steelirish

I don't post here much anymore, but I still read fairly regularly. Seeing as a majority of you are alum, or at least out of the college age, I feel the need to add a students perspective. I don't think anyone should have objects thrown at them. However, if you are going to be near the student section and not handle a little profanity, then you need to find someplace else to sit, or bring ear plugs. Whether you agree with it or disagree is not the point, it will happen. Students will curse. I have been one of them. There are certain teams I hold no respect for and I don't want there fans at our games. If they come then they better be able to handle the little harrassment they see at ND games. Our stadium is soft. No one fears coming to ND because people aren't loud. I recently read an article in the observer about how male and female students shouldn't sit next to each other at games. I honestly feel like half of the alums wish we could go back to the days when the students all wore suits to the games. I'm sorry but F that. I'm going to drink before the games, I'm going to be loud, I'm going to give opposing fans a hard time. As for the snowballs, I can't believe this is still an issue. There was no malintent. We were having fun, when you live in the snow for about 5 months you need to find a way to deal with it. If people had been making it into ice and deliberately trying to hurt people, then you draw the line. I've played snow football with evan sharpley and asaph schwapp, afterwards there was a snowball fight. Are you saying that we should ban those activities as well. Now I'm not all about harrass opposing fans, in fact one of the best pregame experiences I had was when some opposing fans used our lawn to tailgate. I'm just saying we need to be more hostile, we need to be louder, we need to have some F-ing attitude. If you don't like it then watch the game from your couch. As for the recruits, if they didn't enjoy the experience fine. Sorry you don't want to come here, but if those parents think things are different anywhere else they are dead wrong, except for maybe BYU. But I only want playes with an attitude. I only want players who are going to come here and scream and curse and be proud to wear that uniform. And when things don't go well I want those players to be pissed off. Sorry the length, but I'm tired of ND being a comfortable and easy place to play.

I'm going to repeat we lost to Syracuse. We had 9 yards on offensive in the first half. We continue to look like a bad team. Before Syracuse I supported him coming back, but since then I can't. It looks like he has lost the team. No more excuses. I don't care if we were playing the Pittsburgh Steelers (I saw someone say the USC defense could shut down the detroit lions) our offensive performances have been atrocious. Against Cuse we had 3 drives at the start of the third quarter at their 23, 21, and 8 yard line, and we mustered 3 points. That is pathetic. I wouldn't mind if i thought this team played as hard as they could for him. But i don't believe they do. We need a change, we might lose some recruits in the short run but in the long run we will be better off.

I voted no. I would have said yes, but we lost to syracuse, then played terrible against USC. This team seems to be lacking heart and inspiration. I don't liike the play calls whether they are coming from haywood or weis. I just don't see how weis can correct this ship. If he has last the players than he can't, and it looks like he has. I hope we change coaches that way my senior season won't end like this years seniors did. Also think about this. Our season is most likely not over, because we will probably be selected for a bowl game. If we pass on all our coaching options and all the hot up and coming coaches get taken. Then we get blown out in or lose our bowl game against another mediocre team with lesser talent how will everyone's opinion change.

As a student let me just say... Try throwing snow balls, I hear that makes the games a blast. I kid, I kid.

Thanks Mcdougal. I respect your opinions and I thank you for helping keep this discussion civilized. Now I think it is time for me to get back to the real important issue...Notre Dame Football.

Mcdougal, I was trule on the fence when this election began. True I was leaning Obama, but I really really liked McCain. But over the months after watching how he conducted his campaign in contrast with how Barack conducted his, I felt more and more sure that Obama was the right man to lead this country (this is all my personal opinion). So when I see threads like this on a message board I feel I have an obligation to defend my side of this election, and that is all I am doing. People were talking about Obama's ties to Ayers, so I found out what those ties consisted of. I also pointed out that McCain is not free from scandal and linked an article about one of his lobbyists. I respect McCain greatly for what he has done for his country up to this point, but I feel that he adopted a win at all cost strategy for this election, and he lost a lot of what moderates loved about him. I'm a very educated voter, I read the issues from both sides. I know the scandals from both sides. The ones swirling around Obama have less founding in truth, as indicated by my link and the snopes link above. The ones revolving around McCain and Palin seem to be more concerning because they are more widely supported, and not in terms of numbers but as some would say in fact (depositions and the like). I also feel that Obama took a high road and generally avoided discussing those issues, if you disagree with me how many Obama rally clips have you heard with him saying damning things about McCain. Furthermore I tend to support Obama's policies as opposed to McCain's. But like I said before, these are just my opinions. I am not telling anyone here they do not have a right to have differing opinions from mine. I am just stating what I believe. As I stated in an earlier post, I hope everyone here has voted for the candidate they feel is best. I hope I did not offend anyone.

