First things first: Charlie Weis is a complete and utter moron. His inexplicable and indefensible decision to go for it on 4th-and-goal, instead of taking the chip-shot field goal to tie the game with 11 minutes left, was the last straw. It convinced me, once and for all, that Charlie Choo-Choo should be fired. Enough is enough. (And yes, I criticized the decision before it failed. It would have been a dumbass move even if it had worked.)
It was classic Weis — mistaking stupidity for ballsiness, putting too much reliance on his alleged tactical brilliance, failing to understand the limitations of his personnel — and it could easily have cost the Irish the game. Luckily, Golden Tate & co. bailed Weis out on the next drive:
Alas, despite Tate’s brilliance, and despite the relief of finally beating Fredo, Notre Dame was by no means impressive in its 20-16 win over Boston College. It’s one thing to make USC freshman Matt Barkley look like a Heisman Trophy candidate; it’s another to make BC freshman Dave Shinskie look that way (well, until he started throwing interceptions late).
And yet, despite looking like crap, despite another too-close win over an inferior opponent, Notre Dame will be ranked next week.
Why? No, not because of bias, Irish-haters. Because of simple attrition. Four teams from last week’s AP poll — #8 Miami, #16 BYU, #21 Texas Tech and #24 Kansas — all lost this week. So did three of the teams who, like Notre Dame, received double-digit numbers in the “others receiving votes” category last week. #26 and #27 Notre Dame and Ole Miss won, but #28 South Florida, #29 Nebraska, and #30 Michigan all lost.
I expect the Irish to be ranked either #22 or #23, depending on how far Miami falls. Because the Hurricanes’ loss was a close one, and because current #25 Oklahoma should serve as a “floor” because the ‘Canes beat the Sooners, I’m betting Miami will stay just ahead of ND, so the Irish will be #23 in the AP poll.
The coaches’ poll is the same basic deal, though the Irish might be #24 or #25 there, behind Ole Miss and perhaps Central Michigan or somebody like that. The Irish should likewise be ranked in the #23-25 range in the Harris poll. I won’t hazard a guess as to whether they’ll be in the BCS, because I don’t want to analyze the various computer rankings. But ND will certainly be in that Top 25 soon, if not this week, provided they keep winning.
In any case, my full AP poll prediction is after the jump.
1. Alabama
2. Florida
3. Texas (the Longhorns will gain some ground, due to their rout and the closeness of the Top 2 teams’ wins, but they won’t overtake the Tide or Gators)
4. USC
5. Cincinnati (the Bearcats will gain some ground on the Trojans, but won’t overtake them)
6. Boise State
7. TCU (the Horned Frogs will jump up and join their fellow unbeatens in the #5-8 range, due to their impressive win over BYU)
8. Iowa (I have the Hawkeyes dropping a spot, behind TCU, despite winning, because of the ugliness of their win over MSU. It’s quite possible, though, that Iowa will be #7 and TCU will be #8.)
9. LSU
10. Oregon (it’s very, very close right now between #11 GT and #12 Oregon, and I’m guessing the Ducks leapfrog the Yellow Jackets based on their thorough whooping of Washington, though GT didn’t do anything to merit demotion, and this could go either way)
11. Georgia Tech
12. Penn State
13. Oklahoma State
14. Pittsburgh (an impressive shellacking of South Florida allows Pitt, a one-loss team, to gain some respect and climb several spots)
15. Virginia Tech
16. Houston
17. Ohio State
18. West Virginia
19. Utah (the Utes get leapfrogged by both Pitt and WVU after a scare against Air Force)
20. South Carolina (the Gamecocks receive no such demotion after a scare against Vanderbilt, because of course, the SEC is a war!)
21. Miami (the Hurricanes stay just ahead of Oklahoma, whom they beat)
22. Oklahoma
23. Notre Dame
24. Arizona
25. Ole Miss
Pingback: Tweets that mention Notre Dame will be ranked #23 tomorrow -- Topsy.com
Good to see you’ve traded rational argument for Kool-Aid swilling re: firing Charlie Weis. I agree that going for it in a spot where a field goal is all but guaranteed is somewhat silly, but, if that’s to be placed in his “demerit” file, it’s more than made up for by the good playcall against Purdue. That one actually did win the game for them; this mistake made it slightly harder for them to win the game.
