Fantastic post, the ending of which somewhat echoes an article I wrote three years ago about Bobby Williams.
The relevent portion: Michigan State's Bobby Williams is doing a great disservice to all would-be minority head coaches.
Absolutely every week the Spartans' performance screams "FIRE THE COACH!" That team is the most embarrassing collection of underachievers this side of the New York Mets.
Yet, if Williams is dismissed this year, there will almost undoubtedly be backlash from the Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton camp.
Schools will use that as a reason to avoid hiring a minority coach in the future, and that's too bad.
I'm sure this is not a popular position to take, but it's true.
The whole article is here: http://the-ozone.net/football/20...2/
orr102102.htm
Nicely said, Brian.
The only thing I think that has changed with the new contract, though, is that the buyout is substantially higher than 1.5 million. It's all speculation, but Mortensen is saying it's closer to 8 figures than 1.5 million.
Regardless of that, thanks for clearly illustrating what a complete jackass Jason Whitlock is.
I'm stunned. My entire worldview of the worth of a UM education in general and your intelligence in particular has been set on it's ear. You understood that Willingham would have gotten 'his five years' if he had come before Davie. You saw the downward spiral with regards to recruiting and how the program was at a point of no return. You understand how the extension of the contract is only PR if it still has a buyout clause. You see the ultimate effect the racism charges have on the future hiring of black coaches. You see the obvious differences between Ty's 8-0 start and Weis' 5-2 start.
You nailed the whole fucking thing.
I can't hate you anymore because I now know that you're not a blithering idiot.
Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuck!
Nice work Brian. You really nailed it.
Why black coaches never get hired...
Because you're not allowed to fire them.
It has nothing to do with their qualifications.
Should there be more black head coaches in college football? Yes. But schools are afraid to hire them because they get the Whitlock Treatment when they have to fire them.
You are right on the money! Some one should burn a cross in Whitlocks yard to remind him what real racism is
That was dope. Nice work.
The other thing that Whitlock doesn't understand is that the new contract was designed to help ND recruiting. If recruits thought that there was a likelihood that Weis would leave for the NFL, they may not sign (like OL Sam Young). The contract helps end rumors, and thus helps recruiting. It had nothing to do with race
When I see the overuse of the race card, I feel sorry for hard-working minorities who don't make excuses and try so hard to not be seen as a minority but just as another person. The race card promotes seeing someone as a minority, and that is why it is detrimental.
Not to mention the overuse of the race card has produced a 'cry wolf' effect. People are starting to tune it out.
Perhaps Weis's new deal is simply PR, but a buyout upwards of $6 million or so (if Mortensen is right) is an insane reward for somebody who's done nothing but beat the overrated teams on his schedule. If all one wanted was an empty PR gesture, why commit additional millions to the buyout?
Re. Tom's comments from years ago, I don't remember anyone being put out about the Bobby Williams firing except Joel Ferguson (whom everyone knows for a preening clown) and a fewMichigan fans. Notre Dame gets bent over for this stuff because, well, they're Notre Dame, with all the exposure of their private TV deal, and they've built up a lot of resentment over the years wrapping themselves in the mantle of moral superiority.
Church. I can't wait til you take on Scoop's article on Phil Jackson. He talks about the shoes he wears on his "feets" in order to describe his ability to be tapped into the hip-hop culture and still be employable.
Wow, is this a right-wing scream fest. Whether firing Willingham is racist or not isn't necessarily the point; the point of Whitlock's article is that they hype around Weis is unjustified. Willingham's first class was fine. Willingham beat teams he WASN'T supposed to beat, with players recruited to run an entirely different system. Coming close against USC doesn't make a team great. Cal proved that last year in the Holiday Bowl, and UCLA proved that in the Las Vegas Bowl. Whether that hype is due to race? That's pretty hard to determine, but not out of the question.
To Bruce Ciske; what? Notre Dame did fire a black coach. MSU fired a black coach. Teams have fired black coaches in the NFL and NBA without any problems (see NJ and Byron Scott). The Domers were chastized for their hypocrisy (Wilingham forced his players to do well academically), not for any alleged racism. Your statement was racist, however. Congratulations; you are perpetuating a vile meme that idiotic football execs use to justify their white boys club.
The more I read your article Brian, the more I realize why you like idiots like Lynn Swann. You claim that anyone "could see that his 8-0 starting record was built on the shifting sand of fluke turnovers and fortuitous bounces." Yeah, you mean like almost all college football? How do you differentiate "fluke" turnovers from "legitimate" turnovers? By the name of the coach? Was Weis' win over Michigan based on less flukish luck than Willingham's TWO wins were? Were you drunk when you wrote this?
Brian,
I hate this article! Why? Because you are forcing me to come here and praise a freakin' Wolverine for watching ND's back. Damn, I don't like that.
In all seriousness, a very well-written piece of work. Nail, meet hammer.
Carl
Father Figure - clearly you did not see a single game of Notre Dame's in 2002 - otherwise you would have seen the interception that bounced off a referees head, the consecutive unforced fumbles by Purdue that were returned for touchdowns, or the 600-100 yardage differential in the USC game.
Or maybe you did see them and you just don't know shit about football.
Love your work on the blog, Brian, but I gotta call bullshit on you this time.
You simply can't read Whitlock outside of the context in which he writes. College football has a race problem when it comes to coaching. Period. Anyone who argues otherwise is blind.
Calling Whitlock an asshole on this matter would make a lot more sense if there were enough black coaches in D IA to make an argument for or against his position. Instead, you're left grasping at straws -- Willingham would have gotten only 3 years if he preceded Davie (speculation), "anyone" could see that his 8-0 was anomalous (yeah, hindsight and all that, plus there were tons of "Return to Glory" stories in the press), Weis is a better coach (you won't know the answer to that definitively for a couple of years). So you're left arguing that black coaches aren't treated any differently WITHOUT HAVING ANY REAL DATA. When you can point to X number of black coaches who got fair treatment, then Whitlock's point would become falsifiable and you would be justified in taking him to task.
Whitlock may well be an asshole, but for you to argue that race didn't play a part in Willingham's firing -- especially absent any evidence -- is a political statement more than a football judgment.
Steve R, I also noted the missed touchdown in this year's game, the tipped-pass towchdown in the endzone, etc. Before you make accusations, think.
Or, Steve R, are those less lucky because white coaches prepare better? Just asking.
Very well said, Steve.
Also, if people want to act like they know what the hell they're talking about when comparing the 8-0 "smoke and mirrors" ND squad from 2002 and this one, try this: Compare the amount of offensive TDs scored by that team in its first 8 games to this year's ND in its first 7.
And, no... I won't make it easy on you by giving you the numbers. Find them yourself. And when you do you will know how flat-out idiotic it is to state that Ty's 8-0 team was better than this one. Not even close.
Ichiro, shouldn't someone need more than speculation and their own opinion (i.e. FACTS and HARD EVIDENCE) before accusing an institution like ND of racism?
And if the firing of Willingham and Weis' contract restructruing are what amounts to your facts and evidence you may be the "blind" one.
The one real hard FACT here is that Brian has every right to express his opinions and come to the conclusions he has about Whitlock as Whitlock did about ND in his piece.
