Freeman got a pass for the Fiesta Bowl debacle. Does this continue?

[88ND]

You seem very disappointed by Kelly. I'm not.

I'm more disappointed with ND for not figuring out some creative way to carve out football from the rest of what it does. Set up a College of Sports Careers and Enterprises -- or some such thing -- where players could learn everything from coaching to TV work to talent evaluating to NIL promotion -- whatever. That way, the school could attract the VERY BEST PLAYERS IN QUANTITY. Just like UNDER HOLTZ.

And, of course, without Holtz's players, even Holtz wouldn't have fared well against the teams he played.

But do you know who had pretty soft schedules? ARA PARSEGHIAN. THREE TOUGH GAMES A YEAR: Purdue, MSU and USC. Against Purdue, he went 6-5-0; against MSU, 8-2-1; against USC, 3-6-2. Of Ara's 17 losses, 13 were to those three teams. His other losses were to strong LSU, Nebraska and Texas teams and a mediocre Missouri team.

Meanwhile, two other Big Ten teams that had dominated ND for a number of years went south when Ara arrived: Iowa and Northwestern. Plus, ND pounded Wisconsin in his first game and made mincemeat of Illinois the two years his teams played them. Navy after Staubach was never the same; Pitt and Army declined; Oklahoma was beaten badly twice right before they became really good again; and Air Force and North Carolina were annual doormats. Plus, MSU got weaker, the longer Ara was at ND.

Just go to College Football Reference. It's all there. Curb stomping after curb stomping.

Had Ara faced the strong and extremely athletic MSU, Purdue, Iowa, Oklahoma, Pitt, Navy and his own Northwestern teams of the mid-50's to early 60's, things might have been a BIT DIFFERENT. Say, a 70% winning percentage rather than almost 85%.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not KNOCKING Ara Parseghian, but he, too, was treated well by the GODS OF SCHEDULING.

Shit happens.

I've always had to remind our resident "Ara" member that the original Ara's toughest schedule was about on par with Holtz easiest.

You seem hell bent on driving home this shopping from a different aisle theme...
Please tell me the players that Holtz had that never get admitted under Kelly's regime

 

[88ND]

The obsession continues.

Ignoring is free

 

[savvyandsassier]

Ignoring is free

No shit. You guys are just so comfortable, and you are truly enjoying yourselves. You're not even thinking about slowing down!

So we might as well go ahead and ignore you, right?

 

[88ND]

I don't think that's fair to say at all. But do I want to get an agonizing, bad-faith argument on your terms where you literally endlessly rehash possible shortcoming or plausible criticism of BK until the earth crashes into the sun???

The answer to that is no. God no! That's precisely what I want nothing to do with, and am begging you stop doing. But you guys live for this shit. While I quite understandablyI find it excruciating. But it is occasionally fascinating, just to watch you haters do your thing....

More humor.
It doesn't really bother you. See it doesn't bother me one bit your defense of Kelly. If you wish to hold a low bar of approval that's on you but I certainly respect it without taking any offense whatsoever.

I say humor because if this really bothered you then you'd just ignore it? That's free. Easy to do. The fact is someone has an opinion that doesn't match your thus it's not fair.. or not real...or just stirring up shit...or...or...or
When all it is you can't help yourself and feel the need to swoop in defending Brian Kelly.

I appreciate the opinions on this board. All of them.

Opposing views on this board seem to upset you 🤷‍♂️

 

[savvyandsassier]

More humor.
It doesn't really bother you. See it doesn't bother me one bit your defense of Kelly. If you wish to hold a low bar of approval that's on you but I certainly respect it without taking any offense whatsoever.

I say humor because if this really bothered you then you'd just ignore it? That's free. Easy to do. The fact is someone has an opinion that doesn't match your thus it's not fair.. or not real...or just stirring up shit...or...or...or
When all it is you can't help yourself and feel the need to swoop in defending Brian Kelly.

I appreciate the opinions on this board. All of them.

Opposing views on this board seem to upset you 🤷‍♂️

I know you appreciate all the opinions. Like I said, you live for it!!!

So enough self-justifying, just get back to the BK bashing. Don't make it worse.....

 

[88ND]

I know you appreciate all the opinions. Like I said, you live for it!!!

So enough self-justifying, just get back to the BK bashing. Don't make it worse.....

WTF are you talking about. This is a message board that's opinion driven.

You can drive home why you loved Brian Kelly and all his accomplishments but others dare not opine why they dislike Brian Kelly and all his short comings?

Sounds like cancel culture to me.

 

[Bob Rodes]

In my view, that's right. He decided that -- given ND's approach to the game -- he couldn't win an NC in SB. So, he decided to take a RISK -- for which he will be well-compensated -- that he could do it at LSU. I think an NC has always been his goal. Where he actually wins it has not been nearly so important.

The guy is a PRAGMATIST and as Holtz pointed out, never "bought into" the whole ND thing. Big deal. I wish him nothing but the best.

As for his record at ND, his winning percentage at one point was in at least the mid 60's. And it may have been lower. But over time, he pumped it up. My estimate when he arrived was that he'd win between 68% to 72% of his games. For a while the 68% looked out of reach. But he wound up exceeding my upside estimate as I believe he won 73% and change at ND.

