Another week, another TMQ full of Easterbrook and his loose grasp of knowledge about the NFL second guessing the decisions that professional head coaches make in the heat of a game. This week Gregggggggggggggg is vindicated in a way and he is proven incorrect. Of course he never actually will admit he was proven incorrect (I will give you a hint, it involves the Jets and Patriots), but instead makes excuses for why he was wrong.
Has courage broken out in the NFL? This weekend, team after team went for it on fourth down, eschewing fraidy-cat kicks.
I am sure they all worked incredibly successfully because going for it on fourth down is ALWAYS the best move. Gregg thinks you should never take the situation and the time left in the game into account when making the decision to go for it on fourth down, but if your team is in a fourth-and-1 you should always go for it according to him.
Washington went for it twice on fourth-and-1 on its final possession, converting the first time, failing the second time -- but the failure left St. Louis pinned on its own 4 at the two-minute warning.
I think this was the play call that real NFL experts have criticized. (Go to #4 and read what he wrote)
Gregg thinks this was a smart move, but I am not shocked that someone who covers the NFL on a regular basis disagrees with Gregg's position on this. The Rams only needed a field goal to tie the game at that point. It was not a smart move, but of course Gregg thought it was. It tickles me to death there is a real NFL expert who actually questioned the decision by the Redskins for being dumb that Gregg thought was brilliant.
Of course, some of the tries backfired.
Because going for it on fourth down is not always smart. I know the Panthers went for it on fourth down late in the 4th quarter of their game and Jake Delhomme threw an interception. If they have kicked the field goal then they would have had a chance to win the game at the very end instead of just tie it at the end of regulation.
In Week 2's lowest moment, taking the field riding an 18-game losing streak, trailing by a touchdown in the second half, Detroit punted on fourth-and-2 from the Minnesota 42. The public-address system should have broadcast the sound of a chicken chuckling buck-buck-brawckkkkkkk; the football gods punished the Cowardly Lions by helping the Vikings return the kick to the 29, netting only 13 yards of field position.
There are no football gods. They don't exist. Pinning the Vikings deep in their own territory was a smart move to try. Expecting a rookie quarterback to convert a fourth-and-2 against the Vikings tough defense is not a smart move. These are the kind of things Gregg needs to take into account when deciding whether to go for it on fourth down or not. The Lions have a rookie quarterback, they can't see into the future so they don't know how far the Vikings will return the punt, and the Vikings have a tough defense so punting was probably a smart move here.
Why this sudden burst of manhood? Maybe the statistical arguments in favor of going for it on fourth down are finally catching on. Back in 2006, I detailed why probabilities favor going for it on many fourth-down situations. Back in 2007, I asked AccuScore to run thousands of computer simulations of NFL games using a go-for-it metric; going for it much of the time added one win per season to a team's record, and one win is often the difference between the playoffs and the couch in January in the NFL.
I am not Gregg Easterbrook, I don't definitely say a team should always go for it on fourth down all the time, but I do believe going for it on fourth down does make sense in more situations than teams usually go for it. I do believe Gregg is on to something in that coaches should maybe go for it on more occasions but I don't think there are set situations when a team HAS to go for it on fourth down. Maybe I am not smart but I can't help but think if a team went for it on fourth down more often the conversion rate would drop. I don't know why I feel this to be true but I do.
I don't want to be too hard on Easterbrook for saying teams should go for it on fourth down because I also believe it is a good gamble to make, especially if a coach knows he will be going for it on fourth down it can benefit his play calling (Of course in that situation the coach knows he is going for it on fourth down and the situation does not dictate if he chooses to go for it or not like I previously suggested should happen). For example, a team doesn't have to throw the ball on 3rd-and-6 if they know they will be going for it on fourth down. I believe the situation should dictate the call overall. The difference in Gregg and me is that I don't believe this:
football teams usually should go for it on fourth-and-4 or less in opposition territory, and on fourth-and-short in their own territory.
I don't think there should be hard and fast rules like this. I also don't like it when Easterbrook nitpicks certain coaches for not going for it on fourth down and he doesn't look at the situation. A good example of this is his criticism of Jeff Fisher for not going for it on fourth down against the Ravens in the playoffs...and instead went for the field goal. It didn't turn out well for the Titans but the decision to kick a field goal was a good one.
Stats of the Week No. 1: Drew Brees is on pace to throw 72 touchdown passes this season. The NFL record, held by Tom Brady, is 50.
New Orleans is on pace to go 16-0! The Titans are on pace to go 0-16! Small sample sizes are the best. Let's make a big deal out of them!
Sweet Play of the Week No. 2: With Carolina leading 10-7, Atlanta reached the Cats' 10. Rarely used Falcons running back Jason Snelling entered the game. Surely he's in to block, right? TMQ loves the tactic of bringing in a guy who never plays, then calling something for him.
Bengoodfella loves it when a team brings in it's third string running back, Jason Snelling, to give their first string running back a breather when the team's second team running back, Jerious Norwood, is injured. It was a play called for a running back and Snelling was the next running back on the depth chart. I seriously doubt the Falcons went up and down the roster looking for a player who never gets the ball to throw the ball to just for this situation. Little things like this are what Gregg misses. The Falcons aren't looking for a rarely used player, Michael Turner was tired and Norwood was injured, so Snelling was next on the depth chart.
Tony Gonzalez ran into the left flat, drawing defenders; Snelling ran behind him, then cut to the center of the field. The result? An easy touchdown pass to the uncovered Snelling.
I think the lesson for this story is that Tony Gonzalez draws a great amount of attention near the goal line, not that using a player who never plays is a smart move. This lesson may be too obvious for Gregg.