And I am also in agreement with those who have said that "cry wolf" pieces like this actually do more harm to the plight of African-American coaches in Division 1A than any hiring/firing decision ND has ever made.
Ichiro,
Whitlock may well be an asshole, but for you to argue that race didn't play a part in Willingham's firing -- especially absent any evidence -- is a political statement more than a football judgment.
Where's the evidence that race DID play a part?
Ichiro:
Whitlock may well be an asshole, but for you to argue that race didn't play a part in Willingham's firing -- especially absent any evidence -- is a political statement more than a football judgment.
Actually, Brian is making a football judgement. Willingham was fired because he was a bad football coach at ND. That's it.
The only thing that is absent of any evidence is that race DID play a part in his firing. You see, if you're going to make accusations of racism, shouldn't you generally be one to provide the proof?
Willingham was 8-0 with Davie's players but you won't hear that from the press. The only games ND really "won" in 2002 were the Maryland game and the FSU game. Every other game could just as easily have been a loss (See MSU, UM et al.).
Ichiro,
The articles about "Return to Glory" were written by the same journalists who clamour for more minority coaches. True ND fans could see right through the hype of 2002 and realized it was not going to last. Also, there is no data to go by because of scathing articles by people like Whitlock. If the media hadn't crucified Notre Dame for firing a black coach you can bet the prospects for more blacks getting hired would be exponentially greater.
Why are we even falling into the trap of talking about ND? Even Big East schools are looking at ND's schedule fondly. Pitt? An injured and truly TERRIBLE Michigan team (and the worst UM team in decades!)? Washington? Purdue? BY-FRICKEN-U? Or maybe it is their big win over Michigan St. or USC!?!? As is the norm, ND is overhyped and really not worthy of any attention. ND's actions show that they are DESPERATE (the racism allegation is too hard to prove one way or the other)!!! There is no good justification for this type of contract at this point in Weis' career. I can't wait until ND must once again face the fact that good, healthy teams will fair well against them.
Karl, there's at least one good reason for this contract now: recruiting.
Whitlock didn't even have a problem with Ty's firing:
"For the record, I didn't have a problem with Notre Dame's firing Willingham. Yes, he deserved five years. But his firing didn't strike me as particularly racist, just shortsighted and unfair. Life is rarely fair, and we're certainly an instant-gratification society. The same factors could and do lead to the premature demise of white coaches"
Did race play a role? probably. The faithful fell in love with O'Leary then were confronted with the reality that their perfect fit was a liar. They weren't going to embrace the replacement as strongly. The fact that that replacement wasa black may have distanced some more people, I don't know I'm not an ND fan.
The point was that Witlock wrote that it was racist that Ty didn't get the same idiotic extension that Weis got. That's just insane. whitlock argues that it was stupid and an overreaction to give Charlie such an extension this early in his coaching career (I agree with him on this). He then makes a HUGE logical error by saying that it was racist because ND didn't make the exact same mistake with Ty. If you argue it was a bad move to do it with Weis, how can you then argue that ND should have done the same thing you just condemned with Ty?
That is why Whitock is an idiot. He dropped the race card where it had no business being played. Demanding a black coach receive something you admit he didn't deserve just because he is black makes you look stupid.
That should say "replacement was black" not "wasa black". Just a typo, not a ridiculously racist sentence.
Wow; Weis has put up some great offensive numbers with the players Willingham recruited to play that kind of system against mediocre defensive teams. What an ignorant rebuttal, ND fan. Face it; Whitlock absolutely 6-ed ND. Right Wingers and Domers are howling because they see the obvious; what the man said has a grain of truth to it; he supported his argument by looking at facts (scheduling, etc.), and he did so with humour. There always has been a nasty racist streak to the ND nation that isn't present at MSU and OSU.
Scott, racism comes in many forms, including subconcious racism. The decision to give this incredible contract extension to a coach at this early juncture is quite bizarre. Why wasn't the same kind of extension warranted in 2002, after Willingham went 8-0? Recruiting happened then too, right? Or do these extensions only affect white coach recruiting?
Nailed it.
Racism implies different treatment under similar circumstances. With Ty, ND was never faced with these circumstances. If, during Ty's 8-0 run, there was any indication that Ty might be lured away after a year, maybe he would have received an extension. We don't know, because there wasn't any need.
The fact is, at least as far as I know, no one in the NFL wanted Ty. Whitlock's attempt to deal with that fact is to imply that Weis's "handlers" created the NFL rumors - with no support or sources.
Whitlock's better argument should be that every football team OTHER than ND is racist for not wanting to hire him away when he was 8-0.
Father Figure, c'mon, be logical. There was no rumor that Willingham was planning to leave and go to the NFL in his first year. That is a very real possibility with Weis. That's the reason for the extension.
Making claims of racism is not something that should be done lightly, and most certainly should be done with all relevant factors. In this case, comparing the two situations is silly and absolutely wrong.
What a stupid statement; comparing the two situations is wrong? Why, because it makes an overrated (both athletically and academically) sacred cow run by odd old white men possible look racist? What makes the comparison silly? The fact that Weis receives every benefit of the doubt from Domer faithful, while Willingham received a cold shoulder? Wilingham had an excellent track record at Stanford, kept the program clean and effecient, and had two good seasons out of three. Weis has beaten one good team (Michigan), and lost to the two other good teams he faced. Yet, people are writing about him like he invented the Victoria Secret catalogue! His defense wasn't able to stop USC when it mattered most. Willingham lost a LOT of extremely close games; Brian, if you take credit away from him for winning some close games in 2002, you should direct the blame away from him for the Pitt loss, the BYU loss, and the BC loss in 2004. If you want to say that Willingham achieved the 2002 season with Davie's players, please also note that Davie went 5-6 with those players the year before. It seems like a lot of people are overcompensating for some subconcious racism here...
"Racism" implies a large amount of behavior. From "differing treatment under similar circumstances" to a "conscious or subconscious pattern of belief that one race is better suited for a particular task, or has better skills than another," or even the "stigmatization of those of another race," there are numerous ways to categorize behavior as "racist." The only "rumours" in this entire fiasco came from unnamed sources in one filler piece NFL.com article. NFL teams have know about his interest in a head coaching position for at least five years; nobody wanted him.
As is typical, Father Figure is using the "Racist" card to scare people away from their logical albeit opinionated arguments. Either way, no one is going to "prove" this. Obviously Father Figure believes there is a conspiracy out there. No one can change his mind. I feel very sorry for him. It must suck to think there is this "all-white club" pulling the strings around the world. Wow.
Nobody is going to "prove" that ND was racist, but I can and did show; (actually, Whitlock did)
1) Weis is overrated;
2) Willingham wasn't as bad as people wanted to claim;
3) This move isn't a response to a situation that wasn't present in 2002;
4) Weis has been given a complete free pass from the media, especially from domers;
5) Blaming blacks for discrimination against them is disgusting.
