All I keep thinking is we were 5 yards away from making it 34-7 and the game being over. If Gray doesn't fumble on the 2, we would all be loving life right now. Well you know what....that's how this season has gone. One play here, one play there. We got the win, lets move on to the coachless Orangeman. 7-5 is not OK but it's baby steps. Lets get through the next 2 games and win the bowl. God Bless ND.
VicPaul | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:33 am | #

Anyone on the ground at N.D. know the inside scoop on Charlie's torn-up knee? Is it actually worse than he is letting on? Is it so screwed up that he is on painkillers night and day?

Godspeed and Grotto prayers to Brian Smith and Michael Floyd for a speedy recovery. Without them in two weeks against USC, well... we'll probably see Kevin Washington and the back-ups early in the fourth quarter again, but this time with the game pretty much out of reach.
Andy | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 3:21 am | #

Ny Football Giants General Manager Jerry Reese.
Attention: Coach Charlie Weis.
"We learned something last year," said general manager Jerry Reese, already a star executive in the NFL, a guy with an amazing eye for talent. "We learned that if you play as a team, you win. You don't commit stupid penalties, you win. You win the physical battle, you win."
jim masterson | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 3:53 am | #

nothing wrong with hard hits, but the hit on JC seemed to be an intentional spear. one thing Ive noticed is we dont get a lot of calls, in fact, we get almost none. A coach helps you get calls. working the refs quietly all game is part of the HC job. they will give calls to guys they are afraid of.
belocki | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 6:20 am | #

The 4th quarter collapse has led to mor3 "dump CW" talk, and I would just say that I don't think thal of "progress" is valid. We have beaten only marginal teams this year, including SDSU, a game we arguabvly should ave lost. We have lost to some mid-tier teams including Pitt, UNC, and Boston Community College. Not progress.

The OL continues to act like traffic cones, until they had a 50 lb. advantage against Navy. Clausen is regressing. His last couple games don't look like 5-star material. There have been a number of coaching gaffes, and CW taking back they play calling hasn't helped much.

The coaching staff, with the exception of Tenuta, is largely inexperienced. Maybe they're good, but inexperienced.

With all the hotshot recruits we've picked up in the past 3 years, this team should be more productive. I don't give a damn if they are freshmen and sophmores. When I look at other top 5 programs, their underclassmen perform. Hell, UF had a freshman Heisman winner last year.

We are not making progress, regardless of what Swarbuck (sp?) says.

Somewhere the memories of former coaches, Joe Kuharich, Gerry Faust, Bob Davie, and Tyrone are becoming more familiar.

ND football is in a pretty sad state right now. I am beginning to wonder of CW can pull out a win with Syracuse before getting his nuts handed to him at USC. And Poodle will likely run it up to impress the pollsters to get a better BCS berth.

It's gonna be ugly.
gwzimm | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 7:34 am | #

Yup, confirmed in the South Bend Tribune this morning, Floyd and Smith will be out for approx. 4 weeks and will miss the last two games.

Weis said he was glad at least that 'in all likelihood' ND would see a bowl game this year that both would be healthy for.
Ryan | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 8:04 am | #

ND whipped navy and was great running the ball particularly in the third quarter....Has anyone ever seen the bizarre occurrence of two straight onsides being recovered. ND shut down the Navy run.....
captain jack | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 8:09 am | #

I know it sucked, but that second onside kick was awesome. ND surely could have been more aggressive, but that particular kick would have worked against a lot of teams.

what a perfect second bounce.
kevin | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 8:11 am | #

My criticism is something I have thought for a few years; when the second team goes in, let them play! Sharpley could have walked into the end zone or hit a wide opened tight end if on any of the last 3 snaps he had faked to Gray. Charlie needs to be told that 34-7 is not embarrassing a team.
Funny, last week all the talk was no one could stop Navy even though you know what's coming. The D has now played very well for the last 3 weeks, and my prediction is that next year will be a top 10 D.
The real question is Clausen.
canuck 75 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 8:18 am | #

One of the best storylines of this season is the turnaround of Walker. 6 weeks ago I would have been nervous about a chip shot, but when he went in for the second FG, which was a pretty good distance, I felt good, "He's made 8 of his last 9, including three in the do-or-die pressure of OT." Then he nailed it. After last year when Weis didn't have the confidence to let him kick the game winner against Navy, with his parents watching no less, it was great to see his two kicks be the difference this year.
bgr | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 8:42 am | #

gwzimm,
Tebow was a sophomore when he won the Heisman. He learned quite a bit from Chris Leak his freshman year. Who has Jimmy had to learn from. Remember that kid Brady Quinn, Jimmy wasn't around to learn from anybody. You need quality leadership from upperclassman to right this ship, and we don't have it. This team is a long way away from being a national championship team, but following last years 3-9 campain what did a realistic Irish fan expect. You don't win three games one year and the national championship the next. This team is growing up before our eyes and it is painful to watch.
I also agree on Clausen, he has definitely taken a few steps back the last several weeks.
Jerry | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 8:42 am | #

Out of three Navy onside kicks, ND recovered none. Ask yourself, who is coaching special teams?

Somehow after 4 yrs, we've ended up right where we started. However top tier schools did not after 4 yrs of Tressel, Saban, Stoops, Miles, Meyer. 5 coaches is not a fluke. I love the fat man, but a head coach he is not. ND needs to start looking at a CW exit strategy.
Dekom | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 8:48 am | #

Dekom is right. And add to that the fact that the scedule was "dumbed down" this year, and will be even lighter next year with such memorable programs as Nevada, Washington & Washington State on the menu. I wonder what CW's excuse will be then?

And as to Tebow's Heisman and the fact that Jimmy didn't have anyone to learn from, that's what coaches are for. duh. . . . .
gwzimm | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 9:07 am | #

If I was Syracuse, first time I kickoff, go onside!
INDYPT | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 9:11 am | #

I can hear the Poodle laughing already. God, I hate that SOB.
gwzimm | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 9:23 am | #

not to hijack the thread but.. did anyone hear Barack on 60 minutes?? He says he'll throw his weight around for a CFB playoff, who does he root for??
Gabby | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 9:48 am | #

Can anyone clarify the out-of-bounds rule where the toes land in but the heel lands out? I know there are bigger issues with the Irish than close calls - but i just need closure on that ruling...always thought that any part of the foot catching chalk was out...
jerry | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 9:49 am | #

I just want to say that Jimmy Clausen is physically tough as old boots. It's pretty tough to make him miss a play.
Joe Subway | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 9:55 am | #

My take on Tyree Barnes' Catch
On the field the play was ruled a catch.
The video, as far as I'm concerned, did not have enough evidence to overturn the ruling. The receiver's toe landed (presumably, first) on green, and his heel on white. You would need a mini camera underneath his foot or at ground level to overturn that one. There's no way of knowing if the heel and toe, were, as ND fans hoped they were, touching the ground simultaneously. No conclusive video evidence.

As for the other calls, robo-ref, the ref with the big biceps, was nearly smiling with glee as he made the host of other weird calls in Navy's favor.
Brian ND96 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:01 am | #

I was wondering that, too, Jerry. It's not like the toe hit the grass, then came up right before the heel hit the chalk. It's one fluid motion. Either way it was a great catch and relatively poor coverage I thought.

Kevin is right, too. Perfectly executed second onside kick. We just never should have gotten to that point. It looked like the team was expecting the big bounce on the first one, and thus didn't run up lest the ball fly over their heads, but someone needs to run up and snag that thing. It's not like the receiving team has to wait for the ball to travel 10 yards. The second one, though, very little chance with a bounce that good.
Erik '04 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:02 am | #

I feel strangely good about this game. I hated how it turned out as much as anyone, but beyond two plays -- the going for it on 4th and 3 and the Parris batted ball -- we looked pretty good.

