It depends on a lot of factors...but one of the biggest is how much the previous staff left behind...
Take Ara as one example....1963 was horrid at ND (2-7), 1964 was a near-miss title (9-1). He had roughly the same players but moved them around and coached them up and the results were instant. Ara went on to win 95 games and 2 MNC.
Take Lou as another example....1985 was a nadir of sorts, with the bottom reached in the Orange Bowl Massacre (58-7 drubbing at the hands of Pig-faced Satan). 1986 was another 5-6 year but the team was in nearly every game and the fact that ND still had a lot of talent was obvious. Lou was not as instant as Ara in turning things around and making a sustained run of excellence, but he had a lot of tools to work with too. Lou went on to have 100 wins, 1 MNC and 2 near misses.
Then look at FUCUM last year....he was stocked on defense with almost all Zook-players. But even with that, it really took an inordinate amount of luck for UF to win it all last year - they dodged a sure loss with blocked kicks against Spurrier's SC team, they got lucky in avoiding LSU in the SEC title game (instead getting Arkansas - and nearly blew THAT as well), then they got OSU in the title game and were lucky to have the Bucknuts hurt their best playmaker on the celebration of the opening kick-off. Still, the convergence of factors led to a national title for them...what he ends up with is clearly in doubt now, as he has 3L's this year with a bowl game pending.
Who was the best coach in that group? Cases can be made on whatever side people would want to argue, but the one factor in all cases was a relatively stocked cupboard of talent that was immediately augmented with more talent. Those coaches had the luxury of full rosters of upperclassmen - and even though UF played a lot of freshmen and sophomores on their title team, they were all augmenting existing players on the team NOT outright replacing them.
Now on to Chuckles....Weis was outstanding in his opening 2 seasons. Sure, the results were marred by the 2006 blow-out losses, but I think 19-6 in 2 years was an achievment to be proud of regardless of how it ended. Coming into this season, Weis was hamstrung by a lack of depth across the board, but most glaringly on the O-line. He made more than his fair share of gaffes to make a bad situation worse; but in nearly every case the errors were due to trying to do something to win individual games - perhaps at the expense of the season as a whole.
To be honest, this year's ND season was over in the first quarter at Michigan. From that point on it was merely a matter of getting younger guys on the field and gaining experience for future seasons - despite what may have been said publically. I have no doubt that this could have been a factor in the much discussed and rumored rift between the upperclasses and the underclasses. The older guys - especially underperforming guys like Sullivan - could see the season for what it was at that point = an unmitigated disaster. With no future seasons to look towards, it is easy to see how they might chaffe a bit at the younger guys or harbor unspoken but clear resentment of them. Just another footnote in the ugliest season of ND footbal in 40+ years...
Any ND team with greater than 3 losses is in line for a shitty bowl game anyway... So, the $64,000 question we are all (as ND fans) trying to assimilate is "is Charlie Weis a bad coach or did he have a disasterous season"? That question is followed closely by muted expectations and things like "its not realistic to expect a team to go from 3 wins to 10 or more next year"...
I think Weis (until he proves otherwise - which would be easily achieved by falling on his face again to start next season) deserves the benefit of the doubt, and the assumption that this past season is an isolated occurrence. While many people now say things like 7-5 or 8-4 next season would be expected or improvement, who actually believed ND would go from 10 wins in 2006 to 3 wins in 2007? If they can fall that fast, what's to say they cannot just as quickly reverse it?
Can this team make a quantum leap forward - like 1964 - or is something more like a respectable (but disappointing finishing) season - like 1987 - more likely? There are a lot of factors for next year that make either of those outcomes far more likely than another sub-0.500 disgrace. the question of whether or not Charlie can become a program building coach or a terrible hinderence will be answered before the end of the Michigan State game next September.
He will have this team on one of 3 paths:
1) a 1964-esque turn-around season, going from 3-9 disaster to a 9-2 or 10-1 team heading to USC (for a possible showdown in the ROSE BOWL?!?!?!) and on the track for MNC contention...
or
2) a 1987-esque performance, taking a team of talented players on a baby-step journey from horrid to average to adequate before learning to become great...
or
3) a re-run of the mis-steps and gaffes that took ND from 10-1 in November of 2006 to 1-9 in November of 2007.
If it is either of the first 2 scenarios, I would be confident that Weis will have a lengthy stay in South Bend, eventually winning at least one MNC and accumulating 100 or so wins along the way.
If 2008 plays out like 2007 in any way - record-wise is obvious but just as important would be competitive scores in ALL big games and no titanic upsets like SDSU or Navy - then I would expect Weis to receive a buy-out and a new coach to lead his 4 recruiting classes into the next era of ND football...
-------------------------------------------
Useless tidbit of statistical nonsense / fun with numbers -
1963 (ewww) -----> 1964 (woo-hoo!!)
22 years later...
1985 (ewww) -----> 1986 (much better under the hood!!)
22 years later...
2007 (ewww) -----> 2008 (????????)
At that rate, I think in 2029 any of us Irish fans still around might be in store for another ewwww-type season....