But who am I to try to argue logic in the midst of a tantrum? FIRE CHARLIE WEIS! FIRE NICK SABAN! FIRE KIRK FERENTZ! FIRE ANYONE WHO JUST BARELY WON!
Mike, if you’re going to accuse me of being irrational, why don’t you respond to what I actually wrote, instead of the straw-man that I’m calling for Weis’s head because he “just barely won”? I said nothing of the sort. Nor did I call for Weis’s head after the Michigan State game, or the Purdue game, or the Washington game, as I presumably would have, if close games against inferior teams were enough to convince me that Weis should be out the door. Perhaps some folks on some message board said what you’re accusing me of saying, but I didn’t.
Meanwhile, Weis’ call on 4th and goal, in that situation, under those circumstances, wasn’t “somewhat silly.” It was utterly insane and obviously indefensible. It’s also representative of countless similarly bad calls he’s made over the last 3 years, and as such, is damning evidence that Weis hasn’t learned from his mistakes. I was agnostic till now. I’ve been patient. But that was the last straw for me.
Now, if you want to talk about irrational arguments, let’s consider what you wrote on Facebook:
Huh?!? So because Charlie Weis hasn’t had much success over the last 2 1/2 seasons, it’s unreasonable to expect a high level of success now? How does that make any sense at all?
You want to talk about Kool-Aid swilling? Okay, let’s talk about the argument that the bar for success in evaluating Weis is automatically lowered by… the previous failures of Weis-coached teams. So we’re only allowed to compare Weis to the low standard that he himself set, and anyone who does otherwise is irrational. Again: Huh?!?
But, I repeat, I’m not saying Weis should be fired because the game was close. I’m saying Weis should be fired because that particular play call, following on 2 1/2 years of play calls demonstrating the very same flaws in Weis’s judgment (which I mentioned specifically in this post, not that you noticed, since you apparently think I’m some ND Nation moron spouting random crap I didn’t say) is proof positive that he hasn’t learned from his mistakes, isn’t improving as a coach, is a fucking moron, and needs to go.
As a guy who in fact did call for Weis’ head after the Purdue and MSU games (inappropriately so), I’ve since somewhat reconsidered my position, and with nothing to lose appropriateness-wise, here’s more inappropriate commentary:
Notre Dame head football coach, in the modern era, must be one of the most difficult jobs in the country. Not only do you have all the million myriad details that must be managed to turn talent into champions, but you have the unique Notre Dame challenges on top of it. Two that stand out: 1) the passionate, and lucrative, fan base, to which the administration surely insists the coach devote time and indulgence, and 2) the independence, which inherently creates uncertainty (think “Who wants to play Boise State?” when Notre Dame is dominant. During the Notre Dame salad days of the late 80s, many at U of M – for one – didn’t really want to play them).
If Weis’ tenure at Notre Dame indeed ends badly, its possible that he will have success elsewhere (Although that other “devoutly Catholic, deeply passionate about Notre Dame, high school head coach” didn’t have much success later at Akron).
Notre Dame entered the modern college football era by hiring a high school head coach whose connection to Notre Dame was a deep and abiding love for the school, but who was in way over his head. If hanging around Belichick and Parcells is overrated, it is curious that the University Fathers in a certain sense have returned to the same well 25 years later, and arguably doubled down on it, going from the high school head coach who built a powerhouse with 4 national championships (Faust) to the high school head coach with the one Jersey state championship (Weis).
Pingback: Week 1: Ravens Vs. Chiefs Preview « the Will Law Sports Blog « DIY Projects
What’s irrational is having USC stay at 4 with that ugly ass win against Oregon State. Letting up 36 points at HOME?! GROSS! The Hawkeyes only gave up 13 on the road during a night game. Only the 8th night game ever played at Spartan Stadium fyi.
As I said on Facebook, I credit Charlie with dragging us out of that abyss. We went 3-9 in 2007 then 12-8 since. That’s not the stuff dynasties are made of, but we have to have a lot of small ugly wins before we get to the big dominant ones.
