Skip to content

The good, the bad and the ugly: Notre Dame vs. BYU

Nov 25, 2013, 1:52 AM EDT

Cam McDaniel BYU Getty Images

For the fourth straight season, Notre Dame sent its seniors out with a victory, a wonderful change from the Charlie Weis era where the Irish lost their two final home games in devastatingly painful fashion.

But on Saturday, the Irish put together a complete victory, a late-season win that felt like a great pitcher grinding his way through an October baseball game. Very rarely did it look pretty, but while the Irish didn’t have their best “stuff,” they got out of Saturday with a crucial eighth victory.

It may have taken a few weeks longer than they wanted, but hitting the eight-win threshold shouldn’t be taken for granted. That’s four seasons in a row where Notre Dame has won eight games, a feat not accomplished in South Bend in 20 years.

Before we turn our focus to Stanford, let’s take a quick stroll through the good, the bad and the ugly from the Irish’s 23-13 victory over BYU.


The running game. Just what the doctor ordered. As we mentioned all week, the Irish knew they needed to run the ball and they did exactly that, putting together a great performance by both the front five and the three Irish ball carriers.

It was a positive day on the ground for Cam McDaniel, Tarean Folston and George Atkinson, with all three running hard and picking up positive yardage. McDaniel did the heavy lifting down the stretch, doing his best to be a wrecking ball between the tackles to help seal the game.

McDaniel’s 24 carries were a career high. Folston got 13 carries, breaking a 43-yarder and scoring a touchdown. Atkinson averaged seven yards a carry on his six touches, and more importantly didn’t have a negative play.

DaVaris Daniels. The junior wide receiver started the scoring off with a big catch over the top of BYU’s defense. His 107 receiving yards were the first time he went over the century mark since his big day against Purdue, and also the first time he’s caught more than five passes since mid-September.

While there were still some inconsistencies by Daniels, Kelly talked about the evolution of Daniels as a wide receiver, and his ability to fight through the grind of a season.

“I think he’s a young man that — I think the wide receiver has that tendency to get those soft tissue injuries that I think they have to acclimate themselves to not being 100 percent,” Kelly said. “Maybe it’s not a great analogy, but they’re thoroughbreds in the sense that they want to run and they want to feel great all the time, and quite frankly sometimes they’ve got to get by at 80 or 85.  And TJ has been able to do such a great job of understanding that, and I think TJ was very similar to Double‑D early in his career where he’d get banged up a little bit and it would affect his psyche and the way he played.

“I think Double‑D is getting through that now and understands that he’s not going to be necessarily 100 percent all the time, and he’s got to play through those things. I think we’re at that point now with the week off, he felt really good, obviously physically, as well. But I think that’s what we’re seeing with him, the grind of a long year. He’s not going to be 100 percent and he’s got to fight through those things.”

If we credit Daniels for anything, it’s for being up on his pop culture. After scoring his long touchdown, Daniels pulled his celebration right out of the new Hunger Games movie.

TJ Jones. No, he didn’t score a touchdown. No, he didn’t go for 100 yards. But Jones played big in his final game at Notre Dame Stadium, playing through the emotion of a very bittersweet Saturday for Jones and his family.

“I told myself, ‘Don’t cry,'” Jones said after the game. “I knew it was going to be emotional. I knew my mom was going to tear up and any time she does, it makes me tearup too, so I tried to hold it back and not get too emotional before the game.” 

Jones was able to catch five balls for 95 yards, another good day at the office, especially in the weather conditions. It would’ve been great to see him go into the record books along side Golden Tate and Jeff Samardzija, but the win probably felt mighty good.

Matt Hegarty. A really impressive game for the junior reserve center, thrown into the fire after Nick Martin’s knee injury late in the first quarter. Hegarty had to go head-up with two massive nose guards, acquitting himself quite well.

