Swarbrick and company trying to either do it on the cheap or not realizing how far we were truly were being good enough to compete iis exactly why he needs to go.
The 23 CFB was knowable two years ago and not taking advantage of that was a cardinal sin, IMHO.
(no message)
people will hate you here.
Only 13-0, or this is a NC caliber team are permitted. Even when it's obviously not true. You've been warned. The hate will spew if you keep it up :)
If people don’t like that fact, too damned bad.
Saddling a first time head coach with a bargain basement OC and “investing” in one QB and one good DL wouldn’t get the job done nor did it.
optimism when it is unwarranted.
1. Weis turned the rutter of a completely broken ship (the program) and got the dilapidated dingy turned around.
2. Kelly rebuilt a dingy into an actual ship that was worth a damn and got it going in the right direction.
3. Freeman the jury is still out. He's made some good moves and some boneheaded ones. The talent is increasing over what Kelly was bringing in but not astronicallly, though it does look to be a lot better. Couple that with the fact that Freeman actually let's the young talent play. I think the latter part is the biggest bonus. The kids are good, athletic and ready to play and they get to, unlike what BK did. Sit them on the bench and collect talent without ever playing them because they "didn't know how to play the game the right way".
Comparing Recruiting that is finalized:
Brian's first 2 classes: 15 (2010), 9 (2011) = average 12 - BK's 12 year average = 12 (and his last class, 9, was probably more Freeman). His highest class was 5 (2013)
Freeman's first 2 classes: 6 (2022), 10 (2023) = average 8 - Things are looking bright going forward, but with NIL and untrustworthy 18-year-olds today, we just have to wait until they are on campus. https://www.on3.com/db/rankings/industry-team/football/2023/
Are the staff upgrades enough?
+ RB coach is better
+ DB coach is better
+ OC finally should be better
+ OL looked improved in 2023 (we actually had holes to run through and could pick up 2yrds when/if needed... a drastic improvement over the prior decade and nice change)
+ DL coach is still weak and compared to what Elston did the talent is sparse. Yes, I know Cross was good but the unit was weak.
+ LBs produce but we need to get better at the same time
+ WR coaching should be better but still unknown until the games start
+ QB is still the largest issue though Angeli had a great first game. Going back to the portal for one year guys is not a long-term solution and a slippery slope to nowhere IMO.
+ We still can't win big games, though have improved over Kelly. Kelly improved over Weis, and Weis over the other knuckleheads
+ The schedule this year and next are significantly weaker than in past years. We need to start going 3-0 or 2-1 in the only real games on the schedule. The next step, and hopefully what MF can achieve, is consistenly beating top 10-15 teams in the same manner we own the ACC.
Link: https://www.onefootdown.com/notre-dame-football-recruiting-news-recruits-national-signing-day/2022/6/27/23185013/21-years-of-notre-dame-football-recruiting-results-cfb-5-star-top-100-nd-blue-chip-ratio-news
all he did was steer us away from one iceberg with the crew (players) that was left behind by prior captain and then drive us right into another iceberg just as big once he had his own crew (players).
Fact 1: ty took over a shit show from Davie and flashed early but was 6-6 in his last season and things were not looking up
Fact 2: Weis took over a shit show from ty and flashed early but was 6-6 in his last season and things were not looking up
Kelly is the only one who did a damned thing...trying to say one of davietyweis was better is like trying to split pecker hairs on a gnat.
Brian Kelly has in his 11 classes combined (12 in total) 2010 – 2020."
As you seriously have to realize Weis was the only guy in a LoNg TiMe to bring in highly rated talent. THAT'S TURNING A SHIP. I get it. You don't want to give Weis credit. Why? This entire program turned around because he figured out how to woo highly rated prospects like Floyd & Clausen and from there the talent continued to get even better. Though rankings didn't prove it, but wins did for sure.
We had a decade of no names before that. Hardly a single good player, BEFORE Weis.
Kelly's players were better and he brought in more talent but Weis started the trend. Seriously, what is your problem with Weis? Or, do you just not like it because you didn't come up with it? I mean that as legit questions, not snarky. Because the data points to it may be more an ego than facts thing.
A 2 minute google search confirmed exactly my point ---- https://247sports.com/college/notre-dame/article/looking-back-on-weis-era-recruiting-at-notre-dame-133828778/#:~:text=This%20meant%20the,half%2Ddecade%20tenure.