Sorry for addressing a completely irrational straw man argument instead of your argument that one play, or even a string of several plays, negates all of the positive achievements in a head coach’s tenure. You’re right, that’s way less irrational. Seriously, though, I lumped you in with the ND Nation commenters of the world because that’s what I’ve been seeing on the Internet (both there and in the comment section at Blue-Gray Sky, which is becoming more similarly toxic the more Notre Dame seems to win and drive Charlie-haters almost literally crazy) and hearing in the high-class South Bend establishments I watch the games in: that Charlie needs to go because he’s not winning big enough, and as evidence of his malfeasance they cite a play wherein the fallback plan for it worked — pinning the Eagles inside their own 1, forcing a three-and-out — even as its original design fell short of the goal.
So yes, let’s fire Charlie for his play working, but not working in the manner in which we demand! Just like most Charlie haters can’t accept winning by a margin less than what we demand!
If football is a war (except the SEC, which is a WAR!! with capital letters and at least two exclamation points), then it would behoove us to remember the words of Georges Clemenceau, French prime minister during the Great War, that “War is a series of catastrophes that results in a victory.”
Shouldn’t the victory matter more than the minor catastrophes within it?
Jazz: the University Fathers returned to that well because there was nowhere else to go. Everyone else on the planet turned us down. Don’t worry, though, I’m sure the head coaching savior will be available if Weis gets fired this year, and he’ll have larger, more perfect wins, despite Jimmy Clausen and Golden Tate both deciding they’d rather get paid to play on Sundays than spend their senior years learning a new offense and ruining their draft stock.
“Shouldn’t the victory matter more than the minor catastrophes within it?”
The great Weis hype has done what exactly now? Over five years had about the same record as his predecessor the hated dastardly Willingham? Lost in the bowl games, heck lost in any big game, still winless against USC, etc.
If a 59% winning record and an inability to win important games is good enough for Irish fans, then sure, keep Weis around for awhile longer.
Personally if I were them I’d want a coach who could take the talent and recruiting power that ND has and turn it into a team that can WIN those big games again. I’m not saying you have to go to BCS games EVERY year, certainly not the NC game, but still, wouldn’t beating a good team now and then and winning a bowl game be something to aspire too?
In the 30 years since the end of the Devine era, Notre Dame has gone through 4 largely shitty football coaches and 1 good one. Of all people in this community, Mike Marchand, you’re the last guy I’d expect to throw up his hands and say ah heck we couldn’t get anyone else so we’re stuck with Mr.-One-Year-of-High-School-Coaching-Experience-Weis.
That is laughably untrue. Any year there are any number of good young coaches with track records of college success that would love an opportunity to coach up the talent at Notre Dame. A recent example that comes to mind is Brian Kelly at Cincinnati, a guy who won big at Grand Valley State and Central Michigan before turning around Cincinnati, who surely would have done much more with the Notre Dame talent base than Weis is doing.
Not only has Notre Dame had 4 shitty coaches and 1 good one in the last 30 years, they have also had 4 “lifelong-dream-to-coach-at-Notre-Dame” coaches and 1 “take-Notre-Dame-or-leave-Notre-Dame” coach (Willingham). Since you argued that senior managers would be willing to kill people to get cost savings in health care companies, Mike you know why Notre Dame only hires the guys who sing the alma mater full throat:
Because the zeal of the fan base is predicated on a certain indulgence of the whole Notre Dame-Rama. If the senior administrators understand that there are lots of well-heeled donors who will give $200,000/year with three glad-handings of the head football coach, and $50,000 less with each fewer glad-handing, what do you think will be the #1 criteria for the Notre Dame football coach? You of all people know the answer. And you of all people should consequently not be saying “we just can’t get a good guy”. OF COURSE you can. Your management is just not financially rewarded by doing so.
Well, all is not lost. I heard David Ruettiger might get downsized from his maintenance engineer job, making him available to be head coach. True his coaching resume is a bit thin, but lord knows no one gooses up the alumni quite like that guy.
Any year there are any number of good young coaches with track records of college success that would love an opportunity to coach up the talent at Notre Dame.
Then where are they? They’ve had four opportunities to make their presence known in the last 15 years, and they haven’t. In fact, the going trend is for those same coaches to preemptively declare themselves not to be a candidate for the job, just to generate buzz about them coming and hawk their current employers into giving them a contract extension.
