All Things Notre Dame - The Clashmore Mike Memorial Thread

[Optimus Prime]

I can see a Bama-ND matchup being called Saints vs. Sinners...

Unchaste Clergy v. Cotton Pickers

[whodean]

Like most teams, ND did improve over the season but frankly Alabama is going to wipe their ass with them.

Michigan even with 6 turnovers, 2 in the ND end zone should have beaten Notre Dame in South Bend and that really doesn't say much.

Sure the Irish found a way to win a bunch of very close games but come the Orange Bowl, there will be NO place to hide. Just might snag tix to enjoy the carnage up close.

I think ND will keep it pretty close, probably within 10 points. Seems all of Bama's WRs are injured and the defense (while still being the best in the nation http://content.usatoday.com/sportsda...-total-defense) isn't what it was last year (but that was a once in a generation D).

For ND to run that schedule, they have to be a pretty damn good team.

[Clashmore Mike]

...Michigan even with 6 turnovers, 2 in the ND end zone should have beaten Notre Dame in South Bend and that really doesn't say much...

Not picking on you OP...your’s is simply the most recent in what is becoming a disturbing trend. I haven’t responded to these provocations because I see no value in antagonizing, and frankly, there have been much more exciting things for me to focus on. However, in ignoring them, it would seem that I’ve simply invited them to multiply in both number and exaggeration…so…

It was a close, hard-fought Notre Dame / Michigan game that Notre Dame won…not unlike the preceding three close, hard-fought Notre Dame/Michigan games that Michigan won (and that I’ve never felt the need to try and rationalize/validate to you guys by the way). Michigan should not have won, because Michigan either couldn’t or didn’t make the plays it needed to make in order to win.

The “six turnovers” line has been repeated enough that it’s more of a clich? now than it is analysis of the game. Lest we forget that one of those was Denard chucking up a hail-mary from Michigan’s own 40 yard line as the clock hit zero to end the first half. A turnover on paper only. It was a low-chance, low-liability call and it had no impact on the game what-so-ever. You also need to be willingly blind to the two horrendous first half interceptions that Notre Dame threw to keep regurgitating the “six turnovers” sound-byte.

The reality is that Michigan hamstrung itself with a (-3) turnover margin in a close game. Not really all that different than ND’s (-3) turnover margin in ’10 and ND’s (-2) turnover margin in ’11. Both games that Notre Dame lost in the last minute. You get what I’m saying? Negative turnovers and losing close is the precedent here. You guys are acting, and let me emphasize ACTING, like it is some kind of shocking aberration that robbed you of a for-sure victory. Now, had you spent the last two years on this thread speculating that “Notre Dame should have won”, I might call it differently. You didn’t…and I’m calling it like it is.

There is another factor here that is continually neglected, for obviously self-serving reasons:

MICHIGAN COULD NOT SCORE A TOUCHDOWN.

Now I actually feel somewhat sympathetic towards you on this point. Probably more than any other opponent, I think Michigan fans had every right to feel entitled to touchdowns against fucking Notre Dame’s defense…

In ’09 that was the crew that gave up 400 yards to that little kid / freshman Forcier in his 2nd start. Need a sixty yard game winning touchdown drive with only seconds remaining? No problem…its fucking Notre Dame’s defense.

In ’10 it was fucking Notre Dame’s defense that, having reflected upon the ’09 experience, went out and gave up over 500 yards to one player…then gave up a seventy yard game winning touchdown drive with only seconds remaining.

In ’11 fucking Notre Dame’s defense gave up 28 forth qtr points…including a three-play, 80 yard game winning touchdown drive in 30 seconds...the last 30 seconds of the game.

3rd and 17? No problem, it’s fucking Notre Dame’s defense…should we run or throw? Doesn’t matter it’s fucking Notre Dame’s defense. What the fuck was that? Our guy tripped over his own feet while converting…now it’s 4th and 8. No problem, it’s fucking Notre Dame’s defense…

You see my point? I don’t think that it is entirely blind homerism that allowed you guys to feel entitled to score touchdowns against fucking Notre Dame’s defense at will…it’s been years since fucking Notre Dame’s defense gave you any reason to question whether or not it was Michigan’s god-given, inalienable right to waltz into our end zone at your convenience.

However, I do think that it is entirely blind homerism that allows some of you to continue to feel entitled at this point…

So let me provide a rather blunt reminder and restore order to the world. Notre Dame’s very first offensive play…and our rookie QB provides you with a gift-wrapped interception deep in our own territory. Fucking three minutes into the game and it’s first and goal Michigan from the Notre Dame ten yard line…the raucous home crowd downs a glass of STFU in horror…Kelly’s face turns purple on the sideline…Denard confidently pulls up behind center…

…and then Michigan gets completely and utterly bitchified by fucking Notre Dame’s defense. Three straight plays…three straight losses of yardage from the line of scrimmage as our defensive front ran into, over and through at their convenience. Fucking Notre Dame’s defense actually drove Michigan out of the red zone and out of your field goal kicker’s range apparently.