Other than that, nobody knows what lies in the hearts of men. I do know that normally credible, astute writers (such as Brian) have to pick their battles. When they use uncommon vitriol and anger, it indicates that there is something about the issue involved that hits them very deeply, and possibly makes them feel ashamed for something. It's like when James Dobson throws fits about homosexuality; it's pretty obvious that he's had some homoerotic tendencies/fantasies at some pont in his past that he's highly ashamed of. They've tipped their hands, to use a poker analogy.
Wow, get grouchy, why don' you. But of course, throughout the diatribe, you didn't touch on my point. Weis got the extension because there were articles that mentioned him as a future NFL coach, and to preserve recruting, ND offered a contract extension to squelch those rumors. That did not happen with Ty.
You can go on about "old white men" and all that, but you won't touch the central point - the extension was made to help on recruiting and squelch NFL rumors. Race had nothing to do with it.
Sure, there are numerous ways to categorize behavior as racist. That's due in no small part to people, like Jason Whitlock, who spend great effort trying to squeeze every situation possible into the definition of racism.
People didn't recruit in 2002? Which recruits specifically mentioned Weis' contract status as an impediemtn to going to ND this offseason? Actually, people like Jason Whitlock are simply more astute, and can see racism where others can't.
So if anyone vociferously contradicts your claim, Father Figure, they must have some "subconscious" issue with it? What an easy claim to make because it's virtually impossible to prove (after all, it's subconscious).
It's a sure sign of an inability to make your case when you begin speculating about the motives of the individual - be it a Notre Dame fan or Dr. Dobson - making the argument, rather than focus on the argument itself.
Subconcious racism is a witch hunt. You're subconciously paranoid.
The reason that a ridiculous contract extension is ok for Weis and not for Willingham is that there was NO WAY Willingham was going to disappear to the NFL. That means there was no reason to throw money at him to make him stay. Is that not obvious? Way to argue without addressing the issue Father Figure. Comparing the situations is wrong because they are not the same situations not because of whatever BS speculation about the white man is in your post.
How is this not just a creative way to rehash whether it was a race-motivated firing in the first place?
Actually, people like Jason Whitlock are simply more astute, and can see racism where others can't.
Wow. Can't argue with that. I suppose if you post enough and dedicate enough of your day to making an argument on an internet message board, you can convince yourself of just about anything.
FF, if you're still enrolled in college, you might consider swapping Cultural Studies or Sociology for Logic. You claim that "no one knows what lies in the hearts of men," but then argue that ND's motives were racist and that it's "pretty obvious" that Dr. Dobson has personal issues with homosexuality because he is strongly opposed to it.
Which is it? You claim not to know the motives of others, but then go on and make claims anyway.
Seriously, consider taking logic classes.
Nice rebuttal, mister.
The reference to "tipping the hand", though an excellent strategy in Poker has no place in judging people. If I angrily attack the Nazis in a verbal tirade, is that because I secretly desire to mimic them? So, in theory, your defense of Whitlock's argument, must mean that instead of defending a person who points out an alleged case of racism, you must BE a racist? Am I following your pseudopsychology correctly? oops. I must hate my mother. I used the term pseudopsychology.
People recruited in 2002. But of course, that's not what i said. I said that there were NFL rumors involving Weis, which could hurt recruiting. There was none with Ty.
Do you not think there was some connection to NFL rumors qabout Charlie Weis and the sudden contract extension? You don't need to delve into the subconscious to connect those two.
Is there racism in college football. Absolutely. But I don't see it here, and nothing you have mentioned or Whitlock, for that matter, indicates that racism is involved.
Father Figure--
So, ND was rascist to fire Ty, to not give him a contract extension in his first year, blah blah.
How come no one mentions that ND HIRED Ty in the first place? If ND was this evil rascist institution, wouldn't they have hired Gerry Faust again, rather than hire Willingham?
ND won 8 games in 2002 with defensive players recruited by Davie, playing in a scheme Davie left behind (with Mattison as holdover coach). ND didn't score an offensive TD until game 4. Ty's much-hyped west-coast offense he brought over from Stanford didn't work, and ND fans kept getting told "it takes time to install an offense". Funny how it took ND, oh, one game this season--not 4 seasons. Once those defensive players graduated, ND went south, quick--how else can you explain going from one of the best defenses in 2002 to 114th against the pass last year?
"The reason that a ridiculous contract extension is ok for Weis and not for Willingham is that there was NO WAY Willingham was going to disappear to the NFL."
Oh, I didn't know your subconscious impressions of the situation before I speculated. My bad; I'll try to verify stuff next time. Seriously, Weis has been on the market for FIVE SEASONS with no takers. Do you have the name of that recruit yet?
"Dr. Dobson"
Well, it looks like I better brush up on my seig heils, and find my (soon to be) state issued bible. Yikes; there are people who can read that look up to that scumbag?
I don't know that Brian is so hostile and vitrolic because of some form of subconscious racist feelings that he has; I just think that he is. Knowing=proving. Speculation is different. You need the class, kid. Try to take it a real school, too.
Brian--
EXCELLENT post. Wow. Thank you. This may even make me root for UM the rest of the season.
The nature of those "rumours" is of serious debate. One article, written as a quasi-pointless speculation piece, citing unnamed sources. Were those sources plants by Weis, or his agent? I don't know.
Nate, I've made the same argument before. Whether ND's adminsitration was partially motivated by subconcious racism is somthing I won't know, and probably couldn't prove. However, the different reaction to him that the fanbase has had may be affected by racism. Brian wrote an article that is figuratively dripping with hostility and hatred, for an article that he didn't even seem to understand. He uses foul language and insulting names about a well respected columnist who simply wrote an effectively humorous piece smacking the dome. Brian even blames African Americans for their plight, which is especially heinous. Now this comment page is filled with a bunch of white frat kids (kids who paid for their friends) chiming in with right wing crap about how bad Scoop Jackson is, etc.
Brian, this was a very well written piece, and I will defend its literary merits against any and all comers.
I don't know enough about the ND administration to make a judgement about their handling of the situation but I do know two things:
1) I have watched a lot of Patriots football over the years. Charlie Weis is good. Period.
2) Brian can write. 'Specially about college football.
And as I type this, Sportscenter throws up a clip of Charlie Weis. Awesome.
FF, your hilariously wrong. I actually am a Democrat, and a political consultant that has helped elect Democrats all over the country. Yet somehow, because I disagreed with your analysis, I am a "white frat kid" and filled with "right wing crap." You could not be more wrong.
Not only do you ignore the obvious facts on this issue (the rumors of Weis leaving for the NFL, the effect they would have on recruiting), but you fall victim to everything you accuse others.
You say Brian is vitriolic, but in your rants you accuse people of subconscious racism, of being secret homosexuals and acutally used sieg heil to indicate Nazis. Very sad.
You need to get a grip and stop accusing people of subconsciously doing things.
Father Figure, once again you speculate about motives and backgrounds of your opponents, including your claim about "white frat kids." I am not a kid, and my college did not have frats or sororities.
It is intellectually weak and dishonest to attack the persons or institutions's motives in lieu of presenting facts to support your case.
Check into a Logic 101 or debate class near you.
PS Are you aware that several ND students helped break up a KKK rally in South Bend in 1924? Doesn't sound like the act of racists to me (nor does ND's willingness to hire an AA coach, something very few D1 schools have done). Mr. Willingham failed to meet the performance standards of a contract he agreed to, and he was fired, just as two white ND coaches were before him. This is called fact-checking and supporting your case, fyi.