"This meant the 2006 class was the first he’d assemble from start to finish of his four complete classes. And of those four, three offensive skill positions groups outranked the current quartet of Jordan Johnson (No. 29 overall), Chris Tyree (No. 34), Michael Mayer (No. 77), and Drew Pyne (No. 176).
When you consider the current group out-ranks any of Brian Kelly’s 10 previous classes, it’s fair to say that rounding up elite talent on offense proved to be routine through Weis’ half-decade tenure."
I assume the guy that wrote the article is stupid too?
Link: https://247sports.com/college/notre-dame/article/looking-back-on-weis-era-recruiting-at-notre-dame-133828778/
He brought an even better crew (players) aboard the ship (program) and still crashed the fucking ship into an iceberg.
This doesn't debunk what I said, it emphasizes it. Maybe you should go back and rewatch because Weis football was SHIT and it was only getting worse year to year. Start your viewing pleasure with November 29th 2008 @ USC and watch how with all those "Top 50 prospects" the offensive guru could not find a way to pick a single first down for the first 3 Quarters of the game.
The whole reason Kelly was given some slack when he first took over is because it was known he was inheriting a dumpster fire.
Weis came in with his fat playbook and thought that was all he needed. I'll give him credit for putting in work at recruiting unlike ty, but his results were stunted because the product on the field was hot garbage. Tell me what Weis did to advance our program as a whole...??? I'll wait..
I can't stand Kelly as a coach, but HE did a shit ton to rebuild and progress our overall program.
If Weis had I would credit him too, but he didn't.
Serious question and I'm not even trying to be a dick here...How old were you when Weis was here? Because I think if your current football maturity self could go back and go through the Weis years and watch him squander all that talent you'd feel very differently.
3-9
7-6
6-6
-----
1-11
3-9
2-2
That his HC record the last 6 years he attempted to steer a ship. He is not what you seem to think.
You are off on a severe tangent and need to realize or admit it. Wins and losses don't mean you did or didn't turn a program around. It means you are or are not a good coach. The only point that you're making is bad coaches get fired. That's obvious.
"Weis turned the rutter of a completely broken ship (the program)" -- it does not mean wins and losses. How does a turnaround start? With getting talent. Kelly taught the talent how to win. Weis was the first to get talent here in a long time.. AKA "turn the ship around". Weis did get more talent (by ratings) to walk through ND's doors than had in the previous 10-15 years. I gave you the facts. I don't know why you can't admit to that. Kelly was a better coach and continued getting talent here. But, by that time the ship was going in the right direction but was still bad and as you pointed out they had no idea how to win which is what Kelly brought. Weis was a bridge from terrible to good.
"and got the dilapidated dingy turned around." --- When Weis got here the cupboard was bare. Mostly unathletic and hardly talented guys. A few but not many at all.
I respect a lot of things you say but man this is baffling and my only hunch is you hate Weis which is fine but the facts are the facts. It's fine if you desire to ignore them. Just admit the vendetta.
(dating back to 1999), the loaded 2008 class."
"Weis followed by signing arguably the best on-paper Notre Dame recruiting class of the modern recruiting era (dating back to 1999), the loaded 2008 class.
Despite the horrendous 3-9 season, Weis signed more Top 100 recruits in 2008 (nine in total) than Brian Kelly has signed in his last two classes combined (seven in total). All but three of the 23 signees ranked four or five-stars (the 2008 class shown at the bottom of this review)."
Link: http://Weis followed by signing arguably the best on-paper Notre Dame recruiting class of the modern recruiting era (dating back to 1999), the loaded 2008 class.
Do you realize how asinine what you're saying is...in your analogy the HC is the Captain, the Players are the Crew and the Program is the Ship.
Surrounded by a much more skilled crew, he still crashed the ship...period, the end, there is no getting around that.
Instead of looking at total number of top 50, why not list their named and look at the impact they actually had at ND. I know one of them was named Dayne Crist and he was pretty bad.
first coach in about a decade (slightly longer) to be able to attract talent to Notre Dame. You do realize by the time he got here ND was irrelevant in Football? ND was the laughing stock of college football and hadn't been a serious contender 12 years, over a decade.
You're now trying to take this in a completely different direction from the purpose and intent for some odd reason. I even took time to pull up supporting facts that I've never even seen before, that support the whole thesis. This is pretty hilarious. You just don't like Weis, I assume?