Three more good seasons and he'd have been in range of Layden, Holtz and Devine.

If nothing else, he did what THE THREE PREVIOUS COACHES HAD FAILED TO DO. He REVIVED the program.

No small thing.

And certainly no SHOO-IN.

I would have liked to see Kelly take the risk of staying on for two or three more years and seeing if he could win it all at Notre Dame, finishing what he started. Three more seasons with the improvements in recruiting, and he probably would have made it. But some things must have happened that convinced him that that wasn't going to happen, so he decided to move on to LSU.

While Kelly certainly left the program in a good position, I think that Freeman understands what it takes to win it all at Notre Dame better than Kelly did.

One of Kelly's chief weaknesses was an inconsistent, hit-or-miss record in hiring assistant coaches. It seemed to me that the main criterion he used was the coach's record, and whether he knew him. Sometimes it worked out pretty well (Denbrock and Diaco), and sometimes very badly (VanGorder). VanGorder openly stated that he didn't like recruiting, and didn't like having to teach players the fundamentals, because they should already know them. When the whole edifice came crumbling down in 2016, he started really looking for coaches who could develop players. And he found quite a few. On the other hand, he still didn't place an emphasis on recruiting, and hired or held on to people like Todd Lyght and Autry Denson. When Clemson spanked us again in 2018, it was painfully obvious that we were holding our own until Julian Love got hurt and things fell apart. At that point, he started talking about how we needed to recruit better. And then he hired Del Alexander! When it became clear that we weren't recruiting at the level of Alabama/Clemson/OSU, he began talking about how Notre Dame was never going to compete with those three in recruiting, given the need to "shop down a different aisle." In the end, I believe he drank his own Kool-Aid, and decided to leave.

Freeman has a very different take: a lot of the students that would be a great fit for Notre Dame don't know that they are, and it's our job to show them that they are. That makes Kelly look like a low-hanging-fruit picker by comparison. I guess we're all going to find out what Freeman can do. At present, we have two five-stars committed, and are in the hunt for eight more. That's a big uptick.

 

[4-4-3]

"I'm more disappointed with ND for not figuring out some creative way to carve out football from the rest of what it does. Set up a College of Sports Careers and Enterprises -- or some such thing -- where players could learn everything from coaching to TV work to talent evaluating to NIL promotion -- whatever. That way, the school could attract the VERY BEST PLAYERS IN QUANTITY. Just like UNDER HOLTZ."

While you have a good concept, the University will never do that. They have said in the past that Football will not define who the school is -- partly why the recruits that Holtz got early in his years dried up by the end of his time there.

I recall a guy by the name of Andy Katzenmoyer -- went to Ohio State -- he basically said something similar to what you stated -- he was asked what his major was, he said football. He stated he came to college to learn a trade -- his trade just happened to be football.

I realize that ND won't do what I'm suggesting. But it still ticks me off.

Not least of all because it will enable these insane "LAZY RECRUITING" discussions to continue when ND WILL ALWAYS BE FISHING IN A SMALLER POOL AND THEREFORE NEVER GETTING CERTAIN PRIZED RECRUITS.

And BY DESIGN.

Yet, some will simply NOT ACCEPT either the REALITY or EFFECTS of that.

 

[Bob Rodes]

"I'm more disappointed with ND for not figuring out some creative way to carve out football from the rest of what it does. Set up a College of Sports Careers and Enterprises -- or some such thing -- where players could learn everything from coaching to TV work to talent evaluating to NIL promotion -- whatever. That way, the school could attract the VERY BEST PLAYERS IN QUANTITY. Just like UNDER HOLTZ."

While you have a good concept, the University will never do that. They have said in the past that Football will not define who the school is -- partly why the recruits that Holtz got early in his years dried up by the end of his time there.

I recall a guy by the name of Andy Katzenmoyer -- went to Ohio State -- he basically said something similar to what you stated -- he was asked what his major was, he said football. He stated he came to college to learn a trade -- his trade just happened to be football.

Holtz benefited from the Affirmative Action programs of his time, when Notre Dame relaxed entrance requirements for minorities (not just football players). Those programs were started in the 70s and began to dry up in the 90s.

 

[4-4-3]

Fewer recruiting options? ND has currently offered 14 of the 16 rivals 5 star in the 2023 class. I'm beginning to believe the fewer recruiting options were self imposed more than some of us would like to think.

Let's see who actually comes.

Some have suggested that offers like this from ND are often merely PRO FORMA.

 

[4-4-3]

Holtz benefited from the Affirmative Action programs of his time, when Notre Dame relaxed entrance requirements for minorities (not just football players). Those programs were started in the 70s and began to dry up in the 90s.

I wasn't aware of that.

But that certainly went a long way towards his success. During his heyday, there were six teams with super talented players: ND, UM, USC, Miami, Colorado and Florida State. Tennessee and PSU had great talent as well.

But I've always believed that ND had the MOST TALENT.

 

[Bob Rodes]

I realize that ND won't do what I'm suggesting. But it still ticks me off.

