They argue that the talent gap with SC has closed because of the close game but the only real way of determing where they are is the whole season. How is it that BC has such a competitive team year after year despite all kinds of change? They never get top rated recruiting clases yet they have have there way with ND year after year.

How is it ND had such a difficult time beating Purdue and Michican State even though ND has superior talent.

The bottom line is -win this week and get on a roll for the rest of the season or the talk of Kelly is a fair.

My concern is that Clausen and
Tate leave after this year without ever really accomplising anything significant in terms of victories. Then we hear we need to be patient as we lost such talent from the prior year.

I said Weis ran the program into the ground. The facts:

The 2007 season (3-9) was THE WORST SEASON IN THE HISTORY OF THE PROGRAM, and included various negative milestones: the MOST LOSSES IN A SINGLE SEASON (9); two of the ten worst losses EVER (38-0 losses to both Michigan and USC); and the first 6-game losing streak for home games.

ND's losses to Navy and Air Force marked the first time Notre Dame had EVER lost to two military academies in the same season since 1944, and the first time in the BCS era that Notre Dame went winless against mid-majors.

Navy recorded its first win over the Irish since 1963, breaking the NCAA-record 43-game streak.

In 2008, the Irish ended the season with a 6–6 record, including a 24–23 home loss to Syracuse, the first time that Notre Dame had fallen to an eight-loss team EVER. The combined 15 losses from 2007–08 marks THE MOST LOSSES for the storied program in ANY two-year span EVER.

That my friend was Mr. Arrogant, the greatest coach in his own mind, running the most storied program in the history of college football into the ground.

I'll leave alone the 'theory' about Kelly (which i disagree with).

But how has Weis run it into the ground? That is such a ludicrous statement. He has built the best recruiting classes ND has had in 17 years, they have the 12th best offense in the country, he has developed offensive players like Golden Tate into top receivers (when they were recruited as 'athletes' or running backs). They have a culture that is a tight knit group of people, which every recruit remarks about. The offense just obliterated a top 10 defense in the country in the 2nd half.

That's just an absolutely ridiculous and out of whack. There is still work on defense and special teams, but saying this program isn't moving forward under Coach Weis is disingenuous.

1. I am not more talented than Charlie, but since you asked, the plays I would have run on the final two or there plays, in no particular order, are the play they ran on the two-point conversion against Purdue, the play New England used to run successfully all the time UNDER CHARLIE where threw the pass to Vrabel, or a Wildcat run pass option with the ball snapped directly to Tate. All three of these plays had a higher likelihood of the success than the plays Charlie called.

2. It WAS foolish to go to the #4 or #5 receiver. I don't dispute that Tate and Rudolph were covered and Parris was injured, which is precisely why you go with the calls I identified in 1.

3. No, it's not better for ANYONE– the players, coaches, students, alumni or our parents–to suffer a humiliating and demoralizing blowout. I'm simply saying the result ensures that Charlie stays and that's disappointing.

4. Brian Kelly would get ND to the next level. He has UC to the next level RIGHT NOW and he's getting kids to go to Cincinnati. I grew up in Cincinati. It's not ND and it's not South Florida, and yet the kids come. He built the Grand Valley State, Central Michigan and Cincinnati programs into powerhouses, players love him and you know what, he's frickin' humble. Weis has ran the ND program into the ground and is the most arrogant coach I have ever seen.

If a top recruiting class is unproductive, it is the coaches' fault. There are only three options: (1) all the recruiting analysts are wrong; (2) all the analysts are lying; or (3) the recruits are not taught properly. It seems unlikely that all the analysts are wrong or lying.

Throw in the switch from 3-4 to 4-3 and you have a confused group that gets beat up.

Stop blaming the coaches.