To turn a program around does not mean you win. It means you are the guy that does the dirty work. Some guys win at the turnaround stage, a large percentage don't. They are just the stepping stone to another coach getting success because they did the heavy lifting beforehand and got things going in the right direction again. Brian Kelly taught ND how to win again. He actually was able to coach the talent and keep the talent coming in. And I wasn't even a Kelly fan by the time the last 5 years came along. But, I'm big enough to admit what he did do.
I can only assume, based on your responses, you've completely misread this because your responses are way off base from the point. This is odd coming from you. You're usually pretty with it. That or it's just hard for you to admit for some odd reason.
By the way who runs the ship? A captain. Who runs a team the HC. It's troubling that you can't discern or relate these three things:
1. Leader/director (HC/Captain)
2. Components that make up a team that function to do the bulk of the work (players/crew)
3. The container of which the leader and team work within (ship/program)
I'm sort of shocked.
Davie brought in plenty of talent after Holtz left he just couldn't coach for shit.
There was only roughly a 3ish year period when we weren't bringing talent in, and it mostly coincided with ty being the coach. The notion Weis was the first one to get talent to ND in 10-15 years is 1. pure bullshit and more importantly
2. irrelevant
Simply bringing in talent does not equal turning a program around. Faust brought in a lot of talent, while running the program down, as did Davie...I won't say Weis ran it down but he certainly didn't turn it around either.
In terms of overall program health (which wins and losses is a piece of) the program was in no better shape when Weis left than when ty or Davie left, because none of those 3 made any significant organizational or infrastructure changes to the way things were done within the program and none of them ever established any consistent success/momentum.
Kelly, while I don't like giving him credit because I can't stand him, the thing he is really good at is the program building aspect. He made sweeping changes to the way the program operates. He turned the program around, not Weis.
And I don't know what you're talking about here, you're literally saying the same thing as I am but saying it's concerning how confused I am
lol
"By the way who runs the ship? A captain. Who runs a team the HC. It's troubling that you can't discern or relate these three things:
1. Leader/director (HC/Captain)
2. Components that make up a team that function to do the bulk of the work (players/crew)
3. The container of which the leader and team work within (ship/program)"
This is the same thing I was saying. In your analogy ty was the captain steering the ship towards an iceberg and you say Saint Weis (lol) steered us away from the iceberg.
I added to that he turned away from one to crash into another and that he did it while surrounded by better talent.
Simple truth is, Weis never made the type of organizational changes Kelly did because Weis didn't think that's what was needed. He thought his big X n O brain and strong recruiting was all that was needed. He was wrong and that's why the program was still a dumpster fire when he turned it over to Kelly.
What Kelly turned over to Freeman is a healthy turned around program, now Freeman is putting his tweaks in to try and enhance it, while learning to be a HC.
I fully get what you are saying, you think Weis was the one who started the turnaround...you're just wrong.
If you think he turned the program around, name some significant procedures or changes he made (something besides bringing in some talent) that going forward benefited the program. That just wasn't his thing, he was the smartest football coach and he went out on that shield.
There are plenty of teams who would like their programs turned around, if anyone thought Weis was that guy he probably would have already had another gig.
We agree, Kelly built the program and *fully* "turned it around". This means talent and wins were going in a positive direction at the same time.
What I'm saying is that when Weis showed up ND was a dumpster fire. We had no talent + couldn't win. Both talent and wins were going in the wrong direction, a negative direction. Notre Dame could not bring in a quality class, nor could we back to back. We also could not win on the field. There were fits and starts be mostly a 6 to 7 win team (much like Auburn the last 8 years; big name, sparse talent, can't win consistently). We were struggling just to get bowl eligible and had QBs like Gary Godsey, Pat Dillingham, Carlyle Holiday, etc. No skill generally across the board. Yes, we had a player or two: Tuck, Quinn (Samardja wasn't even a thought until Weis showed up). The talent was as low as it had been in two decades and the on-field product was horrible.
Enter Weis, and he was able to recruit. A DRASTIC change (as shown in the previous data). Recruiting is HALF the battle. Winning is the other half (winning starts with coaching). Weis had early success 9-2 and 10-2 (#6) but back to 6-6. ND's ability to *attract* talent did a 360 under Weis. There's no denying that unless you just have a vendetta. It changed in a positive direction (rudder turned). Wins were still a 50/50. Mostly absent, but for the first time in a while we actually competed with a team like Bush-led USC. At the same time, we lost to teams like Syracuse and Navy.
So, Talent direction changed. Check.
Ability to win consistently, No. X.