Reaching fourth-and-1 on the Oakland 5 on the same drive, Haley elected to kick a field goal. Kansas City racked up 173 yards rushing in this contest -- why not go for it on fourth-and-1 on the 5, either advancing for a touchdown or pinning the opponent against its goal line?
Now this is a fourth down conversion attempt I can get behind. Of course Gregg is going to use this one example and say the team should always go for it in this situation, even if the score is 13-10 (in favor of the team on defense) and there are 20 seconds left on the clock.
The defending NFC champions blocked a Jax field goal attempt, and Antrell Rolle returned the rock 83 yards for a touchdown. That was sweet. There weren't any speed players to chase Rolle -- Jax had offensive linemen, two tight ends, a punter (holder) and kicker on the field. That was sour -- every kick unit should have a speed player on it.
So Jacksonville needs to bring in skinnier, weaker guys to block on 95% of the field goal attempts, thereby weakening the blocking up front and on the edges, potentially allowing more punts to be blocked so when the 5% (just a guess) chance of a kick being blocked occurs one of the speed guys can chase down the guy with the ball and not allow him to score a touchdown. This makes ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE. None. The skinnier, speedier guys would have to be on the outside of the punt protection formation and even if the kick is blocked there is a good chance the speedy guys still will not be able to catch the guy with the ball. Why chance this for the 5% occurence when it doesn't happen that often? A team should use good blockers for field goal attempts and extra points and if a skinny, fast guy is a great blocker that's even better.
There cannot be a greater contrast in styles than what happened on "Monday Night Football." Miami played much of the contest with no quarterback on the field, rushed 49 times for 239 yards, kept the Indianapolis offense on the bench, tired out the Indianapolis defense with an incredible 45:07-to-14:53 edge in time of possession, yet lost.
As I started to read this sentence I was wondering what happened to Gregg's "no-huddle offense makes the defense tired" theory that he used last week for the Buffalo-New England game and for the Michigan-Notre Dame game. I guess the answer is that the Indianapolis did get tired despite being on the field three times as much as the Dolphins defense but it didn't make a difference in the game........which would cause any rational person to call Gregg's "no-huddle offense/defense gets tired" theory into question in my mind.
This is a reason time of possession can be a deceptive stat: A team that scores really fast has poor time of possession, but don't you want to score really fast? Even though it wasn't on the field much, by the fourth quarter the Dolphins' defense looked tired, at least mentally, from the relentless Colts pace.
So now Gregg is going to completely contradict himself and say that the no-huddle offense actually makes the other team's defense tired...mentally. Now he says "time of possession is overrated, despite the fact I indicated differently last week." The pace of him changing his mind is relentless. So the Colts defense didn't get tired from being on the field as long, instead the Dolphins defense was mentally tired from being scored on so quickly!
Gregg always has a bullshit reason for why something happens. He is so great at second guessing everyone else, but when he says something wrong there is always a reason...and in this case, it was a made-up reason.
In the fourth quarter, the Dolphins' defense folded, allowing the Colts to go 79 yards for a touchdown in 3:17 and 80 yards for a touchdown in a mere 32 seconds, as Miami's coaches panicked and started calling blitzes, which only made matters worse.
Panicking or trying to throw Manning off his rhythm, it's the same thing in Gregg's mind. This is where Gregg's simplistic mind really doesn't allow him to to analyze a situation accurately. The Dolphins were trying to throw Manning's timing off, they weren't panicking.
They're clearly having trouble running the ball. So don't fall for their play-fakes unless they prove they can run! Yet not only did the Miami front seven bite on Manning's play-fake on the first snap, so did safety Yeremiah Bell.
Of course Gregg conveniently ignores the fact Peyton Manning has one of the best play action fakes in football. Easterbrook would never fall for Manning's play action fake...or thinks he wouldn't, but he doesn't realize there is little time to think while on the football field, there is usually only time to react and when you have a guy like Manning running a play action fake it's very effective.
Meanwhile, as Miami rolls up yards with the Wildcat, I wonder: Where is the X Run? My high school produced a state championship team in 1969 using a veer-option offense only slightly different than the Wildcat, and our big play was the X Run -- making the lateral downfield instead of in the backfield.
Well gee Gregg. if your high school won a state championship in 1969 using this play then it will definitely work in the NFL. That's just logical to assume.
Numerous times Monday night, Brown and Ricky Williams rolled right in the pitch-or-pull situation. Each time Brown kept the ball, Williams just came to a halt and watched. Why can the pitch happen only behind the line of scrimmage? Once you cross the line, defenses automatically ignore the pitch man. Lateral to him then, and he's in the clear for a touchdown.
It's so simple! The defense "automatically" ignores the pitch man...always. Let's ignore the fact these are professional athletes and it would also be equally simple for a cornerback or a linebacker to snatch the ball being pitched BACKWARDS and run it back for a touchdown or at least get the turnover. The ball HAS to go backwards to not count as a forward pass, so the runner would need to make sure the guy he wants to get the ball to is behind him, yet still in his field of view to pitch the ball. This play would maybe work a couple times and then the other times the defense would catch on and take the ball out of the air or at least bat it down for a fumble. Pitching the ball to another player in traffic doesn't strike me as the best idea in the NFL.
I bet Obama gives 10 speeches for every one given by John Kennedy. At the current rate, by 2010, an Obama speech will no longer be viewed as an important moment.
You "bet" Obama gives 10 speeches for every one given by John Kennedy? So you don't know but you are just guessing. Hey, if there are no facts supporting your argument just make up some facts and see if your audience is stupid enough to believe you. I am also pretty sure there is not a saturation point for the American public when it comes to hearing the President speak. He is everywhere right now but he is trying to sell his health care program, much like movie stars are everywhere when they try to sell their movies. I am pretty sure a speech by Obama will always be a semi-important moment, especially if it contains important information.