Why is it that the last three coaching hires had one previous collegiate head coaching gig between them? Because Notre Dame’s Powers That Be WANT it that way? Or because nobody will touch the job with a 39½-foot pole?
A recent example that comes to mind is Brian Kelly at Cincinnati, a guy who won big at Grand Valley State and Central Michigan before turning around Cincinnati, who surely would have done much more with the Notre Dame talent base than Weis is doing.
Maybe; maybe not. Do you even know if he wants to come to ND? And woe be upon him if his i’s aren’t dotted and t’s aren’t crossed, like George O’Leary.
Since you argued that senior managers would be willing to kill people to get cost savings in health care companies
I did what?
Because the zeal of the fan base is predicated on a certain indulgence of the whole Notre Dame-Rama. If the senior administrators understand that there are lots of well-heeled donors who will give $200,000/year with three glad-handings of the head football coach, and $50,000 less with each fewer glad-handing, what do you think will be the #1 criteria for the Notre Dame football coach?
Winning football games. The $3.2 million more Notre Dame gets when they make a BCS bowl as opposed to when they don’t is equal to, by your arithmetic, 64 glad-handings. The $9 million NBC reportedly pays ND per year that they wouldn’t if the team stinks is 180 more glad-handings. And on and on and on.
Mike,
I just realized it wasn’t you, but rather pthread, with whom I was discussing health reform, so among other things apologies, and also, this is why I would likely be a rather poor journalist.
That said, if it is true the difference between the aloof, indifferent-to-the-whole-Domer-phenomenon style you might get from a Brian Kelly and the singing-the-alma-mater-at-the-top-of-his-lungs style you get from Weis is actually in the ballpark of $150 K per deep-pocketed, zealous patron (per my utter SWAG in #9), then how many such patrons must there be to mislead oneself into believing Weis is the “most qualified” coach during the hiring process? My guess is there are quite a few such ND fans, possibly numbering even in the hundreds at donation levels of $100 K+ at risk depending on the “suitability” of the coach.
If the administration is considering a candidate like Kelly, who has actually been a winner as a coach, and Weis, who has only been hanging around with some winners as coaches, and the Directors know going in that Kelly’s outsiderishness is going to lead to a Willingham-esque decline in interest among the rabid fan base, it’s not a stretch to imagine the trustees convincing themselves that Weis isn’t who they fear he might be as a coach.
Well after they way they dumped Ty after 3 years, does it surprise you that fewer coaches were interested in the job at Notre Dame? (assuming thats true).
Kudos to Weis and his manager for spooking the powers that be to give him that ridiculous 10 year contract extension before he’d even finished his first season, thats some good wheeling and dealing right there.
Personally I think they bought into the hype that Weis was some offensive genius and went with him over other candidates with college experience. Not a bad chance to take, the Patriots have been pretty succesful, and I don’t begrudge them with giving Weis the full five years to prove himself (i think he hasn’t) but that contract was the sign of their desperation. They latched on to the first thing that looked SLIGHTLY good. Thats not sound decision making, thats just nuts.
David’s point is well-taken that Weis was arguably a reasonable risk. After all, Josh McDaniels is showing that “no college coaching experience, only coordinator under Belichick” can be a road to coaching success. Peter King had a thing a few weeks back that Belichick went out of his way to help McDaniels, including preparing a little booklet that outlined everything you needed to know to be a successful coach.
Compare that with Weis going back to Belichick, more or less hat in hand, after two years at ND to get advice on how to coach. Clearly, Belichick’s favorite assistants are not created equal, but how would ND know that before the fact?
Also, Mike is certainly right that mediocrity is costly to Notre Dame. But here’s the rub: whether Notre Dame hires someone who a) doesn’t win enough or b) doesn’t play footsie with the alums, there’s a cost to the university. Not winning enough is probably somewhat more costly than not indulging the fan base.
However, in the interview process, its not clear who won’t win enough, maybe Weis got the McDaniels treatment, you can’t know up front…but it is pretty clear who won’t pass muster with the alums.
Which is why passing muster with the alums is going to end up being a major factor, pehaps the primary characteristic, driving that hiring decision.