Not least of all because it will enable these insane "LAZY RECRUITING" discussions to continue when ND WILL ALWAYS BE FISHING IN A SMALLER POOL AND THEREFORE NEVER GETTING CERTAIN PRIZED RECRUITS.

And BY DESIGN.

Yet, some will simply NOT ACCEPT either the REALITY or EFFECTS of that.

My other post addresses this to some extent. Of course there will be a few prized recruits that can't get into ND academically. But Freeman seems to think that there are a whole lot of them that simply don't realize that they are a good fit for Notre Dame and just need to be convinced of it. I think he's right. He's certainly going to put in the effort to convince them, and expect the same effort from his assistants.

Another relevant point is that those prized recruits who ARE a good fit for Notre Dame are going to be more likely to choose Notre Dame than those who aren't are to choose from the several top programs that they are a good fit for.

So, with all that, do you think that convincing players who don't realize that they're a good fit that they are indeed a good fit is time well spent?

 

[Bob Rodes]

I wasn't aware of that.

But that certainly went a long way towards his success. During his heyday, there were six teams with super talented players: ND, UM, USC, Miami, Colorado and Florida State. Tennessee and PSU had great talent as well.

But I've always believed that ND had the MOST TALENT.

They certainly had some serious talent in the late 80s!

My father was a long-time NDLS professor, and they had strong concerns that the African-American community was severely underrepresented in the legal profession. Which, of course, it was. They also felt that this was in part due to inequalities in the educational system, that a lot of very bright people weren't getting the opportunity to apply their abilities and show what they could do. Which, of course, they weren't. So, in the 70s and early 80s, they would generally take any minority individual that they thought could "hack it," in his words.

 

[88ND]

I realize that ND won't do what I'm suggesting. But it still ticks me off.

Not least of all because it will enable these insane "LAZY RECRUITING" discussions to continue when ND WILL ALWAYS BE FISHING IN A SMALLER POOL AND THEREFORE NEVER GETTING CERTAIN PRIZED RECRUITS.

And BY DESIGN.

Yet, some will simply NOT ACCEPT either the REALITY or EFFECTS of that.

I've asked you to tell me which players Holtz got that Brian Kelly couldn't sign.

 

[4-4-3]

I've always had to remind our resident "Ara" member that the original Ara's toughest schedule was about on par with Holtz easiest.

You seem hell bent on driving home this shopping from a different aisle theme...
Please tell me the players that Holtz had that never get admitted under Kelly's regime

I can't answer that as I don't have any data or other evidence to back up anything I say.

What I will say is that Holtz had many of the dominant players of his era, and I needn't enumerate them. Since then, no ND coach has enjoyed that advantage. ND doesn't get the players Bama, Georgia and OSU get in quantity ROUTINELY.

How do we know this? Because ND generally loses to teams of that caliber.

ND was a perennial top-5 recruiting school. Kelly admitted he couldn't attain that under the current setup -- which in my view is a large part of why he left.

But it wasn't only Holtz. Gerry Faust had three classes ranked either #1 or #2 and another in the top 5. In those days, a lot of emphasis was placed on Parade and USA Today All Americans. Faust, one year, had OVER A DOZEN. Today, that would be the FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT of a dozen five-stars. Trouble was, Faust was a high school coach.

When ND starts pulling in 5-star CB, WR and QB talent -- regularly and in quantity -- we'll know something in Denmark has changed.

 

[88ND]

I can't answer that as I don't have any data or other evidence to back up anything I say.

What I will say is that Holtz had many of the dominant players of his era, and I needn't enumerate them. Since then, no ND coach has enjoyed that advantage. ND doesn't get the players Bama, Georgia and OSU get in quantity ROUTINELY.

How do we know this? Because ND generally loses to teams of that caliber.

ND was a perennial top-5 recruiting school. Kelly admitted he couldn't attain that under the current setup -- which in my view is a large part of why he left.

But it wasn't only Holtz. Gerry Faust had three classes ranked either #1 or #2 and another in the top 5. In those days, a lot of emphasis was placed on Parade and USA Today All Americans. Faust, one year, had OVER A DOZEN. Today, that would be the FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT of a dozen five-stars. Trouble was, Faust was a high school coach.

When ND starts pulling in 5-star CB, WR and QB talent -- regularly and in quantity -- we'll know something in Denmark has changed.

I can only think of one.. I'm sure there are some others.

That said unless you can point to a bunch of players that never get admitted present day this "we can't recruit just any player" argument only goes so far

 

[NDinNJ]

Let's see who actually comes.

Some have suggested that offers like this from ND are often merely PRO FORMA.

They never offered more than 2-3 5 stars in the past in a given cycle, so either the administration has changed its stance for Freeman or the rumors are true and the previous HC didn't believe he could recruit those types of players. I believe the latter to be true. For the 2023 recruiting cycle ND has already landed 2 5 star commits with the potential to land 2-3 more in the cycle. If Freeman can pull that off, it's a massive upgrade in recruiting that we haven't seen in a long time.

