Recruiting Disconnect

[dre1919]

Trust me SoCalDomer, I am neither a casual nor uninformed Notre Dame fan. You can believe what you want about the Charlie Weis regime. I don't personally choose to call your posts "wrong" as you have so freely labeled mine, I just choose to say this is where you and I disagree. I also don't feel the need to dissect people's posts line by line in an attempt to prove my point right as it's really moot as to whether it is or not.

That having been said, my opinion is that Notre Dame football is no better under Weis than it has been under Davie and Willingham. The results on the field back this claim up as FACT in terms of quality wins, number of wins overall in a career, and bowl wins. The talent is immaterial to me at this point because as you said, you cannot always determine when/if a player will ever live up to their potential. Oh, and you are incorrect sir...Jimmy Clausen was rated the #1 QB and #1 rated high school prospect coming out his year by many outlets. I know exactly how the ranking process works, so no, I do not have a misunderstood concept of it. Now the system might be, and probably is, flawed and wrong...but having the #1 overall ranking in something like Rivals.com makes that player the most valuable player to land as a recruit. It means he has the highest level of upside potential as well as the best possible skill set coming out of high school. To me, Jimmy Clausen doesn't have that yet / ever because I see players that were rated lower than him in his year or others that are performing at a higher level than he is.

That isn't necessarily his fault...as you point out, the talent around you makes you better. I agree with you. But, what I'm trying to point out to you is, that "scoring top recruiting classes" as people love to hail Charlie Weis for is not the end all, be all to a successful coach and it certainly isn't the reason for keeping him as head coach to me. Other people could potentially recruit as well or as close to him and produce better results on the field. Yes, I completely understand the Miami situation as well as the years being very rough when the cupboard is totally bare. I get that entirely. However, you must understand that I have lost whatever small amount of faith in him as a coach I ever might have possessed. Yes, sacking him and bringing in a replacement would cause more turmoil (see: Michigan and RichRod), but sometimes you have to go through the fire to get to salvation. I do not see Charlie Weis being worth the wait while any of these classes mature into great players. I do not think he was a home run hire, I think he was "the best we could get on short notice" and that's not what I want for our team.

But, as I said, the grand opera will play out before us anyway. Charlie will be on the hot seat after this season and will probably lose his job at some point in the near future for mediocre results. Maybe not next season since the schedule is cake, but the alumni and administration will not tolerate mediocrity for long.

 

[SoCalDomer]

I also don't feel the need to dissect people's posts line by line in an attempt to prove my point right as it's really moot as to whether it is or not.

the "dissecting" is more a matter of ease than some strategy of mine to prove my point right. responding this way also helps others understand my response in the context of your original statement.

That having been said, my opinion is that Notre Dame football is no better under Weis than it has been under Davie and Willingham. The results on the field back this claim up as FACT in terms of quality wins, number of wins overall in a career, and bowl wins. The talent is immaterial to me at this point because as you said, you cannot always determine when/if a player will ever live up to their potential.

You may very well end up being right about Weis and the ceiling to which he may take ND, but talent is certainly not immaterial. My comment about players developing at different rates doesn't prove talent is immaterial. Because of the lack of numbers in the senior and junior classes, the number of recruits who could pan out is substantially reduced. If from an average recruiting class only 5-7 out of 20-25 pan out, the impact of only recruiting 15 players is going to be huge.

Weis' situation is dissimilar to Davie and Willingham in that neither had to rebuild the program without numbers in the senior and junior classes. Granted he may end up with no better winning percentage, but determining that this year when he still doesn't have all 85 scholarships used is too early.

But, what I'm trying to point out to you is, that "scoring top recruiting classes" as people love to hail Charlie Weis for is not the end all, be all to a successful coach and it certainly isn't the reason for keeping him as head coach to me.