Though TMQ is mainly anti-blitz, of course this tactic sometimes works. Jersey/B blitzed 26 times on Tom Brady's 47 pass attempts.
Here's the big question. How is Gregg going to justify hating blitzing when it allowed the Jets to help beat the Patriots this past weekend? The answer is that he barely acknowledges it and then says it won't always work.
If the Jets blitz like this on a regular basis, they are sure to get burned. On Sunday at least, the tactic worked.
Oh I am sure. The Jets must have gotten lucky blitzing like this in this one game. It will never work for them in the long term, that's Gregg's opinion. So basically he just chalks this up to the Jets taking the Patriots by surprise and Gregg thinks the Jets will end up giving up big plays because of the blitzing they do. Nevermind, the Jets have advantages like Darrelle Revis is a lockdown corner so they can put him in man coverage on good wide receivers and Rex Ryan's blitzing tendencies worked out really well in Baltimore...Gregg doesn't believe they can continue to blitz and be effective long term but he doesn't really base it on much other than the fact he doesn't like blitzing.
TMQ contends that it is an illusion -- cultivated by agents, of course -- that tough-guy agents screaming into cell phones translates into big increases in dollars to players. The market sets a player's value, not the agent. A good agent improves the details of an agreement, but no agent argues a sports franchise into paying more than the player's market value.
Tell that to Scott Boras and the Texas Rangers. Boras got the Rangers to almost double the next highest offer for Alex Rodriguez. Actually tell this to pretty much any Scott Boras client or a team that has signed a Scott Boras client. Andruw Jones got 2 years at $36 million coming off the worst year of his career. If TMQ contends agents don't make a difference when it comes to the ultimate number amount in an agreement, then TMQ is sometimes wrong about this. Sometimes a good agent sets the market value for a player by playing the teams against each other.
Another illusion about NFL agents is their pay level. On his latest Dr. Lou segment, Lou Holtz declared that Michael Crabtree's agent will take in "millions of dollars" when Crabtree signs a deal, assuming this happens during the historical period of mankind. NFL agents are limited by their trade association's rule to 3 percent commissions; Crabtree's guaranteed money, the only part of an NFL contract that can be believed, will be at most $15 million; 3 percent of that is $450,000.
It's generally a bad idea to take anything the Daffy Duck sounding Lou Holtz has said as fact, or even suggesting what he says represents what the general population believes. This one example of Holtz talking about Crabtree and his agent should show what I just said to be true. Lou Holtz said he thought Notre Dame would be in the National Championship Game this year. He has no credibility in many ways, which is why ESPN hired him. They only hire analysts who have little to no credibility. Every once in a while a good analyst slips through the cracks but generally the hiring process is pretty stringent that an analyst be sort of mindless.
Adventures in Officiating: With the game tied at 31, Tennessee punted to Houston on the final snap of the third quarter. Houston's Jacoby Jones signaled fair catch; the ball popped out of his hands and into the hands of a Titans player; initially, zebras marked it as Flaming Thumbtacks' ball on the Texans' 9. But a player who signals fair catch receives an "unimpeded" opportunity to catch a punt while it has not yet struck the ground. So officials correctly overruled themselves and flagged the Tennessee player who snatched the ball for fair-catch interference -- since the ball hadn't yet struck the ground and only Jones had the right to the catch. Jeff Fisher went ballistic, though after the game, acknowledged the ruling had been correct. Houston went on to win 34-31.
Wow that's a lot of text to put up for just a simple officials call such as this. I wonder what Gregg's point for all of this was?
Overlooked in all this: The Titans were punting on fourth-and-1 from near midfield! If Fisher had gone for it, Tennessee might have won the game.
It's not really about the officiating, it's all about going for it on fourth down. If Fisher had gone for it there, Tennessee also might have lost the game by an even bigger margin. As usual though, Gregg only focuses on the outcome that he wants to see happen in the situation and would go to show that he is correct.
The Titans could have won the game or they could have lost anyway. Why does he only focus on the outcome that would have made him look right?
Reader Mickey Boland of Harlingen, Texas, adds of the game, "Has there ever been a great quarterback who wore his hat backwards when on the sideline? Bart Starr, Johnny United, Norm van Brocklin: I think not."
Who the hell is Johnny United? Again, ESPN doesn't do a good job of editing Gregg's column or at least editing this guy's email to Gregg.
Mickey from Texas is talking about Tony Romo here. Many times you will find sportswriters have readers who are smarter than they are and make good points in their email and other correspondence with the sportswriter. When it comes to Gregg's readers who write to him...not so much. It seems they catch the stupidity disease that Gregg sometimes has.
Game scoreless, Buffalo came to the line on third-and-1 at the City of Tampa 32. Expecting a run, the Bucs were in a rush defense, and the call radioed into Trent Edwards' helmet was a run. Seeing the defense he audibled to a double-go pass, and hit Lee Evans for six. Short-yardage situations are often the best time to throw deep.
The best part is that if the long pass doesn't work, which is also likely even though Gregg will never let us hear an example of where this occurred, you can go for it on fourth-and-1...........EVERY SINGLE TIME NO MATTER WHAT! Then if that team doesn't get the first down on fourth down, they can know they were at third-and-1 and turned the ball over on downs, which is really pathetic. Gregg Easterbrook will then criticize them in his TMQ even though he would have suggested that team do exactly what they just did.
Hidden plays are ones that never make highlight reels, but stop or sustain drives.