“I thought he did a pretty good job,” Kelly said of Hegarty’s play. “Certainly going in there first time, you know, against a 320‑pound guy on his nose, he did not go against a four‑down where he was uncovered. He had somebody on his nose virtually the entire three quarters that he was in there, snapped the ball without any mistakes.”

Kyle Brindza. Notre Dame’s kicker showed just how clutch he is with a key game-clinching 51-yard field goal in the fourth quarter. With the temperature likely in the teens, even if the kick was wind aided, Brindza stepped up and drilled a beauty in a pressure packed situation.

That’s now 11 of 12 in the fourth quarter for Brindza on his career, who also showed some street-cred going sleeveless out there. After the game, Brindza talked about not wanting to let down the seniors by missing a key kick, and actually lobbied Kelly to take the kick.

“They said to punt and I said, ‘What are you guys talking about? This is my field goal range,'” Brindza said. “They asked me if I was sure and I said, ‘Yeah.’ He has confidence in me and I have confidence in myself, so I’m always in his ear, but he doesn’t mind.”

Dan Fox. What a great way to go out for the senior from Ohio. Fox had nine tackles, including two TFLs, one being a sack of Taysom Hill. Both Fox and Carlo Calabrese had great afternoons, with Calabrese chipping in seven tackles as well.

Jarron Jones, Sheldon Day and Stephon Tuitt. We already hit on Jones and Tuitt last night, but it is worth mentioning again. Another sneaky-good performance by Sheldon Day, who has come back from his ankle injury with a vengeance.

The home crowd. It was an uneasy Saturday around campus before the game, with nobody really sure of what would happen. But the crowd was energized from start to finish, and celebrated the senior class with a ton of respect.

The student section’s late-game chant of “Tommy, Tommy!” was a really impressive display that clearly meant a lot to Rees in the postgame press conference.


Nick Martin’s knee injury. What a tough break for the junior center, who looked to have potentially avoided a serious injury when he walked off the field under his own power, but will now miss the rest of the season with knee surgery.

“Nick has a significant knee injury,” Kelly said on Sunday. “He’ll be out for this game, and he will not be able to play in the bowl game. We’re still getting a little bit more information.  We had an MRI. I’ll probably have a little bit more specific details, but he’s out for the season.”

It had to be a difficult moment for Zack Martin, seeing his brother down with an injury, ending their playing time together.

Tommy Rees’ fourth quarter interception. Rees threw the ball to Troy Niklas a little late, and BYU safety Craig Bills made an impressive one-handed interception. It’s the wrong time to start a late-game interception trend, and Rees will need to clean that up before Stanford on Saturday evening.

A bit of good news: The weather forecast for Palo Alto on Saturday is high-50s with a zero percent chance of precipitation and only light wind. Much better conditions than Rees has faced the past two games.

Safety Play. Austin Collinsworth got beat badly on a slant route near the goal line, something you just can’t give up. (He also fielded a blocked field goal, a no-no, but understandable considering the ball went straight into his arms.)

Matthias Farley continued his shoddy tackling, letting fullback Paul Lasike run through him for a huge 46-yard gain. Farley might have actually helped Lasike stay on his feet, with the former rugby player regaining his footing after coming into contact with Farley.

Eilar Hardy got the start and made eight tackles. Max Redfield chipped in three of his own, too. Change is a brewing at the position, but it’s also very possible that both Collinsworth and Farley are playing through a few injuries that’ll need an offseason to fix.


This stays empty after a hard-fought victory.

  1. wisner74 - Nov 25, 2013 at 2:29 AM

    Also in “The Good” section: Keith Arnold’s timely and consistent reporting and analysis.

  2. onward2victory - Nov 25, 2013 at 3:12 AM

    A couple more you forgot:

    Good: Jarron Jones. Suddenly not so desperate for Matt Elam.

    Ugly: The field. Several more slip and falls on Saturday. Please God/Jack, give us field turf!

