Five Wide Fullbacks returns for the second week in a row, what a treat for our readers. On today’s edition of 5WF we are tackling a joint advisory committee of the country’s two most powerful conferences, Chad Bowen’s decision to stay in South Bend, the future of a pair of Notre Dame assistants, future Heisman odds, and the excitement of a home playoff game this fall.
Off we go…
1) It’s that time of year where Way-Too-Early Heisman odds are released. Who are some of the best value bets heading into the spring?
I feel like Jalen Milroe cursed himself after an insane 4th down throw against a doo-doo Auburn team led him to exclaim, “Give me the Heisman!” last year when he very much did not deserve the award. He’s way too inconsistent to win it in 2024.
I’m torn on Carson Beck. He’s aggressively weird looking and might be an alien for all we know. Somehow he threw for almost 4,000 yards last year!? Man, it didn’t seem like he was doing much for long stretches of 2023 and yet his passing total would’ve been the school record at Notre Dame. If he were in gold and blue I suppose we’d be hyping him up!
I’ll stay on the Quinn Ewers hype train, just like last year. He does need to step up his game more, though.
I’m completely out on Will Howard (weird scheme fit), Garrett Nussmeier (LSU won’t have a repeat and the nation will look for every reason to avoid it, plus BK will lose 2-3 games surely), and neither Jackson Arnold or Conner Weigman have proven enough to put any decent coin on them during the pre-season. Noah Fifita looked awesome last year but is going through a coaching change and possibly huge loss of momentum.
Can Dillon Gabriel find magic with his 3rd team? He could do huge things in that Oregon offense. I would think coming to a new program AND breaking into the Big Ten would keep some people away, but who knows.
I wonder if Jaxon Dart shouldn’t be the smart bet right now. He’s arguably the most polished passer listed above, he’ll put up big numbers in Kiffin’s system, Ole Miss has been bringing in a ton of transfer talent, and they’ll be in the mix against Alabama & Co. within the league.
2) The Big Ten & SEC are forming a joint advisory committee of university presidents, chancellors, and athletic directors to “address the significant challenges facing college athletics and how to improve the student-athlete experience.” Is this good or bad for Notre Dame?
We keep inching closer and closer to the 2-conference super league!
Of course, this new committee probably won’t do much in terms of action but it’s another brick in the wall of other conferences being able to control their own destiny–and another couple steps closer to the NCAA being cast aside as a regulatory body (or whatever you want to call them these days). I don’t think it’s really good or bad for Notre Dame per se if we work under the assumption that some day the Irish leadership will opt to stay within the big boy football division. I’m not sure if the likes of Baylor or Utah are going to have much influence from the Big 12 and we already know several teams want out of the ACC (and even more would take off if they were able to, as well).
What do they want to cook up?
If we take for granted that Notre Dame will always have a golden ticket to whatever football/college athletics new world order is created the only question then becomes how many self-imposed restrictions the University will put on itself in a world of transfers, academic eligibility, and a world with employees in golden helmets. I think they’ll figure out something that works to satiate the University’s desire for education that works within a new framework for athletic workers.
3) Notre Dame’s director of recruiting Chad Bowden has opted to stay in South Bend after a reported offer from Michigan. What does this mean for the future at the program and Marcus Freeman’s success?
Obviously, at this point I’d rather have Bowden than not have him. And I damn sure wouldn’t want him to go off to Michigan, particularly if it meant Notre Dame lost some sort of financial battle that would send Irish fans into a years-long tizzy. By all accounts, Bowden is firmly in the Doing Good Things™ realm of recruiting and we’re lucky to have him.
Now, some cold water…
What’s the ceiling with Bowden around and what’s the ultimate goal keeping him on campus and in his role–or even with the reported expanded role and/or assurances from Notre Dame on ‘increased efforts’ in recruiting? Irish recruiting is in a weird spot right now. It’s really far away from complaining making any logical sense but I also wonder if we’re setting ourselves up for disappointment in believing someone like Bowden can continue to transform Notre Dame recruiting.
More to the point, I’m not saying Bowden isn’t doing a good job but more that Notre Dame can’t continue to recruit at this level and lose 3 games per season. There’s been lots of talk recently that “SEC schools are taking notice!” of Notre Dame’s operation and are they really that worried? If you zoom out, recruiting really isn’t much different than the Brian Kelly era and honestly given some of the fluff that’s been thrown out there, particularly from the recruiting sites, I still feel like the Marcus Freeman era of recruiting is a little disappointing given the promise of a couple years ago.
