- In college, recruiting = success. At Notre Dame, recruiting = only one part of the job. Yeah. Stockpiling the talent on your roster is an excellent step toward creating a national championship program. It's only one step, however, and if you just keep stockpiling talent and never really properly develop it, then it's just going to paint you into a corner when everyone asks why all that talent on that team can't beat a 2-8 Syracuse. Some will start to argue that the talent is "overrated" because these recruits get a "boost" by commiting to Notre Dame, but all of this talent on this Irish squad was highly rated and feverishly recruited by other programs before Notre Dame ever got a commitment from any of them. Further, consistently doing an excellent job recruiting is no reason to applaud a Notre Dame head coach. No, ND does not "recruit itself," but ND still has advatanges over 95% of the other programs in the country that really should make the job easier for anyone willing to put in the effort. The warchest for recruiting makes some small countries' GDP blush. The history is unrivaled. The games are almost always televised nationally rather than televised by Jefferson Pilot. And now a Notre Dame head coach is able to bring in recruits for early enrollment and get them working out a full semester earlier than Lou Holtz ever could in some of the best facilities in the country.
- Money - Notre Dame Football is a Net Profit Center for the University: The money earned by Notre Dame via the football program is massive and easily allows the school the flexibility to overcome any foolish buy-out clause, even if it really does amount to 20 million dollars. The failure to execute on that clause for the sake of the short term could well cost the university in the long term. You threaten the viability of a net profit football program if you continue to make decisions that undermine the performance of that program.
- Brand New AD: I really need to get an AD job. That way I can spend half a year just existing within the job without actually doing it. Jack Swarbrick doesn't need the AD position at Notre Dame. By all accounts, the guy's never going to want for a job the rest of his life, particularly in the city of Indianapolis. If you argue that Swarbrick wasn't prepared to make a change at the HC level of the football program by the end of the Syracuse game, I ask why? It's not as though it was some well kept secret that, after a 3-9 season, Weis' position at ND was tenuous at best. Hell, as a ND alum, and, presumably, a ND Football Fan, I'd have expected Swarbrick to have a list of names he'd be interested in months before he was even contacted about taking the AD job. His primary purpose in life, after taking the job, was being prepared to make a move should the 2008 season turn out to be a failure.
- No Other “Home Run” Options that are Viable. This is such a strawman. Why is it a requirement to get a "home run" hire? Since when has any hire for any position been a "guaranteed success?" Why is the AD not prepared and capable of identifying talented options, regardless of current status and current leadership position, and hiring a fitting candidate from that pool of options? Many Irish fans are incapable, due to some romantic notions, of admitting that the hiring of Lou and Ara were hardly "home runs." They were extremely good hires, but they were hardly guaranteed successes. Really, when Florida hired Urban Meyer while Fr. Jenkins flew back to South Bend with his tail between his legs, Meyer wasn't a "guaranteed success." There were a ton of questions about whether or not his spread offense could succeed in the SEC, or whether or not the guy could coach a big program with actual, delirious expectations of grandeur.
- Charlie is a Good Sand-bagger behind closed doors. If this is true, then Charlie should have been fired the first time he ever tried to "manage expectations." such behavior puts him on a level with Bob Davie and Ty Willingham. Acceptance of those managed expectations is reason for Swarbrick, Jenkins, and any other accepting authority to lose their authority. You don't accept failure at ND. You don't accept mediocrity at ND. The moment the university, the faculty, the students, and the alumni begin accepting mediocrity even with very good mitigating factors rather than doggedly pursuing and expecting excellence is the day we may as well all just give up. What I used to love about Charlie is even when his team looked out-matched, he threw everything and the kitchen sink at the problem, looking for a way to win at all costs. But if he's really just managing expectations with his superiors, why would those under his umbrella of leadership ever learn to "expect to win?"
