• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Notre Dame (football only discussion)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Their closest thing to a quality ND win in almost a year and a half.
Click to expand...
:lol: Thats pretty good

After watching some of the games today, I'm feeling better about the Pittsburgh game, I still think they're pretty beatable and overrated after BGSU controlled them quite a bit in the upset. Dave isn't a great coach, which is why he couldn't make it at the NFL level and came back to Pitt. scUM played a decent Utah team, I'm sure they'll be better in two weeks after settling on a QB and getting some experience. I'm still expecting Notre Dame to lose to the wolverines, but it may be a bit closer than last year. USC will still crush ND, no question there. Didn't catch Michigan State.
 
Upvote 0
As NoD sets out to play against SDSU, I thought I would take a moment to reflect upon the last ten years of NoD football:

1998 9-3
1999 5-7
2000 9-3
2001 5-6
2002 10-3
2003 5-7
2004 6-6
2005 9-3
2006 10-3
2007 3-9

Total for the past 10 years: 71 wins, 50 losses. (59.2 winning percentage)

How this program is able to support itself on long gone tradition is beyond me when an average product is being presented to the public.
 
Upvote 0
muffler dragon;1248514; said:
As NoD sets out to play against SDSU, I thought I would take a moment to reflect upon the last ten years of NoD football:

1998 9-3
1999 5-7
2000 9-3
2001 5-6
2002 10-3
2003 5-7
2004 6-6
2005 9-3
2006 10-3
2007 3-9

Total for the past 10 years: 71 wins, 50 losses. (59.2 winning percentage)

How this program is able to support itself on long gone tradition is beyond me when an average product is being presented to the public.
Click to expand...

Dryden;1248525; said:
You should throw these out, these were clearly all Ty Willingham's fault! :shake:
Click to expand...

1998 9-3
1999 5-7
2000 9-3
2001 5-6
2002 10-3
2003 5-7
2004 6-6
2005 9-3
2006 10-3
2007 3-9

Actually, the numbers in red are Willingham's fault...the numbers in blue Charlie takes credit for because he was coach, the numbers in black he takes credit for because the guys on those teams just KNEW that eventually Charlie Weis would be the coach, so they were infinitely inspired to "win one for the (future) blimper."
 
Upvote 0
Bucklion;1248533; said:
1998 9-3
1999 5-7
2000 9-3
2001 5-6
2002 10-3
2003 5-7
2004 6-6
2005 9-3
2006 10-3
2007 3-9

Actually, the numbers in red are Willingham's fault...the numbers in blue Charlie takes credit for because he was coach, the numbers in black he takes credit for because the guys on those teams just KNEW that eventually Charlie Weis would be the coach, so they were infinitely inspired to "win one for the (future) blimper."
Click to expand...

You had one minor error in your color scheme which I fixed.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top