That is a turning of the rudder on a ship. We did not do a full program direction change or complete "rebuild" until Kelly showed up (I stated this several times) and made the fully sweeping overhaul as you pointed out too. AND, Kelly could actually coach, which Weis could not (see overall record ND/Kansas - I think you posted). I hit on all these points and in your rebuttles you are essentially restating it, but saying it's wrong at the same time. I can only assume for 1 or 2 reasons. 1. It wasn't your idea. 2. You don't like the words but then say the exact same things.
The only other possibility is you are talking about a program fully going in the right direction: gaining talent + winning. I haven't ever stated that and is the exact opposite of my point. We all know Kelly fully rebuilt the program, but Weis got the momentum changed, "rudder turning a ship". In a game where there is a comeback, momentum shift is always referred to. The time you score and change the direction of the game. At that point you are not winning (rebuilt), but "the direction has changed" (rudder turn).
I am saying a turn happened but the program was not complete: gaining talent - winning. It was as clear in the first post as in this one.
(no message)
not a one-off event.
Choice didn’t keep us from the playoffs. Our other QB options were not good enough to get us a better record. With our 2 former QBs not getting playing time elsewhere and a very green backup in Angeli, there was no better option.
The OC debacle was likely the biggest factor.
then an undefeated ND would not have been selected either.
Especially with ND's weak historical record against Top 10 teams
And relatively weak schedule.
Life ain't fair but ND should get rid of Navy and probably 1 additional non-Power 4 opponent
to reestablish legitimacy
FSU was not picked for the sole reason that the key player at the most important position on the field was not going to play. Because of this, at the time of the selection, FSU was not one of the top 4 teams in the country.
The NCAA basketball selection committee does this all the time, downgrading teams that have lost a key player late in the season. Nobody squawks because the team usually gets in if they have the "resume." But the approach and the decision by both selection groups is based on the same premise and logic.
If folks want to wring their hands ("oh the humanity" type crap) about what might have happened (or might in the future). be my guest.
is there that big a complaint to have if you're on the bubble in that big a selection? The math works against a team here, does it not?
My point is simply that the respective selection committees were consistent in their logic. Both take into account in their decisions re: serious injuries that change the basic makeup of a team. When the margin for error is very slim, it is impossible to argue that conference champ FSU should have been selected over conference champ Alabama when FSU did not have their most important player available to them anymore.
The narrative that it was wrong to leave out an undefeated conference champ simply because it never happened before is clutching at straws to say the least.
There were two losing choices as we now know for fact now, since Ala lost. So, instead of going with the actual qualifier, we went with subjectivity because ESPN can't stand they put all their eggs in the SEC basket and had no representative.
Sorry to disappoint you but "record" is not a qualifier. From the CFP website: "The selection committee ranks the teams based on the members’ evaluation of the teams’ performance on the field, using conference championships won, strength of schedule, head-to-head results, and comparison of results against common opponents to decide among teams that are comparable." Nowhere in that is a team's "record" mentioned and that was on purpose.
If you want to pick some random facts:
SOS from various sources
Alabama: 6/1/6/3
FSU: 55/15/13/50
Common Opponent:
Alabama 42, LSU 28
FSU 45, LSU 24.
Most difficult games:
Alabama: Texas (#3) and Georgia (#6).
FSU: Louisville (# 16)
This was going to be a judgement call even if Travis was playing. But it became a pretty simple call when FSU was without their best player at the most important position in football ...and we saw how "good" FSU was without Travis. Sorry but that pesky "performance on the field" actual qualifier gets in the way of your "logic."
I sure as heck would have loved for the SEC to have been shut out which would have happened had Travis not gotten hurt.
Conf Champs won - Tie - - - both won their conf and both are Power 5. ESPN/Committee have made it clear all attempts to keep non-P5 out will be made.
SOS - ALA edge
Head to Head - FSU edge - - - They did not play each other - So look to the conf H2H and ALA played in a weaker conference based on ACC having a 6-4 record over SEC.
Common Opponent - FSU edge - - - FSU scored more against LSU and LSU scored less on FSU than ALA. Both ALA and FSU won against the common opponent, but FSU had a wider margin of victory 21 vs. 16 for ALA.
Based on these 4 criteria:
FSU: 2 + 1 tie = 3
ALA: 1 + 1 tie = 2
FSU met more "actual qualifiers" than ALA
"members evalution of the performance on the field" is a subjective criteria and not an "actual qualifier" because there is no logic whatsoever. This is the, "we need to make sure to have the largest potential revenue producing game regardless of onfield results for ESPN to make a lot of money". ESPN has a conflict of interest with the SEC, and as we saw the subjective qualifier was the one that made them the most money.