 

[4-4-3]

I would have liked to see Kelly take the risk of staying on for two or three more years and seeing if he could win it all at Notre Dame, finishing what he started. Three more seasons with the improvements in recruiting, and he probably would have made it. But some things must have happened that convinced him that that wasn't going to happen, so he decided to move on to LSU.

While Kelly certainly left the program in a good position, I think that Freeman understands what it takes to win it all at Notre Dame better than Kelly did.

One of Kelly's chief weaknesses was an inconsistent, hit-or-miss record in hiring assistant coaches. It seemed to me that the main criterion he used was the coach's record, and whether he knew him. Sometimes it worked out pretty well (Denbrock and Diaco), and sometimes very badly (VanGorder). VanGorder openly stated that he didn't like recruiting, and didn't like having to teach players the fundamentals, because they should already know them. When the whole edifice came crumbling down in 2016, he started really looking for coaches who could develop players. And he found quite a few. On the other hand, he still didn't place an emphasis on recruiting, and hired or held on to people like Todd Lyght and Autry Denson. When Clemson spanked us again in 2018, it was painfully obvious that we were holding our own until Julian Love got hurt and things fell apart. At that point, he started talking about how we needed to recruit better. And then he hired Del Alexander! When it became clear that we weren't recruiting at the level of Alabama/Clemson/OSU, he began talking about how Notre Dame was never going to compete with those three in recruiting, given the need to "shop down a different aisle." In the end, I believe he drank his own Kool-Aid, and decided to leave.

Freeman has a very different take: a lot of the students that would be a great fit for Notre Dame don't know that they are, and it's our job to show them that they are. That makes Kelly look like a low-hanging-fruit picker by comparison. I guess we're all going to find out what Freeman can do. At present, we have two five-stars committed, and are in the hunt for eight more. That's a big uptick.

Many would have preferred that Kelly had stayed another two or three years – I among them. And many of that cohort are also among those cursing him out now most relentlessly. They’ve been jilted.

It's understandable. Kelly had developed consistency to the point of putting together multiple year-on-year double-digit winning seasons and seemed to be fielding better-manned teams.

Plus, it seemed “conceivable” that IF THE STARS ALIGNED, ND had at least a shot at making it back to the NC game and maybe – via one of those proverbial things -- even winning it.

No question.

As for Freeman, I don’t believe it’s a matter of whether or not he UNDERSTANDS what’s necessary to win, though that’s important. It’s much more a matter of whether or not he HAS THE CHOPS TO DO IT. And in that respect, he's a GAPING UNKNOWN.

Which is why, PERSONALLY, I would never have hired him. I hired many, many people for HIGH-PAYING ANALYTICAL JOBS, and I NEVER ONCE went on the BASIS OF POTENTIAL. I ALWAYS went with the REQUISITE EXPERIENCE.

If Freeman succeeds, GREAT. But it won’t affect how I still view this issue. My OWN EXPERIENCE tells me that the SAFER BET is the person with MORE EXPERIENCE. He’s not only seen a problem before, but he can also often see it BEFORE IT ACTUALLY BECOMES A PROBLEM.

As for hiring assistants, it's the same logic. Did Kelly make mistakes in this area? PROBABLY. Will Freeman also make mistakes? PROBABLY. Plus, you only get to choose from the available talent pool. So, it’s OFTEN not a perfect marriage as it simply CAN'T BE.

As a head coach, Kelly was BY NO MEANS perfect, but he did ACCOMPLISH WHAT HE DID, and it’s a CONSIDERABLE BODY OF POSITIVE WORK. But if people are BANKING on Freeman PERFECTING what Kelly started, I’d hedge that bet until we actually see if Freeman has the CHOPS or not to pull it off.

 

[4-4-3]

My other post addresses this to some extent. Of course there will be a few prized recruits that can't get into ND academically. But Freeman seems to think that there are a whole lot of them that simply don't realize that they are a good fit for Notre Dame and just need to be convinced of it. I think he's right. He's certainly going to put in the effort to convince them, and expect the same effort from his assistants.

Another relevant point is that those prized recruits who ARE a good fit for Notre Dame are going to be more likely to choose Notre Dame than those who aren't are to choose from the several top programs that they are a good fit for.

So, with all that, do you think that convincing players who don't realize that they're a good fit that they are indeed a good fit is time well spent?

If you're asking if I think it's a VIABLE STRATEGY, I've no idea.

First, I've no idea of knowing whether or not such a pool of talent actually exists. Second, I've no way of knowing if Freeman is right in "thinking" that it does exist.

We'll see if he's right only if people of this sort actually start showing up.

But here's what this makes me think. Namely, that Freeman knows his STRONG SUIT IS RECRUITING. And he may also -- if he's an honest person -- realize that AT THIS POINT his weakest skill is probably HEAD COACHING. I mean, one blown 28-7 lead DOES NOT A HEAD COACH MAKE. (Though it may prove a useful experience.)

So, in light of this, wouldn't he spend AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME DOING WHAT HE DOES BEST? And in the process try, so to speak, to RECRUIT ND TO VICTORY? He may be thinking, "Hey, if I don't have the X's and O's, I'll still have the Jimmy's and Joe's."

