Lou Holtz

[bobby2615]

a sportstalk know it all in Cleveland (Bruce Drennan) said it was a fact that Lou Holtz was let go because they didn't want Knute Rockne record broken...is that true?

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

That's one theory I have heard before, nothing official.

He didn't like the academic requirements for recruits, because he struggled getting some big name guys like Randy Moss. ND and Holtz just grew apart.

 

[fortwayne_nd]

He was told to lose Skip...see S. Carolina.

 

[acerider8]

That's one theory I have heard before, nothing official.

He didn't like the academic requirements for recruits, because he struggled getting some big name guys like Randy Moss. ND and Holtz just grew apart.

Academic requirements had nothing to do with Holtz (or Notre Dame) losing out on Randy Moss. Moss was involved in a racially-fueled fight in his High School where he beat some kid to a pulp. Notre Dame and Holtz decided to release him from his scholarship shortly after....

 

[jason_h537]

There is an inteview with Lou i cant remember where i gt it about how he was sick of the alumni and fans. NBC hired Bill Walsh and all he would here is about how the game passed him by and Bill Walsh would be winning Championships while he still uses the options and ND wont win again until they get rid of him. Thats why you hear Ara and Lou talking about ND being a 10 year job because after that its too much to deal with

 

[BGIF]

a sportstalk know it all in Cleveland (Bruce Drennan) said it was a fact that Lou Holtz was let go because they didn't want Knute Rockne record broken...is that true?

That's the same rumor that went about when Leahy and Parshegian left. Yawn.

Rockne had 105 wins in 13 seasons
Holtz had 100 wins in 11 seasons
Parshegian had 95 wins in 11 seasons
Leahy had 87 wins in 11 seasons

Rockne, Leahy, Parshegian, and Holtz all had serious health issues. ND takes a hugh toll on a man's health. Rockne had phlebitis before he died. Leahy asked for a year's leave of absence (denied) before he "retired". Ara retired due to health. (Leaving ND has probably added years back to Weis.)

At the time Holtz left ND he had health issues and his wife was battling throat cancer. And yes, Holtz had a running battle with ND Admissions. They weren't happy with Lou and Cerrato turning in transcripts on an "untimely" basis thwarting Admissions efforts to properly vet recruits. They were accused of deliberately stalling to run Admissions out of time. There was lobbying to force Cerrato out. The NCAA took care of that by passing a rule eliminating the Full Time Recruiting Coordinator's position. In 1995, 5 years after Cerrato's departure Holtz tried to slide Randy Moss and a Florida elite RB past Admissions. The recruiting services reported both in ND's NSD Class. Neither was ever cleared by ND Admissions. Neither was ever accepted by ND Admissions. Neither probably would have lasted a year in an ND classroom environment. The RB went on to star at Miami.

Also keep in mind Holtz had a reputation as a turn around specialist. He breathed life into dormant programs. No where in his career did he have a reputation of being a maintainer of an excellent program. Holtz also had an excellent working relationship with the ND AD in his early years Rosenthal. In the latter years he relationship with the AD Wadsworth was cool and with Beauchamp even less so. Notre Dame is the longest gig Holtz had

Holtz is the only one of the legendary ND coaches that ever coached again. South Carolina was a whole lot less stressful than ND. They had only won 10 games once in their entire history when Holtz arrived in Columbia. Holtz didn't have to recruit 50 states nor get Admissions approval. If the NCAA Clearinghouse said they were OK he could get them enrolled. If they flunked out there was no Beauchamp to bit off a piece of his butt.


Your sportstalk know it all is blowing wind.

 

[NeuteredDoomer]

a sportstalk know it all in Cleveland (Bruce Drennan) said it was a fact that Lou Holtz was let go because they didn't want Knute Rockne record broken...is that true?

I heard that too a long time ago. Not sure it holds much weight. I seem to remember ND was also going through administrative changes. Thinking FightingIrishLover's statement can kind of summarize it. They just grew apart. He coached again, so that tells me he still had the fire. Seemed to me his teams inexplicably got worse toward the end. Line precision blocking, special teams, other things seemed to go downhill.

BigIf, help us out here. NDinLA? Anyone? Anyone?

EDIT: Oops. As soon as I clicked my post, I see BigIF beat me to the punch.

 

[BGIF]

Academic requirements had nothing to do with Holtz (or Notre Dame) losing out on Randy Moss. Moss was involved in a racially-fueled fight in his High School where he beat some kid to a pulp. Notre Dame and Holtz decided to release him from his scholarship shortly after....

