The whole "Willingham set this program back 4 years" argument will be accurately put into perspective with Steve Sarkisian at Washington.

 

There can be no argument that Washington's cupboard was even more depleted after Willingham's years there than his time at ND. The team went 0-12 last year, and Sarkisian, it could be argued (and I'd agree) has much more of a rebuilding job than Weis had coming in. That's not to say Weis doesn't deserve credit for bringing in the talent he has -- he does, and I've said that all along.

 

But Sarkisian is walking into, if not a worse situation, than at least a situation that was on the same level that Weis experienced when he took the ND job. We'll be able to look at, and see, if it really is coaching that can get a mediocre team and a bare cupboard a few more wins than expected, or if Willingham's so call "destruction" is all it's made up to be by certain ND fans.

If I'm not mistaken, Weis took Willinghams team to a BCS game two years in a row.

 

So the real comparison will be Sarkisians ability to rebuild the team a few years from now.

 

But that's not really a fair comparison because Sark can bring in JUCOs where Weis could not (which was also a huge sticking point for Meyer as well)

 

So actually I'm struggling to find out how we could accurately compare the two situations.

Cowherd can be stupid but sometimes he is right. One thing he mentioned today is that in college football, you can be outmatched in 21 of 22 positions but as long as that one position is the QB, you can have a chance to win the game. Locker is a good QB.

We have an elite Quarterback, and if the offense doesn't score 40 a week, ND will lose.

Not to mention that Sarkisian knows USC's ins and outs in addition to the fact that USC gave that game away with 4 fumbles, 2 lost, and an INT. Wow, 0-10 on 3rd down efficiency. I don't count that as giving the game away, but I'm just noting... That's a pretty awful stat. I love seeing USC suck like that. In reality, USC just didn't show up to play, ala ND in the fiesta bowl against Ohio St.

it's not really a fair comparison...Sarkisian can go to JUCO's to fill in empty spots on the depth chart with solid guys.

Also, while Washington would have still been sucktastic last season even with him, Locker missed the last half of the season or so. And he's clearly the reason Washington is at least respectable this season.

He might fill a few spots with JUCO's, but he isnt going to be like Kansas State and make an entire roster of them . . . . .

 

And I can almost promise his Oline isnt going to go to #@^&% after 2 years.

it's not really a fair comparison...Sarkisian can go to JUCO's to fill in empty spots on the depth chart with solid guys.

 

Exactly and for this reason a rebuilding job at ND is far more difficult than any place else.

The whole "Willingham set this program back 4 years" argument will be accurately put into perspective with Steve Sarkisian at Washington.

 

There can be no argument that Washington's cupboard was even more depleted after Willingham's years there than his time at ND. The team went 0-12 last year, and Sarkisian, it could be argued (and I'd agree) has much more of a rebuilding job than Weis had coming in. That's not to say Weis doesn't deserve credit for bringing in the talent he has -- he does, and I've said that all along.

 

But Sarkisian is walking into, if not a worse situation, than at least a situation that was on the same level that Weis experienced when he took the ND job. We'll be able to look at, and see, if it really is coaching that can get a mediocre team and a bare cupboard a few more wins than expected, or if Willingham's so call "destruction" is all it's made up to be by certain ND fans.

 

As others have already said, there's two outlier's here.

 

1) Sark can, and did bring in massive amounts of Juco's at Washington, something unable to be done at ND. He brought in 7 Juco players after he came on board, all after December.

 

2) 0-12 doesn't accurately describe that Washington team last year that was playing without Jake Locker. Sure, he's only SO good, and he's not a miracle man, but he's the difference between a 4-8 or 3-9 season and 0-12. Much easier to see a leap from a 4-8 season to an 8-4 or 9-3 type season the following year.

The whole "Willingham set this program back 4 years" argument will be accurately put into perspective with Steve Sarkisian at Washington.

 

There can be no argument that Washington's cupboard was even more depleted after Willingham's years there than his time at ND. The team went 0-12 last year, and Sarkisian, it could be argued (and I'd agree) has much more of a rebuilding job than Weis had coming in. That's not to say Weis doesn't deserve credit for bringing in the talent he has -- he does, and I've said that all along.

 

But Sarkisian is walking into, if not a worse situation, than at least a situation that was on the same level that Weis experienced when he took the ND job. We'll be able to look at, and see, if it really is coaching that can get a mediocre team and a bare cupboard a few more wins than expected, or if Willingham's so call "destruction" is all it's made up to be by certain ND fans.

 

 

It seems like your only objective is to try to put down Weis as much as possible. Always being negative will take you down a path of an unhappy life.

It seems like your only objective is to try to put down Weis as much as possible. Always being negative will take you down a path of an unhappy life.

 

No, it's not. If you've seen my posts, I've said on numerous occasions that I WANT Weis to succeed.

 

I'm simply saying that some fans continue to blame Ty Willingham for Notre Dame's problems on the football field, and I'm of the opinion that (even if he can take JUCOs), Sarkisian's success or failure will give quite a bit of merit to either side of that argument.