Soon, the grace period is over. Either recruiting has to really take off or the results on the field have to improve. There’s a lot of off the field hype around Notre Dame, which is great to soak in sometimes, but eventually it has to lead to something bigger on the field, too.
4) There still hasn’t been any news of an Al Golden contract extension and now defensive line coach Al Washington is being rumored as an option for the open Boston College job. Does Notre Dame need both to stay in 2024?
It’s fine if Washington is given and accepts the Boston College job. He played there, has coaching experience in Chestnut Hill, and with their former head coach skipping town for the NFL it would make a lot of sense for BC to hire someone like Washington who has some promise and would be willing to take the job at this late point in the calendar.
I’m not necessarily advocating that this is a great long-term idea for Washington, though. Still, if he’s able to make $3 million per year for 3 to 4 years without any prior coordinator experience you probably take the job. It’s a big ask of him to do a good job yet that’s money you can’t pass up pretty much ever as a position coach.
BC? Surely not.
Al Golden is in a much different spot and would be crazy to walk away from this Irish 2024 defense for the chance to coach a really struggling Boston College program. The only way it happens is if Golden absolutely wants a head coaching job and his offers from outside South Bend have been a lot less impressive than we believe. But still, don’t do it Al.
5) With no independent teams able to secure a 1st round bye in the upcoming 12-team playoff format, what are some of the fun post-season matchups we could see for Notre Dame in 2024?
I’m going to use THIS pre-season poll from USA Today, which in this transfer era, is already hilariously out of date, especially in regards to Michigan. After doing roughly 2.7% of the proper amount of research (which might be 1.4% more than USA Today to be fair) I am predicting the following 12-team field for 2024:
1st-Round Bye:
#1 Georgia (SEC Champion)
#2 Florida State (ACC Champion)
#3 Oregon (Big Ten Champion)
#4 Texas
1st-Round Matchups:
#12 Liberty (Conference USA Champion) at #5 Ole Miss
#11 Penn State at #6 Notre Dame
#10 Kansas (Big 12 Champion) at #7 Missouri
#9 Alabama at #8 Ohio State
*I’m working under the assumption the “5+7” model will be officially passed after the Pac-12 collapsed.
It’s looking rough for the conference champion that isn’t from the SEC, Big Ten, ACC, or Big 12. You can see why we really can’t have another conference champion in the mix. Who would it even be? Pick a team from the AAC, it’s really hard to see a team being really good and worthy of being in this playoff.
Maybe Penn State will visit South Bend in December? Maybe we’ll get snow, too??
You know what I find interesting? ESPN has the TV rights through 2025 at which point it seems like the sport is going to welcome a bidding war with Fox and split the playoff games among more than one network just like the NFL. However, for the foreseeable future that means if Notre Dame hosts a playoff home game we’ll get to see it broadcast on something other than NBC. That’ll be quite a difference and I look forward to watching it. Let’s make it happen this year.
Even with the 5+7 model you have to win your CCG to get one of the byes, so you can’t have both Georgia and Texas in the top 4. It’s part of the reason that the model works okay for ND still because a number 5 ND team will always have a favorable second round matchup.
I agree Penn State would be a fun matchup, but I’m more looking forward to a true warm weather team coming up the third weekend of December to South Bend. Obviously the most college football dominating potential matchup in a 6 – 11 game at Notre Dame would be to host LSU.
Damn, I must have missed this. I’m not sure I like that at all.
This new setup uniquely disadvantages Notre Dame relative to every major program in the country. That people were praising Swarbrick for being involved in the 12-team format that they ended up with is/was totally baffling. I realize there are reasons for it, but it’s an unambiguously bad setup for ND compared to the previous one. Not sure it’s worth giving up independence over or anything, but it raises the cost of it.
I’ve still never seen if it’s true or not, but I think that only impacts the bye weeks. For example, in the above example Texas would not get a bye (Kansas would) but the next round would treat Texas as #4 for the pairings. If that is the case, a #1 ND team is actually in okay shape because we would get a home game against the worst team available, then get a matchup with the worst remaining team before getting into essentially a 4 team playoff.
