Gene Wojciechowski Thinks Charlie Weis Should Not Be Fired Because Notre Dame Is Like Every Other School

Sorry for the confusing title but I just wanted to get you ready for a confusing article. I am still in disbelief at the conclusion Gene W has reached about Charlie Weis and whether he should be fired or not. I don't want to ruin it so just try and read along. He may be competing with Jemele Hill for the worst reasoning on ESPN's Page 2. It is a tight race. I have never met two people who can read facts that point one way and then come to a bizarrely different conclusion. It has me talking not of sense right now.

Charlie Weis sucks...but let's keep him.

I personally don't care if Weis gets fired, but you can't list reasons why he sucks as a coach and then say Notre Dame should keep him because of some vague and stupid reason. You will all see.

Charlie Weis and his football program are under siege, which is as much Notre Dame's fault as it is his.

Good strong introduction sentence. I love it. It is Notre Dame's fault for hiring Charlie Weis, I completely agree. What usually happens then? The coach gets fired and Notre Dame would then fix their mistake by hiring a good coach. Pretty standard in the real world.

Not in Gene's world though. Gene's world consists of lollipops, poor reasoning, and a cuddly panda bear that hands out fruit to young children and takes grown ups in hot air balloon rides around the sun.

Charlie Weis can't fire Notre Dame and he certainly is not going to quit, so to fix this mistake, there is but one conclusion. Fire Weis. There is a problem, the coach is the problem, Notre Dame needs its "mystique" back, the coach will not do that, so we fire the coach. Seems easy to me.

If Notre Dame football were a blood-pressure reading, the nurse would jot down 40 over 20 -- barely a pulse.

If you have to explain the joke at the end...the joke bombed/never should have been included. Gene is trying to appeal to the all important RN/Doctor market with his jokes now.

"Sounds to me like Notre Dame is circling the drain."

The recent defeat to eight-loss Syracuse (a Notre Dame first) only intensifies the scrutiny of Weis, whose record during the past two seasons is the worst in Notre Dame history.

I am not a Notre Dame fan but this all seems to head to the same conclusion. Can the coach. Or in Charlie Weis' case, barrel the coach...see, because he is fat and can't fit in a can, you would have to use a barrel...because he is fat.

It won't get any better this Saturday, when the Fighting Irish lose their seventh consecutive game against longtime rival USC and finish the regular season at a forgettable 6-6.

6-6 is better than last year and everyone loses to USC, these are not very relevant points in a discussion as to why Weis should be fired. For Notre Dame 6-6 does stink though.

That's another thing. Notre Dame followers are now conditioned to lose to USC. They expect the annual beatdown, which makes sense, I guess. Since Weis' arrival in 2005, the USC margin of victory has grown from three points to 20 to 38 to who knows how much this time as the Trojans try to earn style points for the ridiculous BCS beauty pageant.

I am currently conditioned to have my favorite teams lose to some other teams. It doesn't make it right and it does piss me off but there is not a whole lot you can do about it until the team that is getting its ass kicked decides this is going to stop. Notre Dame sort of decided to have the ass kicking continue by keeping Charlie Weis.

It also happens Notre Dame's downfall has come at the same time as the rise of USC football, so I would expect the margin of victory to get bigger and bigger...until Notre Dame gets a better team/coach.

The sense of doom reveals much about the state of Weis' program. But mostly it reveals why Notre Dame is no different than other football factories.

If this column was a car, Gene was currently driving 65mph on the highway until this point and just now threw the car in reverse. In other words, this was a rapid change of subject.

In a bizarre bit of symmetry, the very reason for Weis' hiring -- Tyrone Willingham's firing after just three seasons -- is why Fighting Irish fans, boosters, power brokers and maybe even school officials now feel empowered to call for Weis' dismissal.

Only symmetry in the fact both coaches had bad records as the head coach of Notre Dame's football team. It is actually a very similar situation when two coaches suck at a different school, in most cases the university would feel the need to fire both coaches for the same reasons. It actually makes sense, even if that sentence I just wrote sort of did not.

It's why Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick had to recently issue a vote of confidence for a head coach he didn't hire.

What the hell is he going to do? Call up the old athletic director and ask him his opinion on Charlie Weis and whether he should get a vote of confidence?

(Jack Swarbrick) "Hey Bob, it's Jack here at Notre Dame, the guy who replaced you as AD. Can you give me a vote of confidence for Charlie Weis?"

(Bob- fictional ex-Notre Dame AD) "You backstabbed me and got hired for the position. Go fuck yourself. I am glad I got you in a shit position."

(Jack) "Traditionally, Notre Dame people don't act like this. Just give him a vote of confidence."

(Bob hanging up the phone)

(Jack) "I guess I will give the vote of confidence, but I don't want to confuse Gene Wojciechowski."

By ridding themselves of Willingham, who just happened to be the school's first African-American head coach, Jenkins & Co. ended the very thing that differentiated Notre Dame from everyone else: a five-year commitment to its coach.

