Alabama averages 59.1 as an FYI. So, I think the comparison works out in favor of ND — ‘Bama lost to the best offense it faced (Texas A&M) while ND stiffled its best opponent, Oklahoma.

Another thing: when LSU throttled Oregon, everyone chalked it up to “they hadn’t played an SEC DEFENSE.” Now that ND is putting up SEC defensive numbers versus similar offenses, where’s that talk now?

Additionally, you go through great pains to show that the KSU and Oregon offenses have played against weak defenses. However, you have not shown that ND’s defense has played against strong offenses. I don’t know how the numbers work out, but you at least have to apply the same analysis to both situations.

You do realize that SEC teams that have recently won titles live on low MOV right? Just take a look at Aurbun in 2010. They had victories against sub-500 teams that were within a TD.

Why do they get the benefit of the doubt and ND doesn’t? It’s absurd. Especially when ND is flat out not letting opponents score.

And if you’d like to talk about MOV, let’s talk about how Oregon only beat their best opponent, USC by 11. ND beat their best opponent, OU by 17. But I guess they are better since they scored 60? Please.

Continuing with MOV, K-State only beat North freakin’ Texas by 14, OU by 5, Iowa State by 6, and TCU by 13.

Notre Dame has better performances against far higher quality opponents.

And the players on the field?! LOLOLOL — you must not watch ND football at all and/or only watch highlights of teams like Oregon.

This was in reply to Linus.

Players on the field has nothing to do with showing a team’s greatness over another team. I know it is the NFL, however, remember the Superbowl with 19 – 0 New England? Larger star quality players against the Giants, yet who won?

Also, if your opponent is weak enough to not stop a 2nd or 3rd string, then can you say with any validity that your team is playing tough, quality opponents? And does the running up of scores against such weak teams show how strong a team is? It shows your team is better than a weak team. Is margin of victory against weak teams any indication of how how your team will fair against any of the top 10 teams? Not at all.

This is why the Human Polls in college football is the weak link of the system. At the end of the season, the polls look far different than preseason. So why do you base your belief in the strength of your team based on faulty opinions? Oregon and K-State are higher ranked than ND for 2 reasons…1) they started higher in preseason ranking, and 2) (in Oregon’s case) the perception voters have of margin of victory. If you eliminate those 2 and rankings are done at the end of the year, objectively, ND would come out higher than at least one, if not both of those teams. That would be based on the metrics that you have…Number of Wins, Points allowed, Yards Allowed, Strength of opponent (SoS). This still does not mean ND is the best in the nation, since neither of the 3 teams played each other. Just means the rankings would be different.

Since we are dealing with the system we have now, then it goes back to the metrics that count in figuring out who plays in the NCG. Margin of victory and style points is not and never will be valid metrics to this end. The “Eye Test” is so subjective, and wholly inaccurate. However, it is what it is, as voters will not change now. Yet, please stop saying that those are valid metrics. Otherwise, you just sound like a 10 year old that still clings to his blanket and is impressed with flashy uniforms.