I'll admit, though, that I'm worried about Weis' ability to motivate this team. Weis seems to be going for a Coughlin-like transformation. He wants to show the players he can lighten up a little without completely losing the toughness. But this is a fine line to walk. Teams take on the personality of their coach, and I think when you see things like Robbie Parris running around grinning after batting that ball out of bounds, it's obvious this team doesn't know how to behave like winners yet.

I don't mean to throw Parris under the bus here -- he just made a mistake. But can you imagine, for instance, a player on a Holtz team grinning ear-to-ear after a mistake like that? Of course not. The player would be (a) fearful of Holtz ripping his head off (b) embarrassed at making an undisciplined play in front of his hard-ass teammates. I'm not saying Holtz's way of coaching is the only way to go. But the players on his team knew what was expected of them and knew who they were.

By contrast, Parris doesn't know what's appropriate in the culture of this team -- should I celebrate the win to show I'm loose? Should I be pissed at myself for not coming down with that ball? Should I be apologizing to my teammates for letting them down?

On a really good team with really good leadership, a player would know the answers to these questions without even thinking. This Weis team doesn't know who it is yet.

The good news: The NY Giants looked like this a 14 months ago.
Hal | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:02 am | #

Since we are asking questions, how did Navy get four time outs? I still can't firgure that out. I watched the game again and they still got four time outs.
irishman43 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:04 am | #

Can someone with TIVO confirm that Navy was actually awarded 4 timeouts in the second half? I know they were not charged a timeout on the first replay, because the ref was simultaneously buzzed by the replay booth, but I thought for sure they had already used all 3 of their time outs.

If so, what should have been the penalty? In basketball it's 2 shots and the ball. Does time get run off the clock? Is it 15 yards?

There was another game on TV where a team was awarded two 40-second play clocks on the same play, while they were trying to run out the clock at the end of the game. I don't know exactly what happened, but it looked like the other team's coach should have been pissed. Two weird clock related issues in different games on the same weekend.
Erik '04 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:05 am | #

Ha, irishman43 beat me to it. :)
Erik '04 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:07 am | #

jerry: There wasn't indisputable evidence that he landed on his toes in-bounds before his heel landed out-of-bounds. I agree that it was close, but the call had to stand because the video didn't clearly show that he touched the line before gaining control of the ball.

How about the penalty on Parris for knocking the first on-side kick out-of-bounds? Was it only because he knocked it forward, or would it have been a penalty no matter which direction it had gone? At first, I thought that was a heads-up play, but I had no idea about rules prohibiting handling a kick like that. Seemed like BS to me, but what do I know? I'm just thankful for the win.
Bobby B | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:08 am | #

jerry,
The reciever had control of the ball when his toes were on the ground. When his heels hit the ground out of bounds, he already had possesion in bounds and it was ruled a catch. That play could have went either way.They took forever trying to make a call on that one. If you were watching the Jets/Pats game last thursday, moss had a last second TD with just the tips of his toes in bounds (same call).
Noel | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:19 am | #

Perhaps Parris thinks he's Samardzija, the receiver he understudied as an underclassman.

He should rethink that. The loosey goosey sideline thing doesn't make much sense when you don't have the Shark's numbers.
Joe Subway | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:20 am | #

Next two games are a perfect opportunity for Duval Kamara to step up.

Can Navy's kicker do that onside bounce consistently? I've never seen two better onsides back to back.

Funny how even in a game where we all agree Clausen was "off," his completion percentage looks great. I notice that each week, his percentage is higher than I would have guessed.

This season is a patchwork quilt. Pick a quarter from Game A and a quarter from Game B and we've got a complete, solid team. Does this mean we're hopelessly poorly coached, or we're about to put it all together in '09?
Mike81 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:23 am | #

The out of bounds pass should have been an easy decision for the replay official. The first foot down landed out of bounds period, there is no provision for part of the foot landing in bounds and part out.
Lou at Rocco's | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:26 am | #

Mike81, he never threw the ball longer than 15 yards (or rarely). The completion percentage was so high because half of them were screen passes. For whatever reason, injury or fear or design, clausen wasn't looking downfield. That really limits us
Majnun | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:32 am | #

Thanks, Lou at Rocco's. I agree -- it's one foot in bounds, not part of one foot. And if you're really at Rocco's, could you send me a large pepperoni and mushroom?
seymour 85 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:37 am | #

Let's not throw Parris under the bus, now. I thought his tipping the ball out of bounds was a pretty heads-up play. "Illegal batting"??? Who knew!!

After watching last year's Navy game and this year's Navy game, it's night-and-day. Our defense dominated them, and our offense is a few mistakes away from being competent. We're definitely improving. Certainly not as fast as I would like, but improving.

Kudos to all those who picked 7-5 before the season. I guess my 9-3 was a bit too optimistic (though we shoulda coulda woulda beaten UNC and Pitt).

Here's to ending that incredibly-overmentioned bowl losing streak!
Clear and Present Danger | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:39 am | #

Lou at Rocco's,
I have to respectfully disagree about the Navy 40-yard catch.
I think the first foot DID land inbounds. The toe was in; no question about it in my mind. Of course there is no provision for partial foot in; I agree with you on that.
What makes this call a bit weird is that typically when a receiver gets his toe in, he is facing the other way - ie, falling forward. If he toed the line falling forward, we probably wouldn't be having his conversation.

In this case, he toed the grass falling backwards, which doesn't happen often. Weird play for sure.

To sum up - toe in bounds with possession = catch. Just trying to be fair.
Brian ND96 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:40 am | #

Hal, thanks for your post. Your sentiments about the coaching are a lot like mine. However, how much did Weis learn from last year? How is this team still coming out flat and unable to play 4 quarters? How does Clausen not know how to check down to his TE and RB's when the deep routes are covered? That's the first thing thing Weis taught Brady when he came in.
I hope I'm wrong, however, I'm not quite sure Weis is cracked up to be a head coach. This team lacks serious discipline, strength training and conditioning. You don't have to look any further than the OL play and WR comments after games and coach/player reactions after dumb mistakes,i.e. Harrison Smith's personal foul which gave Pitt the chance to get back into the game. This is just unacceptable behavior and Weis doesn't know how to coach up this immaturity. I will stand by the guy for one more year if we come out big against Syracuse andclinch a bowl game. If we don't come out fired up, please step down. Everybody matures a year, the OL stays in tactanother year, the D beefs up a bit (if our coaches understand strengh conditioning, the jurys still out) and Walls come back as a huge upgrade over Lambert.
MPG | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:45 am | #

The receiver was in bounds, folks. If the foot had been turned over and he dragged his toe, no one would have questioned it. It's the same thing...he was just trying to get his toes in, not his whole foot, and it worked.

As for Parris' play on the onside kick...that was actually a smart play. The ruling was that it was batted FORWARD which is a unique rule in the last two minutes of the game. Whether or not that was the right ruling is questionable. Parris batted it directly to the sideline...not upfield. The rule is to keep a team from knocking the ball upfield to gain yardage. The ball might have gone 'forward', but even that wasn't obvious. It was a smart play by Parris, because he was coached that they don't have to catch it to gain possession...knocking it out of bounds works, too.

Both college and NFL have changed the rules lately to make these onsides kicks more exciting, and this is one of the adjustments.