    • irishpuma - Nov 26, 2013 at 2:12 AM

      Spot on onward! Field turf or the hybrid….I still do not understand how the hybrid works?

      What about Canada green. I bought some off the informercial and in just two weeks my lawn has been flourishing! Don’t worry boys I will post the before and after’s shortly. Great in cold and freezing conditions, sturdy and needs little water. Just saying…….

      • tedlinko - Nov 26, 2013 at 1:32 PM

        In a nutshell, the way the hybrid works is this. The soil base is mostly sand rather than clay. This allows for better drainage and a much softer playing surface — however on its own the sand wouldn’t stabilize the root system adequately so there is a web of synthetic fibers woven into the base.

        Also, buried below ground are miles of tubes through which they run hot water to prevent the field from freezing – that’s right it is no longer really the frozen tundra. And they also have this massive gro-light system that they use throughout most of the season to fool the grass into thinking it’s summer and thus stay green and growing throughout the season.

        It’s a very cool system but a massive undertaking.

  3. viktory2013 - Nov 25, 2013 at 3:24 AM

    Don’t want to put a damper on a rugged win in miserable conditions, because those boys really sucked it up and played with guts and intensity when they easily could have phoned it in after Pitt.

    Farley, Jackson and Collinsworth don’t have bad technique or injuries, they just aren’t very good. Collinsworth puts in effort, but I think Hardy and Redfield can outplay them ready or not. AND Rees still threw a red zone pick and easily could have had another if Daniels doesn’t intervene. With one game left, no use griping. Stanford is a colossal pain in the ass, especially at Palo Alto, but they do have lapses. They’ve lost two they should have won, and very easily could have lost two more, so they’re by no means invincible. If we can carry over the effort and intensity of the BYU game, we have a shot, but if Stanford comes out with an Oregon game focus it looks grim. One way to find out boys and girls.

    • wisner74 - Nov 25, 2013 at 1:02 PM

      One of my favorite plays of the season so far is Eilar Hardy staying home on Navy’s last offense play to force that reverse wide so that Smith could make the tackle short of a first down. I’d like to see Hardy continue to get more playing time, especially given the injury issues he’s had to overcome since his first year.

      I was in a perfect position in the stands to see the play develop, and I thought we were in big trouble when I first saw that it was a reverse. Not just first down Navy, touchdown Navy. Most of the defense had quickly reacted to the original flow of the play. And then #16 comes up out of nowhere with the perfect angle to blow it up. Smith got the credit, but Hardy saved the day.

  4. 4horsemenrideagain - Nov 25, 2013 at 9:28 AM

    maybe i’m just getting old and soft, but that was a pretty emotional senior day. schwenke leading the Haka at the end of that clip topped it all off.

    KA must be feeling charitable, it being the holiday season and all, because there was plenty of “ugly” in that game to identify, but it was a nice win so why dwelll on the downside?

    for anyone who watched UCLA/ASU, i’m curious whether ASU is that good or if UCLA stinks, or a little bit of both. watching kelly run and throw in the first half, i couldn’t believe ND contained him as much as they did, and seeing ASU’s front 5 in the second half, i was amazed ND’s O-line neutralized them as well as they did. for my part, ASU and ND are about as good as their records reflect, while UCLA’s record doesn’t tell the whole story about them and i wouldn’t be surprised to see an inspired SC team lump UCLA up next week and ND’s win over Stanford next week will seem less surprising.

  5. nudeman - Nov 25, 2013 at 9:30 AM

    After the Pitt debacle, beating Stanford seemed like about a 5% proposition.
    Now I’m willing to concede there’s a shot. Probably less than 50% and I’m not willing to predict it, but there is a shot. The single most encouraging thing was Kelly running the ball 47 times.

    Having said that, reading that the weather will be pleasant and dry makes me wonder if he’ll call 47 passes this week. I could easily see that, especially if SU jumps out to a lead. So was the BYU game plan an anomaly or has Kelly found religion? I’m not totally convinced it’s the latter.

