-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter OSUBasketballJunkie
- Start date
Are you suggesting that they are the same person - or that one is a threat to eat the other?
Upvote
0
ulukinatme
Old Skool
I'm not sure which is larger, they're both pretty big. I would have to say that Charlie Weis isn't a complete waste of space, the football program is at least improving. On the other hand, Michael Moore pretty much useless and should leave America.
Upvote
0
All in all you people have to give Weis some credit. He is a pretty good coach after all. He has ND pointed in the right direction too. True he isn't the most attractive and he does some thing that people don't like but hey who doesn't? So lighten up. Maybe we just love to hate .
Upvote
0
Napoleonbuck
Hall of Fame
He's a good recruiter, but I'm not convinced yet he's a good coach. Coaches need to be good on both sides of the ball in addition to recruiting. He's still pretty reckless when calling the ND offense(I think he gets arrogant on the sidelines so he ends up calling risky plays. Basically he's us in NCAA, except he's doing it for real). The ND defense is still a few years away from being close to good. A person with three fingers could count the number of quality ND dlinemen on one hand. The recruiting looks good, but I'll wait to see how their new 3-4 works. It can be hard to get the personnel for that defense in the pros, let alone in college. I have a feeling their ILB will be undersized in addition to their DEs.
Upvote
0
Napoleonbuck
Hall of Fame
Of course not, but I wouldn't put him in the top ten or twenty either. He's yet to prove himself.
Upvote
0
Why would he have to prove himself ? He is the coach at one of the premier schools in the nation, They have a winning record. They just gave him a humongous pay raise. What more does he have to prove?. He may not be great on both sides of the ball but most coaches are not either. THe great ones have great counterparts.Napoleonbuck;875176; said:
Upvote
0
Napoleonbuck
Hall of Fame
So every coach at all top schools are always great coaches?
I'm just not sure I follow your logic. I don't think having a winning record at Notre Dame is a great sign of success. Notre Dame should ALWAYS have a winning record. I think beating USC, winning bowl games, and proving he's more than just an offensive coach need to happen before he's a top ten coach in America. Just because he's at Notre Dame, that doesn't make him better than a coach like Jim Grobe or Schiano, coaches that have won at schools without a football history.
I guess I don't see how Notre Dame giving him a contract extension qualifies as him having "proved" something.
I'm just not sure I follow your logic. I don't think having a winning record at Notre Dame is a great sign of success. Notre Dame should ALWAYS have a winning record. I think beating USC, winning bowl games, and proving he's more than just an offensive coach need to happen before he's a top ten coach in America. Just because he's at Notre Dame, that doesn't make him better than a coach like Jim Grobe or Schiano, coaches that have won at schools without a football history.
I guess I don't see how Notre Dame giving him a contract extension qualifies as him having "proved" something.
Upvote
0
So Davie & Willingham were good coaches?Best Buckeye;875178; said:
A winning record does not cut it at the elite schools like ND, as seen by the past two firings.
Which was pretty absurd, considering their closest thing to a quality win (at the time) was a loss.
1) Beat a marquee team (not 5-loss UM, 4-loss PSU)
2) Not get crushed in BCS bowl games
Charlie's best accomplishment was taking ND to the wire (though Fresno State almost pulled it off too). Since then, he's been crushed by the 4 elite teams they have played (12-1 OSU, 11-2 UM, 11-2 USC & LSU).
Upvote
0