Holtz to Kelly Through 31 Games

[johnsben]

31 Games into their ND coaching career:

Holtz: 21-10 (67.7%) Davie: 19-12 (61.3%) Willingham: 19-12 (61.3%) Weis: 20-11 (64.5%) Kelly: 21-10 (67.7%)

Pretty dang even.

Through 3 full seasons:

Holtz: 25-10 (71.4%) Davie: 21-16 (56.8%) Willingham: 21-16 (56.8%) Weis: 22-15 (59.5%) Kelly: ?

This is a career defining stretch for Kelly.

 

[Buster Bluth]

This is a career defining stretch for Kelly.

No it's not. Please don't promote that mentality. Not every Notre Dame coach through history is going to become elite in his third season. It will eventually take longer.

That said, 13-0 would b amazing. haha

 

[RDU Irish]

21-10 versus 21-10 is "pretty dang even"

Right now I see worst case 10-2 regular season with competitive losses, no blowouts in the wrong direction. Add the bowl game and worst case I see 10-3, again competing in all games.

Running the table is possible. When is the last time that has been realistically so?

 

[johnsben]

21-10 versus 21-10 is "pretty dang even"

I was talking about all five being pretty even. I am surprised that the difference between Willingham and Davie's record through 31 games is only two games off of Holtz and Kelly.

 

[johnsben]

No it's not. Please don't promote that mentality.

You're right. I should have said 'This could be a career defining stretch.'

 

[bobbyok1]

31 Games into their ND coaching career:

Holtz: 21-10 (67.7%) Davie: 19-12 (61.3%) Willingham: 19-12 (61.3%) Weis: 20-11 (64.5%) Kelly: 21-10 (67.7%)

Pretty dang even.

Through 3 full seasons:

Holtz: 25-10 (71.4%) Davie: 21-16 (56.8%) Willingham: 21-16 (56.8%) Weis: 22-15 (59.5%) Kelly: ?

This is a career defining stretch for Kelly.

Agreed to the obvious "even" nature of those 5 coaches records after 31 games, and your right it is a little surprising that the middle 3 (Davie, Willingham and Weis) had the same or close to same record as Holtz and Kelly. However when you look at the bigger picture of building a program, only two stand out to me, Holtz and Kelly. No, I do not expect ND to run the table and win a National Title this year. I WOULD LOVE IT! But, not expecting it. However, what I am beginning to expect is to be a title contender for the foreseeable future with Kelly as coach (provided things remain fairly constant regarding coaching staff, administration, etc).

I felt the same way under Holtz (though I was much younger and more naive). I NEVER felt a confidence in Davie, Willingham or Weis after seeing them through 2 and a half seasons. Fears and questions abounded.

So yes the last 5 coaches did have a very close record after 31 games, but there are major differences between them in regards to building a program. Holtz-Kelly good, Davie-Willingham-Weis, bad.

 

[johnsben]

Agreed to the obvious "even" nature of those 5 coaches records after 31 games, and your right it is a little surprising that the middle 3 (Davie, Willingham and Weis) had the same or close to same record as Holtz and Kelly. However when you look at the bigger picture of building a program, only two stand out to me, Holtz and Kelly. No, I do not expect ND to run the table and win a National Title this year. I WOULD LOVE IT! But, not expecting it. However, what I am beginning to expect is to be a title contender for the foreseeable future with Kelly as coach (provided things remain fairly constant regarding coaching staff, administration, etc).

I felt the same way under Holtz (though I was much younger and more naive). I NEVER felt a confidence in Davie, Willingham or Weis after seeing them through 2 and a half seasons. Fears and questions abounded.

So yes the last 5 coaches did have a very close record after 31 games, but there are major differences between them in regards to building a program. Holtz-Kelly good, Davie-Willingham-Weis, bad.

Totally agree. Holtz and Kelly's records show a program building where Davie, Willingham, and Weis were erratic and/or crumbling.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

I think it was in 2002 when Willingham had a pretty good run too -- like 7-0 or something like that.

Hindsight is what it is, but you have to give credit where it's due.

 

[koonja]

This team is so different in so many ways that I don't see the point in comparing. Different coaches, different players, college football is a different animal nowadays, different offense/defensive systems, different facilities, etc.

You might be better off pointing to BK's personal track record and see how at every place he's coached, their winning percentage goes up or stays the same from year to year. It never decreases. That's what excited me.

 

[Buster Bluth]

21-10 versus 21-10 is "pretty dang even"

Right now I see worst case 10-2 regular season with competitive losses, no blowouts in the wrong direction. Add the bowl game and worst case I see 10-3, again competing in all games.[/quote]

That's the worst case? I want what you're smoking.

Running the table is possible. When is the last time that has been realistically so?

Well probably 2002.

 

[Riddickulous]

I'm not a big fan of these kinds of comparisons.

 

[johnsben]

I'm not a big fan of these kinds of comparisons.