I'm not sure what you mean here, because I think CW's success in recruiting has bought him extra time. If you mean that if the only thing CW can do is recruit, but can't coach and win, then I agree, keeping a coach around for that reason alone probably is a bad idea. But I disagree that CW has come to the point where he has 4 years of solid recruiting on the team to be in the position where we should expect 10, 11, 12 win seasons.

Yes, sacking him and bringing in a replacement would cause more turmoil (see: Michigan and RichRod), but sometimes you have to go through the fire to get to salvation. I do not see Charlie Weis being worth the wait while any of these classes mature into great players. I do not think he was a home run hire, I think he was "the best we could get on short notice" and that's not what I want for our team.

I believe it would cause more turmoil and might be irreperable if they fired him now. For one thing, the current (2009) recruiting class would probably break up. It is only looking to be a 18-20 member max class anyway, so any losses would be hard to replace. Second, I believe many more players would transfer, thereby hurting the current depth, requiring whatever new coach to need 4-5 years before the program is again full. Third, it would send the message to possible replacements that ND admin doesn't care that the team is still not full of talent, you get 3-4 years and there are no exceptions. Afterall, they just fired the last guy 3-years into his 5-year deal, and then the next coach 4-years into his 10-year deal.

ND is not a place where prospective coaches are beating down the door anymore. And I think this article explains why firing him now is not an option. BlueandGold.com

again, you may be right that CW will not be able to get us back to a BCS bowl game, or win them, or get to a NC, or win it. But concluding so based on last year and this year I believe is too soon.

 

[ARALOU]

Wow, if i did not like the coach or its players that means I am not a fan of the team, right? Sounds simple to me. Go cheer for Tebow, or whats his name at Oklahoma or Pryor at Ohio St. They are good players on good teams. I still like JC and the Irish. I still have faith. I have been around Irish football long enough to see many highs and lows. The chemistry of a team requires a mixture of leadership (usually older players) and athletic skill players. We will/do have that. Look at Bama's QB. How old is he? Look at LSU. They are rebuilding. Troy??? USC gets beat by Stanford last year. Thats college football. The only thing I knock the Irish for right now emotion, intensity, and nastiness. They have lost that. It can be brought back. It is a head thing. Someone on that team has to set a tone and take the leader role, thats it. Off my soap box now.

 

[NDMontana]

Wow, if i did not like the coach or its players that means I am not a fan of the team, right? Sounds simple to me. Go cheer for Tebow, or whats his name at Oklahoma or Pryor at Ohio St. They are good players on good teams. I still like JC and the Irish. I still have faith. I have been around Irish football long enough to see many highs and lows. The chemistry of a team requires a mixture of leadership (usually older players) and athletic skill players. We will/do have that. Look at Bama's QB. How old is he? Look at LSU. They are rebuilding. Troy??? USC gets beat by Stanford last year. Thats college football. The only thing I knock the Irish for right now emotion, intensity, and nastiness. They have lost that. It can be brought back. It is a head thing. Someone on that team has to set a tone and take the leader role, thats it. Off my soap box now.

It's very sophomoric of you to question someone else's fanhood. [profanity redacted]

I think Mike Shannahan is an arrogant puke and I can't believe the hubris that Jay Cutler showed when he said that his arm is better than Elway's. But I'm still a Bronco fan. I wear their gear, I watch their games, I root for them and I'm sick when they lose.

Your definition of a fan is a very childish version. It's the "results on the field be damned, we're good" attitude. Your attitude is of the same vein as the politicians who label anyone that is against the War in Iraq as un-American. The question is the same to you as it is to them: [profanity redacted]

Look around, there are a whole lot of people that aren't impressed with what they've seen.

 

[ARALOU]

It's very sophomoric of you to question someone else's fanhood. [profanity redacted]

I think Mike Shannahan is an arrogant puke and I can't believe the hubris that Jay Cutler showed when he said that his arm is better than Elway's. But I'm still a Bronco fan. I wear their gear, I watch their games, I root for them and I'm sick when they lose.