Highlight reels are maybe a minute long for each game, except when it comes time to discuss a game Manny Ramirez or Brett Favre has played in where ESPN gives us 10 minutes of discussion and a press conference, so there are probably dozens of "hidden plays" that affect the game and don't make a highlight reel. I am nitpicking Gregg pretty bad here but this is a horrible definition for a "hidden play" since highlight reels are so short and only usually show the scoring for the game.
Shawn Harris of High Point, N.C., notes that a week ago, Murray State, a Division I-AA team, traveled to Division I North Carolina State in the paid-cupcake role and got steamrolled, 65-7. Bad sportsmanship, obviously, on the part of the Wolfpack for running up the score. But should we feel sympathy for Murray State? No -- because the previous week, the Racers hosted paid cupcake Kentucky Wesleyan, a Division II program, and relentlessly ran up the score to 66-10,
This "cupcake" team crap has got to end. Some teams play very bad teams and sometimes both teams get paid pretty well to do it. It happens and will continue to happen, get over it or at least only focus on it in one column and not every single week.
This weekend, Cal left on Thursday for its Saturday afternoon game at the University of Minnesota, giving the players ample time to overcome jet lag. Rested, they won, all well and good as regards the BCS standings. But aren't football players of the University of California at Berkeley students, at least on paper? All colleges, including the Ivy League, occasionally excuse student-athletes from class for sports events. But leaving Thursday morning for a game Saturday means two full days of skipped classes, which seems to explode any pretense that football-factory football players are "students."
Here is another issue that has to be dropped ASAP by Gregg. Yes these athletes are also supposed to be students but they get treated differently because they are athletes. This happens at nearly every school and will continue to happen. I don't know why Gregg is so shocked.
Who's to say the students didn't get their class assignments before they left and will have the assignment turned back in on time when they return? Sure, it's not plausible but there isn't only traditional "book and pencil" learning going on at schools now. There are online assignments and classes where a student never has to physically be in the classroom. These students may only need computer access to do their assignments. These players could also get excused from the assignment or get an extension, we don't really know...even though Gregg thinks he does.
Tuesday Morning Quarterback repeats my proposal that college teams in any sport be forbidden to cross more than one time zone for games, except bowls and playoffs.
Which would lead to more schools having to schedule teams more in their immediate vicinity, which means the talent pool of available teams would be diminished, which means teams like Ohio State would have to schedule a potential "cupcake" for the beginning of the season instead of a team like USC, and then Gregg Easterbrook would bitch about it.
I guess Gregg doesn't realize it is sometimes hard for some programs to get teams to play them in a football game, so the idea of a team not being able to cross more than one time zone could cause there to be more cupcake teams scheduled. Actually there are so many problems this is just one of them. It would probably take me the rest of the day to list other problems with this suggestion. Can anyone think of other problems?
Colleges should play only schools in their region, so football team members can be in class on Thursday and on Friday morning.
Because college athletics are all about going to class and learning. Even if they only played teams in their time zone they would still have to leave after class on Friday (assuming they don't have afternoon classes) and travel for a potential 12pm game on Saturday, which doesn't make a lot of sense logistically.
Next Week: Barack Obama gives separate interviews to all seven ESPN television channels
If he talks about football he may be more knowledgeable than Gregg Easterbrook. At least if Obama talked about football we wouldn't have to hear about why teams ALWAYS should go for it on fourth down in certain situations.
Showing posts with label lou holtz is a live action Daffy Duck. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lou holtz is a live action Daffy Duck. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
4 comments Ten Things I Think I Think Peter King Has Not Thought Of
I have got a few things on my mind today while I am trying to figure out why whenever an announcer mentions Fred Lane, who for some reason owns some Carolina Panther rushing records, that announcer always forget to mention the fact Fred Lane's wife blew his head off with a shotgun. Seems like they would mention that for some reason.
1. K-Rod is going to sign with the New York Mets.
Sports Illustrated and Newsday reported that the deal is worth about $37 million.
Three years at $37 million. An elite closer is very expensive and I guess this means Billy Wagner is never ever going to play for the Mets again. $12 million per year for a closer, that just seems like a lot of money, but it could be worth it for the Mets. At least they know they will have a lead to protect in the 9th inning. What was the Reds excuse for getting Francisco Cordero though?
Rodriguez's agent, Paul Kinzer, said, "I am more optimistic than I have ever been" about finalizing a deal between K-Rod and the Mets, according to the Post. "We will know more in the next 24 hours, but so far everything has been positive."
I love agents when are quoted about a potential contract. He is about to make $1.85 million dollars, if he gets 5% of the total amount of the contract, of course he is optimistic and everything is positive. He is about to be able to afford that third yacht that he wants.
The contract would pay Rodriguez about $3 million more than he was offered by the Los Angeles Angels in spring training and $6 million less than Wagner's deal with the Mets, according to SI.com.
Holy shit. This is very new information for me. I did not know that Billy Wagner was making almost $14 million dollars last year. So now the Mets have almost $27 million wrapped up in closers? That's how much Alex "The Big Rip Off/Choker/Mr. Unclutch" Rodriguez makes in a year. I know they need a closer but good grief that is a lot tied into that position.
2. Why does CBS Sportsline only hire writers who try and piss the general public off? Gregg Doyel does it and Mike Freeman, with his cheesy ass picture, tries to do it too.
There is increasing speculation among some NFL personnel men that if Meyer wins another title -- and Meyer will because he has built the college football equivalent of the 1990 UNLV basketball team -- he'll be one of the most pursued college coaches in recent memory.
I thought we all agreed college football/basketball coaches should not attempt to make the transition to the NFL/NBA. I really thought this was understood. This is just a red herring though in this paragraph, I would really love to know what the heck Mike Freeman is thinking calling Florida the 1990 UNLV basketball team.
