I don’t know if there are any redeeming qualities about the play of our beloved Irish anymore. I’ve read for the past five years about how Tyrone Willingham destroyed the program, how Bob Davie started an era of losing, and how Charlie Weis would turn it all around.
At what cost, and more importantly, at what time is this transition going to occur?
If I were a betting man, well, I’d put my wallet away because it just ain’t happening.
The argument was made for the off-field improvements Willingham made, which no one can discredit.
I believe he had the highest graduation rates ever. And through it all, as conservative as he was, he was a stand-up guy.
But guess what?
That and 50 cents will get you a coke when it comes to saving your job as head football coach at the University of Notre Dame. It’s about winning football games. It’s about beating our rivals. It’s about upholding tradition. It’s about bringing national championships to South Bend! Thus, Willingham was cut loose.
So let us talk about winning.
Bob Davie’s Notre Dame coaching career ended with a .583 winning percentage. Tyrone Willingham’s was cut short with a .583 winning percentage. Before Saturday, Charlie Weis’ winning percentage was, you guessed it, .583.
Now he holds the sole third turd position at .571, behind Joe Kuharich and Gerry Faust at No. 1 and No. 2, respectively.
So, how can anyone in an official capacity support Weis’ continuance with a worse record than his past two predecessors? Davie had a 30-19 record at this point in his career. Weis is 28-21.
Willingham didn’t even get a forth year to worsen his record. Records aside, from what I can remember, Davie and Willingham’s losses were not as bad as the ones we’ve witnessed over the past two years.
I look at virtually every other major college football program and changes they’ve made in the past that led to their recent success.
While there are a few more recruiting restrictions and maybe a few more challenges that come with the job, there’s no conceivable reason Notre Dame should not be able to have a coaching staff that breeds success and produces championship-caliber teams year in and year out.
It’s an unfortunate decision Swarbrick has to make, but a necessary one nevertheless.
I’m not talking about the decision as to whether to keep Weis, but the one that will factor into choosing the next boss. I’ve never heard of the forth time being a charm, but let’s hope that is, indeed, the case.
14 comments Last one added 7 months ago — Leave a Comment
Kevin Donohue 7 months ago
I am so tired of the Willingham vs Weis debate.... do you guys see a big difference? Yes there is a huge difference.... Weis has attracted far better athletes to Notre Dame. Anybody who knows football knew this was going to be a 5 year plan to fix the program. Willingham is a great guy and a good game day coach.... he stunk as a recruiter. Brady Quinn was his best recruit yet he flourished under Charlie.
Weis is playing how many underclassmen at this point? Give him two more years and if Noter Dame is not a top 10 team... cut him loose. If you cut Charlie now you will screw recruiting for the this year and part of next year and you will loose some of the underclassman we have now who will jump ship to other schools. Patience and a strong foundation will turn this around.... I think the foundation of players is there.... you guys need patience. Also if anyone considered this team better than a 6-6 team they were kidding themselves.... every analyst had them at 4 and 8 or 8 and 4 this season. Syracuse was a horrible loss but Charlie has won a few he shouldn't have so I say give him two more years.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jim Cowan 7 months ago
C'mon Kevin, it's not a Weis vs Willingham debate here; it's a 'is Weis getting the job done' debate. What is getting the job done, winning games you are supposed to win, and the answer is NO. Big deal, he's a better recruiter, what has he done with these 5 star recruits. Jimmy Clausen has digressed every single game against crap teams. The line got worse, the rushing hasn't been there all season. I tivo'd the game this weekend and I can remember one offensive set they talked about how Charlie was going to kick it up a notch this set of downs, how he was going to pick up the intensity. What did they do, screen, run, run, punt! I was like you at the beginning of the season and was willing to stand by him for one more year regardless, but what I've seen this season is unbelievable and I can no longer support a coach who is "out coached" week in and week out. Offensive guru my ass. What happened to him calling the plays was going to change things? More of the same. All we've gotten all year is more of the same. If he is not able to see what needs to be changed and make adjustments accordingly, he is not fit to be a head football coach, and that's what we've got. A winner in the living room and a loser on the field. I know it's harsh brotha, but Notre Dame is not in the business of nice, they need to do what's necessary to win football games.