Speaking of different standards, were's your outrage for Ron Zook?
I ignore the recruiting rumours? What? I just said that there was one article, citing anonymous sources, that is the basis of the claim of NFL Rumours. That's alredy been covered, twice. Would a contract extension not assist recruting if there isn't an NFL.com article about possible "coack to NFL romours" scaring recruits away? Once again, please name the recruits who have been scared by this article into (hopefully) signing with U of M.... Waiting....
As I said before, NBA teams hire and fire black head coaches with the quickness. Nobody claims that Byron Scott couldn't find a job because Jason Whitlock wrote an article about racism, or mentioning racism, or that somebody else read who was thinking of racism, etc. However, football is filled with conservative twits who go out of their way to find reasons not to hire black head coaches (and, partially related, find reasons not to give college athletes the money they earn). Differing treatment, similar conditions, etc...
But Notre Dame HIRED a black coach!!! Doesn't that undercut your argument?
If you don't think floating speculation of a coach leeving for the NFL is used as a negative recruiting tool, you must not follow it at all.
Again, you provide no hard evidence to support that racism lay behind Notre Dame's decision to fire Ty when others have provided significant facts to explain, first and foremost his performance over three seasons, not just the first one. He and Notre Dame agree to a buyout clause after the third season. ND honored its contract and is still paying TW.
I feel sorry for you for seeing racism behind any negative action involving a minority. Attitudes like yours only hinder progress, not help it. You should listen to DC Wolverine, FF.
Racism, or lack of racism, whatever, I still think it's a boneheaded move for ND to extend Weiss' contract after 7 games played with a team recruited by someone else. Not convinced that ND has anything to gain by this--and wouldn't ND already have a buy-out clause for the original contract?
Besides since when is ND worried about a potential fair weather coach? If someone wants to coach elsewhere, or is using ND for a career stepping stone, THEN THERE'S THE DOOR. KINDLY LET IT HIT YOUR BIG (IN THE CASE OF WEISS, GIGANTIC) ASS ON THE WAY OUT.
If I was a ND alum I'd be crying bloody murder.
But, thankfully, I'm a Michigan fan...
best, zombieH
For smart-ass posts on politics, sports and religion, check out zombieH's Enchanted World
No, he's obviously right, guys. ND is SO insidiously rascist, that in fact they HIRED a black man with the specific intent of treating him unfairly, firing him 3 years into his 5 year contract of absolute mediocrity rather than giving him 5 years to wreak havoc on ND football like previous, WHITE failures had been given, and then, MOST INSIDIOUS of all, hiring a competent WHITE coach to replace him, then giving him a longer contract when rumors of the NFL coming to take him come to the fore. Truly evil...
Why can't this faction of the African-American press accept that Willingham sucked? Rather than villify ND because Willingham failed there and ND took the same action that any other school would have done, why aren't they lauding Karl Dorrell at UCLA? If I'm a mid to upper level school AD looking for a coach, I can see that regardless of a Black coach's poor performance, I'll face a firestorm if I fire him. No one will give me credit for HIRING said black coach--I will only get villified for firing him after mediocrity.
I see Karl Dorrell, and see that a black coach can have success--that's a positive message that should be the focus of Whitlock and his group. However, I see that I can also have success with a white coach, and I sure as hell won't get the same treatment if I have to fire him. The negative message far outweighs the positive. Say all you want, FF, that's the message these guys like Whitlock are putting out there. Good thing for Miss. State they suck anyways, and have nothing to lose by keeping Sylvester Croom.
I'd LOVE to see guys like Charlie Strong get a fair chance. He's the first one that comes to mind, and dammit, he NEEDS to get interviews, and eventually get a job. Focus on the Dorrell message, press, and he might get that. Keep beating this Willingham crap to death, and no AD in their right mind is going to go near a serious black candidate.
Zombie--
This ND grad is raising his eyebrows a bit--I'll defend it against accusations of rascism, but it was certainly a bit of an over-reaction to NFL rumors.
Of course, no one mentions the fact that Willingham took home 1.5 million from ND for not coaching them this year, as part of his OWN buyout clause.
Enjoy blaming victims, Nate? The constant refrain of "Willingham sucked" is the part that is least justified, not based on anything more than your jaded perceptions, and the most susceptible to subconscious racism. This isn't worth debating with people who can't understand racism. go back to your frat, Nate.
If only we were all as smart and as sensitive as you, FF.
Willingham never won a bowl and recruited poorly his last two years. His teams were blown out with regularity and they struggled on offense, which was supposedly his strength. Not sure if that means he "sucked" but he certainly wasn't very good.
And do you honestly believe that rumors don't hurt recruiting? If you do believe that, that I agree, there's really no reason to debate, because you don't understand college football.
The bottom line is, Weis got the extension because ND wanted to calm alums and protect their excellent recruiting cycle. Those are real reasons, not mumbo jumbo about subconscious feelings. Despite several postings, you have not offered anything remotely resembling a fact for accusing ND of racism. Instead, you make snide comments about others motivation and their subconscious feelings. It's silly and demeaning, and you do far more injury to the cause of fighting racism when you do that
Okay... time to chill. FF, DC, Nate: this is an impasse that's just going to degenerate from here. Time to agree to disagree.
Brian -
Excellent article. Well written and honestly it is nice to see someone from the opposition taking a stance based on logic rather then emotional bias.
The reason behind Weis' extension may be for numerous reasons. It may be to salvage the current recruiting class, to appease the alumni, or even because of his merit this season. I don't know the real reason, but I do know one thing: I have been a Notre Dame fan for my entire 21 years of living, and I have never felt more pride in a team then when I watched Notre Dame play for Weis. That fact alone provides enough justification to me for his extension.
Excellent post. I now feel... less hate... towards Michigan. For now.
As an ND alum, reading you post made me feel much better. It's good to see that the disgust for the horribly written article by Whitlock spreads further than the dome. You hit the nail on the head. Let's just play the race card over and over till it all tastes like chicken.
In a way, it doesn't surprise me that you guys would respond like this. It takes people of true tradition and honor to stand up to things like this. To stand up to bigots who use the prominance of our schools, our family, and twist it and sell us out for a few bucks and an adgenda.
In honor of this, I will stop hating Michigan for 1 week, starting now.
Never thought I'd live to see the day that I'd be agreeing w/ a Michigan fan, but that was just about the best assessment of the situation I've read anywhere.
And I knew you guys were secretly pissed ND fired Ty, b/c there was just a slight chance ND would get a real coach to replace him and make the series interesting again! Good times. Thanks for seeing the situation for what it is.
1. ND doesn't have frats, so I can't go back to one.
2. Ty's no victim--not when he's still getting a paycheck from ND (as per his buyout).
Weis has been on the market for FIVE SEASONS with no takers.
FatherFigure, are you aware that under NFL rules, a team looking for a new head coach is forbidden from approaching an assistant whose team is still in the playoffs until the playoff run is over? Weis missed out on two openings, one of them the Giants, because of the Patriots' success.
