(for once in my life trying to be polite, that is) and respond here. It's going to be direct and potentially uncomfortable.
My suggestion that you sit this one out was not primarily driven by you not being an alumnus of the University, although I do feel that there are some areas where non-alums should defer to alums. They can and should still weigh in, but they should understand that they have walked a different, not worse, not better, different path, and have a different relationship with the University. That's not a denigration, it's simply a fact.
What drove the suggestion was your reply in the subthread that "The older we get, the harder it is to deal with change" then "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."
My response: you show up, insult me and other alumni/alumnae, make incorrect assumptions about what we think, note that you won't engage in back and forth, and we're supposed to just smile and nod? I'm sorry, that's not going to happen. I politely suggested that you sit out. If you and others cannot see how your comments and strawman are problematic, then you need to think harder.
Next (and tangential to the main points here), while the athletes at Notre Dame by and large are spectacular representatives of the university, far better than I, there still are a nonzero number of them who are not saints. That's really not anything new, so trumpeting ND as better than others is a problem, and causes more grief than it's worth. That's not particularly pertinent here, but it did deserve a mention.
Then, in a separate thread, you create another strawman: "I’m just going to talk to you and those of your mindset. The negative posters who want Notre Dame of the 70s back again are becoming intolerable."
My response: certainly some like that exist. Most have a different opinion which you are unwilling to or incapable of entertaining.
Moving on, you play the victim card: "I think that it’s pretty simple really. But it’s a non-alum answer which really pisses off (some) of the alumni."
My response: that is weak and beneath you. It also alters people's perception of you. More on that later.
More in that post: "My take? Notre Dame is Notre Dame because of athletics, specifically football. The legion on subway alumni, the NBC contract, that massive stadium, the billion dollar endowment? It can all be traced back to football. Notre Dame isn’t the only Catholic school around. There are plenty of good ones with good academics and a moral grounding. But Notre Dame had football. And for a while, the ghost of what they were was enough."
My response: bluntly, no kidding. The vast majority of people who follow Notre Dame would tell you the same thing. It's no great enlightenment and does not need to be stated on a Notre Dame focused board.
"Fast forward to the 2020s and all of a sudden, Notre Dame has lost some of its uniqueness. It’s still an amazing school filled to the very brim with amazing people. I should know. I know plenty of them and cherish my relationships with them. But there are plenty of good schools out there with good academics and strong alumni networks. And those damned Southern schools are now targeting the exact type of Midwestern kid who used to look at Notre Dame and only Notre Dame."
My response: this did not happen all of a sudden. It was due to repeated failures of leadership and very predictable.
"So some people who have the ability to change things got together and decided to change things.
It’s not going to be for everyone. Some people are going to left behind. Some people think that they can change things and put the genie back in the bottle. I think that’s almost painfully naive. As someone who’s met a bagman and has seen and heard how things get done, I chuckle at the idea that we can turn back the clock to a simpler time."
My response: more strawmen. Very few people are looking to put the genie back in the bottle. They are advocating for strong leadership and forging our own path, which likely is a more difficult, but ultimately much more rewarding one.
Coming back to a point noted earlier in this overlong post. Some time ago you were looking for new employment and a member of the board helped you out in some way. I don't recall the specific details, but I believe that it was behind the scenes. I and many others here congratulated you and were happy that things wound up in a good place for you. Believe it or not, we all want each other to have happy, successful lives. I will tell you that how you have comported yourself in these threads the last few days gives me pause. While previously I would have been inclined to see what I could do or forward along contacts, at this point I would be unwilling to do so. I am not willing to link myself to someone who blatantly misrepresents things then plays the victim. I say this not to be rude (although I understand that I can be and often am a challenging personality, which is something that I try to work on every day but fail at more often than not), but to suggest that you reflect on this, as it may impact you at some point down the line. It certainly has with me. I still wish you well and all the happiness that you can have.
Finally, again regarding subway alumni/alumnae. Notre Dame would not be Notre Dame without them. Their input is welcome in all things, but as noted above, they have walked a different path than graduates of the University, and in some matters I believe that a degree of deference is in order. You and others may disagree, that's just my opinion.
I have no idea if you will see this or not, someone put me on ignore due to uncomfortable comments. But, if you do, be well and have a good day.