Sorry, but the "subjective" call gets in the way of your logic because based on the "actual qualifiers" the one's numbers can be equated to, FSU won. The QB missing is a big deal but it's subjective. Yes, Ala would be a better game based on that, but they didn't have a higher score based on criteria than FSU. I do appreciate you posting all of that because I would not have looked it up but knew the result.
David never would have beaten Goliath if a committee had been involved because they would have determined based on "members evaluation" that he was too small to go to battle.
Sorry, believing this kind of horse-fed bs from MSM (subjective logic) is why society is f'd up and we have a bunch of blue hair kids running around with nose rings and tats on their faces while championing a weak president.
But you do you.
And have fun with that.
By the way, Oliver Stone is looking for a screen writer. You seem to fit the bill.
(no message)
relevant factor in deciding how to rank comparable teams, the unavailability of players or coaches and how that "may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance." (As an aside, I have always believed that Freeman owes his job in no small measure to the "unavailability of coaches" factor, given that without being offered the HC position Freeman was going to accept an offer from Kelly to go with him to LSU as DC, leaving ND without its HC and DC.)
Freeman was an idiot savant's choice. But even blind squirrels find a nut now and then.
It is not as if he was the best available candidate available to ND. He was the lazy and easy way out for Swarbrick. Swarbrick felt the need to protect the recruiting class, so he offered Rees the OC job and then offered Freeman the Head Coach job.
There were any number of qualified candidates, specifically two, Fickell and Campbell, who might have been head coach at ND. There is no question that Fickell would have taken the job if offered. If fact there was some chatter that the prime reason Fickell isn't our current head coach is that he wanted to wait until after the completion of Cinn's season.
the job, but he wanted to wait? Wtf,wait? Not buying it
DUH!
Do you know any coach, EVER, that would leave his team if it had a chance to win the national title?
If he had abandoned his team when they were in the playoffs, then I wouldn't want him as our coach
(no message)
(no message)
But we got nowhere near having to worry about that.
Silver lining, I suppose.
to their third string freshman QB. That's the equivalent of Minchey playing for ND in the playoffs.
(no message)
Huge advantage. 1 game that isn’t a cup cake- win it and in. A lot had to do with how truly bad the rest of the B19 was this year, but some also had to do with paying to get out of contracts with tough nonconference opponents.
This is totally aside from their shenanigans.
Try playing multiple real games in a row against top 20 teams… that is where most great teams slip up.
Because your dick has such a hard on for Michigan, Ann Arbor, anything to do with the state of Michigan?
The offensive playcalling was a simplified retread of the Tommy Rees / Brian Kelly offense, with some of the obviously bad choice plays not being used as much.
To put it this way, even Guidugli's playcalling seemed much more thorough during the Sun Bowl, and that we were seeing our receivers actually getting some separation in their routes.
I still wonder how much better this team could have been if we hadn't botched the Andy Ludwig hire.
What does that even mean?
(no message)
Would be down multiple years ago. Heck, I'd argue UGA was extremely good this year but got upset one game. They probably beat the hell out of Michigan and Washington.
Because apparently there’s no reason not to, and any advantage it actually gives you is forgotten if you win.
ND is more as are a handful of others. It just simply is, and that is what makes us special.
Further, you act as though we are light years away, yet in truth we are very close. Our defense is championship caliber (and better than UT's, UW's, and Alabama's). Our offense had most of the pieces, but was missing good WR's and a top line QB....serviceable doesn't get there these days.
The same can be said of the offensive play-calling. Freeman has taken steps to address this.
I do agree with you that we were hamstrung by the admin too long and too often (esp the offensive coaching hire fiasco last year). But there are a new set of sheriffs in town, and there appears to be hope.
I do NOT agree that we have to cheat like Michigan to get to the top of the mountain. We never want to be like them. We can't be...because we actually care about doing it within the rules. They believe that the end justifies the means.
Frankly, it’s pathetic that SCUM is neither ashamed by the cheating nor do they think they did anything wrong.
…..you would have to have lived in the Detroit or Eastern Michigan Area to understand it. But the bottom line for these people who used to brag that they had a program that took the high road is that the ends justify the means.
When they get stripped of the Ws and the title (I think the NCAA has no choice) in 12 months, it will be persecution complex.