Oh, and I know football pretty well, and I can see the downward spiral the team is heading in. Two more years is a joke! I didn't expect a BCS season, what I do expect is blowout wins where blowout wins are called for, ala SDST, Navy, Washington, Syra-frickin-cuse! And I expect them to be able to be able to play 4 quarters of football not one half or three, ala Pitt, Navy, UNC. And for God's sake compete with USC every single year!!!
Edit Comment Cancel
Kirk Dymbrowski 7 months ago
I just don't see the fire.
Why is it that Ball St. can POUND a mid-major and get style points, and ND can barellllllly slip past Navy?
I've been saying for awhile, its not the Ws, its the way ND is losing, the way they are barellllly winning games which should be 60-3 style pointers.
I just don't see fire and wild devotion to the iconic uniform.
Talent shmalent I want recruits rabid, feral, insane with desire to vaporize BC 56-6. Where are the under-sized/over-hearted Zoriches and Montanas?
Talent schmalent. Whatever happened to such overbearing overachieving pride, that people envied/hated us for?
Edit Comment Cancel
Jim Cowan 7 months ago
Just mark it down as one of the many problems I see with this staff.
Edit Comment Cancel
Kevin Donohue 7 months ago
The O-Line does need work, do I like some of their young players and recruits...hell yeah. They suffered with the lose of their top two TE's, especially from a blocking standpoint. I like their backfield but I think that Clausen has taken steps back all season, he looks like a different QB from quarter to quarter. I don't think he reads the field that well and his decision making has been suspect. Next season if Crist has a good spring I would give him a shot... he moves better than Clausen.
I think Brown has done a decent job with the D but the D line needs improvement. They need both Speed and Size to allow blitzing LB's and DB's to really work. How many times did we get burnt while blitzing. Still need more depth at LB but they seem to be recruiting well so it will come around.
I still think Weis teams recruitment alone gives them time. What ND needs to decide is do they want to maintain their position of producing "student athletes" or do they want to win championships. It used to be that they had every Catholic schoolboy stud in every major Catholic Prep School in NY, NJ, PA, CA, Il,etc wanting to wear the blue and gold. that is no longer the case. Here in the NY/NJ area Noter Dame and Penn State used to get the top players, now they compete with Florida, Boston College, West Virginia, Rutgers, Miami, Penn State, Pitt. In Indiana and Ohio, Ohio State dominates the recruiting wars now. Lets be real, I could care less if their graduation rate dropped from 97% to 90% if we were winning. Thats still better than 99% of college football.
If Wies and Brown are fired do you really think the elite young players will stay? Do you think that Michigan, Michigan State, Rutgers, Boston College, Nebraska etc... will not accept a few transfers to their programs? If Kelly is brought on can he keep them from leaving? Jon Tenuta was supposed to turn our LB's in to sack machines and that has not happened.
I still say this recruiting season is essential to their turnaround.... getting rid of Charlie will only complicate matters. I think Charlie will step down after next season win or not, he looks like crap... the job has aged him 10 years. He keeps this recruiting class together we should been in good shape to compete, if it falls apart you will see another four years of losing as someone else tries to pick up the pieces. The Notre Dame program was destroyed over a few years, not overnight so it will take some time to rebuild. I'll take Weis and four top ten recruiting classes over what they had before anyday of the week.
Edit Comment Cancel
Kevin Donohue 7 months ago
Also... how many games did they loose because of their lack of a decent kicker. That should be solved with the incoming freshman. How many games would those 6 or 9 points or so helped them? It would have helped at Syracuse and North Carolina... could have changed the game against Michigan State also.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jim Cowan 7 months ago
I agree... Look, all of your points are valid. Everyone's 'keep Charlie' points are valid points, that is, if there's steady improvement shown along with those points. Right now I just see them as excuses. Excuses for losses which didn't have to be losses. Excuses which don't work at Texas, at Oklahoma, at Florida, or at any other so-called football powerhouse. If Notre Dame want's to be part of the club, they need to stop making excuses and instead make changes.