    BTW Keith, in the “BAD” section you neglected to mention ND blowing its three 2nd half time outs yet again. It is November, the play calling team of Martin & Kelly is in its 24th game together and they STILL can’t get the plays in on time?

    • irishpuma - Nov 26, 2013 at 2:20 AM

      Right on nude, a veteran qb with over 30 starts, veteran coaching staff, game 11 and still time out after time out. I am not sure Kelly will ever embrace the run. I mean if there ever was a season to do it it was this one and still nothing. I would say a 10% chance to win is the best we can hope for and we would have to get up and on them early to force them into abandoning the run otherwise it shall be a long evening.

      But to reiterate what I said in another post it sure was awesome watching Kelly do his best GA3 down the sideline to stop tommy’s audible. I think the adidas and the back surgery really have paid off for BK as he looked like he was doing a 7.4 40!

      Insider information I hear he challenged Tommy to a sprint off after the game. Who wins that one?

    • irishdrg1 - Nov 26, 2013 at 7:12 PM

      Very Good Nude, A lot of positive feedback. I only got to see the first half here in Aruba, but Kona stuff really rocked, would like to see him motivate the team like that BEFORE the game. I agree 50 running plays would be GREAT. Let Folson get 25 of those and maybe Hooks will reconsider. So proud of George for lowering his pads and busting off that tackle. GO IRISH

  6. canadianirish - Nov 25, 2013 at 9:32 AM

    I’ll give you an ugly Keith. People I know were kicked out of the game Saturday by the ushers for standing and cheering. This couple are season ticket holders who do a ton to support the university as well. It is amazing that BK does as well at home with the lack of support he gets sometimes.

    • danirish - Nov 25, 2013 at 10:26 AM

      All they were doing was standing and cheering? No wonder Notre Dame stadium is one fo the most pleasant places for the other team!

      At UGA they kick you out if you aren’t standing!

    • ndcanuck - Nov 25, 2013 at 11:03 AM

      That’s become my main beef with ND home games. Watch ANY other big time FBS team play at home and it actually sounds/feel like there is some energy and passion in the building. Irish home games seriously feel like going to church. I love the tradition at ND and respect that they have some older season ticket holders who really support the program; but we could sure do with an actual homefield advantage, and sitting on your hands does nothing to provide that.

      Things I’d love to see next season:

      1) Fieldturf (or something, anything other than that embarassing painted mud)

      2) Consistency between the team and the University on what the expectations on fans are. Do they want people to “Take a Stand” or not?

      • bernhtp - Nov 25, 2013 at 11:42 AM

        This has been discussed before. Some challenges to a loud stadium:

        1. Low percentage of the stadium capacity are students. ND has a small number of undergrads (8K) relative to other places (e.g., Michigan, UT, OSU at 50K). There is no replacement for young lungs.

        2. The stadium is a relatively shallow bowl without the sound-holding/reflecting steeper slopes and luxury boxes.

        3. ND Tickets, especially on the open market, are expensive. People travel far. Both these create an older and wealthier demographic. See #1.

    • bernhtp - Nov 25, 2013 at 11:33 AM

      I’m skeptical that the reason was for standing and cheering. I usually sit in an area that has a lot of older alumni, and there is a lot of standing and cheering. No one complains. Given that Swarbrick also began his “Take a stand” initiative last year – very publicly exhorting everyone to stand and cheer – I’m even more dubious.

      Were they possibly drunk, disorderly and/or foul-mouthed? Were they warned before being ejected? How did they respond to the usher.

      • canadianirish - Nov 25, 2013 at 12:03 PM

        From what I gather, the people behind them complained about it. Not drunk or disorderly. People behind kept poking the man and telling him to sit down. He eventually responded with ‘stop f’ing touching me’. The person complained and they were removed.