The 1990 UNLV basketball team was an absolute powerhouse but they only won one National Championship and faded into oblivion after that...well actually after the 1991 National Semi-finals they faded but they did not even make the championship game that year. It's not like there is no competition for Florida among programs who would be seen as the 1990 UNLV team. I am so confused and tired, I don't even come close to getting this comparison, but I think the entire purpose of building a great college program is to try and dominate every single year and Meyer has done that for basically two years. Mission not quite accomplished and this in no way makes him qualified to be an NFL head coach.
According to the Palm Beach Post, Meyer's contract allows him a limited window in which he is allowed contact with other teams. That window is basically now, the newspaper said, until the Gators' bowl game. So that means teams can basically talk to Meyer between now and Jan. 8 (or thereabouts).
You have to love what a class act these college head coaches are. Meyer put in his contract he would be allowed contact, not after the season, but while his team of young adults are preparing for what may be the biggest game of their life. What if he reaches an agreement? Is he going to quit as head coach before or after the National Championship? Either way, this is a very Bill Parcells-esque move and makes him seem like an asshole.
The only risk for Meyer is the NFL is the big boy league.
Ask Steve Spurrier. The other risk is that if/when he fails, he will have given up a position as head coach for one of the top 10 programs in the nation and those don't come around all that often. I am sure Butch Davis and Steve Spurrier are happy where they are right now, but would they rather rebuild UNC and South Carolina or be coaching Miami (bad example...but they were good after David left) and Florida right now? I would rather play in January against Texas, rather than Missouri in some third tier bowl.
I think Meyer has always been a more masterful program builder than strategic coach.
Wonderful point. He is not someone who has brought the spread option offense to three different conferences with great success each time. Not an innovator though, not at all. Shitty point.
Yet Meyer is close friends with New England coach Bill Belichick and he has seen Belichick do great things in the sport.
But not in Cleveland, his first head coaching stop. If Meyer fails his first time, he won't get another shot.
A title game win will be seen by Meyer as accomplishing everything he can at Florida and the NFL will be viewed by him as territory to be conquered.
Before he can reap his wonderful rewards he has to beat a pretty good Oklahoma offense. They may not have a great defense but they can score with anyone in the country and that includes Florida.
He is dumb to even think about going to the professional level to coach.
3. I have never really covered Bill Plaschke all that much here but let it be known his Lou Holtz-esque Daffy Duck lisp annoys the crap out of me on Around the Horn. He is also does bad sportswriting in his spare time.
The Trojans miss Norm Chow. They miss him bad. They miss him historically bad.
Oh yeah, USC has absolutely stunk since Chow left to go run the Tennessee Titans' high powered offense so well he got fired this past offseason.
Chow left in 2004 and USC has lost a total of 6 games. That would be 1 in 2005, 2 in 2006, 2 in 2007, and 1 game in 2008. It's not like they have fallen off the face of the earth during that time period and they have had zero offensive problems in that time span that lasted longer than one game. I think a lack of focus in games against Oregon State and Stanford has been their major problem and that could be because Pete Carroll runs an extended daycare and the players get too loose sometimes before a game and probably do not take their opponent as seriously as they should.
The truth is, if Chow did not leave USC in 2005 after a personality clash with Carroll, they could have played for three more national titles.
The truth is, Chow's play calling would not have necessarily led to the Trojans executing his game plans any better than they already did. The truth is, you are a moron.
With Chow in the booth, there is no way Reggie Bush would not have been on the field on that infamous fourth-and-two play on the Texas 45-yard line. If Bush is on the field, at least one more defender is occupied, and LenDale White probably gains the extra yard that would have clinched the victory.
Yeah maybe. What happens though if Bush is in the game at that point and he tries to cut block a receiver to ensure LenDale White gets the first down, breaks his back and is unable to ever play football again? Kim Kardashian would never date him if he is in a back brace. She doesn't like handicapped people. What if the surgeon was up late in the night celebrating USC's national championship caused by Bush's ill fated block/Chow's wonderful play call and screws up trying to repair Bush's spine and Bush becomes a vegetable and wants to be killed so he is not in any more pain and agony? Well I can tell you George Bush would not allow this, so what if he has the government step in to prevent it, and in response a wack job left wing group has Cheney and Bush killed and now Nancy Pelosi is the President of the United States? What if she begins to get the country back on the right track and there are never any bailouts so she is elected President of the United States in 2008? What if Barack Obama becomes so depressed he is going to have wait four more years to become President he chooses to take his life rather than have to run against Hillary Clinton in four years? Basically by not having Reggie Bush in the game at that point, Lane Kiffen/Steve Sarkasian could have saved Barack Obama's life. Obama can thank them later because they have college teams to coach.
You think Chow would have screamed when Booty tried to play the second half against Stanford with a broken finger?
Absolutely, he would have screamed and then he would have broken Booty's leg so he could definitely not play in the second half. Then he would play quarterback. He can do this because he is Norm "Fuckin'" Chow.
One of the themes this week is that, since leaving USC, Chow has fallen from grace. He was fired from a Tennessee Titans team that has only lost once. He has joined a UCLA team that has won only four times.
This seems to undermine your point that Norm Chow is awesome.
After the victory over Oklahoma for their second consecutive national title, Carroll intimated to Chow that he was going to be calling more of the plays, or at least giving more authority to young Kiffin, who was being created in Carroll's image.
Thing is, Pete Carroll is the head coach, he can do this. If he wants to name Grimace, the fictional character from McDonald's, the offensive coordinator and a midget gymnast from Lithuania the defensive coordinator, he can do it. He is the head coach and has the magical powers to make these types of decisions.
