Yes, that cute little statistic has been discussed ad nauseum in the press. Most Notre Dame fans, myself included, feel strongly that the quality of play in Weis’s first 15 games has been far superior to that in Willingham’s first 15, and the successes far less flukey.
Weis’s 15th game was a 47-21 loss to Michigan. Ty’s 15th game was a 38-0 loss to Michigan. The Irish went 4-6 for the rest of that season. If Charlie Weis’s Irish go 4-6 — or, hell, even 6-4 — for the rest of this season, then we can talk about comparisons to Willingham. For now, it’s just a cute statistic with no actual significance.
the “significance” is that they both got spanked in their 15th game by Michigan at least Ty got served on the road and not in front of the “famed” alumni with National Title and Heisman hopes.
And we all know that that UM should have dropped half a hundo on ND, if not more, and that 21 was hollow. it just allowed Ty to keep the distinction of widest margin of loss for the series.
As I said: it’s a cute statistic, nothing more. It doesn’t imply that Ty is as good as, or better than, Weis. If Notre Dame now goes on the sort of downward spiral that happened under Weis (they lost two straight after the Michigan rout, then won one and then lost three more in a row), then we can have this discussion.
Well, I want to argue because my trading of bonds is going slow right now since the Fed does not make a decision on interest rates until 2:15 this afternoon.
And I don’t want to waste anymore of my retirement money at Starbucks!
Look, you want statistics? Here’s one. Yes, Ty and Weis both went 11-4 in their first 15 games. Of Ty’s four losses, THREE were by three touchdowns or more. His average margin of defeat: 24.5 points. Weis has only lost ONE game by three touchdowns and more, and two of his four losses were by 3 points (one of those in overtime). Average margin of defeat: 11.5 points.
Napoleon had his Waterloo; Shakespeare had Titus Andronicus. Even the Rolling Stones had Emotional Rescue. And speaking of flops, every Notre Dame coach, no matter how great, has suffered a bad one sometime during his career. (Some, like Willingham, have a stash of ‘em).
Charlie’s blowout loss to Michigan was the worst of his young tenure with the Irish, and if he’s destined to be one of the greats, he likely won’t top it. The very best Irish coaches have endured a Little Big Horn only very rarely, and…it’s usually an historic occurence when an Irish coach loses by more than a couple dozen points.
Rockne lost by 26 or more points only once in his career. Leahy, also only once. Devine never did. Ara had a couple, and Holtz, one time only. (Willingham, by contrast, suffered losses by 26 points or more seven different times — in just three years.)
But perhaps you don’t believe me. You seem to think the comparison is very relevant and “significant.” That we’ve all just overblown Weis’s talents and he’s really no better than Ty and now we’re all going to see how wrong we were. Well, let’s see you put your money where your mouth is. I’ll bet you that Weis’s record by the end of the season will be at least three games better than Ty’s at the equivalent point. After its bowl game this year, ND will have played 25 games. Ty went 15-10 in his first 25 games. I’m saying Weis will be no worse than 18-7. (My guess is 19-6 or 20-5 are more likely, but I’m allowing a margin for error here. I’ll be SHOCKED if he’s worse than 18-7.) Name your terms.
While I think Notre Dame was way over-rated going into this season, it is ridiculous to start writing Weis off. How many of the players playing for him have actually been recruited by him? The guy has just started his program. Some media types are just douchebags.
you guys know that ND is the school the majority of people love to hate.
Even I will admit that the school is in WAY better hands with Charlie than with Ty but that comes from Charlie bleeding ND colors as Ty just saw this as a job.
totally different IMO. and I think you all will agree that having an outsider in that job was a nice experiment but not what the doctor ordered I would prefer an Nebraska player as our coach but we need this outsider to muck it up then we will bring in a former player to restore the order
I was going to make a pithy comment w/r/t to Coach Callahan, but now that I see our Husker friend is just pulling a little hair (Brendan likes it rough), I will abstain.
Husker Du, which former player do you have in mind to replace Callahan? Do you think he should return to the run dominated attack, or continue to use the pro-style offense Callahan brought with him?
Hmmm I don’t think its enitrely fair to compare the current coaches (either Weis or Willingham) with the previous generation given the dramatic changes in recruiting and scholarships available over the years.
On top of that, again, is the consideration of what level of team that each prior coach handed off to their succesor. I think far too often people don’t understand the mechanics of college ball when they criticize a new coach. Until your 3-4th season you are still largely working with a previous coaches recruits, and if they had a dramatically different style of football (one that may or may not have worked) you are going to have a difficult time transitioning those players. As Andrew has pointed out elsewhere, the change in style that Willingham was supposed to implement was much more dramatic in terms of personnel changes than the one Weis had to implement.
Now before Leahy pees himself in anticipation of accusing me of calling Ty a great coach or Charlie a poor one, I am not saying that whatsoever. I’m merely saying that the factors involved need to be fully considered before rendering a judgement. And in my opinion, except in extreme cases where the coach is clearly inadqueate, 2-3 seasons is not nearly enough to judge a coach on.
Valid point. You have to look at the situation that said coach inherited when making a determination. I think we probably disagree w/r/t to what Weis inherited and what Ty inherited, but that’s to be expected.
My criticisms of Lionel were so numerous that it’s unfair for me to point to one thing when trying to sum up his suckiness. In any event, we’ve been brawling on this one for 13 months, I think we’ve officially reached the stage where nothing one says is going to change the other’s opinion.
Cheers.
This is an archived post. Comments are closed.
To leave a comment on a newer post, please visit the homepage.
September 20th, 2006 at 8:19:12 am
Don’t Weis and Willingham have the same record over the same number of games?
