Buckeye Fan 19

quote:

---

It’s like you have little concept of the numerous lotto winners who have blown their fortunes. You’ve never had to deal with such temptation so you have no idea how hard it would be to curate your windfall.

---

The vast majority of lottery players are well below average in intelligence, discipline, etc. They typically have many issues (financial, physical, mental, familial...) and are extremely desperate. Obviously, because the lottery is not based on skill / intelligence at all, just luck, if 90% of lottery players are in that lower class, desperation mode, that also means 90% of lottery winners are those people. And they tend to not know how to / be able to manage money well generally and make ridiculously poor decisions.

Additionally, they'll publicize it on Facebook and/or not claim the money anonymously, and all of a sudden, 2nd cousins and HS classmates they haven't talked to in 30 years come out of the woodwork and they feel the pressure to provide them money. Add those two things up, and voila.

Nobody even close to the median in intelligence, discipline, etc., should blow over $250 million (AFTER taxes). That's absolutely insane. And you could still even live a ridiculously lavish lifestyle and still not come close to blowing it. Spend $50 million upfront on like 3 ridiculously nice places (you don't need 8; you don't need a private island), a few really nice cars (you don't need 12), a nice boat for the lake (you don't need a yacht), etc. Then if you didn't want any stock market risk (which likely wouldn't be the best financial decision... but you already have $200M), put in the remaining $200M into a 4% savings account and make $8M annually.

Even after taxes on the interest, the interest alone each year would be able to cover like 12 1-week vacations via charter of a private jet (no, not owning it) and/or first class tickets (plus 5* accommodations), a weekly dinner for you and your wife at a 3* Michelin restaurant (plus a private chef to cover all your other meals...), great tickets to premier concerts / sporting events (no, not a suite to the Super Bowl), etc. You wouldn't even touch the principal.

Or, even better, you can just live your relatively normal life still, make a few fun purchases but nothing ridiculously extravagant, take a couple very nice trips a year, be able to retire from work and take up any hobbies/education you want just for fun, and donate / leave a lot to family/close friends/charity.

quote:

---

Fake news again

---

Nope, when I cited Freeman was 3-1 against the SEC in the past two years and 4-1 against the SEC total, you said that's not relevant because I constrained time to only Freeman's tenure at ND, and it's not a large enough sample size. Power ratings aren't good enough for you, recent ND/SEC playoff results aren't good enough for you, recent ND vs SEC record isn't good enough for you... You've (STILL) yet to describe what an adequate sample size is, what relevant data should be considered, how long "modern history" extends to, etc., when I've asked you to do so three separate times.

This will be the last time I address you in this thread. I would add the caveat that I would address you again if you actually make a substantive post. You clearly don't want to or can't (or, probably, both), so I'm going to stick to talking football with the grown-ups now. Bye.

P.S.: Your perpetual downvoting of every single post of mine and upvoting every single one of your own posts in this thread is one of the most pathetic things I've ever seen on here. :lol:

quote:

---

So of those 3 based off what i can find only USC had a weaker SOS(40-50s). But even that is ~30 spots higher than 2024 ND.(70-80s). Notre Dames schedule this year is preseason 66.

---

Do you have a link to that? I find it extremely hard to believe that (without factoring in the postseason as part of the calculation, just regular season) either of Clemson's 2016 or 2018 schedules, or either of USC's 2003 or 2004 schedules were that far off from ND's. Regardless though, as I've mentioned, the SOS itself isn't an argument about whether a team is good or bad. It can be used to determine "resume" or "most deserving" but the Seahawks are the Seahawks regardless of schedule, and UMass is UMass regardless of schedule.

quote:

---

The whole basis of this thread is built on the fact that when Notre Dame plays a stronger schedule they tend to have multiple losses.

---

One of my main points is that I don't care about "tend to" because that "tends to" brings in data from coaches and players that are no longer around. I care about the past 3 seasons or so.

