RockneDrive

I just don't want to see the "fire Charlie" diatribes in every thread. Then don't read them. They will continue if posters think it is necessary to express that view. No one is forcing you to read those "diatribes." Move on to another thread and stop whining about it.

But God help us (and especially the program we love) if we refuse to see the objective improvement (as measured by wins) shown by this team and we allow our horizon to be totally obscured by an irrational hatred of Charlie Weis. This is the kind of response that is inappropriate and relfects the kind of backhanded slap towards those who offer legitimate criticism of CW. This response is what elicits and starts the mudslinging. What is irrrational is not the arguments made by those who call for CW's firing or who otherwise criticize his poor performance, but this comment is irrational and emotional and typifies the "homers" who start the fights by criticizing other fans. This is the type of post that deserves a warning from the mods if they are serious about stopping the personal stuff. Can't you see this mods? It's crystal clear to so many others that a response like this is THE problem! Instead of encouraging him to come again and post SJ, why didn't you call him out for the backhanded disrespect he showed to other ND fans?

The issue as I see it is: When someone criticizes CW's coaching ability and calls for his firing, is it appropriate to be so offended by such criticism that you MUST attack the person's loyalty, accuse them of not being a REAL fan, and generally belittle them? Sadly, this is the general response on DD by those who are offended by others who criticize CW and are the ones who began and started the mudslinging. Their other options could have been: 1. Ignore the post. 2. Give a logical but respectful refutation. But the only response they seem capable of making when CW is called out to be fired is: 1. Criticize and personally attack the other ND fan. 2. Call for censoring these kinds of posts because they are too pervasive. 3. Express their worry that recruits are so unstable and delicate that if they read this kind of stuff they won't come to ND. 4. Express their frustration that a few people decided to leave DD because of the fighting between the CW supporters and the CW criticizers. 5. Other irrelevant emotional comments and use of profanity. What is the most reasonable way to respond? Group 1 or Group 2? It is too bad that most of the cheerleaders have chosen the group 2 response and that the mods never called them on it in the first place.

When someone criticizes CW, the reader who disagrees can refute the points made or they can begin the process of belittling the person who is criticizing, which is exactly what happened. They were told they were not loyal, they called names, they made personal attacks. What followed from those kind of posts were understandably in-kind responses. When someone pushes sand in your face or craps in your living room, you respond. The problem is that the mods only see the response and accuse people like myself as being the problem when I am merely calling out those who FIRST responded with personal attacks towards me and others for daring to criticize CW. NO, the problem is the first person who decided rather than to give a logical rebuttal to a valid argument or criticism, to start crapping on others' loyalty, etc. THAT was the FIRST VOLLEY thrown. You can't blame us for going after that kind of initial response. The people first responsible for the nasty tone and name-calling should have been called to account for such behavior immediately before the target had the opportunity to defend themselves from those attacks. But instead some of the mods, who essentially agree with the mudslingers and support CW, gave them a pass and when the targets of their mudslinging responded in-kind, the mods decided to make it an issue and they suddenly accused such "negative" and "personal" posts require them to DO SOMETHING as if our in-kind response was made in isolation and was the first cause of the nasty tone that ensued. This is similar to a ref who calls a foul on the guy who retaliated while completely missing the first nasty violation. And some of the mods frankly just ignored those with whom they agreed even though they were the ones who started the mud fight. So don't give me this baloney that the people criticizing CW who responded in retalitation to the pollyianna's mudslinging (which is accepable behavior on this board if you agree with the mudslingers) are the ones who are the problem. You folks (mods) need to take off your rose-colored glasses and call out your buddies when THEY are the ones who make off-hand, pejorative comments directed towards other ND fans who disagree with them. That you are oblivious to this fact is notable. Justice should be blind. Your (some mods) favoritism and inability to be objective towards the ones who started the fight while you try and make those who didn't start the fight the bad guys reveals a troubling bias. Such bias is illustrated by the most recent response to me by one of our mods. He only sees my post, which discusses others as if my post was the initial volley rather than a post directed towards those who started the fight in the first place. It is perfectly acceptable to discuss firing CW. How some chose to respond to that argument laid the foundation for all of the conflict and personal attacks. Why can't you see that? How could you have missed that such that you think the problem lies with those who dare to criticize CW????? "The unexamined life is not worth living." Socrates

You are the one who made it about my post when you wrote: You keep wanting to change the goal posts and are dodging my question which is - what is it about my post that elicits a response by you that "something" needs to be done? Don't bother to reply, I'm done with this "conversation."

LOL! Just what needs to be done because of my post? This is the problem that you would think some action must be taken, not the nature of my post. Please explain what you had in mind as the range of options that need to be done because of my post. I can't wait for this Mr. Stalin.

Then do it and stop talking about it so that everyone can see what you are made of. This veiled threat from a moderator is pathetic! Ban me big guy! Bring it on! Who the hell do you think you are?

