It’s private donations.

Lets separate them completely from the rest of the student body as much as possible. Hell, why don't we just put dorm rooms there too? House their "tutors" too?

I’m open to arguments either way. What evidence would you point to in support of the position that it is possible to win a national championship without engaging in the facilities arms race? I don’t know enough about what other championship caliber schools are and aren’t doing.

> Our kids don't get the right nutrition (many of them currently elect fast food)
> They spend too much time going from place to place on a busy day that often is dawn to past dusk
> They've run out of meeting space with the hiring of analysts and creating more roles
> The weight room isn't state of the art (no idea where it falls short)

Nutrition, time management, physical preparartion, meeting space etc are the issues they're trying to solve for.

Now, shoot the messenger.

offices for the increased headcount?

What new meeting space is required, square footage-wise? For what types of meetings?

And people can cook and serve nutritious meals at both places.

What a fucking canard
.

and the adults get new digs.

All is good.

Player that lives in say, Dillon or Keough walks to Football HQ for breakfast, then to classes, then back to Football HQ for lunch, then back to classes, then back to Football HQ for practice/lift/meetings/dinner?

Players that live off-campus drives to parking lot, follows same routine?

instead of fixing and upgrading what we already have in place.

we need to put a stop to that shit!

would see Sam Hartman at the Duncan Chick-Fil-A at least a couple times a week :-) Not sure QB nutrition is quite as important as other positions, but I do think you are right about where the players eat. Not sure if this will help, but if people are willing to donate, it's their money to give, and I'll take all the advantages we can get.

Much of the criticism seems to come from the older alumni who want things to be like they were in the 80s when they were students and college athletics were simpler. Now I won’t engage in the back and forth about that because everyone is entitled to their opinions about the state of college athletics and nobody is really going to change their minds on the subject.

Now, there is an undercurrent of “this isn’t what Notre Dame should be about” to the argument as well. That’s also a legitimate concern. But here’s my take on that argument. To this point, Notre Dame’s athletic alumni have been overwhelmingly positive ambassadors for the university. There haven’t been any Ja Morant, Antonio Brown, or Ray Lewis types that represent the school in a negative manner. Our athletes continue to absorb the greater lessons being taught to them and take those lessons into their post college lives and live those lessons. As long as that continues to be the case, than you won’t hear me gripe about a billion dollar football facility or a fat NIL deal.

Now the day that our athletes start behaving in a manner that embarrasses the University, than I’ll be the first one in line to bitch and complain.

Just my thoughts.

I can put it.

primarily as I am trying to be polite. If you or others do not see what might be objectionable, then so be it. To each his or her own.

Edit to add - and, I have picked up another ignore. There are some real thin skins on this site. I know that I am nowhere near everyone's cup of tea, but stand up and argue your point. Take your lumps when and if you are wrong. Blocking things that make you feel icky is no way to go through life. I get it in certain cases. Maybe I'm just Mr. Icky. But good grief, if my posts in this thread are ignore-worthy, people are going to have a hell of a hard time dealing with life.

unnecessarily condescending, and comes off as if you're some kind of gatekeeper; you're not.

I know exactly what portion of the OP's response you took offense to, and I, nor my family took any offense to it. (Nearly my entire family graduated from Notre Dame)

condescending to "older" alums (I'm old-ish, maybe I qualify as an older alum, but I still feel like I'm not, even if I am). Condescending? Perhaps. Blunt? Absolutely, and intentionally so. USAF and I sorted things out, so all is well. I'll reply the same way every time that I believe someone shows up being a jerk, building and knocking down straw men, and so on. Does that make me a jerk as well? Probably. I'm comfortable with that. If you feel that it is an attempt at gatekeeping, I'm sorry. That's not my intent, and I have no desire to play board cop. But I will call a spade a spade, and will make no apologies for doing so.