ND lost once in 2024 (inexplicably, still absolutely bizarre and I can't defend it) in the regular season. ND did lose twice last year. They lost by 3 on the road to the national runner-ups (who beat A&M on the road, beat OSU by 10 on an neutral field and beat Ole Miss on a neutral field). They also lost by 1 point to A&M (who finished 11-1 in the SEC). I think those results (in conjunction with ND's performance in the other 10 games, and yes, most of them were not great opponents...) makes it reasonable to say ND is a title favorite (when compared to other teams across the country).

quote:

---

And when they play the types of schedules they are known for they tend to get bullied once they play teams that have the same amount of time to prepare for a single game.

---

I would again point to the 2024 CFP in which ND went 3-1 against top-10 teams in 4 consecutive games in the postseason. I've gone into more explicit details numerous times in this thread so nothing against you or your argument, but most of my points are already in posts in this thread, not gonna type them out again haha.

quote:

---

Do you think Freeman is a good coach?

Or is you’re optimism rooted in y’all finally (lmao) being able to pay players

---

Both?

I think Freeman is a great coach. I also think ND’s roster talent is better than it’s ever been since the early 90s, and it looks like given how recruiting / administrative buy-in (literally and figuratively…) is going, that will continue.

quote:

---

Typically history dictates what you do. I realize that Indiana kinda disproves that but they disprove all history before them.

---

Until UGA won in 2021, they hadn’t won since 1980.

Clemson had a drought of 1981-2016.

Before 2023, Michigan had a split title with Nebraska in 1997, and otherwise hadn’t won since 1948.

Before 2005, Texas hadn’t won since 1970. They haven’t won since. But no one would be shocked if they win this year.

Oklahoma hasn’t won since 2000, but I don’t think people will be shocked if/when they win their next one.

OSU had a 34-yr drought between 1968 and 2002.

LSU had a 45-yr drought between 1958 and 2003.

Bama’s drought time-wise wasn’t particularly long between 1992 and 2009, but there were a lot of bad seasons / a few bad coaches between Stallings and Saban.

There are plenty of examples.

quote:

---

It's crazy that if he just had a serviceable defensive coordinator and defense - instead of the 108th defense - we would have likely won it all in 2023.

---

Honestly, combine the 2023 O with 2025 D and you guys would’ve won it haha.

That was kinda his mantra at ND too. The 2012 O sucked (by top-5/10 standards) but the D was great. The 2015 O was great but the D was awful. He was never able to get everything firing on all cylinders at the same time.

Also, related to both the above and this thread’s discussion / ND, having Mike Denbrock as OC the past couple of years (and continuing to have him) has been beneficial. :lol:

So you might not be aware, but apparently, how recently you win a national championship (or even if you've never won one before at all...) has no impact on if you can win one in the current season.

You probably think the Giants have a better chance at winning the Super Bowl this year than the Bills. Giants have won 2 this century. Bills have never won one ever...

Yep, has nothing to do with 2026. Thanks.

One final olive branch for discussion:

Here's what I have from you on why ND wouldn't be able to compete in the SEC in 2026. If there's anything else you've argued that I've missed, if I'm incorrect on my assessment of your argument, or if there's something you'd like to add, please let me know. Likewise if you'd like to discuss these (since you chose not to address them in my earlier post) please let me know.

a) ND is 5-3 in its past 8 games against the SEC;

b) ND's strength of schedule sucks;

c) Modern history has proven ND isn't consistently "good enough" (this is extremely vague and I don't know what specifically you're referring to, but as I've said multiple times now, I'm willing to listen/discuss if you can expound / be more specific);

d) The SEC has won 4 of the past 7 national championships and had both participants in 2021.

I've addressed these points in the much longer post of mine earlier, so if you want to address that post of mine with a substantive response and/or address this one, please do.

I'm willing to have a discussion with you.

What's "modern history"? What is ND "not good enough" to do? Tell me, let's talk...