This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

Winning is never a problem by El Kabong

It's always been great and always will be.

I watched the game from start to finish today, and I enjoyed it. I especially liked the option of not having Flutie's voice grating on my ears, and I hope to have that option again in the future.

Winning is fine. Winning is awesome. The problem is when people take the current level of winning and try and inflate it into something other than what it is.

What have we seen in the three seasons since the 4-8 nightmare and the Brian Kelly 2.0 reboot? ND is defeating the teams it should defeat. Great, I like that. ND is losing to the other teams, sometimes in very embarrassing fashion. I don't like that at all and that needs to get fixed.

Is that really where we want ND to be? Beating up on the lower quality teams -- and the low ebb of the ACC overall means the schedules have a greater number of those than usual -- while getting thumped by other schools? It's certainly better than it was under Davie, Willingham and Weis, but those are three guys who never should have been hired in the first place ... three of probably the worst hires in Notre Dame history.

Is being better than terrible good enough?

It's not enough for me. I want Notre Dame to win championships. They have the history and the money and the fan backing to do it. It's very possible. And yes, based on objective measures, we're closer to it than ever before.

But it does seem to be enough for some people, the kind of people who crow about "winning 10 games the last three seasons" and how that should be some kind of incredible accomplishment. Never mind that we got absolutely destroyed in Miami, Dallas and Ann Arbor, and wasted a golden opportunity in Athens.

That makes me mad. Yes, we're better, but we're still not there, and given the blowouts in each of the three seasons, I'm hard pressed to see evidence the progress is continuing.

So when we beat a bunch of meatbags like BC by 33 points, I like it. But when it's paraded around as some kind of Grand Accomplishment, I don't like it at all.