Make the series interesting again? Ty went 2-1 against Michigan! Are you an idiot, or do you just not follow college football?
"I have been a Notre Dame fan for my entire 21 years of living, and I have never felt more pride in a team then when I watched Notre Dame play for Weis"
This is the subconcsious racism that I refer to. I'm sure you would say the same thing about a team coached by George O'Leary, too. They "fit the mold" better than Ty, don't they?
If this is the final word, I say this;
1) Brian, you misunderstand the article. The point wasn't to rehash the Willingham firing; it was to highlight the absurdity of the hype surrounding Weis. Whitlock did so with facts and humour, which really angers the Domers.
2) I'll stipulate that the ND administration isn't racist, Nate. I overrached when I talked about White Guys. However, the fanbase is filled with racist idiots. The "pride" people feel when seeing the team play under Weis isn't justified by the on field results; it's a manifestation of subconcious racism.
3) Blaming Whitlock for the racism in football (both college and pro) is pitiful. ND didn't recieve guff over the Willingham firing because of Ty's race. ND was chastized for the unrealistic expectations, and the hypocrisy. Black pro and college basketball coaches are fired and hired with regularity. Nobody hides behind that excuse in basketball ("We just can't risk the publicity that would occur if we fired Terry Porter"), probably because there are fewer racist right wing jerks involved with basketball than there are in football. Just last week, Fisher DeBerry basically says "yeah, what Jimmy the Greek Said!" when explaining why his team stunk, and he keeps his job?!?! That's a red flag that should make people realize that there are a lot of prejudicial subconscious paradigms that are present in football that may be impeding the advancement of African American coaches.
I'm glossing over a few things, but I wanted to chime in with some thoughts:
1. There were multiple people on national TV after Ty got fired who said it was racist. The discussion was out there. I should know - I do sports talk for a living. People were talking about ND being racist, and I was refuting them all along, even though I didn't necessarily agree with the firing at the time.
2. The rumor mill has strong influence on recruiting. It's one big reason Barry Alvarez stepped down when he did. He didn't want the rumors and speculation about his future to affect Bielema's ability to recruit.
3. The extension was clearly an overreaction by Notre Dame to rumors about Weis potentially going to the NFL. But that's not racist. It might not be good for business, either. But that's Notre Dame's problem.
Nice piece, Brian.
Ty Willingham is a great coach who has great success. He is not a bad coach. Ask Washington.
FF-
Weis didn't deserve his extension. NO COACH did. 7 games into a 5 year contract and a winning % below your school's average says this was an over-reaction. whitlock makes this point and I think most would agree with him on it.
Where Whitlock loses the strength of his argument is in saying ND was racist for not being as stupid with Ty as they were with Weis. Shouting "racism" when it isn't justified is incredibly offensive to the real victims of racism. Just because two people of different races received different treatment doesn't mean the difference in that treatment was due to racism.
Summing up Whitlock's article: 1. Firing Ty was OK. 2. Giving Charlie an extension was stupid. 3. Not giving Ty an extension was racist.
How can you defend the leap that Whitlock makes there? I am sure that Ty's race played a factor in his relationship with the university and its fanbase. Nobody is entitled to largesse as a result of someone else's poor judgment, however. Charlie and his agent scared ND into giving them a ton more money. More power to them - they made it happen and Ty didn't. You can't use the word racist because ND was only stupid once.
Those Anonymous posts are mine. Browser forgot to put my name in (Clearly the browser's fault - not mine).
"I have been a Notre Dame fan for my entire 21 years of living, and I have never felt more pride in a team then when I watched Notre Dame play for Weis"
This is the subconcsious racism that I refer to. I'm sure you would say the same thing about a team coached by George O'Leary, too. They "fit the mold" better than Ty, don't they?
Had our team played this way under Ty, we'd have been just as proud, FF. They didn't.
We were proud of our coach (Ty) during the 8-0 stretch, but there wasn't a fan out there that thought that we really should have been 8-0. For a bunch of those games, the defense and special teams were outscoring the offense. So much for the vaunted West Coast offense. But everyone was willing to give it some more time...but as those good defenses and special teams graduated, the offense never picked up and Ty lost 15 of his last 28 games after that 8-0 start, without even being competitive in a lot of those games. I don't think anyone can sit here and say that the team was any good over the last two years (save the surprising wins over Michigan and Tennessee).
Is the ND administration racist? I don't know how anyone can accuse ND of being racist. Number one, they hired Ty in the first place. Also, when I was a student there, the student who dressed up as the leprauchan mascot was black (and on TV all the time). Did anyone have any problems with that? Of course not...he's generally regarded as the best leprauchan we had in years. Was O'Leary the first choice of the administration? Obviously...but no one can say that ND fans didn't embrace Ty whole heartedly. I was at the pep rally before the game that ended the 8-0 streak and I had never seen a coach command a crowd as he did...you could hear a pin-drop when he was talking. One student yelled "Ty for Pope" at one point and the look he gave the guy caused nervous laughter throughout the arena. The honeymoon was over when we started losing in the second season and the excuses started piling up.
Is this extension a good thin? I don't really know yet. I'm not up in arms over it, but it did raise my eye-brows. What it did do, though, is keep ND in the news on an off week and answered the rumors of Weis going off to the NFL. If you think that those sort of rumors don't affect high school kids trying to decide where they are going to go to college, then you're delusional. I knew a couple of guys that were recruited to go to Penn State and one of their concerns was whether or not JoePa would be around for their four (or five) years. And there was more than just the one NFL.com article for talk of Weis going back to the NFL. Were those rumors swirling around Ty? Nope...no one was concerned that he would leave after one year. His NFL experience was lacking and he didn't come to ND after having multiple opportunities for NFL jobs.
Thanks for writing the article, Brian...I usually do cheer on Michigan when they're not playing ND, just so that our wins against you guys look more impressive.
Of course nobody thought that the 8-0 start was legitimate; his teams weren't "disciplined," were they? Ty just couldn't "prepare well," and he relied on "athleticism," didn't he? No, nothing racist there. ND's fanbase is pure as the driven snow. His offense sure didn't work at Stanford, did it? As for those blowouts, you're right; those 1-3 point losses against Pitt, BYU, and BC were actually blowouts; everyone knew that Ty's "undicsiplined" teams weren't in those games. Lazy Ty! I remember those (completely fabricated) articles on ND blogs about Ty taking time off to golf in the afternoons. Lazy Ty! (but what more would you expect, right?)
I'm surprized that nobody thought of the fact that this extension actually brings attention to the "Weis to the NFL" rumours. As Whitlock pointed out, if an NFL team wants him, ND can't do anything about it. Specific performance isn't a remedy for breach of personal service contracts. Hopefully Weis leaves to coach the Vikings, sought after recruits go to a real research university (such as Michigan), and ND hires Fisher DeBerry to go after those ath-a-letic black kids. The fan base can rally around a Nazi pope and a crazy coach.
Father Figure - you asked about 40 posts ago if the bounces this year were the result of coaching. The answer is yes.