- Youth. Yeah. That OL is sure young. Some would choose to ignore this gigantic, raging lunatic of an elephant in the room. Some would choose to try and blame the lack of development of the OL on Coach Latina. I choose to let the buck stop with Weis. If the OL isn't developing because Latina is a bad coach, then Weis should have identified that during one of his previous 3 off-seasons and corrected that issue. If Weis's offensive system doesn't mesh with Latina's philosophy, then that should have been corrected in one of the previous 3 off-seasons. The OL are still making mistakes that they made in early 2007. So let's not just ignore the massive freaking problem at the point of attack for every offense sans the A11. If your offensive line sucks, you suck. Yeah, this team would have had a much better record if the OL were capable of converting a 3rd and 2, but they're not, and Charlie Weis gets paid millions of dollars to ensure that they are better than that -much better than that. It was a mistake for Weis not to take massive corrective action last year for the OL problems. He'd better not make the same mistake twice.
- Goodwill. I'm fairly certain that the goodwill ran out sometime after the 3-9 season, the near-loss to SDSU, the loss to Syracuse, the fact that the team looked like they didn't even know about onsides-kicks against Navy, and the fact that after 4 seasons, Weis' best game came in a loss to Southern Cal in 2005. The goodwill isn't just dead. It's buried under 15 feet of cement supporting a massive underwater tunnel after having been drawn and quartered and burned to a crisp.
- Charlie COULD be the answer. Sure, but so could Brian Kelly, Chris Petersen, Mike Leach, and a littany of other coaches. The difference between Weis and other HCs that ND might have hired is that the other HCs would be coming into ND with some HC experience, and so perhaps they've gone and made a lot of mistakes at their previous place of employment that they wont make at ND. Weis has made a ton of novice mistakes at ND and, given this will be just his 5th year on the job, will likely make more. So why does the existence of some unquantifiable potential work in Weis' favor and not in favor of others? It shouldn't.
I hope Weis succeeds with his 9th life. I really do because I want ND to succeed. I want ND to win a national championship and I want it next year. The schedule certainly has developed into something that a highly talented, well coached team could crush while being nationally televised. So hopefully that happens, but if it doesn't, the excuses for Weis have run out.
By Andy December 4, 2008 - 1:59 pm
Agreeance. Nice work.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit December 4, 2008 - 3:12 pm
You missed on a few of these MQ. And especially this point –> any one of these isn’t a reason and I admitted you could poke holes in each individually. But not as a whole. All together, it didn’t make this a clear/easy decision, but it made keeping Weis the right choice.
Just to clarify:
Recruiting – the point here isn’t that he should be kept only because of his recruiting. It’s that losing him would mean losing the momentum we have, some of the kids we currently have on campus and some of the kids currently committed. One more year to bring them on and build them into the system/institution reduces the chances we’d lose some of those players. Instead of a Top 7 class we’d have a Top 20 class, and with transfers we’d be back to where we started. With 3 Top classes in a row and keeping Charlie, we’d be better set for the future. On the development front, I just don’t get why people keep saying it. I’ve seen a ton of development from players on both sides of the ball. I haven’t seen it at all on the O-line, which is the one place where we actually have experience. That’s the one glaring weakness that I have no clue how to explain.
Money – I agree in principle. But spending $20M to get the other coaches you mention below? No way. And you ignore the negotiation possibility completely.
Brand New AD: Your point here is so myopic it’s beyond reason. Right – Swarbrick has done nothing since he got started. And, by the way, he should only care about football and he doesn’t have any other sports to worry about. Oh, and when we were 4-1, you were calling for a new coach too like everyone else in the world (right, no one was). And again, it’s not that he couldn’t have a list on hand. It’s unlikely that he didn’t. It’s that, given all the other factors outlined in my post, this was one more reason to wait.
No Other “Home Run” Options that are Viable. This is a requirement because our last few hires were botched. BOTCHED. And if it’s not a HR, what’s the point? Get someone that MIGHT be better than Charlie? For the $20M buyout and the loss of recruits and the decrease in continuity??? We’re gonna go with someone that MIGHT be better? That’s just madness. THIS year, the only way you make the change is if you have someone proven – a Home Run. Again, because of all the other factors. “Why is the AD not prepared and capable of identifying talented options, regardless of current status and current leadership position, and hiring a fitting candidate from that pool of options?” That’s exactly what we’ve done the last 3 searches. Worked out great!