September 20th, 2006 at 8:26:15 am
Thru 15 games they are both 11-4
lol
September 20th, 2006 at 8:32:19 am
Yes, that cute little statistic has been discussed ad nauseum in the press. Most Notre Dame fans, myself included, feel strongly that the quality of play in Weis’s first 15 games has been far superior to that in Willingham’s first 15, and the successes far less flukey.
Weis’s 15th game was a 47-21 loss to Michigan. Ty’s 15th game was a 38-0 loss to Michigan. The Irish went 4-6 for the rest of that season. If Charlie Weis’s Irish go 4-6 — or, hell, even 6-4 — for the rest of this season, then we can talk about comparisons to Willingham. For now, it’s just a cute statistic with no actual significance.
September 20th, 2006 at 9:07:24 am
the “significance” is that they both got spanked in their 15th game by Michigan at least Ty got served on the road and not in front of the “famed” alumni with National Title and Heisman hopes.
And we all know that that UM should have dropped half a hundo on ND, if not more, and that 21 was hollow. it just allowed Ty to keep the distinction of widest margin of loss for the series.
September 20th, 2006 at 9:14:02 am
As I said: it’s a cute statistic, nothing more. It doesn’t imply that Ty is as good as, or better than, Weis. If Notre Dame now goes on the sort of downward spiral that happened under Weis (they lost two straight after the Michigan rout, then won one and then lost three more in a row), then we can have this discussion.
September 20th, 2006 at 9:19:41 am
Well, I want to argue because my trading of bonds is going slow right now since the Fed does not make a decision on interest rates until 2:15 this afternoon.
And I don’t want to waste anymore of my retirement money at Starbucks!
LOL
September 20th, 2006 at 9:25:05 am
Look, you want statistics? Here’s one. Yes, Ty and Weis both went 11-4 in their first 15 games. Of Ty’s four losses, THREE were by three touchdowns or more. His average margin of defeat: 24.5 points. Weis has only lost ONE game by three touchdowns and more, and two of his four losses were by 3 points (one of those in overtime). Average margin of defeat: 11.5 points.
Here’s how The Blue-Gray Sky puts it:
But perhaps you don’t believe me. You seem to think the comparison is very relevant and “significant.” That we’ve all just overblown Weis’s talents and he’s really no better than Ty and now we’re all going to see how wrong we were. Well, let’s see you put your money where your mouth is. I’ll bet you that Weis’s record by the end of the season will be at least three games better than Ty’s at the equivalent point. After its bowl game this year, ND will have played 25 games. Ty went 15-10 in his first 25 games. I’m saying Weis will be no worse than 18-7. (My guess is 19-6 or 20-5 are more likely, but I’m allowing a margin for error here. I’ll be SHOCKED if he’s worse than 18-7.) Name your terms.
September 20th, 2006 at 9:25:37 am
LOL… just saw your last comment :)
September 20th, 2006 at 9:34:52 am
Brendan, I think YOU should have given the ND boys their half time speech on Saturday! LOL
Hey, Ty sucked my defense of him comes from me not wanting to see him leave as he was taking this program down the toilet!
And seeing that is what brought me joy
September 20th, 2006 at 9:37:31 am
Heh. :)
September 20th, 2006 at 9:38:52 am
While I think Notre Dame was way over-rated going into this season, it is ridiculous to start writing Weis off. How many of the players playing for him have actually been recruited by him? The guy has just started his program. Some media types are just douchebags.
September 20th, 2006 at 10:07:04 am
you guys know that ND is the school the majority of people love to hate.
Even I will admit that the school is in WAY better hands with Charlie than with Ty but that comes from Charlie bleeding ND colors as Ty just saw this as a job.
totally different IMO. and I think you all will agree that having an outsider in that job was a nice experiment but not what the doctor ordered I would prefer an Nebraska player as our coach but we need this outsider to muck it up then we will bring in a former player to restore the order
September 20th, 2006 at 11:48:14 am
I was going to make a pithy comment w/r/t to Coach Callahan, but now that I see our Husker friend is just pulling a little hair (Brendan likes it rough), I will abstain.
Husker Du, which former player do you have in mind to replace Callahan? Do you think he should return to the run dominated attack, or continue to use the pro-style offense Callahan brought with him?
September 20th, 2006 at 2:00:08 pm
Hmmm I don’t think its enitrely fair to compare the current coaches (either Weis or Willingham) with the previous generation given the dramatic changes in recruiting and scholarships available over the years.
On top of that, again, is the consideration of what level of team that each prior coach handed off to their succesor. I think far too often people don’t understand the mechanics of college ball when they criticize a new coach. Until your 3-4th season you are still largely working with a previous coaches recruits, and if they had a dramatically different style of football (one that may or may not have worked) you are going to have a difficult time transitioning those players. As Andrew has pointed out elsewhere, the change in style that Willingham was supposed to implement was much more dramatic in terms of personnel changes than the one Weis had to implement.
Now before Leahy pees himself in anticipation of accusing me of calling Ty a great coach or Charlie a poor one, I am not saying that whatsoever. I’m merely saying that the factors involved need to be fully considered before rendering a judgement. And in my opinion, except in extreme cases where the coach is clearly inadqueate, 2-3 seasons is not nearly enough to judge a coach on.
September 20th, 2006 at 7:26:15 pm
Davie,
Valid point. You have to look at the situation that said coach inherited when making a determination. I think we probably disagree w/r/t to what Weis inherited and what Ty inherited, but that’s to be expected.
My criticisms of Lionel were so numerous that it’s unfair for me to point to one thing when trying to sum up his suckiness. In any event, we’ve been brawling on this one for 13 months, I think we’ve officially reached the stage where nothing one says is going to change the other’s opinion.
Cheers.