Every team gets a couple lucky bounces each year. But when Purdue fumbles on consecutive plays without being touched (as against Purdue in 2002), that is insane luck, especially when it results in a 24-17 win. On the other hand, when the fumble comes from a jarring hit or from a well-timed blitz, as has this year, that is good coaching.
When an interception is caused by a ricochet off a refs head, that is luck. When it is caused by a tip at the line from a defensive lineman, that is good coaching.
Samardzija's TD against Michigan was not luck - he was in position to catch it before it was tipped, and he was able to make the adjustment to catch it after he was tipped. Henne's fumble may have been luck but don't forget the score was 17-3 at the time.
Look up the Notre Dame game summaries from the AP in 2002. They all read the same "Somehow, ND got luck again." This year, the stories are saying "ND dominates another opponent." The fact is, in Ty's first year, things happened to Notre Dame. This year, Notre Dame is what's happening.
Hopefully Weis leaves to coach the Vikings, sought after recruits go to a real research university (such as Michigan), and ND hires Fisher DeBerry to go after those ath-a-letic black kids. The fan base can rally around a Nazi pope and a crazy coach.
Snif, snif...I got a hell of a whiff of desperation and bigotry here...Hope I'm mistaken....
"Samardzija's TD against Michigan was not luck"... no the CATCH was not luck, but Quinn's completion was...
But anyway...
I actually agree completely with Whitlock's argument...who has ND beaten so far? One ranked team, including the likes of Purdue (tied for last in big 10),BYU, Pitt, Wash. I'm not impressed. What's the rest of the schedule like? They play SU, Stanford, Navy and Tennesse. Tennessee is the only even close to decent team on that list. If Michigan played their schedule they'd easily go 9-2, maybe even 10-1 if a couple bounces here and there against ND went their way. NOT IMPRESSED.
Maybe even 10-1? Are you saying you would beat USC, or that if you played ND's schedule, you wouldn't have lost to them?
Oh wait, you explained that. My bad.
Excellent post, Brian. I concur with the "asshole" moniker, especially as I'm reading over the comments here and the main person defending Whitlock's paranoid worldview is the same guy who keeps making disparaging references about white people and Catholics. Well, I guess that's ok, if you're a self-righteous "anti-racist" crusader. Excuse me for saying it, but fuck people like that.
Go check out bluegraysky.blogspot.com. They have a e-mail exchange between Whitlock and a AA ND fan. Whitlock calls him an Uncle Tom.
Wow Dave, you support your argument with nothing more than profanity. Is it really anti-Catholic to point out that the new Pope is a Nazi? If an Catholic person himself (or herself) does that, is he or she a self-hating Catholic?
FF, this is from the Wikipedia biography of the Pope:
When Ratzinger turned 14 he was forced by law to join the Hitler Youth (membership was legally required from December 1936.) According to the National Catholic Reporter correspondent and biographer John Allen, Ratzinger was an unenthusiastic member who refused to attend meetings. Ratzinger has mentioned that a Nazi mathematics professor arranged reduced tuition payments for him at seminary. This normally required documentation of attendance at Hitler Youth activities; however, according to Ratzinger, his sympathetic professor arranged things so that he did not have to attend to receive a scholarship.
Military service (1943–1945)
In 1943, when he was 16, Ratzinger was drafted with many of his classmates into the FlaK (anti-aircraft artillery corps). They guarded various facilities including a BMW aircraft engine plant north of Munich and, later, the jet fighter base at Gilching, where Ratzinger served in telephone communications. After his class was released from the Corps in September 1944, Ratzinger was put to work setting up anti-tank defences in the Hungarian border area of Austria in preparation for the expected Red Army offensive. When his unit was released from service in November 1944, he went home for three weeks, and then was drafted into the German army at Munich to receive basic infantry training in the nearby town of Traunstein. His unit served at various posts around the city and was never sent to the front.
Ratzinger was briefly interned in a prisoner-of-war camp near Ulm and was repatriated on June 19, 1945. The family was reunited when his brother, Georg, returned after being repatriated from a prisoner-of-war camp in Italy.
I'm Catholic, and while I disagree with the Pope on quite a number of things, I would not call him a Nazi.
"The White Rose Society (German, Die Weiße Rose) was a World War II-era resistance movement in Germany calling for nonviolent resistance against the Nazi regime . . . leaflets were sent out in mass mailings from different cities in Bavaria and Austria, since the members believed that southern Germany would be more receptive to their anti-militarist message."
This is straying too far from football, but that's due to the vitriol and invective hurled at Whitlock. You made it political.
Any further references to Nazis will be deleted.
Maybe Quinn should pay some of the contract. He went from not being included on the watch list for the Davey O'Brien award (top 30 preseason quarterbacks) to being listed as the only college quarterback on CNNSI's top 10 NFL franchise quarterbacks.
Charlie has probably made him about 10 million dollars over the course of his career.
Brian -- thank you in advance for enforcing violations of Godwin's Law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God.../Godwin%
27s_Law
Now, back to football. :-)
Ty's offense might have worked at Stanford, but how are those PAC-10 defenses doing out there? Did his offense work in three years at Notre Dame? No...and I don't think anyone would argue that. The best performances were when we decided to scrap the aerial assault and run the ball (anyone remember Julius Jones?). Heck, there's another good example of poor decision making...Ty's coaching staff insisting on giving carries to Ryan Grant instead of Julius Jones (in that Pitt game where Jones ran for over 200 yards, Grant got more carries). There were flashes of brilliance when ND would call an unexpected play (first offensive play at FSU), but more often than not, it was just a frustrating experience to watch. I was one of those fans that sometimes thought that we were better off with the defense on the field.
This is not an arguement of Ty's performance while at Stanford. Its an arguement over his performance at ND. Stanford doesn't matter anymore.
As far as the team's performance this year under Weis...maybe only one of those wins came against a team that is currently ranked, but remember how all those "experts" out there said that ND would start 1-5 because Pitt was the class of the Big East, Michigan would man-handle them, Purdue was going to win the Big Ten, and the quirky BYU offense/defense would cause ND fits (like it did the year before). Okay, so averaging nearly 40 points a game against those teams is pretty easy and a Ty coached team would have done that. Does anyone really think that?
FF...seriously, did you watch any of those games that you're talking about or just look at the scores afterwards? And there is some deep, underlying hatred going on here. When we're all talking about ND football, did we really have to go off and call the Pope a Nazi? Where did that come from?
I hate the way people villify African Americans who stand up and point out racism. I'm sure that most football fans don't understand or know about critical race theory, but the defintion and idnetification of prejudicial behavior belong to the dispossessed. Its their only power, and people in the majority can't take that away from them. If you read the stories about Ty, they fit the paradigm of the "lazy negro" myth to perfection. "Undisciplined," "poor game coach," "lazy/leaves practice early to golf," "poor in social situations," etc. I don't focus on ND's adminsitration itself; as Nate said, they hired Ty in the first place. The fanbase doesn't come off so clean, and the media/fanbase beattification that Weis is getting is really unjustified.
Geez, let's have less neo-Marxism and racial hucksterism, and more football. Peace out.
This "Father Figure" person has to be one of the dumbest human beings on the planet. Seriously, either he's just trolling or he's an utterly ignorant tool. What an ass.
Another half-wittend ND fan. What else is new?