Charlie is a Good Sand-bagger behind closed doors. Your point here is crazy. RIIIIIGHT, looking at a year where he had almost no seniors, and no talent in those seniors, he’s gonna promise 10 wins to his boss. Dude, if I have a budget of $5K, and my competitors have a budget of $100K, I’m certainly not going to promise market dominance. Managing expectations is just smart. It’s not awe-inspiring, but it’s smart. Your rant on ‘not accepting failure at ND’ makes me think you’ve been on NDNation too much lately. Of course you don’t – but you also have to be realistic – no coach was bringing home a winning record last year. This year? Yeah, should’ve happened, but CW would be an idiot to say we’d have 9-10 wins in either year.
Youth. You point out the one unit where we have experience, and the one that I acknowledged in my post hasn’t progressed as needed. You also point to CW’s lack of making changes here, and I agree. I said I think it’s either coaching or scheme, or both. I don’t ignore the elephant in the room – I acknowledge it. But people that say ‘he’s not developing players’ can only point to the OL to prove this point. That’s one unit that’s experienced and underperforming. Could be due to scheme or a position coach, or due to a lack of development. Yes, he should’ve fixed it. But that’s one unit of 5 guys – 22 play.
Goodwill. That goodwill may have been gone last year or could’ve just been burned at USC for all we know. We don’t know what his relationship is with the higher-ups or how much credit they give him for certain things. Either way, this was a factor – either remaining goodwill, or the fact that he once had goodwill.
Charlie COULD be the answer. Sure, but so could Brian Kelly, Chris Petersen, Mike Leach, and a littany of other coaches. If your response is this, you’ve ignored all my previous points. If you told me that we’d not lose a single recruit, that the $ wasn’t an issue, that continuity doesn’t matter a lick, I’d agree. But there’s so much downside here, that unless there’s a much higher likelihood of those guys (and I dont think there is) being THE guy, then it’s not worth the risk. Again, it’s a combination of all the factors, no single one.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By DeepTeaKup December 4, 2008 - 3:13 pm
Why do mom and dad fight all the time?
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit December 4, 2008 - 3:16 pm
DTK, just to clarify, I’m Dad.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit December 4, 2008 - 3:18 pm
Oh, and Domer, I’m in no way saying this was a clear-cut or easy decision. The thing I take issue with most in your post is “irrefutably flawed”. Given all the factors I outlined, there’s no way you can say this was a clear/easy decision. I get you want him gone, but looking at all of those things, you have to at least admit it’d be a tough call. I think these factors forced a lean toward keeping CW, and not the other way around. Cost-benefits and all that jazz.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq December 4, 2008 - 3:24 pm
Biscuit,
If I can poke holes in everything that’s keeping your argument afloat, I’m pretty sure I’ve sunk your ship. You want the sum of your parts to become some overarching valid reason and I’m saying your sum is < 0.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit December 4, 2008 - 3:33 pm
Wrong. Sum of the parts doesn’t always equal the whole. Factors influence other factors. Certain aspects of a decision make other aspects more or less acceptable. More or less relevant. More or less important. You discount risk-reward and cost-benefit analysis. In your world people look at a list of things and check ‘good’ or ‘bad’ and if there’s more of one or the other they go that route. That’s a weird world and one I’m glad I dont live in.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq December 4, 2008 - 3:51 pm
I live in a world where people make decisions and try to do so without having to hunt for rationalizations behind the decisions within the minutiae. It’s actually quite relaxing.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By nyndfansub December 4, 2008 - 3:55 pm
This will seem the wrong argument for me. I am 100% in biscuit’s corner. But I have different views as to why CW might not be the answer. ’05 and ’06, our “return to glory”. In ’05 ND beat Michigan (sucks!). YAY! We are the best team ever! Then an overtime loss to MSU, you know the story. Then USC, the “we almost did the un-did-able”. Great year.
