each of those teams (if I know which years you are referring to) had a situation that the Irish won't share in 2010.

-USC (2009) had to replace a host of defensive starters, operated with a true freshman quarterback, and had a lot of coaching turnover
-Georgia (2008) lost a ton of talent on their offensive line and Stafford has always been overrated in my estimation (career ~2:1 TD:INT ratio)
-Oklahoma (2009) lost the bulk of arguably the best offensive line in 2008, several very good receivers, and their Heisman Trophy quarterback to injury
-LSU (pick a year) has struggled significantly from some of the worst coaching in recent memory. Miles' clock management is poor at best and cost them a couple of games. The turnover at the quarterback position has also been problematic.

I'd also wager that most of these teams played tougher opposition, although I admit I haven't researched this point.

The lost off Tate and Clausen should not be understated, but Notre Dame returns multiple starters on both sides of the ball and for the most part won't be a young team. Crist is in year three and was a highly rated prospect. The ACL injury certainly provides some suspense, but all accounts indicate he is progressing ahead of schedule. Floyd should be able to fill in for Tate, Kamara has good potential and solid playing time to draw from, Rudolph and Ragone are two very good options at tight end, and the backfield is deep and talented.

Considering they play two, maybe three, solid defensive teams, I can't see the offensive problems being a huge liability. Improving to an average defense should be worth three or four wins alone. Additionally, the momentum generated by a new coach is often a strong asset.

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not predicting 10 wins either. I've learned that, at least recently, the pessimistic view is far more accurate than the optimistic one. But I think 10 wins is not an unreasonable expectation given the talent level and schedule.