Until I see something otherwise in game planning and in-game coaching, I'll probably continue to view Freeman at least partially through this lens. Again, you maximize what you do best in the hope it will carry you through.

I know I keep returning to this, but CAN THE GUY TRULY DO HEAD-COACHING? Does he have THAT PARTICULAR SKILL SET?

Because THAT'S THE ACTUAL JOB.

 

[4-4-3]

They never offered more than 2-3 5 stars in the past in a given cycle, so either the administration has changed its stance for Freeman or the rumors are true and the previous HC didn't believe he could recruit those types of players. I believe the latter to be true. For the 2023 recruiting cycle ND has already landed 2 5 star commits with the potential to land 2-3 more in the cycle. If Freeman can pull that off, it's a massive upgrade in recruiting that we haven't seen in a long time.

No question it would represent a MAJOR SEA CHANGE.

Then the question would become -- IS FREEMAN A CAPABLE ENOUGH HEAD COACH -- BEYOND TALENT-SLEUTHING/RECRUITING -- to RUN AN NC LEVEL PROGRAM? And, of course, there's no way to know that until it either does or doesn't happen.

But again, let's see how many ultimately declare? How many actually sign? How many remain? And how many strings ND either pulls or not to help Freeman in his search for "the kind of hidden talent" the Irish have been "bypassing."

So-called.

In short, is this a VIABLE REALITY or merely a HOPIUM/FEEL-GOOD STORY that promotes Freeman to a fan base still licking its wounds over Kelly's defection.

Right now, it all reminds me of the same kind of PR that was once used to promote major Hollywood films. Some turned out, some didn't.

 

[NDinNJ]

If you're asking if I think it's a VIABLE STRATEGY, I've no idea.

First, I've no idea of knowing whether or not such a pool of talent actually exists. Second, I've no way of knowing if Freeman is right in "thinking" that it does exist.

We'll see if he's right only if people of this sort actually start showing up.

But here's what this makes me think. Namely, that Freeman knows his STRONG SUIT IS RECRUITING. And he may also -- if he's an honest person -- realize that AT THIS POINT his weakest skill is probably HEAD COACHING. I mean, one blown 28-7 lead DOES NOT A HEAD COACH MAKE. (Though it may prove a useful experience.)

So, in light of this, wouldn't he spend AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME DOING WHAT HE DOES BEST? And in the process try, so to speak, to RECRUIT ND TO VICTORY? He may be thinking, "Hey, if I don't have the X's and O's, I'll still have the Jimmy's and Joe's."

Until I see something otherwise in game planning and in-game coaching, I'll probably continue to view Freeman at least partially through this lens. Again, you maximize what you do best in the hope it will carry you through.

I know I keep returning to this, but CAN THE GUY TRULY DO HEAD-COACHING? Does he have THAT PARTICULAR SKILL SET?

Because THAT'S THE ACTUAL JOB.

Dabo Swinney can coach and he went from WR coach to HC. Swinney is a great recruiter and he put together a solid staff. MF has finalized putting together a solid staff as well, and he's a relentless recruiter. I've got news for you, HC's have to be great recruiters. Look at the elite coaches, every one of them recruits relentlessly, Saban, Dabo, Smart. IT'S PART OF THE JOB!

 

[4-4-3]

I can only think of one.. I'm sure there are some others.

That said unless you can point to a bunch of players that never get admitted present day this "we can't recruit just any player" argument only goes so far

I believe there were others. But I don't want to single any one out, LET ALONE DEFAME anyone in my ignorance.

But I think my recruiting-limitations argument still goes FAR ENOUGH. In fact, it's self-evident when ND can't even touch the elite kind of talent that winds up in the SEC. Those aren't even battles. Not to mention the talented recruits lost to OU, OSU, USC and UM regularly.

Where's ND's long list of OU-like QB's? Or its OSU-like QB's, WR's and RB's? I mean, all of these players are going somewhere. And it isn't ND.

Why not?

In many instances, it's because THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO TO CLASS AT ND. And even if some can somehow get in, they still don't want the additional burden of having to be a STUDENT.

 

[NDinNJ]

Which is why, PERSONALLY, I would never have hired him. I hired many, many people for HIGH-PAYING ANALYTICAL JOBS, and I NEVER ONCE went on the BASIS OF POTENTIAL. I ALWAYS went with the REQUISITE EXPERIENCE.

I've hired many individuals as well for HIGH-PAYING TECHNOLOGY ROLES, and SOME OF MY BEST HIRES HAD ZERO EXPERIENCE, and went on to BECOME MY BEST EMPLOYEES.

 

[4-4-3]

I've hired many individuals as well for HIGH-PAYING TECHNOLOGY ROLES, and SOME OF MY BEST HIRES HAD ZERO EXPERIENCE, and went on to BECOME MY BEST EMPLOYEES.

Occasionally, that happens.

In my business, it was NOT the higher-percentage play.

 

[NDinNJ]

Occasionally, that happens.

In my business, it was NOT the higher-percentage play.