      • ndsugarsand - Nov 26, 2013 at 4:52 PM

        You and Bern make excellent points. Increasingly people feel their right to stand outweighs anyone else’s right to view the game. I side with the ushers trying to calm rude and often over served people. The group that sits in the last row of the old stadium are often not just standing but stand on the cement shelf behind their seats (which is higher than their seats) The problem with this they are often drunk an aggressive and the area directly behind them is for wheelchairs. Those people don’t have the option to STaND. I always say sitting and cheering are not mutually exclusive activities

      • wisner74 - Nov 26, 2013 at 6:42 PM

        NDsugar – I had the exact thing that you describe happen at the OU game this year. I was one row down from the top of the old stadium and a couple of young guys across the aisle were insisting on standing the whole time. Several of us requested that they sit down between plays, and they refused. One of them called us “idiots.” I pointed out that there were some folks right behind us in wheelchairs who may not be able to see over them when they are standing, and they eventually got into the flow and stood/sat more appropriately.

    • wisner74 - Nov 25, 2013 at 1:12 PM

      There has to be more to this story than that, Canadian.

      BTW, were you at the USC game? Section 22? My buddy and I sat right behind two very nice and interesting Canadian guys who came all the way from the Toronto area to take in their first ND game.

      We all stood and cheered a lot during that game. (But at 61 I really don’t want to have to stand through the whole game.)

      • wisner74 - Nov 25, 2013 at 1:23 PM

        Excellent points at 11:42, Bern. Fact is that there are a lot of older, even elderly, fans in attendance at ND games. There has to be some consideration of that.

        I think everyone is fine with standing and cheering as called-for during the course of the game, but when you get someone in front of you (usually in their 20s or younger) who insists on standing the whole time, it gets irritating. I’m 61 and have a bad knee and I’ve had back surgery. My buddy who came with me to the SC game is about 65 and has struggled with phlebitis for at least a decade. The people sitting right behind us were about 10 years older than we are. We all want to be able to sit during portions of the game and still see what’s going on.

        A couple of guys about three rows up insisted on standing the whole time. That causes a ripple effect up the rows, and you can end up with a ton of people having to decide whether they want to stand the whole game or sit part of the time and look at the back of the person in front of them.

        This has been a bigger and bigger issue in recent years.

      • shamrocknroll - Nov 25, 2013 at 3:08 PM

        @wisner74 — Glad to hear that you’ve noticed standing fans to be “a bigger and bigger issue in recent years.”

        That means we’re succeeding in starting to turn our stadium into the kind of place it should be–exciting energy for ND fans, and intimidating for our opponents.

        If you can’t handle it, stay home and watch it on TV, or maybe save up for one of those new luxury boxes they’re talking about adding on. I’m not trying to be rude, but I swear, I can’t believe we have fans that complain about standing and cheering. I doubt any other school has to deal with this, and certainly no NFL team. Maybe I’ll catch you at a game sometime, wisner. I’ll be the guy in front of you on his feet rooting for Notre Dame–and turning around and telling people to get on theirs.

      • wisner74 - Nov 25, 2013 at 4:00 PM

        Incredibly ignorant response, Sham.

        One of the best places in all the world to see a college football game is UW-Madison. You know . . . the place that invented Jump Around? Ever been there? I’ve been to at least a half a dozen games there in recent years, including some major ones. The energy there is absolutely electric. Never once had a problem with when people want to stand and when they sit down.

        I stand plenty during games, but no one needs to stand for four hours straight just to prove their a real fan of the Irish.

      • mtndguy - Nov 25, 2013 at 6:31 PM

        Perhaps Notre Dame could have a separate LOF (Little Old Fart) section where standing is only allowed intermittently and Depends undergarments are free for all so nobody needs to get up for a bathroom break.

      • wisner74 - Nov 25, 2013 at 7:18 PM

        Mtndguy – Hah! If you had an LOF section like that you’d probably have to set aside about a third of ND stadium for it. Bern is right about the demographics of an ND crowd compared to other venues. We are definitely an older-than-average group as a whole.