Do you think that might have been a hint that Michigan was no longer entitled to our end zone? Perhaps you believe that it was mere coincidence that neither Michigan St. before you, or Miami after you, COULD NOT SCORE A TOUCHDOWN. Time to wake up and face a harsh reality…one where your long-snapper and place-kicker are your only vestige of hope…because the red-zone is our world now…we just let you visit...sometimes.

I’ll chill on the overly dramatic and condescending language…confident in the fact that it has some of you seething, some of you rolling your eyes and the buckeyes snickering.

In all honesty and sincerity and given the hindsight of the entire season, I do believe that, between the 20’s, Michigan moved the ball better than any other opponent we played…and I also respect that you were able to do it consistently. There were a couple of other teams that moved the ball consistently between the 20’s on Notre Dame in the first half, only to get stifled in the 2nd. In other words, though we were able to shut you out (of the end zone), we were never really able to shut you down…and I respect that…but all it really did was allow some of you to believe that the game was closer than it was.

We are the #1 scoring defense in the country…it’s what we do…I’m as shocked by it as much as anyone, but it’s reality. I’m sure the fans of our other opponents are bitching about their QB and OC too…multiply by twelve and I think a case can be made that perhaps there was another factor at play here, than the remarkable occurrence of Notre Dame facing twelve straight shitty offensive coordinators and QBs who had a bad day.

So I’ll take this opportunity to tout a couple pretty cool factoids that I’ve been looking for a reason to flaunt:

1) In 2012, given a total of 116 offensive possessions by ND opponents that started at or behind their own 40 yard line, a total of 2 have resulted in touchdowns. The first was actually Navy in the 4th qtr against our water-boy and the cheerleaders. The other was by USC last week.

2) In 2012, the cumulative rushing yardage of all Notre Dame opponents, when in a “# and goal” situation negative twenty eight yards. The cumulative total yardage of all Notre Dame opponents when in a “# and goal” situation is negative five yards.

In other words, take it easy on Denard and Borges…you’re pissed at them for not being able to do what nobody has been able to do...

...yet.

[hack]

Enjoy it while you can, Clash. Won't always be like this. Certainly after last year's Michigan game you were due some friendly bounces. That was one of the least-deserved wins I can ever recall. But for fuck's sakes, if our OC weren't making cash on the side selling his game plans to opposing DCs, you probably lose that game this year.

[WM Wolverine]

"let me emphasize ACTING, like it is some kind of shocking aberration that robbed you of a for-sure victory"

Not at all, this was a game that easily could have went either way and should have been decided in the last possession. Oh yeah, it was despite M's 6 turnovers...

Outside of one player trying to do way too much, I felt like the better team was wearing maize that day as M moved the ball in your red zone with relative ease when they weren't giving the Domers the ball back. ND's defense deserves a lot of credit for keeping M out of the end zone, putting pressure on Denard and forcing those turnovers.

[lineygoblue]

I guess he told YOU guys ....

[Clashmore Mike]

Enjoy it while you can, Clash. Won't always be like this...

I know…the question is how far will we fall? I think we have a very good chance to be a power offensively next season. Golson is showing rapid improvement weekly and has shown that he can pick this team up and carry them if necessary…sounds like our LT Martin is planning on playing his final year of eligibility…and very quietly, Notre Dame’s receivers are having a great year…


…but it’s obviously the defense that makes this team special and I don’t see them playing at the same level. We lose three starters off the defense assuming NG Louis Nix comes back. Given the playing time and performance of a number of up and coming 2nd string underclassmen, the 2013 defense will project to be even better…on paper.



But it won’t be better, and I think (am afraid) that the ’97 to ’98 Michigan defense will be a case study. As I remember it, you lost two players (three when you consider Marcus Ray’s suspension). But the fall off from ’97 to ’98 was much greater than what one would reasonably infer from nine returning starters. You guys obviously lost Woodson, the guy that an OC literally has to plan around first…the guy that takes away a third of the field just by walking onto it…the guy that can make ridiculous plays look easy, energize the team and make everyone else around him better. You lost Glenn Steele, who (I think, especially in hindsight) was overlooked as an anchor that made everyone else’s job easier. One leader in the front seven, one leader in the secondary.


Obviously Te’o is our pinnacle and the heart of the team…but I’m afraid that losing Sr. Safety Zeke Motta will have a much bigger impact than what most ND fans want to acknowledge. Do you guys realize that the ND CB covering Marquis Lee last week is a true freshman who was playing running back in high school a year ago and has only been on campus for five months? Our other CB is a true Jr. who transitioned from WR last year. Our other Safety is a true Sophmore who transitioned from WR three months ago in fall camp. Our nickleback is a true freshman.