I get it, each industry may have its own specific requirements. I don't, and most don't believe MF is just going to step in next year, run the table and win a NC. There is going to be a learning curve, and it's going to depend on how quickly he can grasp the position. He appears to have the passion and determination to learn as quickly as possible, and I believe he will succeed at ND.

 

[Patrirish]

Holtz benefited from the Affirmative Action programs of his time, when Notre Dame relaxed entrance requirements for minorities (not just football players). Those programs were started in the 70s and began to dry up in the 90s.

How exactly did Holtz benefit ?

Describe in detail the relaxed entrance requirements that ND adopted AND

Identify the minority players who were admitted under relaxed entrance requirements.

Thanks

 

[Patrirish]

Occasionally, that happens.

In my business, it was NOT the higher-percentage play.

I’d venture to say that it’s not the higher-percentage play in any business !

 

[Patrirish]

With NO prior Head Coaching experience, how does one assess and measure potential ?

 

[Bob Rodes]

How exactly did Holtz benefit ?

Describe in detail the relaxed entrance requirements that ND adopted AND

Identify the minority players who were admitted under relaxed entrance requirements.

Thanks

Sounds like you're offended by my statement. Sorry if you are.

"Describe in detail the relaxed entrance requirements that ND adopted." I've already said what I know about relaxed entrance requirements. Exact measures, such as quotas and the like, aren't a matter of public record.

"Identify the minority players who were admitted under relaxed entrance requirements." Transcripts and SAT scores are none of your business and none of mine either. I do not, by the way, mean to say that Notre Dame relaxed academic standards in any way. Anyone they admitted would have to be able to make it through. (As my father once said, Affirmative Action can get you in, but nothing can keep you in if you aren't making it.) But race and gender were factors in deciding who got admitted and who didn't (so was availability of an athletic scholarship, it is true), and Holtz would have benefited from that.

If you want to read up on Notre Dame and affirmative action, you can read some of the links from this google search.

 

[Bob Rodes]

With NO prior Head Coaching experience, how does one assess and measure potential ?

Intuition.

 

[Bob Rodes]

If you're asking if I think it's a VIABLE STRATEGY, I've no idea.

We'll see if he's right only if people of this sort actually start showing up.

But here's what this makes me think. Namely, that Freeman knows his STRONG SUIT IS RECRUITING. And he may also -- if he's an honest person -- realize that AT THIS POINT his weakest skill is probably HEAD COACHING. I mean, one blown 28-7 lead DOES NOT A HEAD COACH MAKE. (Though it may prove a useful experience.)

So, in light of this, wouldn't he spend AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME DOING WHAT HE DOES BEST? And in the process try, so to speak, to RECRUIT ND TO VICTORY? He may be thinking, "Hey, if I don't have the X's and O's, I'll still have the Jimmy's and Joe's."

Until I see something otherwise in game planning and in-game coaching, I'll probably continue to view Freeman at least partially through this lens. Again, you maximize what you do best in the hope it will carry you through.

I know I keep returning to this, but CAN THE GUY TRULY DO HEAD-COACHING? Does he have THAT PARTICULAR SKILL SET?

Because THAT'S THE ACTUAL JOB.

I feel pretty confident that I don't need to ask you what you think to get you to tell me.

"We'll see if he's right only if people of this sort actually start showing up." I agree. I don't claim to have a crystal ball either, but I found his pitch for Notre Dame to be very convincing. i didn't find Kelly's to be as convincing.

"Wouldn't he spend AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME DOING WHAT HE DOES BEST?" I sure as hell wouldn't!! I'd be spending as much time as I could learning what I didn't know. If I did what you suggest, I wouldn't be up for the job. To me this is very, very obvious, and I can't imagine that it isn't obvious to Freeman, even more so than it is to me.

A guy with the TALENT to DO HEAD COACHING is a guy who can quickly develop the parts of THAT PARTICULAR SKILL SET that he doesn't have. We don't KNOW he has the talent until he gets a track record. But my gut feeling says he absolutely has it.

He already is clearly better than Kelly at recruiting, and clearly better at surrounding himself with top talent. We don't really know whether he's a good game manager: one blown 28-7 doesn't mean that he can't cut it, especially when he's drinking through a firehose at the time.

As you say, that blown lead could prove a useful experience. I think so too; I imagine that he knows every play very well now, and every mistake he made, and what he would do differently next time he runs into that situation. But, maybe not.

Maybe he just can't cut it. But maybe he can. My gut says he can and will.

 

[Patrirish]

Sounds like you're offended by my statement. Sorry if you are.

"Describe in detail the relaxed entrance requirements that ND adopted." I've already said what I know about relaxed entrance requirements. Exact measures, such as quotas and the like, aren't a matter of public record.

"Identify the minority players who were admitted under relaxed entrance requirements." Transcripts and SAT scores are none of your business and none of mine either. I do not, by the way, mean to say that Notre Dame relaxed academic standards in any way. Anyone they admitted would have to be able to make it through. (As my father once said, Affirmative Action can get you in, but nothing can keep you in if you aren't making it.) But race and gender were factors in deciding who got admitted and who didn't (so was availability of an athletic scholarship, it is true), and Holtz would have benefited from that.