With all due respect, your request is ridiculous. I'll say what I want to say about CW or the ND football program, good or bad. That you would even attempt to stifle honest debate reveals something that is not very pretty. Please just relax and let people speak their minds. If the posts get personal, follow the protocol with a warning and remove personal attacks on other members of this board. There is one person on this board who seems to be the only one (or two) allowed to make personal attacks and disguised profanity without any reprisal because (s)he is a big cheerleader who acts like a spoiled little girl when (s)he doesn't get her/his way and when everyone doesn't conform 100% to her views. I see one standard being applied to those who give honest criticism and another standard being applied to those who blindly support CW. Their is obvious moderator bias. That's fine but if it spills over into stifling honest but heated debate, it's just plain ridiculous and wrong, in my view. I think that the arguments made by those who are criticizing CW are generally good arguments backed up by data. On the other hand, those who criticize anyone who dares to wander off of the happy, positive, party line, are the ones who are making the personal attacks and questioning people's loyalty, etc., rather than providing a logical or cogent rebuttal. So I see the problem lies not with those who give logical arguments and who criticize CW but with those who are too sensitive and touchy to be able to handle the fact that someone, another ND fan, can disagree with their enlightened and annointed opinions about CW. Now they are the ones who started all of this personal BS but are the ones apparently whose hands are so clean because they cheerlead all of the time and who the moderators seem to give a pass to when they initiate the personal attacks and name calling. So the ones who start the mess get a pass and end up being the good guys while the other posters who never initiated any personal attacks or name-calling (with rare exception we see someone making a personal remark about CW's weight) end up being the bad guys. This is bass ackwards in my view. This reeks of lack of equity and fair play and is heading down the path of politically correct speech, which is something that is reprehensible. If you choose to censor me because I criticize CW's lack of coaching skills then I'm outta here. I agree that comments about his weight are juvenile but it is completely legitmate to criticize CW and call for his firing. If you don't like those comments, ignore them. I'm not going to agree to your request. I'm going to calls em' as I see's em and if anyone doesn't like it, then they should just ignore my posts and stop the incessant whining about "negative" posts. No one is twisting your arm and forcing you to read those posts. Move on and grow up.

That's not the new "head" coach is it? just askin'

I can't imagine JC pushing someone for no reason. The article is like the ref who only saw the retaliation and threw the flag at the wrong guy. I'm glad JC sticks up for himself and his team and doesn't take any crap or trash talk. Just like the Miami brawl where the whole team said, "enough" and proceeded to beat the s#it out of the convicts and where Holtz told the team in the locker room just afterwards, "save Jimmy Johnson's ass for me!!!" JC is a winner and that's what kind of leadership this team needs. Don't let em' bully ya. If anything, this attitude will work in his favor for the Heisman.

Are you having a sargasm today?

Very perceptive my man!

If you ignore the devil and pretend he doesn't exist, he will devour you before you know it's happening and when it's too late to do anything.

BC = Big Crybabies! JC didn't want to hear the whining and taunting. Hey stupid BC player, we WON! Take your talk somewhere else. Way to go JC. Ignore the idiot.

Who is BC playing?

Notre Dame 34 Boston College 24

Criticizing the critics. How about offering a substantive rebuttal as to why CW should not be fired and back it up with some data instead of your usual pom-pom, rah-rah pejorative remarks directed toward other fans? I'm frankly a little bit surprised that it took so long for you to pop in on this thread to belittle other ND fans just to make yourself feel superior. Apparently you missed the essence of what most folks were saying. If it's so boring for you to read a thread critical of CW, why read it and comment on it? You just repeat that same sanctimonious "I'm a real fan and you aren't" crap over and over. Who cares what you think? I don't. Wow I am impressed that you are the only Notre Dame fan on the planet (in your own mind) who is more concerned about winning against BC than you are about firing CW. We are not worthy. We can only hope to be as good as you someday. Fire Weis! Muh!

I hear you. My point is that people ought to be able to freely talk about what they want to talk about since we are all ND fans. If you don't like a thread that criticized CW or any other aspect of ND football, then just ingore it. What is tiring is the nannys who think they must always criticize others for criticizing CW. I don't really give a rip if you don't like CW being criticized and some on these boards use that to belittle other people while puffing themselves up self-righteously and we begin hearing people bragging about being "true" fans and suggesting that anyone who disagrees with them is not a "true" fan. That's borish behavior which stinks of elitism. Someone will come on a thread and criticize the criticizer and someone else will come on and say "way to go. I agree with so and so that people should not criticize, blah, blah, blah." What is this a frat house? If you don't like it, move along to another thread and ignore it. It gets tiresome to put a wedge between one another and argue not about the facts, the stats, the opinions. If you disagree with someone's negative assessement about CW, state the reasons why you disagree if you must and provide statistical evidence or a logical argument but don't try and make those who disagree with you to look like they aren't "true" fans. Keep the personal stuff out of it and simply discuss the issues. We can all agree to disagree in an agreeable manner without it becoming a personal and "mine's bigger than yours" mentality. Nothing is more boring than people coming on a negative CW thread and thumping their chests about "real ND fans don't talk like that." Puhleese. That is sophmoric and sanctimonious. Just ignore the thread if you don't like it. We don't need to hear that juvenile, self-righteous chest-thumping.