Wins, losses, and National Championships are all that will really count once Kelly's tenure is over. This is how he will be compared to past coaches. I know that its not relevant right now, in the middle of his career and the middle of a season but its interesting.

 

[nd1989]

If we finish 10-2 this year, then BK's percentage for first three years would be 68.4%, well ahead of everyone except for Lou, and only a few points behind Lou.

 

[ClausentoTate]

Running the table is possible. When is the last time that has been realistically so?

In October? It's been a while.

 

[Chris P. Bacon]

31 Games into their ND coaching career:

Holtz: 21-10 (67.7%) Davie: 19-12 (61.3%) Willingham: 19-12 (61.3%) Weis: 20-11 (64.5%) Kelly: 21-10 (67.7%)

Pretty dang even.

Through 3 full seasons:

Holtz: 25-10 (71.4%) Davie: 21-16 (56.8%) Willingham: 21-16 (56.8%) Weis: 22-15 (59.5%) Kelly: ?

This is a career defining stretch for Kelly.

wOw, that is a very interesting stat line, espeically with Holtz and Kelly being at a dead heat at this point in their careers. I won't look to much into these numbers, but they are telling, and it will be interesting to see how things pan out. Here's to Kelly taking the lead after year 3 , going 29-10(74.4%), has a new era began?

 

[JadeBrecks]

Wins, losses, and National Championships are all that will really count once Kelly's tenure is over. This is how he will be compared to past coaches. I know that its not relevant right now, in the middle of his career and the middle of a season but its interesting.

I will have to disagree with you on that one. If Kelly builds a team or not will make a massive impact if he were to leave. We have been shown what happens when we get rid of a coach that wasn't building a team.

The biggest problem I have with these comparisons is a win is a win. Two coaches could have beaten a easier team but if one wins by 30 and the other on a last min field goal there is a big difference. Take for instance where this team is at 5-0 verses when Weis was 5-0. They are two totally different teams. Im not on the NC bandwagon for this year but I do have to say that I really like what Kelly is doing with this team. If he were to not work out I believe the next coach will be far better off than what Kelly was at the start.

 

[johnsben]

Take for instance where this team is at 5-0 verses when Weis was 5-0.

Weis was never 5-0. The last 5-0 was Willingham (8-0 until BC loss) in 2002 and before that it was Holtz in 1993 (10-0 until BC loss).

 

[GowerND11]

Even though these are pretty even, remember what year three looked like for Ty and Charlie. So as others have said remember that Lou was building a program, much like we see Kelly doing now. Were Ty and Charlie really building? By year three their teams were on the decline.

 

[sparkyND]

In my humble opinion, Weis was trying to build a program here. However, he did not have many pieces to work with in year 3 as Willingham didn't recruit really well. I am not saying Weis was the best fit for ND or that he did everything right. Remember Weis's incoming recruiting classes ranked quite highly. Kelly, I personally think, is in a slightly better shape. If you think about, Kapron, Manti and Eifert are all from the Weis era.

See year 3 record of the past coaches also show why we all had such high hopes for Weis during his tenure here as well.

 

[Cackalacky]

Weis was never 5-0. The last 5-0 was Willingham (8-0 until BC loss) in 2002 and before that it was Holtz in 1993 (10-0 until BC loss).

If I remember correctly, Willingham's 8-0 start was also a series of fortunate events and a stout veteran defense.....

 

[North Buffalo Irish]

In my humble opinion, Weis was trying to build a program here. However, he did not have many pieces to work with in year 3 as Willingham didn't recruit really well. I am not saying Weis was the best fit for ND or that he did everything right. Remember Weis's incoming recruiting classes ranked quite highly. Kelly, I personally think, is in a slightly better shape. If you think about, Kapron, Manti and Eifert are all from the Weis era.

See year 3 record of the past coaches also show why we all had such high hopes for Weis during his tenure here as well.

Weis recruited well in certain areas. To succeed in Year 3, you need some quality veterans from the last coaching staff, but you also need to be developing your own players by that point.

Look at this defense... how many of the contributors are Kelly recruits? Almost all of them. Weis did not recruit very well on the defensive side of the ball, sans Te'o. That's why his teams failed. That's why he was fired. Even having one of the greatest offenses in CFB history couldn't save him. That's how bad his defensive recruiting and player development was. It was not Willingham's fault that Weis failed.

 

[GoldenTerp]

21-10 versus 21-10 is "pretty dang even"

Right now I see worst case 10-2 regular season with competitive losses, no blowouts in the wrong direction. Add the bowl game and worst case I see 10-3, again competing in all games.

That's the worst case? I want what you're smoking.



Well probably 2002.[/QUOTE]


I really can't see us losing more then 3 games at this point. USC & OU look over rated and Stanford doesn't look great either. Although I thought Stanford was a 8-4 team this year. Barkley's MO is sucking it up Senior Year after a monster Junior Year