If you want to read up on Notre Dame and affirmative action, you can read some of the links from this google search.

I’m not offended in the least.

i‘m just asking you to substantiate your statements, which you failed to do.

Contrary to your claim, Race and gender had nothing to do with Notre Dame’s admission of scholarship football players in Holtz’s era !

Please also explain why you inserted gender into the ND football program.

thanks

 

[Bob Rodes]

I’m not offended in the least.

i‘m just asking you to substantiate your statements, which you failed to do.

Contrary to your claim, Race and gender had nothing to do with Notre Dame’s admission of scholarship football players in Holtz’s era !

Please also explain why you inserted gender into the ND football program.

thanks

Ok, perhaps you're not offended. However, you disagree with my opinion in a manner which suggests that it is simply contrary to fact. That suggests that you have an antipathy to it.

I didn't insert gender into the ND football program. I mentioned it as an aspect of affirmative action ("race and gender were factors in deciding who got admitted and who didn't" means who got admitted to Notre Dame, not who got admitted to the football team). I thought that would be obvious, but perhaps not.

Perhaps race had to do with admission of scholarship football players, and perhaps it had nothing to do with it. You can't prove a negative, and I don't have absolute proof of my position. So, I can't substantiate my statement, but neither can you. This is just your opinion and mine.

That said, I do feel pretty confident that affirmative action gave preferential admission options to minority students, partly because my father said so and had to do with admissions back then, and partly because I consulted some of the documents in the links I shared.

With that in mind, I can't imagine that Holtz would refuse a minority player that was accepted by the administration. Nor can I imagine that football players were excluded from affirmative action initiatives simply because they were football players. Nor can I imagine that ethnicity was never a factor in the administration's acceptance of a minority football player in the days of affirmative action quotas. That's the basis of my opinion.

So, what's wrong with my assessment?

 

[Patrirish]

Ok, perhaps you're not offended. However, you disagree with my opinion in a manner which suggests that it is simply contrary to fact. That suggests that you have an antipathy to it.

I didn't insert gender into the ND football program. I mentioned it as an aspect of affirmative action ("race and gender were factors in deciding who got admitted and who didn't" means who got admitted to Notre Dame, not who got admitted to the football team). I thought that would be obvious, but perhaps not.

Perhaps race had to do with admission of scholarship football players, and perhaps it had nothing to do with it. You can't prove a negative, and I don't have absolute proof of my position. So, I can't substantiate my statement, but neither can you. This is just your opinion and mine.

That said, I do feel pretty confident that affirmative action gave preferential admission options to minority students, partly because my father said so and had to do with admissions back then, and partly because I consulted some of the documents in the links I shared.

With that in mind, I can't imagine that Holtz would refuse a minority player that was accepted by the administration. Nor can I imagine that football players were excluded from affirmative action initiatives simply because they were football players. Nor can I imagine that ethnicity was never a factor in the administration's acceptance of a minority football player in the days of affirmative action quotas. That's the basis of my opinion.

So, what's wrong with my assessment?

Your assessment lacks bona fide substantiation and is pure supposition and speculation on your part

Notre Dame has admitted qualified football players, irrespective of race, dating back to prior than Brown vs B.O.E.

Let‘s not try to divert and deflect the discussion away from the football team and players by injecting affirmative action which was primarily focused on employment

I believe that I am and continue to be significantly closer to the University, the football program and Lou Holtz than you

 

[Bob Rodes]

Your assessment lacks bona fide substantiation and is pure supposition and speculation on your part

Notre Dame has admitted qualified football players, irrespective of race, dating back to prior than Brown vs B.O.E.

Let‘s not try to divert and deflect the discussion away from the football team and players by injecting affirmative action which was primarily focused on employment

I believe that I am and continue to be significantly closer to the University, the football program and Lou Holtz than you

1. We'll agree to disagree on that. IMO, it's somewhere between bona fide substantiation and pure speculation.
2. Of course they have. Straw man, though.
3. This discussion started with my assertion that Holtz benefited from AA. You don't need to run it on, if you prefer not to talk about it. If you read any of the stuff I linked, I think you would find that admissions were very much a part of it as well. Not so much now, of course.
4. Well, I'm God. That trumps your argument from authority. Seriously, we've about beaten this argument to death, and are reduced to respectfully disagreeing with one another. So, what's your role at ND? I'm just interested. My closeness to the university is that my father was a law prof there from 1956 to 2013. I'm not an alum; went to IUSB and majored in music. My experience with the football team is mainly a year I spent in general maintenance, and had to roll the tarps on and off the field with about 30 other people when Dan Devine wanted it done. Which he once wanted done four times in two days.

 

[Patrirish]

1. We'll agree to disagree on that. IMO, it's somewhere between bona fide substantiation and pure speculation.
2. Of course they have. Straw man, though.
3. This discussion started with my assertion that Holtz benefited from AA. You don't need to run it on, if you prefer not to talk about it. If you read any of the stuff I linked, I think you would find that admissions were very much a part of it as well. Not so much now, of course.
4. Well, I'm God. That trumps your argument from authority. Seriously, we've about beaten this argument to death, and are reduced to respectfully disagreeing with one another. So, what's your role at ND? I'm just interested. My closeness to the university is that my father was a law prof there from 1956 to 2013. I'm not an alum; went to IUSB and majored in music. My experience with the football team is mainly a year I spent in general maintenance, and had to roll the tarps on and off the field with about 30 other people when Dan Devine wanted it done. Which he once wanted done four times in two days.