It also presumed, incorrectly, to know what I might hope for Notre Dame. Much as you are doing here. So yes, I do think that there were many things wrong with usaf's post, and in yours to which I am replying. Unless I am misunderstanding you, and I don't think that I am, given your comment about your family's alum status, you believe that I had a problem with usaf's non-alum status. If you believe that is "exactly what portion of OP's response you took offense to", you would be wrong. I will say the same to you as I did to him. Kindly refrain from presuming to know what I think. If you want to know, just ask.

That's why I bluntly but politely asked him to can it. I am happy to debate back and forth, but do it based on what I say, not what you think that I believe.

If I am misinterpreting your post, my apologies, and my request that you clarify.

Please read my other responses in various threads, particularly to usaf and jt. I don't think that lack of alumni status means that someone's opinion is not valid or should not be heard. I _do_ think that alumni have a different understanding of ND that non-alumni. Just as I with my friends and siblings who attended different institutions - they understand them better than I do and have a different attachment to and influence with their alma maters than I.


Finally, have a good day and a nice weekend.

All of the following is my opinion. I am not stating that it is the one and true way, that anyone else is wrong, I am simply laying out my vision or part of it. I can't say that I spend significant minutes thinking about these things, so much of this is basically off the cuff. Take from it what you will.

We can't know if it is possible to win a national championship without engaging in the arms race unless we try. We already have engaged in it to an extent, but my opinion is that we need not and should not be doing things like erecting a 100 million dollar facility for football, particularly 20ish years after the prior Taj Mahal opened.

Notre Dame should assemble the best coaching staff that it possibly can. It has taken some steps along that front, and I very much like Freeman, but he and his staff are not the best that could have been assembled. Hopefully they grow into that. Whether they do remains to be seen.

I believe that athletes for whom the new facility vs the Gug is a deciding factor likely will be challenges to recruit. Notre Dame should strive to have facilities that are sufficient to achieve the goal but it should not be necessary to go as far as is planned. Maybe something could be added to the Gug, or a dining facility built next to it. I'm not against some improvements where truly necessary, but I am against the continued sequestering and unnecessarily opulent facilities (that goes for the general student body as well).

There has been an arms race forever. It's gotten larger over time, but this is nothing new. Notre Dame used to forge its own path and stand for how things should be done. This isn't about yelling at the sun, wearing an onion on my belt, or talking about how things were back in nineteen dickety-two. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

I would like to see Notre Dame stand for something (other than wasteful excess). I would like to see Notre Dame stop settling for mediocrity, in all things. I would like to see accountability at Notre Dame. I believe that the first step towards returning to a regular spot among the best teams in college football is to assemble a top notch staff. I am not convinced that we have done so. The jury is out on Denbrock, hopefully he surprises. Golden has been pretty good. Some of the other spots have been hit or miss. Freeman needs to insist that he be able to hire the best, then he needs to identify them and get them to join him. If he accomplishes that, the team will overachieve based on its talent, which will attract more talent. If the facilities are reasonably good then they will be a smaller factor in a given recruit's decision. If they are the make or break decision then Notre Dame may not be the place for them, and that's ok. But if a player knows that he is going to get the best coaching possible on his presumably desired path to the NFL, while also earning a degree from Notre Dame that he can make use of after his playing days are over, to me that's a very strong sales pitch.

If you made it through all of my rambling, congratulations, and have a good evening.

It is a net negative for the players and the football team. It takes them away from campus and their classmates for another hour or two per day. As grace said below, it might be best for non alums to sit this discussion out.

It is clearer why Swarbrick is hanging around like the smell of bad cologne at an Zahm SYR. Watch for him Don Kinging it at the announcement with his Montgomery Burns visage at the annoucement. It is not out of the question for part of it to be named after that useless douche.

after pointing out that ND seems to be indicating that it isn't very important to them (the administration, the program, whomever you want to define as "them") that the players spend time around their classmates at all.

I might add that a great many of "them" appear to be alumni.

Is going to make sure he is in the team photo.