        Re the Depends, I may have my orthopedic issues, but fortunately I do not have that problem. I’ve got to admit, though, that I regulate my pre-game fluid intake more than I used to. Actually, it seems to me that there are an awful lot of younger folks who can’t seem to go a quarter without their Nachos who are getting up all the time and making their way to the aisles.

        Bern – Another point re stadium architecture. Many stadiums have upper decks, which I would think also tend to contain and focus the lower deck cheering toward the field and the opposite stands.

      • bernhtp - Nov 26, 2013 at 8:51 AM

        Wisner: Given that many/most like to stand and cheer and this clearly needs to be accommodated/encouraged, you might need to up your game by either getting into better shape (61 is not old) or donating enough to be in the gold seats or the box upstairs.

        My normal section tends to sit between plays unless it is tight at the end of the game. It gets very loud by the time Crazy Train gets going. I tend to not like the box because it is too insulated from the game and crowd, though it has its advantages in really bad weather.

      • wisner74 - Nov 26, 2013 at 3:07 PM

        Bern – You misunderstand me. I am not a curmudgeon. I am in decent shape and don’t feel my age (although I don’t know exactly what 61 is supposed to feel like.) I’m all for standing (and screaming my lungs out) at the right times, which hopefully is frequently because of good developments (although I reserve most of my absolute screaming for bad plays or bad calls), and I’m standing when all the folks around me are standing, probably a bit more — I’m the excitable type. It definitely adds to the enjoyment of the game. Most of us at ND stadium know when standing/stomping/screaming/backslapping/high-fiving etc. are called for and when they’re not. Having been to close to 100 games, I’m confident I know how to behave and when to do it.

        I just object to those few people (who do tend to be younger guys), whom I have occasionally had the misfortune to be behind, who think that you are being less than a loyal and supportive fan if you don’t stand the whole time. That’s irritating and unnecessary; it is also inconsiderate. Not counting student sections at various venues, I know of no other stadium, arena, ballpark, etc. in any sport at any level (high school, college, pro) where that is expected.

  7. NotreDan - Nov 25, 2013 at 11:27 AM

    Good: The foundation is clearly there. To beat ASU, MSU and USC and have a legitimate shot at Stanford, all with debilitating injuries and painful suspensions/defections; it signals to me that ND can compete next year. On top of that, some real grit and heart seemed to emerge this game more than others. I’d love to know all that went on behind the scenes for 2 weeks.

    Bad: I still think play calling can take some serious improvement; my take is STILL that the system was not changed enough to account for TR vs. EG, but just my opinion. Burning timeouts is tough; it didn’t really hurt ND this game, but sure could have.

    Ugly: The field. And it’s petty, but do Mike Mayock and Dan Hicks NOT consult each other on suits? Really, that was hard to look at.

    • dbldmr - Nov 25, 2013 at 12:55 PM

      Dan Hicks looked like he took the suit off the back of the winner of the 3rd race at Santa Anita.

      • wisner74 - Nov 25, 2013 at 7:20 PM

        His suits are horrible.

    • irishpuma - Nov 26, 2013 at 2:27 AM

      and for a 100k + a year could either of them get a decent haircut. I know those guys usually have to do their own makeup I just can’t figure out which one interned at the morgue to pick up their skill.

  8. somebadhatharry - Nov 25, 2013 at 3:05 PM

    In regards to the crowd being electric, I was at the game at it was no louder than a typical nd game. Loud at times (3rd downs), but other than that, like going to church. I remember watching a replay of the Auburn-Georgia game on TV. The crowd was so loud, they drowned out the music that would play over the speakers. Would love to see that excitement from the ND crowds.

    • wisner74 - Nov 26, 2013 at 5:07 PM

      Harry – It can be done, and has been done, at ND Stadium.