With two minutes to go, we had a comfortable lead, and I'm wondering where I'm going to get enough points to cover the second half over. Why is everyone falling all over themselves to blame the Weis, Jenkins, and Pope Benedict for the 'collapse'? It was a series of fluke plays that all went Navy's way. Sure, our guys could have done more, but Navy had a team on the field, too.

If you want to criticize the coach for a lackluster first half, then that's warranted. But don't fire the coach and reboot the program because of three onsides kicks.
Dogger | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:51 am | #

Not to get ahead of ourselves, but ESPN has some early bowl projections and Mark Schlabach has us slotted for the Gator Bowl vs. Miami (FL). Wouldn't that be something? Just interesting to think about...

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bo...on=2008& week=12
bpeters1 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:05 am | #

It is not the same thing. His foot was not turned over, he was backing out of bounds and his foot landed out of bounds. He did not tap his toe, his foot landed out of bounds.
Lou at Rocco's | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:06 am | #

I finally agree with Mark May. This team has not developed like they should and I don't think that CW is the answer. Alot of passion in the man, but he cannot relate to the college player. Its time to cut our losses and start looking for a coach with college experience. Dump everybody besides Tenuta and Corwin.

I'll be rooting for the Canes until a Notre Dame football team can start showing some f@cking heart. Its been too long and I can't take it anymore.

Peace.
ndfaninflorida | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:09 am | #

Personally, I am hoping for Sun Bowl in El Paso, but for entirely selfish reasons, as it is only a few hours' drive from my house.

If we do go to the Sun Bowl, the most likely opponent would be Cal.
Colonel Klink | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:28 am | #

You'll be rooting for the Canes???? Show some f@cking brains....besides, how much college experience did Pete Carroll have before he went to USC?
mikes1160 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:29 am | #

ndfaninflorida,

You must be a new ND fan. There can NEVER be any rooting for the 'Canes!!! Best regards.
Colonel Klink | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:29 am | #

Dogger,
You are right on target. Add to the mix that the half time ajustments on offense were very good. Finally, the defense was very good throughout, not just the second half. As the head coach, Weis should get credit for that.
Yeah, the last 2 minutes were not good, but my takeaways are that we stopped the #2 rushing offense very well, rushed for over 200 yds. and found a way to win witout having to put the game on Clausen's shoulders. By the way, I am hopeful that this teaches Jimmy to remember that particular fact the next time he tries to force the ball into coverage to make a play.
Kind of glad to see so many postings with perspective.
Jim | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:30 am | #

I want the Gator Bowl, and I want FSU or Miami. That is the only thing that saves the season in my eyes. 8-5 sucks, but it's pretty sweet if they beat the Crimi-Noles or prevail in Catholics vs. Convicts IV.
Mark | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:34 am | #

we could hang with FSU as they are not that good and have dysfunctional coaching.

miami has way more talent than ND, but also has dysfunctional coaching. if the kids come to play for miami, they could damage us bigtime.
belocki | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:44 am | #

Weis will be around next year and god willing so will I.....then we can recall all the negative posts. Next year will be fine....how many of you predicted 7-5? Why are you now up in arms?
captain jack | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:48 am | #

Since nobody else is taking the title of the post as an opportunity:

Re: Last 5 minutes

The second team was just not able to keep the devil down in the hole.

Re: Breakdowns in parts of the game

We're building something here. All of the pieces matter.

Re: Robby Parris' penalty

What the $#@& did I do?

Re: Two weeks from now in LA

Omar's commin'!
Sean F | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:51 am | #

The Floyd injury really hurts -- how will we ever beat USC without him? Oh, wait....
Joe | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 12:04 pm | #

...cornerback play still suspect...safeties making too many tackles/plays after cornerbacks "whiff"...at least Lambert's on the sideline...
jim/redondo beach | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 12:05 pm | #

Has anyone heard if Clausen is hurt?

We were at the game this past weekend, almost every long throw seemed to come out wobbly and ended up short.

His short passes were more on the money.

Is it possible something is wrong with his shoulder?
jk'72 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 12:07 pm | #

Congrats, boys. You beat a team that's above .500. That will be the only one this season.
irishru2 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 12:23 pm | #

Why did Front Butt put in the 2nd team? We weren't up by 30, and if we were, we should have laid it on. The team needed to whoop someone's butt, if anything to get revenge on Navy, to instill some killer instinct. Also,the first team can use all the experience they can get. Another poor decision by a rookie head coach (well, practically a rookie, and he sure seems like one.) Charlie almost blew that game by doing that, and he can't afford any more screwups. This was a chance for the team to dominate an opponnent for the whole game, and do what we haven't been doing...FINISH! It seems everything Charlie does turns to Sh**.

The coverage on the onside kicks was horrible, no one even went for the ball on the second one. Did you see Robby Parris get absolutely laid out when he was just sitting there watching the ball in the air, while Navy AGGRESIVELY went for it and got it?! More bad coaching.
S man | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 12:23 pm | #

Clausen was 15/18 passing, but 2 of his 3 incompletions were interceptions. I know that Navy plays pretty deep coverage and soft corners to take away the long ball, so Charlie wanted to keep the passes underneath. Also glad to see that our O-line was able to control the line of scrimmage against the undersized Navy D-line, and that we made them pay for not committing an 8th man to stopping the run.
Erik '04 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 12:24 pm | #

While I can't cite the NCAA rulebook on this, I've gotta say I'll be dumbfounded if, after it's all said & done, that 40-yd "catch" ruling turns out to be valid. My gut feeling is that the rules don't go any deeper into it than if this: if any part of the first foot to hit the ground LANDS on the chalk, you're out. There's no separation between toe & heel - it's all your foot.

Those trying to use the "toe drag" rule as justification, where the receiver is falling forward out of bounds, I can't buy that, b/c in that instance, the toe is the ONLY PART of the foot to hit the ground. And in this case, he didn't drag his toes anyway.

Those saying there wasn't sufficient evidence to overturn the call on the field, 1) yes there was - all angles show the heel on the sideline. I believe the only question is the particular rule in this case. 2) Although defaulting to the call on the field IS the rule if there's not sufficient evidence (& there was), I lose all confidence in banking on that initial call when that call is DOUBLY WRONG! On top of calling it a catch, the guy called it a TD when the WR never got CLOSE to the end zone - he was a full yard-to-yard-&-a-half away! And 3) the thing that worries me the most is that, in the so-far-still-TBD-absence of a clear rule in this case, it appears that the replay officials once again took it upon themselves to MAKE UP a rule to suit the instance. Like w/ Grimes superman-TD last year, Oregon being gifted a game against OU on a triply-botched onside kick call (among other absurd PAC-10 crew rulings), and Michigan being granted a phantom TD for catching a ball out of bounds against MSU this year, the replay booths, instead of helping to clarify rulings & "get it right" every time, have instead become a joke - a reason to hold your breath & pray. There seems to be little-to-no expertise, & perhaps worse, zero accountability - those are serious problems.

I really want to hear an official ruling on that call, though.

Also, is there still no word on the Fourth Time Out? And did anyone else find it hilarious how much the announcers, who were so clearly pulling for Navy, just seemed to shut up & not have a clue what was going on or what to say when the officials just let things slide there?

Sorry for the long rant, but I needed to get all that out. Go Irish!
baIrish | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 12:26 pm | #

Just to comment on the injuries.....Two knee injuries and the total amount of injuries means 1) Navy needs to be much more policed when playing Notre Dame for the excessive and extremely costly chop-block. 2) The amount of injuries in one game means bad conditioning i.e. Mendoza = out of a job
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 12:40 pm | #

One of the announcers was Steve Buerlein...an Notre Dame grad. I don't think he was rooting for Navy -- they just didn't have ANY explanation for the 4th time out.

