Skip to content

Charlie Weis and wastefulness

Preface: I dislike Notre Dame, but I don’t hate them. Nor do I enjoy the undue attention they receive from ESPN and NBC for playing pedestrian football almost every year for the past 10 years (besides their Fiesta/Sugar Bowl losses). And in those 10 years, it’s become more and more common for the definition of “success” in college football to mean “making bowl games.” Regardless of whether it’s a BCS Bowl or the papajohns.com Bowl, I still consider it a success because you’re playing in the “postseason“, whether that be a playoff or bowl system. So with that understood, I find it shamefully lavish that Notre Dame (or its fans) want to fire Charlie Weis because he didn’t win a national championship in 5 years. Somehow, it’s forgotten in their thought process that under his guidance, the Fighting Irish played in 2 BCS games (against very good teams), earned 2 top-25-at-end-of-year BCS rankings, and won the Hawaii Bowl. This year, they’re 6-5 (bowl eligible, yet again). Weis has a winning overall record in South Bend and 4 of ND’s 5 losses this year came by a touchdown or less. Is that his fault? Maybe – but you can’t deny the guy will see his QB and stud WR drafted early in this year’s NFL draft. I’m guessing 110 out of 120 D-1 teams would be thrilled to have the kind of success Weis has had. Think they’re screwed for the future? Rivals.com ranks Weis’ recruiting class as #11 in the country.

From what I gather, there’s at least $20 million owed to Weis, and it’d require at least $5 million per year to hire a new coach. I have no idea if donors and boosters are willing to cough up such an outrageous amount of money to fire a successful coach. If they do, it could be the most disgusting display I’ve seen in a long time. In economic times like this, it’s simply a display of arrogance and unreasonable expectations, especially in a sport where athletes are unpaid. I have no respect for attitudes like this.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *
*
*