Urban legend. See my previous post. Randy Moss did get into a racially-fueled fight but the fact remains he NEVER cleared ND Admissions. You don't get to be a student at ND until Admissions clears you. Moss wasn't.

Moss was left in the lurch and Holtz did call Bobby Bowden. Bowden scarfed him up and then tossed him for smoking weed.

 

[devolg]

Sorry but anybody who believes that is suffering from a severe case of cranial sursum sphincter syndrome

 

[HereComeTheIrish]

a sportstalk know it all in Cleveland (Bruce Drennan) said it was a fact that Lou Holtz was let go because they didn't want Knute Rockne record broken...is that true?

Drennan is a bag of crap who should stick to his "Oscar" reviews instead of doing sports talk. There is nothing funnier than listening to this dummy talk about his "time away" in Morgantown Minimum Security for tax evasion on gambling charges and how he's "bros" with all of the other inmates....LMAO

 

[Irishkid23]

Academic requirements had nothing to do with Holtz (or Notre Dame) losing out on Randy Moss. Moss was involved in a racially-fueled fight in his High School where he beat some kid to a pulp. Notre Dame and Holtz decided to release him from his scholarship shortly after....

I believe he stabbed a kid in a fight and ND said goodbye because he obviously had questionable character. Then Bobby Bowden picked him up at FSU and couldn't control him. Then he left for Marshall.

 

[Riddickulous]

Stressful job, Lou got out.

Look how horrible Charlie looked in December compared to how he looked in December of 2005.

 

[yankeehater]

Lou Holtz Nails It !!

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas. The America that works and the America that doesn’t. The America that contributes and the America that doesn’t. It’s not the haves and the have nots, it’s the dos and the don’ts. Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society and others don’t. That’s the divide in America .

It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility. It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office. It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country.

That’s not invective, that’s truth, and it’s about time someone said it.

The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income inequality.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just. That is the rationale of thievery.

The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. Vote Democrat. That is the philosophy that produced Detroit.

It is the electoral philosophy that is destroying America. It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.

The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope. The president’s premise – that you reduce income inequality by debasing the successful–seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices. Because, by and large, income variations in society are a result of different choices leading to different consequences.

Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.

Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.

You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course. Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.

My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives also have had an in equality of effort. While my doctor went to college and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant. He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine. Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.

It is not inequality Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail. There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure. The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy. Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and short sighted decisions.

Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring inequality of effort.

The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get.”

Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society. Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster equality through mediocrity. He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts.

It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.

What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow. Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

“Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond to it.”

Lou Holtz

Leo “Lou” Holtz (born January 6, 1937) is a retired American football coach, and active sportscaster, author, and motivational speaker.

 

[NDdomer2]

Source?

 

[NDBoiler]

Lou Holtz Nails It !!

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas. The America that works and the America that doesn’t. The America that contributes and the America that doesn’t. It’s not the haves and the have nots, it’s the dos and the don’ts. Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society and others don’t. That’s the divide in America .

It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility. It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office. It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country.

That’s not invective, that’s truth, and it’s about time someone said it.

The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income inequality.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just. That is the rationale of thievery.

The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. Vote Democrat. That is the philosophy that produced Detroit.

It is the electoral philosophy that is destroying America. It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.

The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope. The president’s premise – that you reduce income inequality by debasing the successful–seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices. Because, by and large, income variations in society are a result of different choices leading to different consequences.

Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.

Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.

You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course. Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.

My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives also have had an in equality of effort. While my doctor went to college and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant. He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine. Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.

It is not inequality Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail. There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure. The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy. Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and short sighted decisions.

Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring inequality of effort.

The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get.”

Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society. Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster equality through mediocrity. He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts.

It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.

What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow. Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

“Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond to it.”

Lou Holtz

Leo “Lou” Holtz (born January 6, 1937) is a retired American football coach, and active sportscaster, author, and motivational speaker.

Albeit an interesting commentary, it was not written by Lou according to snopes.com. Rather, a guy named Bob Lonsberry wrote it 3+ years ago.

Here's the link: Lou Holtz Nails It : snopes.com

As we all know, everything on the internet is true

 

[yankeehater]

It is making the rounds again then if this is old. It was posted by two different people in my FB network with his picture today.

I know he is very conservative and I have heard him speak out on TV about social issues.

 

[Irish YJ]

well bob pretty much nailed it then...

 

[woolybug25]

It is making the rounds again then if this is old. It was posted by two different people in my FB network with his picture today.

I know he is very conservative and I have heard him speak out on TV about social issues.

So you're that annoying FB guy that is constantly hassling everyone with political updates?

 

[yankeehater]

So you're that annoying FB guy that is constantly hassling everyone with political updates?