I agree wholeheartedly about instant replay...it's a joke in the way it has been implemented in college.
Dogger | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 12:43 pm | #

Dogger, you're right, Buerlein was in the booth & I completely forgot. But as crazy as it sounds, even so, I still feel like I noticed a pro-Navy vibe. Maybe some of that came from the other announcer, & I guess a lot of it can probably be attributed to everybody's general respect towards Navy. And then on top of it, throw in what looks like one of the craziest, most unlikely comebacks ever, & you get announcers who are just excited by the situation as a whole.

But, not to gloss over it, my "so clearly pulling for Navy" comment was going too far - my fault. I think having so many of the calls & breaks go against us (last 5 min of the game) just has me too tightly wound - even 2 days later! - and that tends to push me into a "defend my Irish," "everybody's against us" type of mind-set.

Here's hoping for an absolute beat-down against Syracuse!
baIrish | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 12:59 pm | #

I was amazed at the Navy reciever's catch. To drag your toe in reverse is pretty impressive.

I watched it with two dozen people in the Baltimore Sports Museum after the deluge caused us to run for the parking garage.

I was arguing with some guy who said it was a toe drag. You can't drag toes in revers.
RedMahoney | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:05 pm | #

It seemed to me that the subs came when the deluge was upon them and he was trying to protect the first team from injury. I thought it was a pretty good move at the time, as the game was seemingly in hand. However the phantom inbounds call, the 4th timeout, and the perfect onsides kicks, made it look silly in hindsight.
ND67Aquajock | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:05 pm | #

RedMahoney, you CAN drag toes in reverse. Go watch a ballet class. Seriously.
I find interesting that so many people can watch the same video and see different things.
Brian ND96 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:17 pm | #

The guy was out of bounds on that catch. Period. He came down on one foot, and half that foot was out. End of story.

I cannot understand what the discussion is. This replay stuff is taking us backwards.
Hal | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:18 pm | #

I am amazed at all the talk about the second team being in with ten minutes to go. They did just fine and didn't give up anything for the first 7 minutes they were in the game. So the Irish were up by 20 with 3 minutes to go. What coach wouldn't have the second team in there. Like I said after the game Saturday you can't put this on Charlie Weis. It is the players job to come up with one of the two onside kicks. It is the players job to not get beat deep. Let's finally put some blame where it is deserved and that is the players lackluster effort on the two onside kicks and getting beat deep late in a game. Those bone-headed mistakes are inexcusable.
gwzimm
I guess our head football coach that has NEVER played a down of college football is supposed to teach our freshman QB the nuances of the position. Interesting concept. Brady Quinn had the same trouble and finally figured it out when he became an upper classman. Funny how that usually works out.
Jerry | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:26 pm | #

Completely agree with baIrish and Hal on the out of bounds (because it was) "catch." The argument that he dragged his toe only works when his toe is the only part of his foot that hits the ground. If his toe had hit inside the white, and then he somehow picked his foot up so that none of the rest of it landed on the turf at all (and then fell down), that would have been a catch. As it happened, his foot landed out of bounds. There is no special provision that makes some sort of distinction between the toe and the heel. He was out of bounds.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter because we won the game. But it was utterly baffling to hear the announcers talking about how hard a call it was to make because his toe landed in bounds. Just because the toe landed first doesn't somehow make it more special than the heel.
Jade | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:29 pm | #

What about the QB keeper on 4th down that our D appeared to stop? No measurement, no hesitation just automatic 1st down for Navy. The officiating was truly awful.

My understanding of calling a timeout when you don't have one is the officials are supposed to disregard you and keep the clock running. (Remember the '05 USC game where their assistant was running along the sidelong calling a T/O they didn't have?) Apparently, these officials forgot how to count along with their other shortcomings. I don't fault Parris for what he did - they probably muffed that call, too.

And yes, I thought the announcers sounded a bit gleeful as events unfolded in Navy's favor.
OC mj | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:36 pm | #

For all the talk this season about Weis not being able to adjust, he did so in the second half by running, and he took risk away by only calling short passes for Clausen (who is not playing sharp right now).

A pretty ridiculous series of events took place and I won't put the blame on Weis for that. Did you guys notice that the downpour even let up for Navy to complete their comeback? Just a ridiculous last 2 minutes.

The Irish are progressing, but it should be BCS or bust next year. Players need to develop big time this off season.
www.southbendblarney.com | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:36 pm | #

One more thing regarding our lack of experienced coaches. I would not consider Latina inexperienced.
OC mj | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:42 pm | #

Jade, Sorry for beating a dead horse, to me it appears that the toe DID hit ground first (inbounds), before the heel. If you believe otherwise, you might be right, but there isn't CONCLUSIVE evidence to the contrary.

NB: I am all for beating dead Trojan horses.
Brian ND96 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 1:43 pm | #

Don't blame Weis, don't blame Jimmy, don't blame the officials, and don't blame anyone else in the stadium or the Baltimore area. Blame my wife. She put the baby in a USNA sweat suit on Saturday morning, supposedly because she didn't know who the Irish were playing and it was the warmest, most comfy outfit she could find for him on the first cold day in Houston this year. He watched the first half with me, with the obvious consequences, but he took a nap starting at half time. Things took a turn for the worse for the Middies from that point onward, but the little guy woke up just minutes before they started to come back. I did my best to get him to cheer for the Irish, but the power of the sweatsuit was too powerful. Fortunately, we don't have any Syracuse, USC, FSU, or Miami hand-me-downs, so you can blame someone else for any more games we lose in '08.
Bobby B | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 2:15 pm | #

A couple thoughts:

1. Catch on sideline was only a catch because of replay. The line judge didn't see the play. That is why he thought the receiver scored a touchdown when the pylon went down. It was knocked by the ND defender (Gray?) Only in slow motion does the toe land in bounds and the heel fall on the line. With a referee in position they would never have called that a catch. Only if you can slow down the play, does it show that the receiver had possession and the toe (which I thought clearly) landed first.
2. I didn't think Charlie called off the dogs too early. I thought he gave the ball to the 2nd string and they performed pretty well. They moved the ball down the field and into position for a TD. Fumbles happen (especially to freshman running backs).
3. Onside kicks were executed about as well as you can by the kicking team. The first one should have been caught, but the second one is almost impossible to defend. Professional kickers do not execute as well as that. That being said, the inherent problem lies in that the first line of guys are not supposed to try and recover it. They are supposed to block so the second line can receive it. They did not, which was why Parris wasn't smiling after the 2nd one.
4. Charlie and Claussen finally did what we should have done against Pitt, BC and Navy (first half). Take what the defense gives him. The d-backs were playing anywhere from 10 to 15 yards off the ball and we should have been eating them up all day with the 5 and 10 yard screens followed by spreading out the run. Every time Claussen has tried to throw downfield he has gotten picked because the receivers are covered. We clearly cannot run-block when the defense puts 7 or 8 in the box, so why not spread them out. First game this year we have done this.
5. Bill H., gwzimm, etc. - Do you guys think we should keep Weis? I mean really. We know. You don't like him. It is worse than Faust, Davie, whatever. I am not saying your opinions are not valid, but at least say something different for a change. You guys are like the little bitch in the back of class who never says anything but whiney crappy comments. Tone down the vitriol and add something worth reading. Please.
6. Can someone please provide me an example of a team with true freshman and/or sophomores at every skill position winning 10 games. It is obvious our defense is playing well enough for us to win some games. Wonder if that has to do with Crum, Brown, Kuntz, McCarthy, Lambert and Brutun all being upperclassmen. Do you think experience might actually matter in college football. I watched the USC/Stanford game the other night and every single starter was listed as a Senior. (although I thought that safety was a junior)

My only question is where was McNeil for the last series? It looked like Blanton and Gray were in.
Michael | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 2:22 pm | #

Bobby B;

That was the post I was looking for. Now it all begins to make sense. The baby-dressing angle is definitely underrated. I make sure my toddler is wearing his 'Lou Holtz Sweatpants' every Saturday. He also lisps a lot, so it totally works.

