Charlie has to go at least 8-4 this year. Agreed?

[daytonirish]

SoCal I'm going to bite my finger on this dude. But if he thinks he can name 30 coaches that Notre Dame would higher to replace Charlie, well then he is a troll and just here to start crap.

 

[Junkhead]

I agree that Weis' coaching was beyond horrible last season. 7-5 is the minimum I would say. I think recruiting will drop off if we don't have a good season this year.

 

[notredomer23]

I agree that Weis' coaching was beyond horrible last season. 7-5 is the minimum I would say. I think recruiting will drop off if we don't have a good season this year.

agreed, and I hate to say this phrase, but allota you are gonna be like Missouri, they are gonna have to show you first(pulled a mark may). For the sceptics out their, I GUARANTEE 9 wins the minimum this year. i can state tons of reasons why, and I will do so if one person wants me to. I can ramble on for hours if you want me to lol.

Oh and Charlie stays as long as they go 500. if they go 5-7 he is out, but with this schedule and all the great development happenning thats not happening.

so, anyone want me to explain why we will atleast win 9 games

 

[kmoose]

For real? 7-5 would not be making HUGE strides. An AVERAGE NCAA Div. 1 Head Coach given ND's team last year would have won 6 games at a minimum last year. I believe that.

I never said winning 7 games would be making HUGE strides. I said, ".......if they go 7-5, AND make HUGE strides.". What happens if they go 7-5, are in it in the 4th Quarter of every game, and just have some bad breaks go their way? According to you, we fire a guy who went 3-9, AND pulled in a Top 5 recruiting class. I get what you are saying about recruiting classes vs. showing up and playing to that potential. But the reverse is also true: No one has one terrible recruiting class after another, and then contends for a NC. We have some coaches who are doing new things this year, so it might take them a year to really get their feet underneath them. You can take a myopic view of "win X number of games or you are gone.", but most of us prefer to wait and see how the season plays out.

You believing that any average D-IA head coach would have won 6 games with last year's team doesn't make it true. It's speculation. Speculation that I don't necessarily agree with. Not yet, anyway. Weis' first two years were outstanding, minus not being able to get over that hump of beating the top flight teams on the schedule. Maybe that was more Brady Quinn than Charlie Weis, and maybe it was just a combination of Weis' coaching and Quinn's previous experience. Maybe after getting some serious PT last year, Clausen and Co. will understand more of what the coaches are teaching them. Either way, you are no Miss Cleo, and are only speculating as to the correct answer, at this point.

 

[Junkhead]

so, anyone want me to explain why we will atleast win 9 games

Yes, please do!! I soooo want to drink the vodka and kool-aid. But last season sobered me up. I secretly am looking at 9-3, and then I think back to being 1-9 last year, and am brought back to reality.

 

[SoCalDomer]

SoCal I'm going to bite my finger on this dude. But if he thinks he can name 30 coaches that Notre Dame would higher to replace Charlie, well then he is a troll and just here to start crap.

30 was probably hyperbole, so we'll let that one slide. LOL

 

[irishfan]

It's been pointed out already that should the Irish go 8-4, we will be among the top turnaround teams in NCAA record. I cannot recall the exact numbers connected with this so if someone knows which article I am talking about, I would be glad to be affirmed or corrected.

Biggest turnaround in a season was Hawaii which went 0-12 on 1998 and 9-4 in 1999 in June Jones' first year. So in other words we would have to go 12-1 to match that but still, I think 8 or 9 wins would be one of the bigger turnarounds in NCAA history. I remember in some article in Willingham's last season that some guy connected with the Gator Bowl made a comment about how they would take a 7-5 ND team almost over anyone for the bowl. I am in somewhat of an agreement with midwestguy that I would be happy with 8 wins, but fairly dissapointed with 7 wins. (After the bowl game.) I know it sounds stupid, and I wouldn't want Weis to be fired, but 8-5 just sounds so much better than 7-6. And realistically looking at the schedule, the only schools who I think have a chance at beating us are USC, Michigan, MSU, Purdue, UNC, BC, and Pitt, and I'd like to think that we can at the very least go 2-5 against them.

 

[GO IRISH!!!]

I agree with a lot of what people are saying here. However, I won't be happy with 8 or 9 wins if the team stumbles and sleep walks through and gets lucky. By the same token, I won't be too down about 5, 6, or even 7 losses if the team is in the games fighting and bloodied, but the chips just don't fall our way. You can't just look at purely wins and losses. If all you do is read the paper the next morning, then the final score is all you have, but if you really want to judge a team you have to look at how they played to get the full story.

With that being said, I am making my prediction for the year: 10-2. I am also calling my shot and saying we upset USC in LA this year in what will become knows ans one of the greatest Irish games of all time. I think we get beat by MSU and lose in the final minutes to BC. I welcome all comments and good natured debate.

 

[midwestguy]

By the same token, I won't be too down about 5, 6, or even 7 losses if the team is in the games fighting and bloodied, but the chips just don't fall our way.

With that being said, I am making my prediction for the year: 10-2. I am also calling my shot and saying we upset USC in LA this year in what will become knows ans one of the greatest Irish games of all time.

Dude. You won't be upset with 7 hard losses, yet you think we are going to upset USC? Does not compute.

I would love to beat USC too, but I have seen nothing in the past 2 years which would indicate we'll keep that game close, let alone win it.

Let's be real for goodness sake.

 

[jboxer562]

we need a bowl win.

 

[TC_57]

I for one am sick and tired of hearing all of these requirements for Charlie to keep his job. IMO, Charlie took the brunt of TY's failures last season. TY's failure in OL recruiting almost guaranteed a season like 2007. To be honest, 2008 was on track be just as horrendous, but CW has managed to inject some top flight talent into this program. And now we are DEPENDING on underclassmen to carry the team. My opinion is that CW should be allowed to let the current JR class become SR's before we start calling for his head. It is hard for me to imagine an AVERAGE D1 coach doing much better. The 2007 team was lead by a bunch of freshmen and sophs. That might work in basketball, but it doesn't fly in football.

 

[midwestguy]

I for one am sick and tired of hearing all of these requirements for Charlie to keep his job. IMO, Charlie took brunt of TY's failures last season. TY's failure in OL recruiting almost guaranteed a season like 2007. To be honest, 2008 was on track be just as horrendous, but CW has managed to inject some top flight talent into this program.

If you are going to follow that logic, I guess we have to give Ty credit for Charlie's first 2 seasons as well.

I'm quite sure Navy and AF had OL recruits ranked a bit less than Ty's OL for that year.

 

[ndlb41]

chill guys chill! We are all nd fans here no need to go for the throat!!

 

[SoCalDomer]

the board has had this discussion of the faults for last year many times before, and i think CW's philosophy of we're moving on is a good idea.

i think enough has been said about what we would like the team to do this year as well.

 

[ACamp1900]

My honest thoughts... if we don't win six games anything that happens is deserved... but I would be shocked... not suprised but SHOCKED if we don't win six with this schedule...