dwccrew wrote:when Weis goes, he'll fall into oblivion just like the other two mentioned.
If Weis is fired, he will probably take a year off and then he will be one of the top candidates for the myriad job openings in the NFL. There are more bad coaches in the NFL than ever before in my opinion; Weis' four Superbowl victories would make owners drool for him. Make no mistake, the only way Weis doesn't work is because he chooses not to after the $18,000,000 buyout Notre Dame gives him.dwccrew wrote:when Weis goes, he'll fall into oblivion just like the other two mentioned.
Actually, USC is a private school. And the academic standards at Michigan are pretty similar to those at Notre Dame.BCSbunk wrote: It is not only academic standards. USC and Michigan are both state schools and the demands are not that of Notre Dame.
There are other regulations to note or standards.
Single sex dorms with rules and regulations NOT at state schools the top of the list is parietals.
The promise of a social life is not what it is at a state school.
I believe it does not matter what coach they bring in until they relax these regulations and standards they will never be the top program in the country.
Now I DO NOT propose they relax these standards for the sake of sports and am not suggesting they should. I am merely stating that they will not ever return to their glory days unless they do.
Time will tell though and I will glad to admit I was wrong when Notre Dame is ranked top 10 most years and challenging for national titles on a fairly frequent basis.
No they're not, not even close!krambman wrote:And the academic standards at Michigan are pretty similar to those at Notre Dame.
BCSbunk wrote: Joe Montana has it exactly correct.
http://www.sportingnews.com/college-football/article/2009-08-12/montana-notre-dame-should-lower-expectations
"You can't ask any football coach here to be constrained like that on the academic side and to have a consistent team," Montana said. "Unless you try to relax some of that for the athletic programs here, it's hard to consistently compete with the programs that have different standards."
Until the academic standards for football players at Notre Dame are reduced the football team will be what it is today. Under the circumstances Weis has done a great job. I agree with Montana.
It has not been just the last 10-15 years. Notre Dame has not been at their normal level of greatness since the 70's. They had some flashes of brilliance with Lou Holtz but also some mediocre seasons.krambman wrote:BCSbunk wrote: It is not only academic standards. USC and Michigan are both state schools and the demands are not that of Notre Dame.
There are other regulations to note or standards.
Single sex dorms with rules and regulations NOT at state schools the top of the list is parietals.
The promise of a social life is not what it is at a state school.
I believe it does not matter what coach they bring in until they relax these regulations and standards they will never be the top program in the country.
Now I DO NOT propose they relax these standards for the sake of sports and am not suggesting they should. I am merely stating that they will not ever return to their glory days unless they do.
Time will tell though and I will glad to admit I was wrong when Notre Dame is ranked top 10 most years and challenging for national titles on a fairly frequent basis.
I don't buy the academic excuse either. If that was the case, then why have things just changed during the last 10-15 years?
In ten seasons, from 1987-1996, Notre Dame went 95-24-2. That makes an average season be 9.5-2.4; not a bad decade by any stretch. What makes that record even better is it was when Notre Dame played the toughest teams in the country. Notre Dame vs. Miami, Penn State, Florida State, Tennessee, Pittsburgh, Michigan, and Southern Cal. That's impressive competition. To say Notre Dame had only "flashes of brilliance" makes you look like a fool. The 1988, 1989, 1992, and 1993 teams were all stellar.BCSbunk wrote:It has not been just the last 10-15 years. Notre Dame has not been at their normal level of greatness since the 70's. They had some flashes of brilliance with Lou Holtz but also some mediocre seasons.
My info wasn't a rumor. It was straight from the source...rock_knutne wrote: BTW, this whole Bob Stoops to ND stuff is picking up some serious steam. Anyone else here about the University of Houston coach being granted permission to talk to Oklahoma? I got a call from a friend of mine about it, said he heard it on the radio but I can't find a link or story anywhere.
athlete37 wrote:My info wasn't a rumor. It was straight from the source...
rock_knutne wrote:
No he won't. He may take some time off but the NFL will hire him on the drop of a dime as a coordinator. I doubt Weis would be without work unless he chooses so.
Charlie did well under two great coaches, Parcells and Bellicheck. He also cheated with Bellicheck. I just don't see Weis ever doing anything that great again.sjmvsfscs08 wrote:
If Weis is fired, he will probably take a year off and then he will be one of the top candidates for the myriad job openings in the NFL. There are more bad coaches in the NFL than ever before in my opinion; Weis' four Superbowl victories would make owners drool for him. Make no mistake, the only way Weis doesn't work is because he chooses not to after the $18,000,000 buyout Notre Dame gives him.
You speak as if it's in Stoops' blood that he can't ever win a BCS game anymore, which is simply beyond idiotic. I don't understand how you, and numerous fans everywhere, can honestly think "oh, that coach? Yeah he can't win this or that. It's just not possible for him anymore." Really? Has fortuna decided this or something? Have I missed something? Maybe I'm wrong, but there is a huge difference between "cannot" and "has not."dwccrew wrote:Stoops can't win BCS bowls anymore. Not sure if I was Notre Dame I would want him. I guess he's better than Charlie. I still think a Harbaugh or Kelly type coach would be better.
I think that his team was vastly superior to West Virginia (talent-wise) and with a new coach calling the plays (hadn't been the HC in a game up to that point).Mooney44Cards wrote: Umm the only BCS game he lost that he should have won was the Fiesta Bowl vs Boise St.
Jim Tressel can't either........what's your point?dwccrew wrote: Stoops can't win BCS bowls anymore.
you lost me, is there a point in this post?sjmvsfscs08 wrote: What are the odds you'll tell us this source after the fact?
This.sjmvsfscs08 wrote: Jim Tressel hasn't!
I'd bet my life both Stoops and Tressel win another BCS Bowl game, they are both more than capable.
What's your point? There is no talk of Tressel going to ND. That would be another bad choice for coach at ND. They would lose to USC every year still.rock_knutne wrote:Jim Tressel can't either........what's your point?dwccrew wrote: Stoops can't win BCS bowls anymore.
Huh? It's asanine to think Stoops can't win a BCS game again. In his 10 years at Oklahoma, he has been to 7 BCS games. Granted he is 2-5 in those games, but to question his success as a coach is incredibly ingnorant. His worst season was his first year at Oklahoma with a 7-5 record, and he has lit it up every year after as a consistent top 10 team, 1-1 in Nat'l championship games.dwccrew wrote: Stoops can't win BCS bowls anymore. Not sure if I was Notre Dame I would want him. I guess he's better than Charlie. I still think a Harbaugh or Kelly type coach would be better.
I'm simply wondering if, after Stoops is hired, we'll get to know the source.athlete37 wrote: you lost me, is there a point in this post?