Please keep any Orange garment off your child this Saturday.

Thanks in advance.
Joe Subway | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 2:27 pm | #

Micael,
I believe Mcneil was the cb who was burnt on the long, questionable completed pass. Weis probably pulled him thinking he was dogging it.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 2:35 pm | #

>If you want to criticize the coach for a lackluster first half, then that's warranted. But don't fire the coach and reboot the program because of three onsides kicks.

If this were just this game, maybe people could forgive. Maybe even 2 or 3 games. However, I have not seen an ND team play good or even to it's potential since Army 2006. That is 24 games straight. Mistakes or poor play are not abberations but part of the system now.
GB | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 2:38 pm | #

Bobby, thanks for coming clean. I hope your next purchase will be the warmest, coziest ND-onesie on the planet!

Michael, you said the 40-reception was only a catch b/c of replay, but the ruling on the field was completion & TD. The rest of your description of that play sounds exactly right to my recollection. Yes, the toe hit first (thank you announcers for beating that into our heads 97 times), that much is clear. I think the only thing left to determine is whether or not there's some subtle rule about half of the foot touching in FIRST, then the other half touching OUT. By my logic, it's one STEP, one landing motion, w/ no separation from the ground or dragging, so it's one foot out of bounds. What burns me is that it was never clarified by the officials on the field, the announcers, or anyone else yet that I've seen/heard. Makes me wonder whether or not the booth knew the technical rule, or if they essentially made one up by their interpretation of things (or let slide the video evidence of his foot hitting the line in favor of the on-field ruling BECAUSE they didn't know the rule). Is one of you BGS guys a rulebook guru, & would you be able to find some kind of substantiation here, one way or the other? Hope so...

And I also wondered why Gray was in there on that last series. Unfortunately, I think I need to work on "wondering to myself," as my whole apartment building probably heard my un-censored "wonderings"...
"WHY THE @#$%C#@&T% IS A SECOND-STRINGER STILL IN?!?!"
baIrish | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 2:46 pm | #

Regarding the catch:
NCAA rule is: "If one foot first lands out inbounds and the receiver has control of the ball, it is a catch even though a subsequent step or fall takes the receiver out of bounds."
His entire foot did not come down in bounds, and his next step was out of bounds. The ruling should have been incomplete.
WyoMike | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 2:47 pm | #

The coach is responsible to teach the fundamentals and to get them ready to play and to perform. Weis and his staff is very inconsistent in this respect.

Jerry, you're kidding around, right?
10 minutes left in the game and up by 20 and you put in your second string? That is absolutely ridiculous. You know how fast college football teams can score? Well, you gotta know now, cause Navy did twice, and almost 3 times in 3 minutes. It was WAY to early to put in the second string. Florida leaves there starters in till they have a COMFORTABLE lead, like up by 30 with 2 minutes to go. Another move by front butt that almost backfired.
I really want to like CW, but damn, going down to the last minute to beat Navy? Come on, man, beat em by 40. They came and beat us on our home turf last year, and celebrated all over the stadium! Beat em by 50, for Christsakes.

Oh, and just casue Latina's been around, doesn't mean he's a good coach. They obviously need a new one on the O-line. I'm a freak with TIVO, and I've compared USC's line with ND's, and it is like watching Pro vs High School. ND's line doesn't shoot out, they stand up, there footwork is long and slow, instead of short and powerful(conditioning, and repetive practice), and there leverage is horrible, they get pushed around by guys 100 lbs smaller than them.
Thanks for letting me rant, I'm just very frustrated.
S man | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 2:49 pm | #

Regarding putting in the second-stringers, can you really blame Weis that much? I mean, on offense you're up by 20 and facing soft coverage & smaller average players - that's prime time to give your back-ups a chance to gain some valuable time & experience. And they looked fine until they fumbled at a terrible time - which was admittedly a killer. On Defense, yes, college teams in general can score quickly, but NOT Navy, usually. They are the epitome of a grind-it-out team that sticks to the run. They just don't throw & catch very well b/c it's not what they practice. On top of that, throw in the horribly sloppy conditions & the fact that our starters were already dropping like flies.

So no, I'm not gonna second-guess Weis on the subbing, even if hindsight tells us it was excessive &/or just a bit too early.
baIrish | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 3:09 pm | #

Brian ND96:

Yes, the toe did hit the ground first; I never meant to give the impression that I didn't think so. My point was that it doesn't matter whether the toe hit first or not. His foot (the rule makes no mention of "toe" or "heel") landed out of bounds.
Jade | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 3:28 pm | #

In regard to playing the 2nd string for most of the 4th quarter, I don't disagree with it either. Remember how much flak CW got last year because he HADN'T played the backups his first two years? Now you're telling him not to? Plus, the "Hands" team that gave up two onside kicks are all first-stringers (Hughes had the ball bounce right past him on the first one).
Erik '04 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 4:02 pm | #

Michael,
Appreciated your post. Agree on all points. Eric Hanson (SBT) had a good article on Weis putting in subs. He recalled that Weisd was savaged 2 years ago when he didn't do it in the Navy game. Now he gets savaged for doing it. The media is so predictable.

Absolutely agree on your point no. 5. I'm tired of the same whining as well. It gets old. Same thing week in and week out. No substance mind you.

Hey one other thing as a takeaway from this game: Brandon Walker is quietly becomming reliable. His first kick I was thinking "He should make this". The second one I was thinking "Good, another three" before he kicked. What is that now 9 of the last 10? Aside from the last 2 minutes, Special teams were good. A punt block for a TD, Anello almost recovers a muffed kickoff and finally Golden gets a significant return. Someone needs to tell him to quit dancing around back ther and use his speed with forwad movement. He is too hesitant after catching punts.
Jim | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 4:15 pm | #

S-Man

Good comparison with the USC offensive line. I think they are a lighter unit than ND's as well (I've read they average under 300lbs), which helps them out of their stance. In the NFL, the Broncos have always been a good line, and they stay light (at least as far as offensive lineman go).

Maybe time to change philosophy for the big uglies? I do not know if Latina is a bad coach or not, but the possibility of getting a new line coach should be explored.
www.southbendblarney.com | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 4:24 pm | #

The ruling was correct with regard to the pass near the end--it should NOT have been ruled incomplete.

Nowhere in the rule book does it say that the ENTIRE foot needs to be in bounds. It says "foot". Since the toe is part of the foot, then if the toe lands in bounds, the foot lands in bounds. We all learned the transitive property in high school geometry, didn't we?