Your definition of a fan is a very childish version. It's the "results on the field be damned, we're good" attitude. Your attitude is of the same vein as the politicians who label anyone that is against the War in Iraq as un-American. The question is the same to you as it is to them: [profanity redacted]

Look around, there are a whole lot of people that aren't impressed with what they've seen.

[profanity redacted] I said go cheer for someone else if you dont like this team. This place is full haters just like ESPN. I have been a fan all my life and there have been years that did not like what i saw but i still supported them. That is what cheering them on is all about. I call cheering just when things are good bandwagoning. Having hope when the chips are down is what a fan is. Inspire them, dont beat them down. Leave that to the opponent. Damn. I need a beer.

 

[SoCalDomer]

Aralou and NDMontana, please watch the language directed at other members.

 

[dre1919]

The thing is, the very reason I have issues with Charlie is because I do care about Notre Dame football. If I was one of the random, vague and bandwagon fans that comprises way too large of our public "fan" base I wouldn't be on here expressing my opinions about how to make it better.

SoCalDomer, I totally understand your point of view and respect your argument. You do indeed make many very important and true points. I guess the split in the trail where you and I veer away from the common path is that you feel, regardless of the ultimate outcome, it's best to retain Charlie's services to steer clear of any potential damage. I say the damage has already been done from not only his regime, but from many in the past (all since Holtz). I look at it as the program needing a complete facelift and restructuring into something completely different under solid, very capable leadership that everyone can truly believe is the right man for the job. For example, Bob Stoops came into Oklahoma and had a down turned program. Within a very short period, he not only had them back to respectability, he had them a National Championship. I'm not saying I'm looking for 10, 11, and 12 win seasons or a NC right now. That's near impossible. What I'm saying is, I want the caliber of coach a Stoops, Meyer, Brown, Carroll or Beamer are. A top notch, landmark figure in college football that top recruits will want to come play for and will deliver results on the field.

I'm very happy Charlie is pulling in top recruits. That portion of his regime I am more than pleased with. It's the ego, the aloof promises, the mediocre teams, the blowout BCS losses, the lack of any creativity on offense (when he's supposed to be an offensive guru)...it all just looks like Willingham rehashed to me. I'm just not feeling the "change for the better" yet, even with his first two "successful seasons". Yeah, I was as happy as the next guy when we nearly beat USC and we got into two BCS bowls. That was cool. I wish we'd won all of them, but it was nice to be there. But the thing in sports is always sustaining that success. Ty had everyone believing too until he had his down seasons. Then he was out. It was a knee jerk reaction, and really foolish, on Notre Dame's part to give Charlie a huge extension when he hadn't really proved anything. That's their fault. But to make things right, they need to do what Swarbrick promises and "evaluate the program" at season's end and see where it's at as well as where it's heading. In my opinion, what we've seen is indicative of what's to come. Other's have just plain done it better on the field than Charlie and I don't think it's unfair for us to want the same. I realize Notre Dame doesn't have the draw it once did, and this isn't 1950 in the college football world, but still. Surely we can do better.

 

[NeuteredDoomer]

oops.

 

[NeuteredDoomer]

... I say the damage has already been done from not only his regime, but from many in the past (all since Holtz). I look at it as the program needing a complete facelift and restructuring into something completely different under solid, very capable leadership that everyone can truly believe is the right man for the job.

...I'm very happy Charlie is pulling in top recruits. That portion of his regime I am more than pleased with. It's the ego, the aloof promises, the mediocre teams, the blowout BCS losses, the lack of any creativity on offense (when he's supposed to be an offensive guru)...

... It was a knee jerk reaction, and really foolish, on Notre Dame's part to give Charlie a huge extension when he hadn't really proved anything. That's their fault. But to make things right, they need to do what Swarbrick promises and "evaluate the program" at season's end and see where it's at as well as where it's heading. In my opinion, what we've seen is indicative of what's to come. Other's have just plain done it better on the field than Charlie and I don't think it's unfair for us to want the same. I realize Notre Dame doesn't have the draw it once did, and this isn't 1950 in the college football world, but still. Surely we can do better.