So it would look like this:
#1 Georgia (SEC Champion) *1st round bye
#2 Florida State (ACC Champion) *1st round bye
#3 Oregon (Big Ten Champion) *1st round bye
#4 Texas
#5 Ole Miss
#6 Notre Dame
#7 Missouri
#8 Ohio State
#9 Alabama
#10 Kansas (Big 12 Champion) *1st round bye
#11 Penn State
#12 Liberty (C-USA Champion)
Liberty at Texas
Penn State at Ole Miss
Alabama at Notre Dame
Ohio State at Missouri
With chalk results…
Georgia vs. Kansas
FSU vs. Missouri
Oregon vs. Notre Dame
Texas vs. Ole Miss
So, if this is true and ND can be “#1” but without a bye week, I think it’s a completely fair trade-off.
I don’t believe that is true. AFAIK there is no reseeding or anything of the kind WRT the byes; they are the top 4 seeds.
That said, it puts a hypothetical “#1” ND in a pretty good position because they get to face (in all likelihood) the G5 team in the first round, at home, then take on the worst P4 champ, which in all reality will be something like the #8 or #9 team in the true rankings. No juggernaut until the semifinals.
Where it will hurt, and what I don’t like, is when the quarterfinals inevitably move on campus after the NY6 contracts are run out. Having to play a road game as the higher seed would be annoying. I’d be in favor of a situation where the byes stay as they are but who hosts the quarterfinal is determined by the rankings once that move is made.
I fully admit that this is just my interpretation of the rules. They are a bit ambiguous so maybe the homer in me is giving ND the best possible result. Agreed that it is a bit of a wash since there won’t be reseeding and a #1-5 ND will always get to have the second game be against a team that is likely a 1-2 loss conference champion that is likely ranked in the 8-12 range in reality if we truly are capped at 5.
I could be wrong, but you’re the first person I’ve ever heard interpret the setup that way. I think it is what it says it is, which is the only way I think anybody has discussed it to my knowledge: if you’re the 5 seed, you’re the 5 seed.
See, e.g., here: https://www.ncaa.com/news/football/article/2023-12-03/how-12-team-college-football-playoff-will-work-teams-schedule-bids (“teams will not be reseeded”).
It’s a bad setup for ND, full stop. Probably better than an 8-team playoff that provides some preference for conference champions, but that’s all it really has going for it from our perspective.
Gah, then I don’t like it again!
I disagree here, because ND is essentially in same bit as 2nd place on big ten and sec teams, so what happens to them happens to ND, which is actually a pretty good position to be in. No way sec is conceding their 2nd/3rd place teams will lose a bye and play a 2nd round road game at insert crappy big 12/acc champ here
If Ryan Day finishes 8th and doesn’t win 2 playoff games, ohio state might be looking for a new coach.
With conferences scrapping divisions, the conference champions should always match up 2 of the best 2-3 teams so the losers of those conference championships get screwed the most. The winners of the big 10 and sec will definitely earn a bye. The winners of the acc and big 12 could really coast though, but that would make getting a 5-6 seed all the more imperative.
I do expect big ten/sec teams with multiple losses to be looked upon favorably though. they will almost always get the benefit of doubt
This is why I think surely they won’t let byes automatically go to conference champions only for very long!?
Certain aspects of this suck for ND but it really sucks for a legit elite conference title team who loses their 13th game just at the time when conference title games are about to get as difficult as ever (in the SEC & B1G at least).
Eric is right about recruiting not matching production on the field. Yeah, we can’t lose 3 games and expect recruiting to improve. I think it would be a much different story now if ND would have beat Marshall, Stanford, Louisville and Clemson.
Has Freeman’s recruiting had time to make an impact on the field yet? Certainly his first year as HC still had Kelly’s fingerprints all over that class too. We’re just coming into the time where we’ll know if Freeman is identifying and getting more talent.
I think Golden has flat out stated he has no interest in the BC job.
I suspect ND’s impressive results in the advanced stats this last year are partly attributable to Freeman’s raised floor in recruiting. Us smothering all the lesser opponents we played this year boosted our numbers.
I seems like we had way more garbage time in wins this year, as opposed to farting our way through a 27-17 win over a random ACC team.
We had the misfortune get a great recruiter right as the playing field shifted to you could make up for lack of charisma by throwing money at the problem. A huge kick in the pants there, but at least we don’t seem to be losing ground. I know Jamie U has been writing that our average recruit and blue chip rankings have gone up under Freeman, but the Alabamas and Georgias of the world have gotten somehow gotten even better than they were before, leaving up still stuck in the 10ish range. At least we’re finally brining in some skill players now, instead of having the backbone of the class ranking be highly rated Jeff Quinn commits who never seem to pan out.