So now anyone who disagrees with FF is a "half-wittend" ND fan...whatever the hell "half-wittend" is.
I despise Notre Dame. Hell, NBC carries their games and I dislike NBC for doing it. That's how much I love Notre Dame.
No, anyone who supports his/her argument by simply saying "X must be the dumbest person on the planet" is half witted (and probably half-wittend, too). There are ways to respond to Whitlock's article without implcating racial politics. Looking at The scoring margin difference between Weis's team and Ty's team in 2002, for example. However, to provide the camaflouge for racist "football men" to continually reinforce their prejudicial worldviews isn't one of those responses. I don't dislike ND; in fact, I used to like their fans more than any other team that visited A2. However, there's a nasty streak in that fanbase now that rears its head from time to time.
FF--
Simply trying to prop up Ty's team from 2002 and Weis' team from this year, and then crying racism when the coaches weren't treated equally under TOTALLY DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES is dumb.
And that's what Whitlock did here. Not only that, but it's hard to respond to him without implicating racial politics when THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WHITLOCK DID.
Do you want me to respond without invoking race? OK.
Whitlock is an idiot for comparing the two situations without mentioning that there were no NFL.com reports saying that Willingham was going to be pursued by NFL teams during the offseason.
Whitlock is an idiot for comparing the two situations without mentioning that Notre Dame had just been burned for giving Bob Davie a new contract when the reality was that he was incapable of leading the Notre Dame program. That cost them a lot of money because Davie was smart and went into TV instead of trying to get another coaching job, meaning ND had to pay him off. They weren't about to make the same mistake a second time because Willingham got off to a hot start with Davie's players.
Whitlock is an idiot for not taking into account the fact that Weis is a Notre Dame guy, and the gesture of giving him a ten-year deal would probably keep him around for a while, since he wants to be able to put his son through high school and eventually college in South Bend. Not only that, but again, the rumors were only getting started about Weis going back to the NFL, where he has a strong background and resume. Notre Dame has four games left and I don't think they wanted to taint the rest of the season by allowing those rumors to persist and increase in coverage as the season wore on.
It was an overreaction, in all likelihood. But for Whitlock or anyone else to label it racist based on minimal circumstantial evidence is short-sighted, and it's an absolute disservice to the cause of getting more African-Americans in coaching...a cause that a guy like Whitlock should be using his bully pulpit on ESPN.com to advance instead of damage.
So the name Gerry Faust doesn't ring a bell to you, Bruce? Seems like ND makes these mistakes with most of their coaches, save one. You're right; the circumstances in 2002 were different. Ty actually beat good teams, arguably in a more sustainable manner (as Brian quasi-flippantly argued this week, the top defensive teams tend to outperform the top offensive teams) than Weis has. Is there room for you to disagree with Whitlock based upon what you just wrote? Yes. Does it make him an idiot for disagreeing with you? No.
Why has this disservice not affected coaching in the NBA, Bruce? People write about the NBA, right?
I some how got on to this forum through a ND site and I can't stop reading it. Father Figure, you are wrong. During Ty's first year, no one wanted him to succeed more then ND fans did. We were sick of losing and here comes this new coach who starts off 8-0. We thought the offense would show up eventually, but it did not matter at the time. Enter years 2 and 3 of the Willingham Era. While he may have won games he wasn't supposed to win his first year, he now began to lose games he was supposed to win. This includes Syracuse, Pitt, BC, and BYU. To go along with this were the blowout loses to USC, FSU, UM, and Purdue. It became evident to me during last year's USC game that something was wrong. ND scored on it's first 2 drives and was still very much in the game through the 2nd quarter. But then came the halftime adjustments. USC blew ND away in the second half, for the 3rd year in a row. While Pete Carroll and his staff made all of the right coaching moves at halftime, Willingham and his staff obviously did not. This is not completely Willingham's fault, considering he did not run the offense or defense. But, as everyone knows, Willingham was given the choice to make changes to his staff,(offensive coordinator), or face the possible consequences later on.Ty decided to stick with his staff and that ultimately doomed his fate. He did not deserve 5 years considering the program was going nowhere but down. The ND administration made the bold choice to fire Willingham, who had the 3-year Performance Clause in his contract, and go after a better football COACH. Not specifically a white coach or a black coach, but a better coach. They found one in Charlie Weis, a proven NFL offensive coordinator who brought in an outstanding staff. Weis has already showed the difference coaching makes, and the USC game is an example of this. Losing to "the greatest offense ever assembled" by 3 points after losing to the same team by 31 points 3 years in a row is quite an accomplishment in this fan's opinion. As far as the racism issues goes, I do believe that all of this negative writing against universities will ultimately hurt black coaches. Notre Dame made smart football moves by firing Willingham and hiring Weis. Giving Weis a contract so that he doesn't leave for the NFL is not racist either.There is a buy-out clause in Weis contract too. If Weis was to fail like Willingham, he would not last through this contract. But, as the whole country already knows and cries themselves to sleep just thinking about it, Weis will not fail.He has the mind, the staff, and the recruits on there way in.
So Whitlock isn't an idiot for arguing race in an argument where there is no evidence, outside of some minimal circumstantial evidence, to suggest that it exists?
"Why has this disservice not affected coaching in the NBA, Bruce? People write about the NBA, right?"
There are many AA head coaches in the NBA, and this has been the case for some years now. College football is the opposite. There are few AA coaches, and colleges fear hiring AA because of the backlash that will follow if they fire them. The NBA already has many black coaches so the firing of one is not shocking or controversial. If there was not this huge backlash every time an AA was fired, more AA would be hired. This would lead to the end of this whole argument.
To echo the parallell post, when would there be evidence, Bruce? Are you going to limit your definition of "racism" to situations where there is a smoking gun? Can you see why that type of limitation 1) is advantageous for strategic racists; 2) is too limited, because it under-represents situations that educated people consider racism; 3) makes you seem like another Angry White Man? Circumstantial evidence is evidence, Bruce. As for the backlash, Whitlock hit that nail right on the head earlier in his ESPN chat; that's like blaming Rosa Parks for making things worse for black people for refusing to stand up on that bus. This debate has played out over many, many years, starting with the great "Booker T. vs. WEB Dubois" debate that was handily won by WEB.
"Seems like ND makes these mistakes with most of their coaches, save one."
Are you talking about Hunk Anderson there Father Figure? Because Hunk, who was hired as ND's head coach after Knute Rockne died, was fired after 3 years as a head coach. With a better winning percentage than Willingham to boot.
Although I'm sure that doesn't count for some reason.
When Rosa Parks did not stand up on that bus, she made things better for AA. She helped spark the civil rights movement, which led to equal rights for AA. By righting an article accussing ND of being racist and trashing the university, who is whitlock helping? certainly not AA coaching canidates. He is just making more likely that fearful universites will not hire them. There is no comparison between not standing up on a bus and not trashing your future employer.
Great article!
ND fans know that the 5-2 record under Weis has shown more improvement than all three seasons under Losingham. He sucked as a coach and he bitches about his firing being racist on ABC. Im sure as hell glad he is gone and Im more glad Weis is our coach!!