Edit Comment Cancel
Michael McCormick 7 months ago
I think what we all are saying is that we want improvement and now. What I am astounded is by the passes given to the O-line coach. That is where we are failing the most. How can you evaluate a quarterback who is under constant pressure? How can you fault receivers who do not have time to develop routes? Our running backs generaly are hit almost as quick as they get the ball. Fans can see the constant blown assingments of the offensive lineman. The defense is folding under the pressure of always being on the field. The lineman have no fire, no desire and fail to make contact. It is not possible that we only have 6 or 7 players available for the offensive line. None of these players are held accountable. The only reason I would accept for Weis's dismissal is that he is under the delusion that his offensive lineman are playing with effort. There is no reason to keep the current O-line coach. He is the one who should be held accountable. There is no excuse for these horrible performances to keep happening. Unfortunately for Charlie Weis, according to what I have been reading in the press he is that delusional.
Edit Comment Cancel
Kirk Dymbrowski 7 months ago
I have to agree with Jim. Can't blame academics. Stanford and Wake play their rivals harder than we have the past 7yrs. And if anything, they have even stricter admissions and academic rigors.
7yrs without a win over a MAJOR rival (BC, USC), and most of those losses being historically bad, and listless. The ND team should be infused with rage and screaming bloodlust the second their shoes touch the grass at Chestnut Hill. If Wake can beat BC and Stanford can beat USC at least once every 7yrs. Their is no reason our tiny little private-academic school shouldn't be able to do it. We have better recruits (genetically) than BC or Stanford. They either lack heart or training. It takes an "It" factor leadership-coach to implant that in 18yr old spoiled boys, not an Xs n Os guy.
Where is that Schematic advantage? Apparently Stanford knows how to take physically lesser teams into USC and beat them....apparently Wake beat BC in 06, when was the last time our beloved have done that?
You can have elite academics AND beat BC and USC, I think Wake and Stanford have proven that. We can't fall back on that excuse.
They come out lackadaisacal against Navy and BC, because their classes are tough? I don't think requiring young men to be responsible in the classroom defacto-negates being 'up' for a game.
Edit Comment Cancel
Mike Muratore 7 months ago
Shouldn't the coach be judged by his performance on the field? The way Notre Dame hemorrages points in the second half to teams that they only need one more shovel of dirt to burry... doesn't that scream coaching? The way that Notre Dame is totally one-dimensional, had 6 games with under 100 yards rushing, three with 50 or less, and attempted fewer than 25 rushes in 3 games put alot of pressure on a young Quarterback with a true sophomore and true freshman receiver? Against Syracuse... a team undoubtedly less talented than Notre Dame, the Irish ran the ball 28 times for only 41 yards. 41 yards! BC 21 carries for 66 yards. Teams had the Irish's number by the last 5 games... they can't run the ball, they are having trouble protecting the QB, so use the LB's to take away the short passing game and safeties to over-cover Floyd and Tate... and you've greatly reduced what they can do. As bad as Clausen was against BC, he was still 26-46 for 226 yards. 46 pass attempts on a cold and rainy night versus only 21 rushes. Against Syracuse, Clausen played well, despite the lack of a rushing game (22-39 291 yds, 2 TD and no INT).
A large problem for Weiss that he is slow to change his game plan. Opposing coaches adjust to Notre Dame, and come back on them... Notre Dame doesn't do the same. S
So if they have the talent... and recruiting isn't the problem... it can't JUST be that they are YOUNG. A young team with two top ten recruiting classes BEATS Syracuse and doesn't lose the leads against Pitt and NC.
Doesn't that all point to coaching?