Is recruiting really not all that different from the BK era? Are there no significant differences? Is freeman not consistent recruiting more top 50 or top 100 players? And hasn’t he had a higher blue-chip ratio? I’m genuinely uncertain but this has been my sense.
The last thing I had heard – and this doesn’t always show up in the rankings – is that Freeman is after more athletes who are potentially NFL bound. So the 3 stars that he takes have a lot more upside if they hit. Not sure if that’s true or how much difference it makes but it’ll be something maybe to track a bit as those lower ranked guys take a few years to develop.
Recruiting is improved in an absolute sense (average star recruit is up, not massively but not a blip) but not relatively – we’re still in the 8-13 range, and trending that way for 2025 too. I think it’s fair to say that the recruiting has been mildly disappointing overall thus far under Freeman, but not so much that it’s a *problem*. I think Eric is right – if we keep losing clunkers in the regular season, recruiting isn’t good enough to save Freeman, but also it’s good enough to hope that (a) we’ll mostly stop losing the clunkers and (b) there’s room for improvement.
Also CJ May just decommitted, apparently because he was planning to take other visits. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I think it’s a little better from the overall averages of the BK era.
Some variation of this is made about every new ND coach, except Willingham hahaha. The idea that “we’re doing things better this time” is infectious but it hasn’t been enough time yet to know whether it’s true or not.
The recruiting has definitely seen an uptick. It hasn’t been Kirby Smart level that we were all hoping for but if we’re being honest it’s never going to be to that level anyways. ND not offering to pay Keon Keeley as an incoming freshman I think really hurts the cause. I know people don’t want to pay the recruits until they “prove something” but you needed to get someone like him in the door to showcase to the others. If you can take Keeley out of Florida and put him in the first round of the NFL in 3 years that’s where that pipeline starts. Even if Bryce Young does exactly this, it’s going to be the same narrative spin that Kyle Hamilton gets. ND just got in on him early and if he had been a 5* the whole time, he doesn’t end up at ND. As I’m typing this, I remind myself that unfortunately a huuuge percentage of the top 100 recruits aren’t looking to play school in college. They want to focus on football, girls, and getting paid today.
I can see where you are coming from with the argument of getting Keeley because he actually seemed like an ND kind of guy but we just wouldn’t pay him to enroll. However, and while the narrative is not always true, Keeley is in fact basically the same story as Hamilton and Bryce Young. When he committed to ND in June of 2021 he was on 247 the #216 ranked recruit in his class.
While committed to ND he blew up in the rankings and of course ended up at #3 on 247.
I don’t see how Notre Dame can be a part of the coming Brave New World of “college” football. Why should the Big Two submit to any academic restrictions like academic ineligiblity, APR and penalties, and needing to attend classes? The point of “how to improve the student-athlete experience” is a euphemism for spreading the wealth and with the eye towards any antitrust lawsuits. Why should their be a restriction on the limit of scholarships once Title IX is done away with in the courts? They would prefer to operate under the umbrella of a university’s non-profit status. But they are only nominally such and immense wealth concentrated on one sports program in an athletic department should draw the attention of appropriate federal and judicial entities. The stakeholders in “college” football are increasingly the boosters and two media companies. Why shouldn’t they get a return on their investments?
When Hafley left for Green Bay he said:
How is that non-profit? Why would Notre Dame be a part of this? Why should the Big Two have to pay any attention to compliance or enforcement by the NCAA?
Notre Dame can still participate in major college football if, for example, academic ineligibility no longer exists. Maybe they won’t want to (I have my doubts) but they could still try to do it.
I’d rather drop down a level than be a part of soulless NFL lite
One could argue it’s been that way for decades!
I’d rather they play at the highest level or close the program down. It’ll all come crashing down if they drop down a level, no need to do it for such a violent and time consuming sport IMO.
I look at it as adding a division in football. Make a for-profit “level” with universities who have developed all their athletic programs as preferred stockholders who have seats at a Board of Directors table for decision-making. In that way, it would be similar to other of a university’s investments to generate revenue while acknowledging their centuries old development in the profit-making football.
Moving to for-profit entities for football would mean that federal funding would not put universities’s at risk of losing that funding for not complying with laws like Title IX.
Currently, university revenue also comes from donors, federal and state (for state schools) and NCAA distribution of its almost $1 billion or more dominated by its contract with ESPN for March Madness. The Big Two would like to redirect much of that to their conference(s) instead of to the NCAA.