind that this is a major aspect to the slow start. If we scheduled games like many of our opponents, I guarantee things would be different. How I wish we had Purdue's (yyyyaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwn) opening schedule, filled with teams from PORTIONS of states: EASTERN Illinois, WESTERN Michigan, Toledo and Minnesota. Let's flip-flop schedules and see which team is more likely to be 0-4 and which is 4-0. We'd see a different story I'm sure.
The Gauntlet? Yes. An Excuse? No. We should be better, and we should win some of these games. Especially if we play as the Wizard.
By blogs for industry September 26, 2007 - 1:56 am
SOS
YearCoachSOS rankrecord
1999Davie105-7
2000Davie369-3
2001Davie145-6
2002Willingham1410-3
2003 Willingham 15-7
2004 Willingham 56-6
2005Weis 149-3
2006Weis1810-3
2007 so farWeis110-4
How well college football teams do is a comple…
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit September 26, 2007 - 11:21 am
Good stuff, nice for context. But I think your comment got cut off…
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Andrew September 26, 2007 - 2:43 pm
We definitely have a tough schedule this year.
What is interesting to me is that all I heard from the talking heads at that four letter sport network at the beginning of 2006 was how easy our schedule was with teams like Stanford, Navy, etc. Our schedule this year is nearly identical and now those bobble-heads are saying we have a tough schedule! The differences between last year and this is adding Boston College and dropping Army (a far more difficult opponent) and adding Duke in place of NC (a wash as far as I’m concerned). Idiots (the bobbleheads, not any of the aforementioned teams.)
However, I don’t put much emphasis on strenght of schedule ratings, because the formula they use is usually too simplistic.
For example, the NCAA uses a formula that simply compiles wins and losses of your opponents.
Let’s say one of your first opponents was a ranked, tough team but then folded after they play you and never win again because of injuries. The NCAA formula will result in a low strenght of schedule based on that opponent. But their wins-loss record may not be indicative of how good they were when you played.
A true SOS formula should take into account home games vs road games, rank at the start of the season, rank at the time you play a team, rank at the end of the season, offensive rank, defensive rank, and perhaps other factors.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit September 26, 2007 - 3:53 pm
Agreed. But Sagarin’s is the best we’ve got. And while I think you’re right that a more detailed/complex formula would be better, that could result in some more subjective measures being used (e.g. Team X was better in September than they are now, so that should be considered a ‘tougher’ game). W’s and L’s is the best metric to use when comparing across schedules. At least, it’s the best we have for now. Of course, this is also a sport where we have the BCS, so…
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Andrew September 26, 2007 - 4:37 pm
Biscuit, I don’t know what Sagarin’s method is, so it may be a good indicator.
The only way to fix the strength of schedule divide is to set rules for teams that want to go to bowl games and the NC game.
For example. The SEC is always touted as the toughest conf. I agree they have many of the top teams year to year, but saying playing in the SEC means you have the toughest schedule is misleading. Compare Arkansas (who had 3 ranked SEC opponents on their sched to start the season) with Alabama (who has 5 of the 6 ranked SEC teams to start the season). IMO, the structure of the SEC (and others with more than 10 teams) needs to change. Every team should play every other team in their conf. Then, a conf champion game would be unnecessary and every BCS team plays 12 games.
No D I-A team should play D I-AA teams.
BCS conf teams should not be allowed to play non BCS schools.
Those teams in BCS conf’s that perenially fail to compete (like Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, etc) should be bumped with teams in non BCS conferences that are competative (like Utah, Hawaii, etc)
Sort of off topic, but I couldn’t help myself.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By DeepTeaKup September 26, 2007 - 7:22 pm
Andrew,
So what happens to ND when they can’t compete? By your logic ND would have to join a conference right?
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Jim Hu September 27, 2007 - 6:38 pm
Biscuit, it got cut off because it’s a trackback…follow the link for the whole thing with formatting.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Irish Roundup » Blog Archive » By the numbers: Is there hope for the Irish against Purdue? October 4, 2007 - 12:40 pm
[...] The first lies in the extremely low quality of opponents that Purdue has played thus far. The Boilermakers blew out 1-3 Toledo, 2-2 Eastern Illinois, 1-3 Central Michigan, and 1-3 Minnesota in the first four weeks of the season: hardly a gauntlet of the sort that the Irish have faced. (For what it’s worth, Toledo, Central Michigan, and Minnesota are ranked 86th, 107th, and 100th in the nation by SI, and Eastern Illinois is a I-AA team. Compare this to ND’s opponents: both Penn State and MSU are either ranked or just outside the top 25 in both polls, while Michigan ranks 30th and Georgia Tech 44th.) [...]
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0