Comments on: Cowardice and Greed

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:54:41 +0000

Notre Dame is usually in the top 10 – 20 for schedules. Several weeks ago they were rated at 38th hardest. For me the strength of shedule is not the problem, its the playing of the same teams year in and year out. Let's keep the main 3 or 4 rival games – MSU, USC, Navy, Purdue then play more games against teams we have never played or haven't played in years. Arkansas, Missouri, Texas, Cal, Arizona, Az State and so on. Spread some of the excitement around.

By: Mike Coffey

Mike Coffey — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:54:27 +0000

No, actually, it won't. Florida plays teams like Tennessee, Georgia, LSU and Alabama in addition to their buy games. We're playing Michigan State, Purdue and Stanford. That's why the model doesn't work. When you're playing eight home games and still only have two marquee opponents……..

By: Kris

Kris — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:09:24 +0000

2009 is not 1999 or 1989. The competitive landscape has changed, where the teams we compete with for BCS births play similar schedules to ours. In the current BCS framework, preseason rankings play a crucial role in whether a team has a high enough ranking to get into a BCS bowl (even more so Notre Dame, since we can't count on a conference win as an automatic berth). Holding ourselves to a scheduling regime that is harder than those we compete with for BCS births and championships is unilateral disarmament. You may not like the 7-4-1, but if it were 8-4 with the eighth game at home as a "buy" game, it will look very similar to schedules played at Florida, Alabama, Texas and Southern Cal.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:46:12 +0000

When I look at the National Championship years that I have been alive to witness, there was a common denominator. In 1966, 1973 and 1977 it was Army,Navy and Air Force. In 1988, it was Army, Navy and Rice. I think a lot of fans are frustrated because some of the traditional opponents have not been that good over the last few years, i.e. Michigan, Purdue, Michigan State. Washington has had success but not since the early 90s, Pitt has been up and down. It is tough to get excited when you play a team wherever, that on the surface wouldn't be worth the price of admission. I kind of like the idea of keeping Michigan State, Purdue, USC and Navy and rotating two more teams out of the Big Ten, Pac Ten and whatever other conference in a four year home and home arrangement. Without the home and home, get used to more WAC & MAC opponents.

By: Matt T.

Matt T. — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:58:54 +0000

With commentaries like this, it is not a surprise that the message boards continue to have ample doses of entitlement and bitterness. The genorosity of spirit so prevalent through the University community is sparse on this site.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:55:32 +0000

"The people who run our football program don't want to make difficult choices, like bringing in a high-profile coach who might make them nervous sometimes ... Instead, they want the path of least resistance to winning just enough games to keep the alumni wolves from their door ... Meanwhile, the win total is padded, camouflaging any shortcomings that may be present on the field or sidelines ... shortcomings that will become embarrassingly apparent when a quality opponent is encountered."

You're way off base here. The program has made a lot of tough choices. They fired Ty earlier than many thought was appropriate because they thought he was not up to the task. They were right. He was a good guy who ran a clean program but he couldn't recruit or coach.

Weis was hired because of his pedigree and the fact that he was a ND alum. I was as psyched as most. Although he's an excellent recruiter, he's ridiculously pompous and not nearly as good a coach as he thought he was coming in. It's time for him to go and unless the Irish go 3-1 or better the rest of the way, he will be.

The scheduling gripe is simply misplaced. All great programs schedule a few cupcakes. If ND scheduled Top 25 teams every week, they'd never make a BCS bowl.

As for the where the games are played and why and money, look, it's big business, accept it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:02:24 +0000

While you make some good points, I think your recent pieces reflect an extreme and often unfair criticism that makes it hard to read them. A perfect example is the use of the terms "cowardice and greed." I was also troubled by the gratuitous and extreme criticism of the administration about the Obama commencement speech in you "Men wihtout Chests" piece.

I have found your writing to be thoughtful and insightful on many occasions. But, thee pieces lack both thoughtfulness and insight and have substituted an almost hysterical emotionality. Labels such as "cowardice" and "greed" ought to be resreved for truly reprehensible conduct. To use them because you disagree with a decision or course of conduct suggests a weakness in your substantive argument that you think needs to be propped up by these inflammatory terms. In short, it turns readers off and obscures your points, rather than enhancing them.

By: Larry B

Larry B — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:46:57 +0000

It needs to be stated again that when Saturday's game was scheduled, Washington State was not the pushover they are now. They were coming off a 6-6 season in which they won at 10-4 Oregon State and lost 28-22 to 11-2 USC. Sure, they weren't exactly Rose Bowl contenders. But they weren't a guaranteed win either. Let's consider all the facts before we jump to any sweeping conclusions (or at least sweeping conclusions based on Saturday night's game) about the administration's alleged agenda regarding the schedule, shall we?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:02:45 +0000

I have to agree with Mr. Coffey. This is NOT your daddy's (or grand daddy's) Notre Dame. Too bad for those of us who care about true Notre Dame football tradition. We have entered a new era: "Tradition Light."

Having that said: The next few games are going to be VERY interesting. Buckle-up, alum friends and all you subway followers. It's time for Charlie to shine. (Or not.)

~mpsND'72

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 11:23:36 +0000

Alcohol, alcohol, and then again alcohol are the reasons that we should not have night home games. At Notre Dame the vast majority of attendees get in their cars and drive home. I was at the San Antonio game and the parking lot was not full. The vast majority walked to and from the stadium. I don't think anyone was injured by a drunk walker.
With a night game you have fans who have been drinking all day and all night and then they must get into their vehicles and drive back to Chicago, etc.
I want to add that you cannot even begin to understand how fabulous this weekend was unless you were there. It was great. Try it, you'll like it.