Edit Comment Cancel
Jim Cowan 7 months ago
Of course it does. Here's another point. I dare anyone to find me a coach who has done less with more. Maaaaaybe Tennessee, and you see where Coach Fulmer is... Miami a stretch, but even still they haven't produced the classes Notre Dame has in recent years. I see a lot of coaches who do more with less with a tougher schedule. Weaker sched., less production with the best athletes, who does that fall on?
Edit Comment Cancel
Mike Muratore 7 months ago
I'm with ya Jim. THe team is underperforming. The Irish should have cruised to a 9-3 record this year. The finger has to point to the sideline. Notre Dame was more talented than most of it's opponents. The losses to Pitt and Syracuse... and the near disaster to Navy in Baltimore were embarrassing. Something has to change.
Edit Comment Cancel
Kevin Donohue 7 months ago
Kirk, Stanford and Wake are never going to win an NCAA football championship.... Notre Dame (like Texas, Florida, Oklahoma) are expected to win them on a regular basis. The USC Vs Stanford game was a freakish anomaly. California, Texas and Florida are huge High School Football States... look at the top prospects and you will see the number of 2 star, 3star, 4star and 5 star players that come through the football powerhouses in those states. Though Illinois and Indiana produce some good players they don't produce the volume that California does. Most of California's top players go to USC, UCLA, Cal etc... still plenty of very good prospects to keep banging on Stanford's door. Notre Dame, though a national recruiter, does not have the luxury of so many top rated prospects in their area... Charlie almost beat USC (darn that illegal push by Reggie Bush) and though we had Brady and Jeff... we had no business being in that game with the depth of talent that Pete Carroll and company had... so Charlie almost had his Stanford moment.
Look if Charlie stays they still need a change with the O-staff, and they need to build a pool of players on both sides of the line if they are going to win.... still not sold on Clausen as a leader... I hope he proves me wrong.
I beleieve we have a really good foundation. I agree we need to put it together and we need to go 10-2 next season or the experiment is over. We have Nevada, Michigan, Michagen State, Purdue, Washington, USC, Boston College, Washington State, Navy, Pitt, Connecticut and Stanford.... Like I said 10-2 or 11-1 season is needed at this point. Here is what I see:
Clelland, Brophy, Golic, Cave, Mahoney, Olsen, Robinson, Romine are all underclassman lineman and I think Clelland, Cave, Romine, Olsen and Robinson have very bright futures; add recruits Watt, Bullard and Martin and I think you are going to fix the Offensive line issues... Fauria, Ragone, Rudolph are all underclassmen TE's that with some strength training and size will be really good players, throw freshman Eifert in there and I think we are in good shape..
At receiver I like Floyd, Goodman, Kamara, Tate with Evans as a freshman. At Running Back you have Aldridge, Hughes and Allen returning with youngsters like Gray, Wood and Riddick (Riddick is going to surprise lots of people). Tausch will fix the kicking problem.
On D I like the youngsters they have in Cwynar, Johnson, Lewis-Moore, Nwankwo, Hafis and Ian Williams with Stockton as a freshman....
At LB you have youngsters like Filer, Fleming, McDonald, Neal, Posluszny, Smith, and throw in freshman like Motta (Will play LB not S), Calabrese (kid loves to destroy people) and Dan Fox I think you have a great foundation here. If Charlie lands Manti Te'o or Jenkins wow.... watch out.
As for the DB's - Blanton, Gray, Slaughter, McCarthy, Harrison Smith and add freshman like Pollard, Oliver and Banks.... I think the D is headed in the right diretion.
Like I said... he is bringing the talent... but next year he needs to win if he is going to continue to recruit top talent. If he has a 7-5 season nobody will believe in him. The one thing saving ND is their national TV contract... kids want to be seen each week but if they lose that too will go away. We will see what happens but I still believe in them... But I also love Santa and the easter bunny.
Edit Comment Cancel
Kevin Donohue 7 months ago
Great views and I am as frustrated as the rest of you are... I just think we are turning the corner and don't want us to regress again.
Edit Comment Cancel
Leave a Comment
You must register to post a comment.