Then comes ’06. Our rivals have adapted. Michigan (sucks!) and USC beat the brakes off of us. MSU and UCLA pretty much beat us, but we had Brady Quinn, and Terrail had the only game that I have been glad to see him on the field.
’07. What could anyone make of that year? We were able to chalk it up to youth and inexpierience. No one knew who to point the finger at. So we didn’t point to anyone (hence Latina still having a job).
’08. To me this is Weis’ first real year. This is his team and he needs to realize that certain things of his don’t work. His scheme is easily adapted to, which explains why teams in the second half have been killing us. He does not change it up, they do, and look – a loss to ‘Cuse. DickFraud (sucks? Do I put sucks there? he does definitely suck!) is probably already making his adjustments to CW overused plays.
I believe that Weis can make the changes that he needs to make. I think he can coach this team to an NC, and I think he can do it next year. However, if I see Hughes running the stretch, then in comes AA to run the stretch, then Tate/Floyd/ShaqDaddy run the fade, I will be terribly mistaken. Prove me right, Weis. I am sure that MQ would be more than happy to be wrong in this case, as well as NDegativeNation.
By the way, MQ, I agree with biscuit in the fact that NDNation can give people a negative outlook on ND football. The same people who will bury someone for a typo are the same people that said they have always called for CW’s head.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq December 4, 2008 - 4:02 pm
Sweet Jobu, nynd, I don’t give a damn what NDNation thinks. If I were good at group-think, I’d have more friends.
Just because my opinion aligns with the zeitgeist of NDN doesn’t mean it’s been informed by them. If I tended to think more like them I wouldn’t have been banned to their “2nd Tier” board.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By san diego irish December 4, 2008 - 4:13 pm
I think that Biscuit makes about as strong of an argument as possible for keeping Weis. In the final analysis, given the probability of another great recruiting class, ND doesn’t have much to lose by giving Weis one more year. It could be hard on ND fans to suffer through another mediocre year. But let’s not pretend that ND is going to win a NC next year no matter who the coach is–there are just too many areas that need improvement to get them all fixed in one off season. Even under great circumstances, the odds of winning a NC are extremely low, just ask Pete Carrol. Despite SC’s recent dominance, they only have one NC.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq December 4, 2008 - 4:18 pm
san diego,
Just for argument’s sake, let’s say the current recruiting class only ends up being in the #20-#25 range. And no. I don’t think anyone is defecting. Let’s just go with a bit of hypothetical discussion here. If the class were to end up in the “okay but meh” range for ND’s standards, then how would you feel?
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By san diego irish December 4, 2008 - 4:34 pm
I admit it would weaken the case for keeping Weis, depending on what the final class looks like (they could still get enough difference makers–i.e. Cierre Wood, Stockton–and not have an overall great class). Clearly Weis’ biggest positive right now is his recruiting, without it, he starts to look a lot more like Daviham.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Publius December 4, 2008 - 4:36 pm
I’m just really hoping that we have a decisive year next season one way or the other. I’m still hoping beyond hope that Weis can get his shit in order and come away with a BCS win. What terrifies me the most, though, is not a 2007-esque season, but a season closer to the current one. My fear is Weis will will something like 8 games and be retained for another season, and will continue with a similar record ad infinitum. We don’t want to “Clemson Syndrom”, where a program is mediocre-ish for years because the HC is not good enough to do anything remarkable, but not bad enough justify his firing.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit December 4, 2008 - 6:00 pm
Publius, i wouldnt be too afraid of that. externally there will be no absolute criteria. my bet is that Jack and Jenkins do have an agreement with Weis on X wins or more (8 or 9 most likely and I really hope it’s 9) or something along those lines. i dont think they’ll take a 2 game improvement over a mediocre result this year when we should’ve had 8 wins. the fans will ‘demand’ 10. i think 9 keeps his job.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0