No way that hodge-podge gaggle of relocated rookies put out a season like this without a Sr. leader like Motta back there to get them in position and keep them focused. We're losing one stalwart anchor from the front seven and another in the secondary.



Anyway, this group would be good on their own, but they’ve reached elite status because of the right mix at a couple key positions…I don’t see how we’ll be able to replicate that…and yes, I’ll enjoy it while I can.

[UMStan White]

Cogent analysis Clash. I don't disagree with any of it. True test will be the bowl game. You guys are much like 2002 buck nuts. Playing the defending national champs (I assume) with a great defense. Kick the shit out of the SEC whether it's Bama or Georgia.

[Optimus Prime]

Mike, your version of events is appreciated but does very little to dissuade me. Michigan lost to ND because they failed to develop a viable backup OB backup to Denard, it was only a matter of time before DR had a really bad game or was lost to injury. Gardner obviously was and is ready to play, unfortunately when it was clear Denard Robinson was off his game in South Bend, our moronic coaching staff failed to pull him in relief. Later in the season, our Nebraska debacle really exposed of staff, going with Bellomy in lieu of Gardner, really? Hoke's excuses afterward were nothing short of embarrassing, not to mention cause for alarm.

After all, Kelly has used 3 QB's this season much to his benefit, he obviously found the time to get his QB's "game ready" should the need arise.

Good Luck against 'Bama, you'll need it.

[hack]

After all, Kelly has used 3 QB's this season much to his benefit, he obviously found the time to get his QB's "game ready" should the need arise.


Well, yeah. Point taken. Michigan didn't have any that looked particularly ready to do what Borges wanted them to until post Nebraska. What an embarrassment. So frustrating that nobody really has to answer for this.

[Clashmore Mike]

Come on…if you’re going to cherry-pick a single line out of 15 paragraphs to base your argument on…at least be right about it.

Not at all, this was a game that easily could have went either way and should have been decided in the last possession. Oh yeah, it was despite M's 6 turnovers...

Decided on the last possession…



The last possession was Notre Dame’s. Leading by a touchdown, our 2nd string QB put together a 50 yard drive into your red-zone, then comfortably burned out the clock by taking a knee. Michigan absolutely needed to:


A) Stop ND from converting and get possession back (which they didn’t).


B) Score a touchdown (a feat which Michigan had consistently failed to achieve for the first 57 minutes of a 60 minute football game).



Now, if we all agree to pretend that A + B had occurred, then Michigan would have been tied with Notre Dame for the first time since 0-0...



In 2010, with Michigan down by 3 points, Denard Robinson led an 72 yard drive to score the winning touch down with :27 seconds remaining. That was a game that was decided by the last possession. Notre Dame had a (-3) turnover margin.


In 2011, with Michigan down by 3 points, Denard Robinson led an 80 yard drive to score the winning touch down with :02 seconds remaining. That was a game that was decided by the last possession. Notre Dame had a (-2) turnover margin.


To recap the event that transpired to deny Michigan a game it "should" have won: Notre Dame scored first. At no subsequent point in the game did Notre Dame relinquish the lead or even allow the score to be tied. At no subsequent point in the game did Michigan trail by less than a touchdown…which is significant because:


MICHIGAN COULD NOT SCORE A TOUCHDOWN.



Michigan went into halftime, shut-out and down two scores. In the second half, when you pulled back to within that elusive touchdown, Notre Dame put you back down two scores on their very next possession. When you pulled back to within that elusive touchdown a second time, it proved to be nothing more than a symbolic accomplishment because it was the last time Michigan touched the football…and the game ended with Notre Dame, 1st & 10 inside the Michigan red zone, taking a knee.



Again, it was a good, close, hard-fought Notre Dame/Michigan game…but under no circumstances evident anywhere on planet earth (excluding only a Michigan-fan message board) can it be argued that Michigan “should” have won that football game.

[Clashmore Mike]

I guess he told YOU guys ....

Liney...I know that you were one of the guys who was seething...


:-)

[hack]

Michigan beat MSU without scoring a TD. You're not reliant on that alone in making your argument, but it's there to be pointed out. You don't need a TD to win. Michigan could have taken 6 points in the first quarter instead of outsmarting itself. That would have changed the complexion of the game if they'd done that instead. What would have happened is anyone's guess, but you can hardly blame Michigan fans for wondering what could have been if there was a responsible adult in charge of the offense that day.

[UMStan White]

Hack's cogent analysis: Borges sucks ........blah....blah....blah....blah... Dumb Did I mention Borges sucks? Blah....blah...blah..blah ...blah. Did I mention UM is unbeaten if Borges didn't suck? Did I mention I who have never played a down of football and never coached a down of football has decreed that Um's losses are because Borges sucks? blah...blah...blah ...blah blah. (Guess what---Borges sucks!):

[hack]

If you think I'm wrong you're welcome to try and prove me so.