Seriously, haven't you guys seen receivers drag toe(s) in bounds and have it be ruled a catch?? It happens all the time.
kmf | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 4:38 pm | #

Yes but if the heel lands out of bounds, the foot is out of bounds. It wasn't just the toe and then his momentum carried him backwards for another step, or he landed a toe, then fell on his back. His toe landed in bounds, then his heel hit the line. Thus the "foot" as a whole is out of bounds. It was an incomplete pass and was ruled incorrectly.
WyoMike | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 4:51 pm | #

while we're talking the toe-drag...
anybody remember the shark's diving catch along the sideline in 2005 against Tennessee? replay officials overturned the call when it appeared samardzija got his foot down in bounds, but they called it incomplete anyways. similar situation, and i believe in both cases the ruling on the field was a catch. seems both times we got the short end of the stick
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 4:52 pm | #

S Man,
No I'm not kidding around. I still can't blame this almost loss by putting in the second stringers. Navy isn't a quick strike team that you are referring to. And as Erik '04 stated in his post the first team hands team didn't get the job done. Putting in second stringers when you are up by 30 with 2 minutes to play doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Those kids aren't getting valuable playing time putting them in then. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one. However what I am curious about is if anyone says it is a bad idea if the kick team recovers the first onside attempt. My guess would be probably not. Remember hindsight is always 20/20.
Jerry | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 5:08 pm | #

Enought with the toe already!

Good points about the subs, but I still think he did it too soon, and anyone can score quickly, even Navy (see 2008 ND vs Navy game for reference).
Latina comes from a grind it out, power run offense when he was at Ole Miss. We are a pass first team, a different philosophy. Plus, why don't we pull are tackles or guards? It is very rare to see with ND, but I see it with everyone else. And your right, Blarney, seems like lighter lineman are more the norm these days, have you seen some of the Michigan and Florida guys? 250 average, and good protection and run blocking.
S man | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 5:10 pm | #

Weis's decision to pull the starters when he did would've been a smart move if this team had repeatedly shown it can finish off inferior competition and hadn't suffered soul-crushing defeats in 3 out of their last 4 games. I would've applauded his decision to get the backups some experience in 2005 or 2006. Not so much in the current context. But the bottom line is we won, and that's all I care about. Onward to the 'Cuse and (gulp) SC.
scott | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 5:45 pm | #

bairish,

I know the call on the field was a catch, but I think the field judge misread the play. (although he was directly in front of it) That is also why he called it a touchdown when the receiver never came near the pylon. I confirmed it was McNeil who knocked it over. I think it was clear in real time that he landed on the line, but once slowed down in replay the toe lands first in bounds. The strange thing is after the play the field judge is looking down at the spot where the receiver went out of bounds, then looks over and calls touchdown. Call me a conspiracy theorist but I wonder if this is another one of those calls where the referee figures he will call a TD and it will be overturned if he is wrong. Ultimately doesn't matter as ND won and covered the spread.

Whoever said McNeil was out because he got burned might be right. It looked like he was a step or two behind. However, I have not been overly impressed by Gray so far this year, and was surprised to see him on the field. (Please note I have not written him off as he is a redshirt freshman) I am not aware of any formations or personnel groupings where he plays in front of McNeil. Maybe he was fresher? Anyone see any comments from Charlie regarding?
Michael | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 5:46 pm | #

So to get this straight. If Notre Dame wins a game. Then they played a cupcake that they should have beaten in the first place. But if Notre Dame loses, or doesn't totally manhandle the opponent. Then it's the coach who sucks and we should fire him immediately. Ok I think I get it now.
aaron b | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 5:50 pm | #

We had lighter/quicker O-linemen the past three years and it didn't work, so CW decided to change his philosophy and bulk the O-line up. It's not really working either. Something is missing. Coaching? An inate attitude within the players? Both? Something else?
Erik '04 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 5:52 pm | #

I made this point at the top- let the second teamers play. Run the same offence and D and don't back off.
Michael-good post. Good to see more positives than negatives today.
BTW even with the fumble, can't help but think Jonas Gray has looked great in his 2 chances.
canuck 75 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 5:52 pm | #

One other item I forgot about. What did everyone think about the punt block? I believe this is the first time I can remember this season where we attempted to block a kick. I may be wrong, but it seems that we are almost always blocking for a return. Just wondering if this is something Charlie has been holding back for the SC game.
Michael | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 5:53 pm | #

It was nice to see a punt block. It would be nice if someone told Golden Tate that it's OK to call a fair catch every now and again. It's getting to where I cringe whenever he is back in Punt return formation.
aaron b | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 5:56 pm | #

Anello is our MVP, that guy is amazing, and now he's got a punt bock under his belt, hope next week he scores 6!
I think they will give Weis 2 more years, unless it gets realllyy ugly next year, than they fire him at the end of the season.
Didn't seem Swarbick gave Charlie a ringing endorsement when he was in the booth.
S man | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 5:58 pm | #

I'd love to drop the toe discussion but I just can't, knowing that Wyomike will go to bed tonight with a misinterpretation of the rule.

I think we both agree that a player can 1) catch a ball, 2) drag his toes, and then 3) have his shoulder land out-of-bounds, and it would be considered a catch. We've seen it happen many times before.

Why, then, can't the player 1) catch a ball, 2) drags his toes, and then 3) have his heel land out-of-bounds?

Once the foot--and that includes toes, heel, soul, ankle, etc--touches the ground, it is considered a completion. It makes NO DIFFERENCE what part of the body touches the out-of-bounds area next. Even if that includes another part of the foot.
kmf | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 6:09 pm | #

Haven't seen so much intense discussion of toes in the media since the days of Dick Morris.
Joe Subway | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 6:38 pm | #

Michael,

Think it is the first block this year. Outside of FG's I think this is the first points on special team as well.

Does anyone know who has corrected Brandon Walker's mechanics?
Jim | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 6:39 pm | #

Brandon Walker, by himself.
yogo45 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 7:28 pm | #

Canuck75, exactly right on the sub situation. If Weis chooses to put in the backups, then he needs to let them run the offense as is. If Navy puts 9 in the box and blitzes, we have to throw. As Spurrier said when asked why he kept throwing when up by 40, "They blitz, I throw. If you want to know why I threw when the game was over, ask him why they blitzed when the game was over."

As far as the catch/toe thing goes, has anyone ever seen another completion given in a similar situation? By similar situation, I mean a situation in which a player's foot hits in bounds and out of bounds in one continuous motion without any other part of his body hitting the ground.

On a side note, I think anytime a referee gets a call so blatantly wrong on the field (calling that catch a TD), there should be no need for "conclusive video evidence" to overturn the call. How the hell can someone score a TD when the ball never gets close to the endzone? Even if he had kicked the pylon, that doesn't matter; the ball was clearly still a yard short and he was moving away from the endzone.

Another advantage to being an ND fan: hearing penalty calls that one would never otherwise hear. Illegally batted on-side kick is another one to add to the list that over the last 5 years has included: roughing the center, leg whip, and defensive line holding on punt coverage. I'm not saying they aren't penalties, they technically are, but has anyone heard these called before or since?
cjdomer04 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 8:06 pm | #

The difference in this case about the toe drag is that the receivers first foot was out of bounds already. Once you touch the out of bounds you are out, doesnt matter what the second foot, the shoulder or anything does, the first foot has to be in bounds. I believe if you watch the replay his first foot was on the line and he toe dragged the second foot, also the heel being out and the toe in does not make the foot in bounds. If that was the case I would run all my sideline patterns to where the heels were out of bounds but the toes were in bounds.
DB12 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 8:23 pm | #

This may help:http://en.allexperts.com/q/College-Football- 2792/2008/7/foot-rule.htm
DB12 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 8:55 pm | #

“Usually you don’t spend a whole bunch of time on hands team,” Weis said. “But obviously we’ll take a lot more time this week.”

It was almost like Weis was handing Navy the game once again with bloated complacency. (What are they doing at practice besides the drills we see on B&G Illustrated reports?)Give Navy or BC an inch and they will take full advantage of it. It also still appears like (non-player) Weis has yet to grasp the concept of momentum. Pete Carroll didn't fit the Sunday game, Weis still has not adjusted to the Saturday one. (I hope Weis gave a better pre-game speech than the tepid one shown on CBS by Niumatalolo.)