4. I have focused on this a whole lot last week so I will not belabor the point but did anyone catch the fact Duke lost on Saturday to Michigan, a team they manhandled a week earlier? Surprisingly I could not find any articles that talked about how the 110 articles written last Wednesday about how awesome Duke was going to be were potentially wrong. Doesn't matter because online articles now consistently deal with reactionary journalism. The Carolina Panthers beat Tampa Bay last night, now they are the team to beat in the NFC. Forget the fact they still can't throw the ball and the Giants have played only one bad game, now they have ordained Carolina the team to beat.
It drives me crazy. After one victory, journalists act as if the entire landscape has changed overnight. I wanted to wait until February/March to determine if this Duke team is different and I still do. Why any journalist who wants the slightest credibility would write flip flop articles for the next three months based on the last game played is beyond me. I guess that is where journalism is at now.
5. I am beyond pumped up to read how my preseason predictions for the NFL panned out, I am sure I am going to look like an idiot, but I really, really enjoy being wrong/right. I don't remember the exact records I predicted, but I do remember loving Jacksonville this year. Ouch.
6. Woody Paige writes a Brandon Marshall puff piece.
The cocky, irresponsible kid seems to have grown up to be a humble, responsible adult at 24 1/2. Instead of hanging out late at night in disreputable clubs, he is hanging out on off days at youth centers. He is staying in bounds and out of trouble. The young man who had needed help is helping others.
If you think I am not 100% confident this kid has become a living example of a saint in the past four months since he last caused the Broncos problems, then you are probably right.
Marshall once ripped the Broncos fans for leaving. On Sunday, he thanked them for staying.
This isn't a change at all. He wanted them to stay and they stayed so he thanked them. Seems to make sense to me. I am not sure the crowd doing exactly what Brandon Marshall wanted them to do is a sign of maturity.
"Harvey and his family have done a lot for me over the past few months, and I really appreciate it. I promised him a game ball," Marshall said.
It is not necessarily a sign of maturity when a player gives the game ball to the attorney that has helped him with all of his legal problems.
And because of that makeover, Marshall has become a better man — and can become The Man.
Fortunately Woody Paige knows nothing about maturity but he does know a thing or two about how to write a puff piece for a man who hurt himself slipping on a McDonald's bag.
7. Greg Maddux has retired.
CC Sabathia, A.J. Burnett and Derek Lowe, who will sign contracts this winter for something more than $250 million, have a combined 330 career wins, 25 fewer than Maddux alone.
He was amazing at one time. I know I am biased because he played for my favorite MLB team for a long time but I am not sure I have ever seen a pitcher set up hitters like he did. I think he had a patent on soft one hoppers back to the pitching mound. Not to go all Bill Simmons on you, but when he gave up a couple of runs I was surprised and actually angry with him because I expected him to be perfect all of the time. To put up the numbers he did is amazing, since he pitched in the steroid era.
Look at his numbers. Even if you think you know them, look at 1994-2002 and just remember that was right in the middle of the steroid age. I personally think he is the greatest pitcher of this era. I know others can say Clemens or Pedro but I think Maddux's numbers really back it up.
8. Here is my big question...does Maddux go in the Hall of Fame as an Atlanta Brave or a Chicago Cub? He came up to the majors as a Cub and played for them for 9.5 years. He had most of his success as an Atlanta Brave and played for them for 11 years. I have my opinion on the matter, but I am surprised this question has not been posed by more people.
9. I always get really excited for bowl season but doesn't it always seem like many of the major bowls are massive disappointments and not that interesting? Last year Hawaii got picked apart, LSU ran away with the game in the second half, WVU won big and it just seems to go on from there. I try not to get too excited because I know the good games are going to be the early games and not necessarily the BCS bowl games. Sure, you do have your Oklahoma v. Boise St. games but for the most part you never get four quality BCS bowl games and end up with a couple of blowouts. I guess it is inevitable but I still wish the games were all a little closer.
10. The Timberwolves fired Randy Wittman and Kevin McHale is now going to wear sweaters on the bench every night and hope his team can win 1 out of 5 games.
"If this doesn't work, it'll be on me," McHale said. "The thing I told Glen is that nothing changes with the plan. The plan stays the same. We have a lot of cap room in the future. We have multiple [draft] picks. Nothing's going to change. The only change is that I'm going to spending all my time coaching."
So the Wolves are 4-15 currently, the new coach guarantees nothing is changing, he is banking on cap room and brags about the fact they have tons of new draft picks to choose even worse players. I am sure everyone in Minnesota is rushing out to buy season tickets right now. These promises are from the same guy who relieved the Timberwolves' fans of having to watch OJ Mayo turn into a real NBA player and traded him for a guy who will crowd the lane so Al Jefferson has less room to move and is 20 years old but still has baby fat. I am glad I am not a Timberwolves fan.
1. K-Rod is going to sign with the New York Mets.
Sports Illustrated and Newsday reported that the deal is worth about $37 million.
Three years at $37 million. An elite closer is very expensive and I guess this means Billy Wagner is never ever going to play for the Mets again. $12 million per year for a closer, that just seems like a lot of money, but it could be worth it for the Mets. At least they know they will have a lead to protect in the 9th inning. What was the Reds excuse for getting Francisco Cordero though?
Rodriguez's agent, Paul Kinzer, said, "I am more optimistic than I have ever been" about finalizing a deal between K-Rod and the Mets, according to the Post. "We will know more in the next 24 hours, but so far everything has been positive."
I love agents when are quoted about a potential contract. He is about to make $1.85 million dollars, if he gets 5% of the total amount of the contract, of course he is optimistic and everything is positive. He is about to be able to afford that third yacht that he wants.
The contract would pay Rodriguez about $3 million more than he was offered by the Los Angeles Angels in spring training and $6 million less than Wagner's deal with the Mets, according to SI.com.
