Wrong.
Navy didn't almost pull off a ridiculous comeback Saturday because Charlie Weis decided to get his backups some experience. It's because the entire team, the players, took this move to mean that the game was over. "No need to really try, this game is over."
The same folks that are criticizing Weis for getting his 2nd and 3rd string guys some reps are the folks that bashed Weis after Quinn's last year for not getting the backups in enough. "Why would you leave your starters in when you're up by over 20 points with 5 minutes remaining?" they asked when ND left Quinn and Company on the field in the waning minutes of ND-Navy circa 2006. "Classless." "Stupid." and other such sentiments were echoed across the media.
Now that Charlie has tried to get his kids some experience? Bashing him for that. The guy can't win either way. Literally damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't.
Listen folks, that comeback didn't almost-happen because of the 2nd stringers being in there. In fact, a lot of those '2nd stringers' have been key players for ND this year. Eric Hansen, ever the somewhat-clueless 'expert' calls out Ethan Johnson as a 'no name' player. Hey Eric, do you even KNOW how much Johnson has played this year? He's one of our more regular guys on the DL! Same thing with Paddy Mullen, who's a veteran on the team, and has played a decent amount this year.
Hansen says you can't blame the players for checking out when you see backups in the game. I call BS on this. The PLAYERS have a responsibility to PLAY. Especially if you're a 2nd stringer or 3rd stringer getting some reps and trying to move up the depth chart. Sometimes, players just have to take it on themselves to GO GET IT.
Example: The second onside kick. NOBODY went after that ball. The players just stood there and watched it bounce by, with Hughes barely even making a stab at it. And those were the first team Hands guys out there. You have to GO GET THE FREAKING BALL. Weis isn't perfect, I know. But players have to take it on themselves to be aggressive - to make plays without being afraid of making an error. In the final 3 minutes Saturday, I saw Irish players afraid of losing, rather than trying to win. That, and only that, is what led to the almost-comeback. You can chastise Weis all you want for getting some players experience, but it was the right move. It's up to the players to play. And they didn't.
Luckily, the Irish escaped with a much-needed win. But clearly, there has to be a mental shift on this team. A shift to where every single play of every single game is played with intensity and aggressiveness. We know they CAN do it - we've seen it at times in games throughout the year. It needs to become automatic, consistent, and non-stop - there can be NO letting off the pedal. If anything, this is ND's biggest weakness this year. And while the coach can't get in and make the plays, he does need to instill this instinct. This attitude. If it doesn't happen, this team will be decent in 2009 and 2010, but will never be a contender. This shift to a true killer instinct, a strong and unending desire to flat out destroy opponents, will be crucial to ND's success in the future. All the talent in the world doesn't mean squat if the entire team, from starters to the water boy, doesn't want it.
You gotta want it.
By Sed November 18, 2008 - 11:23 am
I have no problem with playing the 2nd stringers. I have only a small problem with the fumble by Jonas in the red zone – the ball was wet and he doesn’t get a ton of carries. I have a little bigger problem with some of the ref’s calls, but that’s football and you can only hope they err on the side of both teams in the end. No, my only major problem is with the 4th down non-punt play call at near midfield with 2:30 to go. You NEVER EVER EVER EVER attempt this, especially without the first team in. I don’t care how easy it is to pick up 3 yards and I don’t care that we’d averaged way more than 3 yards a carry the entire game. You DO NOT go for it at midfield, you take the delay of game and punt it to the corner of the field/endzone and call it a game. That single call changed the entire game and opened the door for the rediculous comeback. Sometimes a killer instinct includes pinning the opposing team deep and playing killer defense to end a game.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By tjak November 18, 2008 - 11:28 am
When I was in grade seven I was a starting guard on the St. Andrew’s Saints school’s elementary basketball team. We were playing a school named Fairburn one day and found ourselves up by 38 points at the half. Our coach Mr.Morgan ever the kind man did not want to embarrass the other squad. So he put in our seconds and thirds. I felt okay with this until we were up 6 with two minutes left. I begged him to put the firsts back in, but he said not to worry, it would all work out. Well, we lost and I will never forget that game. I am not telling this story because I feel Weis was wrong for putting in subs; the biscuit is right, Weis was heavily critisized for not doing this in Brady”s last year. I am telling this story because the Irish must want to crush their opponents. As long as you play fair, you can be the good sport after the game. Since that game 30 years ago I have never let up in competition. Florida put up 52 points on South Carolina;they shook hands at the end of the game-that’s all that counts(God I hate mentioning anything connected to Meyer) Again, “If winning isn’t everything why do they keep score”.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit November 18, 2008 - 12:47 pm
To both, 100% agree.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By scott November 18, 2008 - 11:08 pm
“Now that Charlie has tried to get his kids some experience? Bashing him for that. The guy can’t win either way. Literally damned if he does, and damned if he doesn’t.”
Are you kidding me? We’re an emotionally fragile team that’s lost 3 out of our last 4 games, facing a team that dealt us our most infamous loss in our most infamous season one year ago. Oh yeah, and that same team came back from a 3 TD 4th quarter deficit just a couple of weeks ago, and our guys have repeatedly shown that they cannot finish when they’ve got the other team on the ropes.
In contrast, the 2006 team was a veteran-dominated unit with no history of repeatedly letting inferior opponents up off the mat. Nor were they coming off a harrowing stretch of losses (the scUM prison rape was a distant memory by the time the Navy game rolled around) that had turned them into a bunch of head cases.
The contexts of the 2006/2008 games couldn’t be more different. And Charlie was wrong in both instances.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0