Week by week Weis teams do not look prepared, disciplined, or focused. Those attributes used to radiate off Lou's program and I saw it last Saturday in the BC & Florida State game. (Like it or not, BC has been on the forefront of sharp & mean movement.) ND administration is paying Weis too much for the circus and almost total breakdown we saw in the final four minutes. I thought the program hit the nadir against SDSU and then BC, but then the Navy game turned ugly and pride was handed over to a half-empty stadium of uppity Midshipmen.

It doesn't have to be this way.
ND will lose more in the long run vs. the buyout of the contract after year 5. Maybe they can sell the jet.
08/08/08 | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 9:26 pm | #

Weis should have learned his "Do the Collapse" lessons from this year's Stanford game.

This year's version of the Navy team if far from a Paul Johnson one. They look like a disciplined version of the 2008 Washington Huskies.
In the name of Sonny Sixkiller | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 10:00 pm | #

kmf, it's not really that complicated. If the guy's whole foot came down at once & landed half on the sideline, half in-bounds, is it a catch? No. He's out. Whatever part of you that touches the ground first (as you're going out) must NOT touch the chalk, otherwise you're out.

The only exception to this, that's been brought up a lot already, is the "toe drag" rule (which is not limited to toes). If your momentum is carrying you out & your first foot to land while coming down w/ the ball hits in-bounds but skids onto the sideline, then it's a catch.

In this instance, the guy wasn't dragging his foot, he was just landing on it, & part of it hit the sideline. No catch - it's that simple.
baIrish | Email | Homepage | 11.17.08 - 11:44 pm | #

I know we're beating the "toe issue" to death here, but I want to make a point. If the Navy receiver had been turned around; facing the sideline instead of having his back to it, and he catches the ball as his foot is coming down near the sideline, and if his heel lands in bounds but the toe is out (like the natural heel-to-toe motion of taking a step), then he's out of bounds and it's no catch. Why is that any different if his toe lands first but the heel is out? It was NOT a catch...
PouncerDog | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 12:02 am | #

PouncerDog

Depending on the situation, most likely it would be split second and the ref would not see it. However, if one does a thought experiment and a guy catches the ball at the sideline and lands with both toes inbounds. Let's say he can stay that way for two seconds ( probably not feasible in reality ). Then he puts his heel down. There would be no discussion on this. However, this happened in a split second so it appears that the whole foot was out. Dragging the toe also happens in a split second usually.
GB | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 2:37 am | #

to quote a very wise man (and a hell of a bowler):

"Forget about the fucking toe!"
domer03inflorence | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 6:59 am | #

Brady Quinn got his first win yesterday as an NFL starter. His numbers were actually better in his first outing. But he got his first W yesterday against Buffalo.

WTG Brady.
jp | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 8:01 am | #

I find it simply amazing that at 7-5 (trying not to jinx us against SU, but...) we will be in serious consideration for the Gator Bowl. I know that being ND has its advantages...

but this is precisely how we've managed to go more than a decade without a bowl victory. If I remember correctly, it all started with a 6-5-1 Lou Holtz team playing a very strong Colorado squad in the Fiesta and giving up something like 400 all purpose yards to Rashan Salaam (spelling? - too lazy to google it).

From what i've seen, i'm not sure this team is ready for a new year's day bowl game. I guess the upside is that it would certainly give them a chance to send a message to fans and to the country... though we haven't been very good at "message control" lately.
domer03inflorence | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 9:02 am | #

bairish-

Did you really just make an argument for "intent to drag"? I'm sorry, but that's just ridiculous.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one and spare everyone else from witnessing the beating of this long-dead horse.
kmf | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 9:31 am | #

toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe toe

Man, it's just one of those words that, if you look at it a lot, it ceases to be recognizable, like it no longer makes any sense at all.

Too much toe on this blog, if you ask me!
okiedomer | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 9:37 am | #

Look what you've gone and done now.


http://www.fresno.k12.ca.us/divd...istory/ tojo.jpg
Joe Subway | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 10:12 am | #

kmf, I never used or even implied the word "intent" or any variation of it - that would be you trying to put words into my mouth. And don't cop out w/ "agree to disagree" just b/c you haven't found something to refute what I'm saying. If part of the receiver's (non-dragging) first foot hits the sideline upon landing, it's not a catch. Incorrect call, via replay booth - AGAIN.

The only possible way it could've been a catch is if there's a little clause in the rules about a specific instance like this, where there's a small delay before part of the foot hits out of bounds - GB addressed this a few posts ago, & that's the only thing that can cloud the issue - but given that there's been no clarification or "official word" from Weis/ND, Navy, the Big East, the NCAA, etc, I'm assuming at this point that it's not coming.

I'm sorry I'm obsessing here (yes, we should move on past "Toe-gate '08"... yeah, I'm coining that), but it's tough for me to get over this one. Just like I wasn't ok w/ the Grimes TD call last year because it didn't end up costing us the game, I'm not gonna be ok over this one just b/c we didn't end up losing. If this crap keeps happening, it's going to cost us a game. Right now, we're barely good enough to win w/ some of the breaks going our way - we can't afford to get the shaft on these calls.
baIrish | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 10:24 am | #

While I can't stand Stewart Mandel or bowl projections in general, his ND-Miami Gator Bowl prediction yesterday made me a little giddy.

http:// sportsillustrated.cnn.com...f=si_topstories
Matty | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 10:26 am | #

To baIrish and anyone else still obsessing about whether Navy's 40 yard catch should have counted:

The ruling on the field was that the catch was in bounds. To overturn that call, the officials needed to see "indisputable video evidence" that the ruling on the field was incorrect.

There was no indisputable evidence that the ruling on the field was incorrect.

It is indisputable that the receiver's toe touched in bounds and that his heel touched out of bounds. It is also indisputable that the rule speaks only of a "foot" touching in bounds. The rule does not address whether part of a foot counts as a "foot" or not.

Reasonable minds can and do differ about whether part of a foot should count as a "foot" for these purposes. Because minds can differ, it is not indisputable that the receiver's "foot" landed out of bounds. And for that reason, the ruling on the field should have been upheld. If the official on the field had called the receiver out of bounds, that call should likewise have been upheld.

Too often fans and officials alike treat replay review as a second chance to make the correct call. It isn't. The standard in which replay officials require "indisputable video evidence" to overturn calls is of like the standard in which appellate courts require "abuse of discretion" to overturn cases. We may not like the standard, but the alternative would be worse.
Joe Magarac | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 11:18 am | #

seriously, why hasn't anybody who dvr'd the game put the slo-mo replays on the net for viewing?
yz | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 11:50 am | #

i was deeply gratified to see brady quinn perform so well last night on mnf. i just hope that someday jc is given the same chance in the nfl. i hope he does not regret the decision he made to come to notre dame and that he is not developing any sort of resentment towards charlie..
brian custer | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 12:17 pm | #

yz, because there's no real debate over what happened. His toe hit in bounds, then he went back on to his heel, which was out of bounds. The debate is on how the rule should be interpreted.

Personally, I don't get how it's a debate. If his heel had hit in bounds and he finishes his step out of bounds, most all would say no catch. Why is this rule reversed depending on which part of his foot hits first?

My biggest complaint remains, though. How does Navy get 4 timeouts???? They also got a simultaneous booth review, which could have easily gone against them. The refs went and talked to each coach twice about it, yet never gave us an explanation about it. How does that happen?
cjdomer04 | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 12:39 pm | #

coaches need to intimidate the refs. CW scares nobody. you want the coach afraid for his life when he walks over to sideline. the ref was so unconcerned about CW or ND, he did not even give him an explanation. not good.

heck, the BE refs may want to screw us since we wont join their league.
belocki | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 12:51 pm | #

a.) I would like to know why we had to burn a timeout at midfield on the first drive on a 3rd and two?

b.) Go Brady!