Geez. If I may politely stick my dick into this thread where friggen geniuses chimed in...
Dre1919 - you continue to impress but, your statement:

"I say the damage has already been done from not only his regime, but from many in the past (all since Holtz). I look at it as the program needing a complete facelift and restructuring into something completely different under solid, very capable leadership that everyone can truly believe is the right man for the job."

tells me that ND needs to hire a new president (or whatever the top dog at college is called) who really knows football.

You sound like you want to restructure all of college football. Give CW 2 more years before you call for his balls. Dats alls.

You cry that the firing of Willingham was kneejerk, then call for CW's balls?

 

[NDMontana]

Aralou and NDMontana, please watch the language directed at other members.

Come on in and pull up a seat. This is the place to chat, share, argue, flame, curse, discuss, whine, or bitch about Fighting Irish football!

Isn't this the description of the site?

 

[NDMontana]

[profanity redacted] I said go cheer for someone else if you dont like this team. This place is full haters just like ESPN. I have been a fan all my life and there have been years that did not like what i saw but i still supported them. That is what cheering them on is all about. I call cheering just when things are good bandwagoning. Having hope when the chips are down is what a fan is. Inspire them, dont beat them down. Leave that to the opponent. Damn. I need a beer.

Really? I don't think that being dissatisified, and saying as much, is rooting against the team. You're not a "hater" if you say that you don't like Charlie Weis or Jimmy Clausen.

Did the person in question say that they were rooting against the team? No, they're passionate fans who don't like what they're seeing. Whether I agree with them or not is immaterial, what is important is that people like you don't try to question their fanhood because they aren't wearing the rose colored glasses. They are every bit the fan that you and I are....so save it.

 

[dre1919]

Geez. If I may politely stick my dick into this thread where friggen geniuses chimed in...
Dre1919 - you continue to impress but, your statement:

"I say the damage has already been done from not only his regime, but from many in the past (all since Holtz). I look at it as the program needing a complete facelift and restructuring into something completely different under solid, very capable leadership that everyone can truly believe is the right man for the job."

tells me that ND needs to hire a new president (or whatever the top dog at college is called) who really knows football.

You sound like you want to restructure all of college football. Give CW 2 more years before you call for his balls. Dats alls.

You cry that the firing of Willingham was kneejerk, then call for CW's balls?

Thank you for the compliment.

I don't know if I would say they need a new president at this juncture, but the current president needs to do a more thorough and impressive job. So does the athletic director. This includes their personnel decisions for coaching staff (working in conjunction with the Head Coach on selections) and finding a happy medium in scheduling between impossible and cake.

No, I do not want to restructure college football. I love it the way it is...I just want Notre Dame to be a relevant part of it again.

I said giving Weis a huge contract extension after not really proving anything on the field was a knee-jerk reaction (to real or imagined interest from NFL clubs). All it did was set Notre Dame up for hypocrisy based upon the circumstances of the Willingham firing, as well as lock in a coach that really hadn't proven himself worthy of a ten year extension. Based upon their first two seasons, Willingham and Weis could have easily been given the same reward on their two year merits alone and one was given the extension, the other not. I don't feel either coach was worthy of anything at those points in their tenure, but the offer to Weis and not Willingham looked bad from a public relations standpoint. For the record, I thought Willingham was a mediocre coach and a terrible recruiter, but an outstanding human being.