I think another factor is that Sark was able to bring in coaches he is comfortable with. Weis threw together a coaching staff but it became obvious that Minter, Haywood, Latina, and a few others didn't work out. If Weis started with the staff he has now our O-line would have been much better and our D as well. We could have really used Corwin's defensive recruiting the first couple years because our youth upfront is killing us.

The whole "Willingham set this program back 4 years" argument will be accurately put into perspective with Steve Sarkisian at Washington.

 

There can be no argument that Washington's cupboard was even more depleted after Willingham's years there than his time at ND. The team went 0-12 last year, and Sarkisian, it could be argued (and I'd agree) has much more of a rebuilding job than Weis had coming in. That's not to say Weis doesn't deserve credit for bringing in the talent he has -- he does, and I've said that all along.

 

But Sarkisian is walking into, if not a worse situation, than at least a situation that was on the same level that Weis experienced when he took the ND job. We'll be able to look at, and see, if it really is coaching that can get a mediocre team and a bare cupboard a few more wins than expected, or if Willingham's so call "destruction" is all it's made up to be by certain ND fans.

 

I doubt UW will win 19 games over the next two seasons. I would even guess that he wont win 29 over his first 4, we'll see.

The whole "Willingham set this program back 4 years" argument will be accurately put into perspective with Steve Sarkisian at Washington.

 

There can be no argument that Washington's cupboard was even more depleted after Willingham's years there than his time at ND. The team went 0-12 last year, and Sarkisian, it could be argued (and I'd agree) has much more of a rebuilding job than Weis had coming in. That's not to say Weis doesn't deserve credit for bringing in the talent he has -- he does, and I've said that all along.

 

But Sarkisian is walking into, if not a worse situation, than at least a situation that was on the same level that Weis experienced when he took the ND job. We'll be able to look at, and see, if it really is coaching that can get a mediocre team and a bare cupboard a few more wins than expected, or if Willingham's so call "destruction" is all it's made up to be by certain ND fans.

 

The one part where you're wrong is saying that Washington's cupboard was more depleted than ND's. When CW took over, all the experience was with Jr's & Sr's. And there were gaping holes in recruiting the incoming frosh and sophs.

 

Washington played a lot of underclassmen the last 2 seasons esp last yr, so even though they were thrown to the wolves, they got a lot of experience.

 

Their soph class was a good class. 26 guys and 9 of those guys were 4 star guys.

 

Washington's soph, jr, sr classes

'09 class -- 2 guys (committed before new coach hired)

'08 class -- 26 guys (9 of those 4 stars, 13 of those 3 stars)

'07 class -- 27 guys (4 of those 4 stars, 14 of those 3 stars)

'06 class -- 22 guys (5 of those 4 stars, 8 of those 3 stars)

TOTAL ---- 77 guys

 

Notre Dame's soph, jr, sr classes

'05 class -- 6 guys (committed before new coach hired)

'04 class -- 17 guys (3 of those 4 stars, 10 of those 3 stars)

'03 class -- 21 guys (12 of those 4 stars, 8 of those 3 stars)

'02 class -- 18 guys (12 of those 4 stars, 4 of those 3 stars)

TOTAL ---- 62 guys

 

This also hurt this year & last year's Sr. Classes b/c we had to play frosh right away b/c we had no depth. We coulda def used Pat Kuntz this yr and Sergio Brown and Eric Olsen next yr.

Edited September 21, 200915 yr by irishziggy

Jake Locker has carried that team his entire career there. Without him last year they were horrible. The guy is like Brett Favre.

This is so fricken ridiculous.

 

Everyone gets their panties in a twist because Washington, at home, against a very much overrated and non-vintage USC team, pulled off a mildly surprising win. People, USC is not that good this year. They're just not. Washington has beaten a pretty dreadful Idaho-IDAHO!-team and a very average USC team. UW won a "big game" alright, with USC starting their backup quarterback. Do you think we would have beat the Trojans in 2005 if they weren't starting a Heisman winning QB named Matt Leinart instead of their backup? Don't tell me Charlie Weis doesn't have a "statement" win either. We went into the Big House, game #2 of his career, and knocked off the #3 team in the country, on the road. A team with vastly more talent than we had and multiple NFL players. And we also would have defeated USC in '05 if the refs would have ruled Leinart's fumble out of bounds correctly or flagged Reggie for the Bush Push. People looking for a signature win are just trying to hard. You play who is on the schedule. One thing I will agree with though, is that Ty Willingham singlehandledly crippled two once proud programs that are now trying to put the pieces back together. And just because UW won this past weekend does not mean they are significantly ahead on the rebuliding process than we are.

I'm still amazed at the willingness by everyone to accept mediocrity. Sounds like a bunch of excuses to me. I simply don't think that CW can motivate young men. We have 9 times the amount of talent that UW has right now so I am curious to hear what all of you guys' excuses will be when they beat us. Think our D can stop Locker? Good luck with that.

 

Even without Floyd, I think our offense will be able to score on people almost at will. But we all know that defense wins big games.

BTW, "Shut up and win". I'm sticking with that mantra.

Couple thoughts..wasn't Sark part of the staff at sc that averaged an implosion per year? It's great he has uw ranked but it's week 3, let's hold off the comparisons until we see how things shake up...at least until we see our coaches go head to head.