C.) Steve Spurrier is an ass.
Tennessee Domer 78 | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 1:19 pm | #

I think you all need to watch this..pretty sad..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p...h? v=p0Y7yjxJVlc

How much is our former AD at fault for the last 15 years of ND football....davie (and extension), oleary, willingham, weis and extension..
jmc | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 1:28 pm | #

brian custer, that is a danger rumor and one that doesn't merit much wonderment at this time. JC is a sophomore, on pace to set all kinds of career passing records, has or will have a whole crew of highly rated wideouts at his disposal, and an offensive line that is going to continue to mature in the next year or two. He will have his chance to impress the sunday scouts.

Was anyone else underwhelmed by BQ's (and/or the Brown's) performance last night? They had 3 gift interceptions in the 1st quarter and came away with 6 points. Granted, BQ has had all of 2 weeks to get in synch with the wideouts, and Braylon Edwards is a very inconsistent receiver, but it just felt like we saw BQ walking off the field undoing his chin strap more times than we saw him making great throws. He will get better, and I'm really happy for his chance to be the starter in Cleveland, but in a microcosm the game last night wasn't an all-pro performance.
Erik '04 | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 1:28 pm | #

Joe M, nice analogy to court appeals, but there are far too many examples of the system breaking down, reversing a ruling w/out ind. evidence, etc.

Hopefully we'll get a clarification on the rule (or lack thereof) eventually, & if nothing else, that would be something positive to take out of it.

Ok, I'm hereby cutting myself off & going back to just hoping for a new "Statistically Speaking" post...
baIrish | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 2:27 pm | #

This discussion of about whether the Navy receiver was in or out is driving me insane.

Let me put it this way: If a ball carrier were running along the sideline and one of his feet were to land in a way where his toe was in bounds and his heel out of bounds, what would the call be? The answer is simple: he's considered out of bounds.

Please stop saying this should have been ruled a catch. It's driving me crazy.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 2:31 pm | #

People saying that the discussion of Toe-gate is driving them crazy is driving ME crazy. Haha, sorry, couldn't resist. :) It is a lot of "I'm right," "No, I'm right" though.

BGS Mike said that the guys are planning a more detailed analysis of the 4th quarter breakdown, so perhaps they will be able to provide some closure for us. I tend to agree with the "he was out: no catch" crowd, but it would be nice to see a more professional analysis/interpretation of the rule.
Erik '04 | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 2:55 pm | #

Anonymous-
1) It WAS ruled a catch.
2) Your hypothetical situation with the running back is a different argument, as no one would dispute that the runner established possession in bounds long before he touched the sideline.

My argument regarding the wide receiver is that possession was established as soon as his foot (read: toe) touched the ground in bounds. His toe established possession.

The fact that his heel was the first part to touch the out-of-bounds area is inconsequential as it relates to the establishment of possession. Rather, the heel establishes where the receiver stepped out-of-bounds, and thus, where the ball should be placed.

**Pat, Mike, Jay and the crew: apparently this is what happens to BGS when losers like us have nothing else to talk about!**
kmf | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 3:17 pm | #

Anonymous

He was out AFTER the heel hit the ground.
GB | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 3:29 pm | #

Guys; Trying to switch the topic a bit, doesn't anyone else think Jonas Gray may be the answer(not that there is too much wrong with the incumbents.)It seems like Cleveland had the same dilemma, not using Harrison. Then he rips off an 80 yd run last night.
Maybe Jonas hasn't learned the blocking schemes sufficiently, but he sure looks good to me.
canuck 75 | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 3:32 pm | #

To me, it seems like FSU and ND are in similar situations. Both were very good in parts of the '80s and '90s. In fact, I believe FSu had a span where they were in the top 5 for at least 10 years straight. ND has had 3 coaches since Lou and FSU has the same head coach. In the 2000s both have had good recruiting classes but both continue to underperform. Can anyone tell me why FSU has underperformed? Is it the assistant coaches? Is Bobby getting senile? I do know that Bobby's son was OC for awhile but their new OC does not seem to be doing any better. Is Bobby domineering as a coach like possibly Weis? Any thoughts at all?
GB | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 3:37 pm | #

Weis is calling Offensive Plays for the rest of the season.
GB | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 3:40 pm | #

Anyone wanna place bets on ND wearing the green jerseys on Saturday?

http://green.nd.edu/news/1209-ir...n-and-act- green
kmf | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 3:53 pm | #

i had hoped that charlie would start a tradition of wearing the green jerseys at the last home game each year
brian custer | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 3:58 pm | #

cjdomer04,

ah yes, roughing the center. I couldn't help but chuckle at that one again.

Jim,
re: Brandon Walker. CW has been saying all season that he kicks just fine in practice, but he doesn't have the confidence -- he finally has the confidence, as well as a backup who can challenge him. Anyone notice that it was after the kicker from William and Mary joined that Walker finally straightened out his aim? Nothing like a little competition to change his thoughts from "do I kick right?, should angle more?" to "Oh, s***, I better kick this ball straight through the uprights or I'm going to be on the bench the rest of my career!"
--maybe it keeps him from 2nd guessing his kicks.

For Toe-gate:
We need to bring in the lawyers here, since we all agree on what his foot did; it's just a matter of what that means under the NCAA rules. So it's time for a little research as to how this has been called previously, a discussion about the rule itself, and a little more name calling, then we'll be all set!

I bet we wear green jerseys on Saturday to celebrate our win over Navy.
JM | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 4:28 pm | #

Those green jerseys should reside with moth balls until we're a Top 10 program.
OC mj | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 4:35 pm | #

one last thought about the foot issue....in the unc game, the receiver was ruled "not in possession" when both feet hit the ground and then the ball came loose when his body hit the ground. how does the toe hitting the ground a split second before the heel does, with the heel out of bounds, result in being "in possession"? if two feet aren't enough, how can half of one be?
yz | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 4:48 pm | #

Wearing green jerseys as a political statement is ridiculous. Thats my perception of the ND email

Although green against "orange" has a certain amount of "art imitating life"
Dana Payne | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 8:07 pm | #

The green jerseys have lost so much meaning, we might as well pull out the gold helmets with the shamrock on them.....
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 8:47 pm | #

I agree with the young lady known as OC mj...keep the green jerseys away until we beat a top 10 team!!
knoxville irish | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 8:50 pm | #

Here is some historical info. Outlined below are the average nmber of losses/season from 2002-2007 inclusive for some major teams:

1. Alabama - 5.5

2. Auburn - 3

3. Boston College - 3.5

4. Florida - 3.8

5. Florida State - 4.7

6. Georgia - 2.5

5. LSU - 2.5

6. Michigan - 3.3

7. Missouri - 5

8. Nebraska - 5.3

9. Ohio State - 1.8

10. Oklahoma - 2.5

11.Penn State - 4.8

12.Texas - 2

13.Texas Tech - 4.3

14.USC -1.3

15.Utah - 3.66

15.Wisconsin - 3.8

And look at all the people who were bitching when Weis lost 3 games in each of his first two years, 5 of them to top 5 teams!!
lush | Email | Homepage | 11.18.08 - 9:31 pm | #

I'd like to see a gold uniform, with navy(colour) pants. A gold uniform might give a team a bit of a boost. Has a gold uniform ever been done?
Noel | Email | Homepage | 11.19.08 - 11:41 am | #