Other than Tony Rice what other player benefited from a departure from normal recruiting standards under Holtz ?

I’ve always contended that if you took the top students in their class, strapped pads and a helmet on them and made them practice and attend meetings every day that their grades would suffer.

it’s very difficult to serve those two masters

I might have had your dad as one of my professor.
What subject did he teach ?

 

[4-4-3]

They certainly had some serious talent in the late 80s!

My father was a long-time NDLS professor, and they had strong concerns that the African-American community was severely underrepresented in the legal profession. Which, of course, it was. They also felt that this was in part due to inequalities in the educational system, that a lot of very bright people weren't getting the opportunity to apply their abilities and show what they could do. Which, of course, they weren't. So, in the 70s and early 80s, they would generally take any minority individual that they thought could "hack it," in his words.

Interesting.

And how do you -- or your father -- view that all as having turned out?

 

[4-4-3]

Dabo Swinney can coach and he went from WR coach to HC. Swinney is a great recruiter and he put together a solid staff. MF has finalized putting together a solid staff as well, and he's a relentless recruiter. I've got news for you, HC's have to be great recruiters. Look at the elite coaches, every one of them recruits relentlessly, Saban, Dabo, Smart. IT'S PART OF THE JOB!

No argument, but it isn't ALL recruiting.

There are play calling GENIUSES, too. And to win an NC, it's GOOD TO HAVE ONE.

 

[4-4-3]

I get it, each industry may have its own specific requirements. I don't, and most don't believe MF is just going to step in next year, run the table and win a NC. There is going to be a learning curve, and it's going to depend on how quickly he can grasp the position. He appears to have the passion and determination to learn as quickly as possible, and I believe he will succeed at ND.

There's no way of knowing.

He could start out running the table like Willingham looked to be doing, only to fail later. He could have two good years before imploding like both Brennan and Weis did -- and to a lesser extent Davie (7-6, 9-3). He could flop right out the gate like Faust. Or he could grind out a couple or even a few 5 loss seasons like Kelly did.

Personally, I have no BASIS for believing anything about him other than I don't see the idea of him outperforming in his first five years what Kelly achieved in his LAST FIVE as at all LIKELY.

Yet, that is what some people in that part of their brain that is still THREE YEARS OLD WANT TO BELIEVE. And some will even push THAT NARRATIVE.

My Daddy is bigger and stronger than your stupid old Brian Kelly Daddy.

 

[4-4-3]

I feel pretty confident that I don't need to ask you what you think to get you to tell me.

"We'll see if he's right only if people of this sort actually start showing up." I agree. I don't claim to have a crystal ball either, but I found his pitch for Notre Dame to be very convincing. i didn't find Kelly's to be as convincing.

"Wouldn't he spend AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME DOING WHAT HE DOES BEST?" I sure as hell wouldn't!! I'd be spending as much time as I could learning what I didn't know. If I did what you suggest, I wouldn't be up for the job. To me this is very, very obvious, and I can't imagine that it isn't obvious to Freeman, even more so than it is to me.

A guy with the TALENT to DO HEAD COACHING is a guy who can quickly develop the parts of THAT PARTICULAR SKILL SET that he doesn't have. We don't KNOW he has the talent until he gets a track record. But my gut feeling says he absolutely has it.

He already is clearly better than Kelly at recruiting, and clearly better at surrounding himself with top talent. We don't really know whether he's a good game manager: one blown 28-7 doesn't mean that he can't cut it, especially when he's drinking through a firehose at the time.

As you say, that blown lead could prove a useful experience. I think so too; I imagine that he knows every play very well now, and every mistake he made, and what he would do differently next time he runs into that situation. But, maybe not.

Maybe he just can't cut it. But maybe he can. My gut says he can and will.

That's a lot of gut but a paucity of evidence.

But many of you seem intent on elevating your BELIEFS and INTUITIONS to the level of empirical evidence. I wish I had that POWER. But then, maybe you don't have it either.

You say you don't know, yet YOU BELIEVE IT WILL ALL TURN OUT OKAY. That doesn't sound like even SPECULATION based on analysis but rather RAW UNADULTERATED HOPE. A kid's Christmas wish, to be honest.

Since I don't deal in belief or hope or even observe Christmas much, there's very little I can add. Football to me is not a faith-based exercise, and HOPE IS NOT A STRATEGY.

Yet, the one thing I AM expecting -- because there's really no IF about it but merely a WHEN -- is that a first-year college head coach WILL MAKE MISTAKES. I'll be watching INTENTLY to see how MANY there are and HOW COSTLY. And ON THAT -- the FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY OF MISTAKES -- the season may turn.

It's one thing to learn the lessons of OSU, another to make as many new mistakes every week. One game does not a HEAD COACH EDUCATION MAKE.