 

[irishandy]

It seems like this is another discussion about bashing Clausen and Weis. Look, Weis can recruit, just look at our past 3 classes- top 10. Second off, it takes time, why do so many people expect freshman and sophomores to come in and turn the program around overnight?? Patience...just have some. If this is another thread about getting rid of Weis- give me some names to replace him!! Now getting rid of some of our other coaches, okay maybe. Onto Clausen- Dre1919 Bradford and Tebow are doing great, no doubt about that. ND is not in their class of college football. You are comparing ND to Oklahoma and Florida and there is no comparison because they are both much better. Also Clausen has been relied on to pass more because our running game sucks; with the exception against Navy. About being #1, I agree that Pryor is doing outstanding this year, but the rest of the big 10- no competition this year have you seen the highlights?? Take a look at 2006's #1 recruit (Mitch Mustain)- he is being benched by USC. Clausen will be fine. Again I will use Chase Daniels of Missouri for example, did you know who he was before his junior year?? In my opinion about Quinn, I think his best year was his junior year.

 

[realitycheck]

It seems like this is another discussion about bashing Clausen and Weis. Look, Weis can recruit, just look at our past 3 classes- top 10. Second off, it takes time, why do so many people expect freshman and sophomores to come in and turn the program around overnight?? Patience...just have some. If this is another thread about getting rid of Weis- give me some names to replace him!! Now getting rid of some of our other coaches, okay maybe. Onto Clausen- Dre1919 Bradford and Tebow are doing great, no doubt about that. ND is not in their class of college football. You are comparing ND to Oklahoma and Florida and there is no comparison because they are both much better. Also Clausen has been relied on to pass more because our running game sucks; with the exception against Navy. About being #1, I agree that Pryor is doing outstanding this year, but the rest of the big 10- no competition this year have you seen the highlights?? Take a look at 2006's #1 recruit (Mitch Mustain)- he is being benched by USC. Clausen will be fine. Again I will use Chase Daniels of Missouri for example, did you know who he was before his junior year?? In my opinion about Quinn, I think his best year was his junior year.

Benched by USC? Mustain was never the starter

 

[NeuteredDoomer]

I don't know if I would say they need a new president at this juncture, but the current president needs to do a more thorough and impressive job. So does the athletic director. This includes their personnel decisions for coaching staff (working in conjunction with the Head Coach on selections) and finding a happy medium in scheduling between impossible and cake.

No, I do not want to restructure college football. I love it the way it is...I just want Notre Dame to be a relevant part of it again.

I said giving Weis a huge contract extension after not really proving anything on the field was a knee-jerk reaction (to real or imagined interest from NFL clubs). All it did was set Notre Dame up for hypocrisy based upon the circumstances of the Willingham firing, as well as lock in a coach that really hadn't proven himself worthy of a ten year extension. Based upon their first two seasons, Willingham and Weis could have easily been given the same reward on their two year merits alone and one was given the extension, the other not. I don't feel either coach was worthy of anything at those points in their tenure, but the offer to Weis and not Willingham looked bad from a public relations standpoint. For the record, I thought Willingham was a mediocre coach and a terrible recruiter, but an outstanding human being.

Geez. Notre Dame fan huh? I am sooo outclassed....
You a Rhodes Scholar or sumsin?
Summbeyotch!

Ty had a proven mediocre history as a head coach when he was hired. I thought ND gave in to pressure to hire a black man. (But he did kick ND's ass while at Stanford) Ara kicked ND's ass the year before they hired him..

I did not like Ty's overall system from the start. Sure, they could knock each other out on defense while the opposing team scooted under and scored, but the offense always stunk. Need proof? UDub 0-10 this year.

CW was pie in the sky choice. They thought they had found the pie in a homegrown son. ND avoided the floor by firing Ty, and reached for the stars. Good choice at the time.

I say give the guy 2 more years before we start grumbling. This is a vastly improved team from last year.

And thanks for chiming in. You are one impressive Mofo.

 

[dre1919]

Thanks...I..think? I'm pretty sure that was a compliment, unless there was unnoticed sarcasm.

 

[NeuteredDoomer]

Thanks...I..think? I'm pretty sure that was a compliment, unless there was unnoticed sarcasm.

Unadulterated compliment.

But I (mark) may adulter tomorrow.