Holy shit. This is very new information for me. I did not know that Billy Wagner was making almost $14 million dollars last year. So now the Mets have almost $27 million wrapped up in closers? That's how much Alex "The Big Rip Off/Choker/Mr. Unclutch" Rodriguez makes in a year. I know they need a closer but good grief that is a lot tied into that position.
2. Why does CBS Sportsline only hire writers who try and piss the general public off? Gregg Doyel does it and Mike Freeman, with his cheesy ass picture, tries to do it too.
There is increasing speculation among some NFL personnel men that if Meyer wins another title -- and Meyer will because he has built the college football equivalent of the 1990 UNLV basketball team -- he'll be one of the most pursued college coaches in recent memory.
I thought we all agreed college football/basketball coaches should not attempt to make the transition to the NFL/NBA. I really thought this was understood. This is just a red herring though in this paragraph, I would really love to know what the heck Mike Freeman is thinking calling Florida the 1990 UNLV basketball team.
The 1990 UNLV basketball team was an absolute powerhouse but they only won one National Championship and faded into oblivion after that...well actually after the 1991 National Semi-finals they faded but they did not even make the championship game that year. It's not like there is no competition for Florida among programs who would be seen as the 1990 UNLV team. I am so confused and tired, I don't even come close to getting this comparison, but I think the entire purpose of building a great college program is to try and dominate every single year and Meyer has done that for basically two years. Mission not quite accomplished and this in no way makes him qualified to be an NFL head coach.
According to the Palm Beach Post, Meyer's contract allows him a limited window in which he is allowed contact with other teams. That window is basically now, the newspaper said, until the Gators' bowl game. So that means teams can basically talk to Meyer between now and Jan. 8 (or thereabouts).
You have to love what a class act these college head coaches are. Meyer put in his contract he would be allowed contact, not after the season, but while his team of young adults are preparing for what may be the biggest game of their life. What if he reaches an agreement? Is he going to quit as head coach before or after the National Championship? Either way, this is a very Bill Parcells-esque move and makes him seem like an asshole.
The only risk for Meyer is the NFL is the big boy league.
Ask Steve Spurrier. The other risk is that if/when he fails, he will have given up a position as head coach for one of the top 10 programs in the nation and those don't come around all that often. I am sure Butch Davis and Steve Spurrier are happy where they are right now, but would they rather rebuild UNC and South Carolina or be coaching Miami (bad example...but they were good after David left) and Florida right now? I would rather play in January against Texas, rather than Missouri in some third tier bowl.
I think Meyer has always been a more masterful program builder than strategic coach.
Wonderful point. He is not someone who has brought the spread option offense to three different conferences with great success each time. Not an innovator though, not at all. Shitty point.
Yet Meyer is close friends with New England coach Bill Belichick and he has seen Belichick do great things in the sport.
But not in Cleveland, his first head coaching stop. If Meyer fails his first time, he won't get another shot.
A title game win will be seen by Meyer as accomplishing everything he can at Florida and the NFL will be viewed by him as territory to be conquered.
Before he can reap his wonderful rewards he has to beat a pretty good Oklahoma offense. They may not have a great defense but they can score with anyone in the country and that includes Florida.
He is dumb to even think about going to the professional level to coach.
3. I have never really covered Bill Plaschke all that much here but let it be known his Lou Holtz-esque Daffy Duck lisp annoys the crap out of me on Around the Horn. He is also does bad sportswriting in his spare time.
The Trojans miss Norm Chow. They miss him bad. They miss him historically bad.
Oh yeah, USC has absolutely stunk since Chow left to go run the Tennessee Titans' high powered offense so well he got fired this past offseason.
Chow left in 2004 and USC has lost a total of 6 games. That would be 1 in 2005, 2 in 2006, 2 in 2007, and 1 game in 2008. It's not like they have fallen off the face of the earth during that time period and they have had zero offensive problems in that time span that lasted longer than one game. I think a lack of focus in games against Oregon State and Stanford has been their major problem and that could be because Pete Carroll runs an extended daycare and the players get too loose sometimes before a game and probably do not take their opponent as seriously as they should.
The truth is, if Chow did not leave USC in 2005 after a personality clash with Carroll, they could have played for three more national titles.
The truth is, Chow's play calling would not have necessarily led to the Trojans executing his game plans any better than they already did. The truth is, you are a moron.
With Chow in the booth, there is no way Reggie Bush would not have been on the field on that infamous fourth-and-two play on the Texas 45-yard line. If Bush is on the field, at least one more defender is occupied, and LenDale White probably gains the extra yard that would have clinched the victory.
Yeah maybe. What happens though if Bush is in the game at that point and he tries to cut block a receiver to ensure LenDale White gets the first down, breaks his back and is unable to ever play football again? Kim Kardashian would never date him if he is in a back brace. She doesn't like handicapped people. What if the surgeon was up late in the night celebrating USC's national championship caused by Bush's ill fated block/Chow's wonderful play call and screws up trying to repair Bush's spine and Bush becomes a vegetable and wants to be killed so he is not in any more pain and agony? Well I can tell you George Bush would not allow this, so what if he has the government step in to prevent it, and in response a wack job left wing group has Cheney and Bush killed and now Nancy Pelosi is the President of the United States? What if she begins to get the country back on the right track and there are never any bailouts so she is elected President of the United States in 2008? What if Barack Obama becomes so depressed he is going to have wait four more years to become President he chooses to take his life rather than have to run against Hillary Clinton in four years? Basically by not having Reggie Bush in the game at that point, Lane Kiffen/Steve Sarkasian could have saved Barack Obama's life. Obama can thank them later because they have college teams to coach.
You think Chow would have screamed when Booty tried to play the second half against Stanford with a broken finger?