I pull one thing from FB and that is the conclusion you come up with........NICE!

Heck, I figured I would go against the norm on this site and actually post something that somewhat pertained to ND.

 

[ulukinatme]

Albeit an interesting commentary, it was not written by Lou according to snopes.com. Rather, a guy named Bob Lonsberry wrote it 3+ years ago.

Here's the link: Lou Holtz Nails It : snopes.com

As we all know, everything on the internet is true

 

[Irish#1]

As we all know, everything on the internet is true

Are you saying it isn't? Oh crap!

 

[Bogtrotter07]

It is making the rounds again then if this is old. It was posted by two different people in my FB network with his picture today.

I know he is very conservative and I have heard him speak out on TV about social issues.

It is not just old, it is misattributed, and wrong. Not that I disagree with your sentiment.

Errors in the essay :

• Nothing is that simple, anything that maintains it is has sprung enough 'leaks' that it flounders.
• Income inequality, as defined by almost all who rail against it has no common element with communist, or socialist ideological beliefs that all the wealth should be shared, or there should be no rich, and there is no poor.
• What income inequality addresses is equal pay for the same job, regardless of skin color, sexual preference, or gender.
• True income inequality proponents take in to consideration that amount of education, and experience for the same position may even result in different compensation.
• Few are saying that the entire capitalistic system be scrapped, most are saying that the field has to be leveled for all to have an even chance to compete.
• It never has been level, so those that want to automatically cast a jaundiced eye to all those that don't seem to make it, or the 'do nots' of the article, (what a negative, judgmental and stereotypical view of others!), are creating their own 'straw man.'
• Use of the term 'Democrat' to refer to the party of opposition, show that the author, a conservative, is crass, and uncouth in his presentation, and it spills over to the filters he has that reinforce his world view.
• These characteristics are clearly not true of Lou Holtz, regardless of his conservative opinions, he does not see the bad in others, nor does he oversimplify things in attempt to reconcile his world view with reality. No real winner does.
• The line about 10% versus 90% is the only quote or view attributable to Lou, and it is only presented, as a true Holtz quote, to tie in all the previous opinion and make it look like Lou actually said something like that.
• In other words, the whole presentation of this fictional false representation of the unspoken views of Lou Holtz is deceptive entirely, and deserving of summary dismissal in an intelligent conversation about the issues.

Are you saying it isn't? Oh crap!

'Snopes dot com' is a lot different than 'the Internet.' There are a few sites on the Internet where you can take their research to the bank. Snopes is one of them. If you check their source references, they are complete, impeccable, and unbiased (unvarnished, with out agenda.)

 

[Legacy]

Is the only thing Lou Holtz said was: “Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond to it.”? I agree with that.

As far as income inequality goes, consider:

• Some of the middle class earners have moved into the upper class earners, but more have moved into the lower income class since the recession
• that shrinking middle class is accumulating more debt despite their efforts
• the tax plans of the three top Republican candidates would increase the national debt with spending, cutting and tax breaks by trillions
• despite the Middle East war costing $4-6 trillion and climbing (medical costs, continuing engagements) plus the stimulus money to get us out of recession, the Nationl Debt has decreased by over two-thirds under Obama
• the economy always recovers with real good job creation with more opportunities, which is slow at best

-- Donald Trump's tax plan would increase the National Debt by $9.5 trillion over the next decade, increasing it by 80%
-- Ted Cruz's tax plan would add $8.6 trillion to the National Debt over the next decade, decreasing the GDP by 3.6% (an increase of 2-3% is an indicator of economic growth)
-- Marco Rubio's tax plan would add $6-8 trillion to the Debt over the next decade
(Source)

All of those are premised by the facts that nothing changes - worsening wars, etc.

 

[ulukinatme]

Should probably get all this political crap out of this Lou thread.

 

[Veer option]

Should probably get all this political crap out of this Lou thread.

No kidding. Keep it in the lounge where it belongs.

 

[Irish Insanity]

That's probably just the goodie bag everyone got when they arrived.

 

[TDHeysus]

looks like he came prepared

 

[Meatloaf]

That's probably just the goodie bag everyone got when they arrived.

You would think, being the RNC and all, that they'd at least give away an American brand of whisky.

 

[ACamp1900]

You would think, being the RNC and all, that they'd at least give away an American brand of whisky.

freakin commie bastards....

 

[gkIrish]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Lou Holtz on immigrants: "I don't want to celebrate your holidays, I sure as hell don't want to cheer for your soccer team"</p>— Betsy Woodruff (@woodruffbets) <a href="https://twitter.com/woodruffbets/status/755457370663313409">July 19, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>