I completely agree with you dreamer, I respect people's opinions and everyone's right to vote for whichever candidate they support. I hope everyone here has voted for who they think will be the best president. I was using an exaggeration about eating children. As for his association with Bill Ayers I suggest looking at this link http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/national/stories/DN-ayers_05pol.ART.State.Edition1.2698a11.html Here is an interesting article about one of McCains top aides, a former Saddam Huessein Lobbyist. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/14/mccain-transition-chief-a_n_134595.html

Sir John, I had no intentions of convincing anyone. All the imformation is out there for people to see. If someone hasn't made up their mind yet after all this time, I hardly believe a few paragraphs will sway their mind. Just posting my opinion on the topic.

If you guys want to have a political debate, could we debate the issues and not the more extremist claims about candidates. I read all over the web Obama is a Marxist, is terrorist, hates america, routinely burns flags, eats young children,.... What about their stances on key political issues. Why do you support one policy over the other. I personally will be proudly voting for Obama tomorrow, but that is because of his policies not because i'm afraid of mccain. Support a candidate because you think they will do a better job. If you are curious as to why I think Obama is better suited than McCain to handle the presidency I will be more than happy to oblige. These types of things only hurt political discussion because they are unfounded. Obama not putting his hand over his heart does not imply that he is trying to dismantle america. What concerns me more is that fact that Palin was being investigated for trying to get her sister's ex-husband fired, how she changed the records so that she could charge alaska for bringing her daughters on business trips, and her lack of foreign policy experience. So there are those types of claims against all parties, some have more support than others. But I would much rather discuss the issues as oppose to these claims.

Thanks Chris Also I wonder if anyone knows the play breakdown when we come out in the 2 TE 2 RB 1 WR set. It seems like every time we do that we put Kumara in motion and hand off to aldrige. I understand setting up the play action, but I just think that isn't the strength of this team. When you can throw the ball effectively and then use quick run plays out of the shotgun or single back set why spend 3 - 6 plays running into the line just to set up a pass play later in the game? It appears that is what they did for that 4th and 1 at midfield at the end of the game. You can either use the run to set up the pass, or the pass to set up the run. I think we are better when doing the latter. That is why AA has been having a great year so far. Hughes and Aldrige are better at the former. Now I haven't played football since 7th grade. So my knowledge of coaching isn't great so those who are more informed please give me pointers. But football is really the only sport I follow, I read about and watch it as much as possible. So I feel like my working knowledge of the game is sound.

I said we would beat USC earlier and I haven't changed my mind. Although I was wrong about the pitt game.

But when they drop 8 and rush three it would be the perfect situation to throw in a draw or a quick hand off to Allen. Maybe even a direct snap (not wildcat). I think that is the type of strategy we used for much of the game. It is those series where haywood says we are going to run the ball and end up with 0 first downs that i don't get. Why do we do this for at least 3 or 4 series a game. I can understand once if it works it works and do it more. But in the third quarter when it failed why come out and do it again on the next possession. We can use it to change pace, but with the recievers we have and how clausen has been playing, lets let them make plays. The line isn't great so why put all the pressure on them. My philosophy is if something is working why stop using it. Make them stop you before you change. Especially in the pitt game where they're corners could not stop an out route to save their lives. People hate playing NCAA against me because I might run the same play 5 or 6 times in a row if it works. I know real football is more complicated, but it is not hard to see i something is working or not.

What bothers me most was the play calling. The short screen on 3 and long. How in the third quarter and in the 4th OT we stopped throwing. I'm tired of watching us try and line up in a traditional set and power the ball. We can't do it. Sure it works on the occasional third and short, but as a football philosophy we can't. Meanwhile we seem to be able to move the ball rather effectively with 3 wide a TE and a running back. I don't understand why we feel the need to change from this formula if it is working. I think Weis needs to have a serious talk with haywood about play calling. Also they need to work on defending the screen. This is another game where the screen pass killed us.

Its nice to see us getting more pressure. These past three games its looked like the defense has been getting to the quarterback much better.

Run it in to the ground is strong phrasing for 6 games into his first season. Look at the attrition UM experienced last year between players transferring and leaving for the NFL. I expected Michigan to be at about this level. I would have been surprised if they had made it to a bowl game. But you have to give him time. I hope I am wrong, but I feel that once he gets the right QB UM will have a scary offense.