Absolutely, he would have screamed and then he would have broken Booty's leg so he could definitely not play in the second half. Then he would play quarterback. He can do this because he is Norm "Fuckin'" Chow.
One of the themes this week is that, since leaving USC, Chow has fallen from grace. He was fired from a Tennessee Titans team that has only lost once. He has joined a UCLA team that has won only four times.
This seems to undermine your point that Norm Chow is awesome.
After the victory over Oklahoma for their second consecutive national title, Carroll intimated to Chow that he was going to be calling more of the plays, or at least giving more authority to young Kiffin, who was being created in Carroll's image.
Thing is, Pete Carroll is the head coach, he can do this. If he wants to name Grimace, the fictional character from McDonald's, the offensive coordinator and a midget gymnast from Lithuania the defensive coordinator, he can do it. He is the head coach and has the magical powers to make these types of decisions.
4. I have focused on this a whole lot last week so I will not belabor the point but did anyone catch the fact Duke lost on Saturday to Michigan, a team they manhandled a week earlier? Surprisingly I could not find any articles that talked about how the 110 articles written last Wednesday about how awesome Duke was going to be were potentially wrong. Doesn't matter because online articles now consistently deal with reactionary journalism. The Carolina Panthers beat Tampa Bay last night, now they are the team to beat in the NFC. Forget the fact they still can't throw the ball and the Giants have played only one bad game, now they have ordained Carolina the team to beat.
It drives me crazy. After one victory, journalists act as if the entire landscape has changed overnight. I wanted to wait until February/March to determine if this Duke team is different and I still do. Why any journalist who wants the slightest credibility would write flip flop articles for the next three months based on the last game played is beyond me. I guess that is where journalism is at now.
5. I am beyond pumped up to read how my preseason predictions for the NFL panned out, I am sure I am going to look like an idiot, but I really, really enjoy being wrong/right. I don't remember the exact records I predicted, but I do remember loving Jacksonville this year. Ouch.
6. Woody Paige writes a Brandon Marshall puff piece.
The cocky, irresponsible kid seems to have grown up to be a humble, responsible adult at 24 1/2. Instead of hanging out late at night in disreputable clubs, he is hanging out on off days at youth centers. He is staying in bounds and out of trouble. The young man who had needed help is helping others.
If you think I am not 100% confident this kid has become a living example of a saint in the past four months since he last caused the Broncos problems, then you are probably right.
Marshall once ripped the Broncos fans for leaving. On Sunday, he thanked them for staying.
This isn't a change at all. He wanted them to stay and they stayed so he thanked them. Seems to make sense to me. I am not sure the crowd doing exactly what Brandon Marshall wanted them to do is a sign of maturity.
"Harvey and his family have done a lot for me over the past few months, and I really appreciate it. I promised him a game ball," Marshall said.
It is not necessarily a sign of maturity when a player gives the game ball to the attorney that has helped him with all of his legal problems.
And because of that makeover, Marshall has become a better man — and can become The Man.
Fortunately Woody Paige knows nothing about maturity but he does know a thing or two about how to write a puff piece for a man who hurt himself slipping on a McDonald's bag.
7. Greg Maddux has retired.
CC Sabathia, A.J. Burnett and Derek Lowe, who will sign contracts this winter for something more than $250 million, have a combined 330 career wins, 25 fewer than Maddux alone.
He was amazing at one time. I know I am biased because he played for my favorite MLB team for a long time but I am not sure I have ever seen a pitcher set up hitters like he did. I think he had a patent on soft one hoppers back to the pitching mound. Not to go all Bill Simmons on you, but when he gave up a couple of runs I was surprised and actually angry with him because I expected him to be perfect all of the time. To put up the numbers he did is amazing, since he pitched in the steroid era.
Look at his numbers. Even if you think you know them, look at 1994-2002 and just remember that was right in the middle of the steroid age. I personally think he is the greatest pitcher of this era. I know others can say Clemens or Pedro but I think Maddux's numbers really back it up.
8. Here is my big question...does Maddux go in the Hall of Fame as an Atlanta Brave or a Chicago Cub? He came up to the majors as a Cub and played for them for 9.5 years. He had most of his success as an Atlanta Brave and played for them for 11 years. I have my opinion on the matter, but I am surprised this question has not been posed by more people.
9. I always get really excited for bowl season but doesn't it always seem like many of the major bowls are massive disappointments and not that interesting? Last year Hawaii got picked apart, LSU ran away with the game in the second half, WVU won big and it just seems to go on from there. I try not to get too excited because I know the good games are going to be the early games and not necessarily the BCS bowl games. Sure, you do have your Oklahoma v. Boise St. games but for the most part you never get four quality BCS bowl games and end up with a couple of blowouts. I guess it is inevitable but I still wish the games were all a little closer.
10. The Timberwolves fired Randy Wittman and Kevin McHale is now going to wear sweaters on the bench every night and hope his team can win 1 out of 5 games.
"If this doesn't work, it'll be on me," McHale said. "The thing I told Glen is that nothing changes with the plan. The plan stays the same. We have a lot of cap room in the future. We have multiple [draft] picks. Nothing's going to change. The only change is that I'm going to spending all my time coaching."
So the Wolves are 4-15 currently, the new coach guarantees nothing is changing, he is banking on cap room and brags about the fact they have tons of new draft picks to choose even worse players. I am sure everyone in Minnesota is rushing out to buy season tickets right now. These promises are from the same guy who relieved the Timberwolves' fans of having to watch OJ Mayo turn into a real NBA player and traded him for a guy who will crowd the lane so Al Jefferson has less room to move and is 20 years old but still has baby fat. I am glad I am not a Timberwolves fan.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
2 comments 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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)