Just dropping in from IrishEnvy.com and I wanted to thank you for that awesome piece.
Guess you Michigan guys aren't so bad after all! You can catch our Irish discussion on this topic at the link below:
http://www.irishenvy.com/forums/...read.php?
t=4491
Again, excellent piece. Definitely one I'm going to pass around to the Notre Dame faithful.
Still labeling and using ad hominem remarks to make your case, huh, FF??
Weak.
What does it mean for an institution to be racist? A decision can be racially motivated, but this one wasn't. Does anyone honestly believe someone was even unconsciously thinking: "How do I screw Black people today... I know, lets give Charlie Weis a raise." The whole thing is just bizarre. I can see people calling Notre Dame fans racist, but it has nothing to do with a contract signed by the head coach.
If Charlie is a good coach and wanted the maximum payout he would have waited until he won a BCS game or had an NFL offer before requesting an extention. Notre Dame had more money that they could offer Weis originally, but because he was largely an unknown as a head coach he was given a lower figure. Seven games showed enough to support a long-term competitive contract which was under consideration for a while already. The NFL is a real player since Weis has so many existing connections, where Willingham was rarely considered an NFL prospect.
The 2002 Irish were really good, but the coaches were talking about only having 35% of the system installed. The defense drove the team and Kent Baer isn't a bad coach. The problem was that Ty was hired to bring a West Coast offensive system-- we already had a good defense and defensive talent under Davie. Talent wasn't being developed on offense as is clearly happening this year. This basically says it all: Notre Dame was undefeated and 4th(AP) in the Nation (first in the computer polls) in 2002, this year Notre Dame is 5-2 and ranked 8th(AP) (~20th in the computer polls). People who watch games are impressed by Notre Dame more this year despite losses. If Notre Dame had managed to beat USC and MSU (5 more points would have done both), Notre Dame would be #1-2 with the best win in the nation. No one quite bought Willingham at 8-0 and most everyone is buying Weis at 5-2. Those polls are racist.
Couple of notes -
I agree with the article - Whitlock is being silly in claiming that ND is racist for not having offered that extension to Willingham. They shouldn't have offered it to Weis, either. They're extremely stupid, but not racist.
That having been said, I want to respond to one of the threads of argument in the comments here - the comparison between D-IA football and other sports with regards to how many head coaches are minorities.
A couple folks have mentioned that the reason it is possible to fire minority head coaches in those other sports is because there are more of them, so the backlash isn't as serious. That's a rather unfair argument.
At one point in time, there were no minority head coaches in any sport. So how, then, do they exist now if the backlash still exists? (Well, in part it's because most professional leagues are private entities not subject to the whims of constantly-under-pressure state governments, unlike colleges... but that's a different argument) The only way minorities break into coaching is if several institutions are willing to take the chance on possibly getting a poor minority coach and receiving that backlash when they fire him.
Look at the NFL: in 2002 there were only 2 black head coaches, and they were sued by the Fritz Pollard Organization. There are now 5. (considering there's only 30-odd teams, a that's a 10% increase in 3 years with only limited vacancies, a pretty sizeable change)
Additionally, one would suppose that with so few current minority coaches and such a preponderance of minority players (as many players try to go on and become coaches when their careers are over - see Karl Dorrell as an example), the talent pool should be much less depleted.
Now, that doesn't mean that Brian's post was incorrect for cutting down Whitlock. He's Wrong with a captial 'W' - not for playing the race card necessarily, but for playing it in such a silly manner ("Notre Dame is racist because they didn't offer a MORONIC contract to the black head coach!"). In fact, as one earlier commentator mentioned, there's a much better target in all of this that's been ignored: why haven't the media pushed to talk about Karl Dorrell's success as much as they have for Weis? I'd be much more interested to read that article (then again, I'm a UCLA homer, soo...)
Underbruin, point taken re: schools not hiring minorities. This sort of media pressure is a drag on their hiring but in all honesty should only be a slight one.
Personally, I believe that the black head coaches thing is overblown.
Generally these things come with "the NFL is 2/3rds black" or something, which implies something false: that the attributes that make you a good player would also make you a good coach. It also fails to note that most coaches are old men who played when the proportions were more in line with the overall population (ie, whiter). It's my belief that eventually head coaching jobs will settle down into an equilibrium approximately in line with the population (so that would be maybe 15 across DI) in the next dozen years or so, but not thanks to Jesse Jackson or Jason Whitlock.
The residual racism of the 60s and 70s still lingers in coaching because most head coaches today were coaches then. Black coaches got a late start and are gradually catching up. Once there are a lot of old black coaches there will be black head coaches, because head coaches are generally old.
Let me attempt to be brief:
ND administration fouled up in these instances:
- Selecting George O'Leary as their first choice the 2nd last time around
What had he accomplished at GA Tech, in the ACC, where his only annual competition at the time was FSU? Remember, Miami and B.C. were still in the Big East.
- Bringing in Ty Willingham multiple times before settling on him as their 2nd choice
It was an injustice to him, who was a promising coach at the time, although ND made him look like damaged goods before he got there. He will hopefully turn things around at UW.
- Firing Ty Willingham without making it abundantly clear that it was based upon the declining performance of the football team
Instead, they made ridiculous 'Sun.-Fri.' statements about Willingham's influence on academics. Yes, head coaches bear responsibility for getting their student-athletes in classrooms, but their primary duty is to adequately prepare their charges to compete in a particular sport.
- Overreacting to rumors of interest from NFL teams in Charlie Weis
Some gesture was probably warranted, but 10 YEARS?! Give me a break, nobody with a 5-2 record deserves that.
I am a ND alum, and I care deeply about the university, the football program, and the way both are perceived by the outside world. I don't believe that anyone can make accurate statements about ND alums and fans without taking the time to get to know them. Brian, however, showed some insight based upon an on-going series between two rivals who respect one another.
While I don't completely agree with Father Figure and Jason Whitlock, I think that the extension was unwarranted. I also find their positions intriguing, and I would like them to expound upon them. At no point do I believe that racism dictated the actions of the university, but I do believe that the last few years do not represent Notre Dame's finest hour.
I only hope that much has been learned from this ordeal, and that everyone can move on.
Just a note to Father Figure after reading your comments. If you and Whitlock are going to call an institution racist, shouldn't you look at everything that an institution does, rather than two staffing moves?
Maybe you could look at the fact that Notre Dame graduates more of its players than Harvard or Yale, and that the percentages are the same for minority players as for the caucasians? Or maybe the fact that Notre Dame is well known for taking care of its players even if they get hurt, a strong break in practice from most other schools (The SEC numbers in particular are awful) that are in the habit of keeping minority players around as long as they can play, and then ditching them afterwards.
Maybe you're right. Maybe Notre Dame is racist. But Notre Dame's brand of racism involves taking care of the students, and paying Willingham millions of dollars to not coach. Instead of ranting about that, maybe we should all be more worried about the students? I think Willingham will get by just fine.
Father Figure has to be a bit. There is no way he is for real.
Correction on what I wrote above... they actually graduate more players than any 1-A institution other than Harvard and Yale. My apologies.
Great article. I really enjoyed reading it.
Commenting by HaloScan