This "commitment" is pretty short sighted. If you have a crappy coach what is the point of wasting everyone's time, money, and college eligibility keeping that coach around? This "commitment" is pretty easy to commit to you when you have a coach that is actually good at his job. When you find a shitty coach, lose the commitment, and change the direction of the program.

That commitment represented the very best of Notre Dame.

It also represented the fact it is easy to do this when the pre-Daffy Duck Lou Holtz is your coach.

It was a mistake to fire him then, just as it would be a mistake to fire Weis now.

Why is it a mistake if both coaches were not meeting the Notre Dame standard and getting their ass kicked by USC? Gene just spent the first half of the column indicating Weis had to go because of all the trouble the program was having with winning. Now he is saying don't fire Weis because of some stupid ass "commitment" to a five year contract.

Good journalism meet Gene Wojciechowski. (Gene pushes good journalism out of the cuddly panda's hot air balloon into the sun.)

Money isn't the issue.

Then fire Weis.

And if they did, the school would soon have its fifth different coach (Bob Davie, O'Leary, Willingham, Weis, the new guy) in the past nine years. You expect that out of Alabama, not Notre Dame.

Gosh, changing coaches a lot seemed to work out really well for Alabama, huh? They are the #1 ranked team in the country and barring an upset-ish game in the SEC Championship, will be playing for the National Championship. Sure it is embarrassing to change coaches every few years but when your team is suddenly good again, it is pretty easy to get over this embarrassment.

Weis is responsible for much of his own discomfort. Those nine losses last season were the most in Notre Dame history. His record after his first three years was almost exactly the same as Willingham's. His celebrated recruiting classes haven't translated to the field yet.

I fucking give up. This is like staying with your girlfriend who is a real pain in the ass because it is embarrassing to be single. Gene lists three great reasons to fire Charlie Weis here but does not want to because of some mythical standard Notre Dame held when they were actually good at football.

So it's amusing to hear the criticism four years later. What made Weis endearing in 2005 makes him unbearable in 2008? Funny how that works.

This happens with everyone and everything. It all depends on the result. When Lou Pinella's teams are winning and he is throwing bases and acting like a five year old, he is just firing up the team. When the team is losing, he is acting like a child.

When Marvin Harrison is quiet and reserved it is because he is a private person who just wants to play football. When Marvin Harrison is quiet and reserved, but has allegedly shot someone, he is secretive and manipulative.

When my favorite football team runs the ball three straight downs and gets first downs, I don't want to have the scattershot QB throw the ball, when they don't get first downs running the ball, I call the coach too conservative and start texting the two friends I have in the world to complain.

People can handle other people's shit when things are going well, but not when things are bad. Consider this a life lesson for Gene.

The worst thing a school can do to a coach is hang him on the clothesline and let him flap in the wind. Vote of confidence or no vote, that's what has happened to Weis.

If they go ahead and fire him, they would have no one to coach this week's game and the bowl game they will be invited to participate in. This will create more instability, it is better to have candidates in mind and fire Weis once the year is over once there are no more football games to be played.

Weis has alienated his share of people at and outside Notre Dame.

So why should he not be fired for this?

He deserves much of the criticism leveled against him, but he doesn't deserve to be fired. Not for this.

Here is a list of things Gene W thinks Charlie Weis should not be fired for:

1. Having a bad football team every year.
2. Losing to USC every year.
3. The team has gotten worse since he started coaching.
4. Having the same record as the coach before him had...who got fired.
5. Recruiting Top 10 recruiting classes and still losing games.
6. Being an asshole to the people at Notre Dame.
7. Being an asshole to the people not at Notre Dame.

Notre Dame lost its football DNA and its inner self when it dismissed Willingham four years ago. It compromised a belief.

Here is a reasons why Gene W thinks Charlie Weis should not be fired:

1. Notre Dame made a mistake in firing its last coach before he could coach one more year, which at that point they probably would have fired him...so they should not repeat this "mistake" and let Weis coach one more year and then fire him.

Win or lose Saturday, it's time for Jenkins and Swarbrick to end the speculation and say Weis will return in 2009 for his fifth season.

How can Gene make a list of great legitimate reasons why Charlie Weis should be fired and then say Weis should not be fired because Notre Dame has traditionally given coaches five years to get a good team? Sure, give someone five years if there is continued progress by the team, but Weis' Notre Dame team has gone from great to horrible back to average with great recruiting classes. What's to stop them from going back to horrible?

Good Catholic people are throwing snowballs at the team for God's sake. Can it get worse?

You say it because it's not only the right thing to do, but because it used to be the Notre Dame thing to do.

Incorrect. You can't do it because it is something Notre Dame used to do when they actually had good coaches. If the Oklahoma offense starts struggling you don't go back to the wishbone offense because that is what used to work back when Barry Switzer coached the team.

So Notre Dame should keep Weis for one more year and then fire him because it is the "Notre Dame thing to do?" You know what else used to be the "Notre Dame thing to do?" WIN FUCKING FOOTBALL GAMES.

Maybe they should fire Charlie Weis and start doing that.