“…I think Ty cared about ND more than Charlie did…”

Ok…you’re going to have to back this one up with some real specific evidence that TW cared more about ND than Weis.

In my book, Ty “the outsider” never fully understood or embraced ND’s values; never showed in his last two years that he was capable of recruiting with the desire and drive necessary to succeed; and thought of ND Alums and faculty as intolerables.

This can never be compared to Weis “the Alum” who may have failed as a head coach, but clearly showed a greater desire, drive and love for the values, culture and vision that is Notre Dame.

Some processes are meaningful, and some processes are not. Deciding to have a training table is meaningful. Deciding what building to put it in is not. Deciding to have tutoring available is meaningful. Deciding what time it should start is not.

I don’t find any of the processes listed in the article are particularly meaningful. I also believe that a lot of the content of this article has been covered already and don’t know the value of covering it yet again.

My award-winning tulips should be blooming, by the end of April.

Every time I see “nothing matters, but wins” I think, “no shit.”

Nothing matters but winning is hardly an elucidating idea. Everyone knows that positives now will fade if wins don’t follow. It’s an insipid point.

If the accompanying thought is “we should just wait for results before writing or reading anything,” then why are you reading anything about Notre Dame football now?

I know the answer.

The answer is because you’re interested in what’s going on in the program.

Nothing matters but winning in the end, but almost everyone is interested in following and understanding the journey. I wrote the article and I don’t think anything matters in the end but winning, but I’m very interested in how this evolves and noting what I think are positives and negatives. That’s the reason five ND sites are busy now. Following the journey and noting the negatives and positives (which everyone does, btw) isn’t at odds with the thought that nothing matters in the end but winning. They’re not mutually exclusive.

This article is not about judgment (which will be based on wins,) it’s about changes in the program that clearly many find informative.

During the coaching search, all we heard on NDN was “focus on the process” ad naseaum because the process was supposedly flawed (which I disagree with).

And now “process and protocol mean bupkes” and “People who have great processes still lose. People who have crappy processes can still win.”

Safe to assume that you weren’t in the “damn the hire because the process sucked” camp?

“Heck I was wrong on CW and I admit it.”

Well at least you have experience in admitting that you’re wrong. It will make it that much easier for you to admit again…soon. 🙂

You mean losing to Tulsa and Navy…which was bad enough. Losing to W. Michigan would have caused a seismic riven in South Bend! 🙂

Jimbo,

But did you predict that we would drop to Navy and W Michigan and then beat Utah and USC? I think you predicted a team that would lost the big ones and get 7 of the easier wins. The most telling, (or encouraging,) aspect of last year absolutely cannot be ascertained from the record, but from how the team actually GOT BETTER by the end of the season for a change. That team that beat Utah, USC and Miami would not have lost to W Michigan or Navy, (or Michigan for that matter.)