      The single loudest crowd I have ever heard in my life, at any time and anywhere, was at ND late in Charlie Weis’s first home game as coach. The team had won its first two on the road, and the crowd was completely jacked-up throughout the game because we were all hoping he was going to be THE GUY. But the Irish were having a tough time with Michigan State in a very close game. As I recall there was a critical third down play (or something) late in the 4th Q where the Irish needed to make a big stop, which would have effectively won the game for ND.

      The crowd was so loud before that play that it created a weird echoing or vibrating sort of sound that I had never heard before and haven’t heard since. We were all going crazy.

      As it happens, MSU got the first down, went on to tie the score and win it on an option play in overtime. Of course the crowd was also loud as hell during the OT also, but talk about the air coming out of the balloon! Oh well. . . .

  9. cpfirish - Nov 25, 2013 at 4:39 PM

    The ugly…

    The field! I have never seen it that bad in 30 years!! Wow! Can’t we get something different than the paying surface that’s in the staduim?? What about the tuff Mich st has or the tuff Green Bay has..

    Go Irish!!

  10. twebb2 - Nov 25, 2013 at 5:46 PM

    Count me as just glad that our team was able to pull this one off. This is the kind of game that a team like the Irish are trying to become (that is, a consistently solid team) must win. Yes, they lost a bad Pitt game, but they pulled this one out. I’m now cautiously optimistic about Stanford… a few weeks ago I would have thought that we were walking into a killing. Go Irish!

  11. mediocrebob - Nov 25, 2013 at 6:21 PM

    At the $C game I had an issue with the people behind me. But luckily most people remained on their feet for the game and they were in the minority. Pretty good atmosphere for that game. Interested in seeing some more on the addition to the stadium. Hopefully there will be some more seats added and the new pressbox will keep some of the noise.

  12. newmexicoirish - Nov 25, 2013 at 9:12 PM

    Matt Hegarty played for Aztec High School which is in northern New Mexico. I live in Belen which is about 30 miles south of Albuquerque in the Rio Grande valley. We played Aztec twice in the NM AAAA playoffs, so I got a chance to see Matt play a couple of times. It was clear he was a man among boys, and we had some pretty good teams.

    You may have access to better Notre Dame history than I do, but I believe Matt is only the second kid from the state of New Mexico to play for Notre Dame in her entire football history. Can you verify that stat? Thanks.

    Go Irish – fell the tree!

  13. sacramentosubwayalum - Nov 25, 2013 at 10:36 PM

    Long time reader, first time poster. I’m attending my first Notre Dame game on Saturday, does anyone have the skinny on the fan experience at stanford stadium? The posts lately have me questioning my plan to stand and cheer loudly the entire game for my beloved Domers. I’d hate to inconvenience any fans of THE Cardinal.

    • wisner74 - Nov 25, 2013 at 11:15 PM

      Go with the flow. I think that you’ll find that other than in the students’ section it’s up and down all game long as the situation dictates. Plenty of standing, and plenty of sitting, and cheer loudly from both positions. I think that this is true in most stadiums, and I’d be interested to hear from you after this weekend about your experience.

      The notion that you need to stand for four hours straight to be a good ND fan is both ludicrous and a fairly recent idea. Rudeness and insensitivity also play roles in it.

      For the best explanations for why people perceive a lack of energy at ND stadium see Bern’s excellent observations above. Insisting on standing for four hours straight with no consideration for those behind you will prove nothing other than that you are an inconsiderate jerk.

  14. sacramentosubwayalum - Nov 25, 2013 at 11:40 PM

    Wisner, thanks for the response although my post was mostly tongue in cheek. I agree that standing for four hours is ridiculous, and a healthy dose of cheering and tolerance does well for both sides. I expect the cardinal fans to be a classy bunch. I expect the Cardinal fans will rise the meet the prestige of the institution.