"Since Weis arrived in 2005, Notre Dame has played 14 games against ranked teams and has won four of them. The Irish won three in '05, and one in 2006. With the Irish ranked No. 4 at the time, their last win over a ranked team was at home Sept. 9, 2006, a 41-17 decision over No. 19 Penn State. "Eight losses have followed since that game. "Holtz was 34-20-2 in his 11 years against ranked teams. Willingham was 7-7, Faust 6-13 Davie 6-14." Weis 4-14 EDIT: 4-10 Source: SBT Facts are stubborn things. Yep, it's amazing how CW has really turned things around.

We were ranked 50th in SOS at the end of last year. There were times that we were in the top 20 and lower than 50th. SOS doesn't mean that much after only a few games and the number is skewed depending on who you play early in the schedule. People can still enjoy the games while criticizing CW. I don't understand how people can just ignore or deny the huge differences between the W-L records against ranked teams that CW has done thus far and those of Holtz, and the others who were fired. Those are indisputable facts and CW is dead last in those numbers behind even Faust. Sooner or later people are going to have to snap out of their state of denial about CW. CW's best year against ranked teams was his first year when he had Ty's recruits and he won 3 of those. The next year with Ty's recruits he had only one win against a ranked team . And he has had none since then. I thought when CW was hired that things were supposed to have been turned around to the postitive side and that things would improve. Instead, things have gone the other way. This is a fact. What is more frustrating than having another thread calling for CW to be fired is the incessant homers and deluded, rose-colored glasses wearers who whine about one of those threads while not even acknowledging the sober, cold hard facts about CW's failures that are put before them. They have their blinders on about CW and for some strange reason keep thinking he is a good college football head coach (or will be some time in the future - heck give CW the Nobel) when the facts and stats and comparisons to other coaches reveal he is the worst of the worst. Why some of you probably called for Faust's and Davie's head to roll when they actually have outperformed CW who you continue to defend to the death is beyond all comprehension. So I would like to see some of you homers who think it is taboo or unpatriotically unIrish to have the audacity to criticize CW actually come around to the side of logic, objectivity, and the undeniable truth and admit that in nearly every category that matters on the field that CW isn't much better than his predeccessors who were fired. I just think that CW's motto should be "doing less with more." It would be extremely tough to argue that in many of the games which we lost in the past few years, that we should have lost those games because our athletes were not as good as the teams who beat us. Think of Navy and some others. I don't care how you slice it but when a good coach has more talent than the opposition, more athleticism, bigger, stronger personnel, that person 99% of the time can beat opponents who are inferior in all of those aspects; yet, CW lost those games and even this year has barely beaten the teams that we should have trounced. Look at Michigan. How much did we beat them by last year? Did they get so many new freshman who were NFL ready that they were significantly better from last year? And did we not also have the opportunity to improve just as much as they did? There really wasn't much difference between both teams from last year to this year. Oh, Michigan got a new coach? It ALL boils down to coaching. Who has outcoached CW over the past few years? Who has he outcoached? Just where, after the first year when all CW had was Ty's guys, is this "decided schematic advantage" he promised? Please open my eyes and help me understand how that "decided schmatic advantage" played out and when did we see it? Tell me how he has impressed the world of college football and all of our opponents' coaching staffs whose weaknesses he promised he would exploit mercilessly into a humiliating defeat. What games did we see what was promised? Where has CW delivered on any of those promises, now when he has essentially all of his own recruits?

How would you compare this year's ENTIRE schedule with the schedule we played last year? Tougher? Lighter? About the same? just askin'

"Since Weis arrived in 2005, Notre Dame has played 14 games against ranked teams and has won four of them. The Irish won three in '05, and one in 2006. With the Irish ranked No. 4 at the time, their last win over a ranked team was at home Sept. 9, 2006, a 41-17 decision over No. 19 Penn State. "Eight losses have followed since that game. "Holtz was 34-20-2 in his 11 years against ranked teams. Willingham was 7-7, Faust 6-13 Davie 6-14." Weis 4-14 Source: SBT Dean Turner from South Bend wrote: "Charlie's signature win was the day he duped ND and signed his name on his long term contract extension. Now that's a "signature" win!!!"

Good post!

How can this team not go 10-2 with the soft schedule? Is that what we want for ND? Soften the schedule even more so we can be undefeated every year? Just because we are 10-2 at the end of the year doesn't mean squat given that we could easily be one game away from a winless season to date when we should have had only one loss and soundly defeated the rest of the teams on our schedule. You can't just look at wins-losses if you are playing an aberrant cupcake schedule and conclude that hey, Charlie's the guy, we only lost two games. Again, how has ND done since CW was coach against teams with a winning record? Where are those signature wins?

If Tenuta did that well at Ga Tech, then the reason he is not doing well here must be that we have less gifted athletes. They can only play up to their capabilities. The Peter Principle applies even in football. Better athletes who are faster, bigger, stronger, quicker, and more athletic usually beat the snot out of less athletic players. We simply have not recruited the best athletes on the defensive side. That might be changing but why wasn't it a priority for CW four years ago when he arrrived on campus? If he would have made it a serious priority then, I would think that by now we would have had some solid defensive beasts like Allen Page by now.