    • irishpuma - Nov 26, 2013 at 2:41 AM

      Sactown I too am in Sacramento! the Cardinal game is fairly seated and the crowd fairly subdued. You are going to see a good amount of bay area tech people who don’t fully understand football…wine drinkers men with sweaters tied around their waists more of a social gathering….a very civilized experience. it could just stem from that fact that they were crucifying us but I did not have a lot of opportunities to stand and cheer. Outside of the student section it was a very tame crowd. There was a good amount of ND fans in the house though.

      As for the stand sit I agree with bern and wise…I prove my loyalty and fervor for ND by watching TR for the last 4 years I do not need to prove it by standing for 4 hours. Just as the standing people have the right to stand (although it is inconsiderate if you know the people behind you are not or not capable of standing long periods) so do others have the right to sit. We all paid for our tickets.

      I maybe wrong but I thought my class started the tradition in the student section in 1988 under Lou. It was new and did not catch on right away with the upperclassmen that is why I am thinking it started new right around then. It was for students to stand in the student section to show support and involvement plus as we all know student tix are cheap. We did not care that the rest of the stadium was sitting they paid good money for their seats and they are not in their teens (physical prime) after all we are all supposed to be ND. And it did give us a huge advantage when the other teams were driving into the section they could not hear anything and the volume was unbelievable and that was the same stadium before the renovation which probably made it even harder to be loud as less people and even a lower stadium.

      I think all the excuses are a cop out, you must stand to be loud and loyal, stadium is not conducive to noise, only the young are loud……80,000 people can be loud if the product is good, the game exciting and the team battling for something real…..

      • dillonbigred - Nov 26, 2013 at 9:22 AM

        I was a student during the ’79 through ’82 seasons, and we stood during the game and sat at halftime. The stadium got quieter as the Gerry Faust years wore on.

        I have always thought there could be sections of seats for those unwilling or unable to stand. I stand my fair share, but do not see the need to stand the whole time. People typically stand for action close to the end zone, third down plays, etc. I agree that you can make plenty of noise sitting down, or be silent when standing. I don’t think the team cares if the fans are standing all the time. If anything I think there is more emotion and effect when the crowd rises for big situations.

      • dsharp86 - Nov 26, 2013 at 10:55 PM

        I was there ’82 to ’85 seasons during the Faust years and the entire student section stood the whole game.

  15. getsome99 - Nov 26, 2013 at 6:03 PM

    If you’re going to go to the games, we can’t force you to stand and cheer the entire game. But by the same standards, if you’re going to go to the games, you can’t expect the other fans to stay in their seats just so you can have a clear view while sitting down. If you don’t like that deal, then it’s better to watch the games from home. It’s not fair to the fans who attend games to be part of the live fan experience to be restricted so you can move your living room in to the stadium. Trust me, for every paying fan traveling to see Notre Dame at home that wants to stop going, there are 5 more in line waiting to take his seats.

    • wisner74 - Nov 26, 2013 at 10:20 PM

      Getsome99 – how about you actually read what we’re saying? OK? I probably spend half of every game on my feet, as do most others. The point is simply that a real “fan experience” including at ND and every other of the sports venue I have ever been at involves a lot of both. Nowhere I have ever been to view a live event has ever involved standing the whole game, unless your in the student section.

      Trust me, Marine. I have agreed with a lot of what you have said over time here, and have even tried to coach you a bit about what goes on here. But go back and read what people are actually saying. Your lecture here is out of line. The fact is that most fans want to stand and cheer when appropriate, and sit and cheer when appropriate. But if you have a few people who think like Shamrocknroll does, they can force literally scores of people to have to choose between standing when it’s really not called for or missing parts of the game.

  16. ndsugarsand - Nov 26, 2013 at 8:00 PM

    Get, thankfully there are not more of you in the stadium. Thankfully you do not sit near me. I would like to see you step out from the security of your computer and tell the vets with prosthetics they should stay home so your wants are met.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!