Maybe those of us who have such little faith in Kelly and have felt that way since at least a year before he was hired are perplexed and somewhat amazed that others don't see the almost surreal similarities that we see between him and the man he replaced. i.e. An obsession with his own offensive wizardry which results in spectacularly moving the ball between the 20's but having difficulties getting hard yards at critical junctures and a penchant for making risky in-game decisions. I could go on for quite a while detailing what I believe to be are other similarities but it's doubtful that I would convince anyone who doesn't already feel that way and I'm tired of getting into arguments on this board.

But there's another reason for the intransigence - in my case at least. I'm not going to be a patsy this time and I'm not going to let the admin off the hook for another half-assed hire. Just because they say it's time to go into return to glory mode doesn't mean I'm going to do it. I did it for Faust, Davie, Willingham, and Weis. Most of the time (particularly Faust and Willingham - I very much wanted Holtz when they hired Fuzzy and a host of people including Coughlin when we got Ty) against my better judgement. I probably would have for O'Leary also. I'm not going to do it this time when I'm convinced to the core of my being that this guy isn't up to the job. I don't care that he spent 15 years at a glorified community college, or was .500 at a MAC school or took what Dantonio started and won a crappy conference against the likes of Wannstedt and then lost a bowl to a team that continually loses big games.

I'm not going to pretend just because the admin and the hype machine say I'm supposed to and, if they have anyone looking at this board, I'll rub it in their faces when my expectations are met because they fucking deserve it. I would much rather be part of the rah-rah-just-wait-and-see-it's-going-to-be-ok-eventually crowd because that's much more my nature but I can't and won't do it this time and I won't pretend to be in a wait and see mode because I'm not.

I didn't post this to be confrontational to you personally 3b but you seemed genuinely interested in the motivations of someone of my ilk.

"Much of the discord here stems from reactions by people who feel this way to posters who seem to conclude, with certitude, that Kelly is doomed to follow the path of Davie, Willingham, and Weis"



Point out who and where this is happening. Please, let's put the light of day on all those who are doing it.

We should not and cannot mistake being pissed off because we're off to a historically awful start this season, as certainty that Kelly will fail.

Kelly shouldn't be compared to his predecessors, both good and bad. He will succeed or fail on his own, not because he was like Lou or Weis.


Anyone who is certain Kelly will fail, is full of it, and should be shouted down from all quarters. I don't think it's happening, so I think you're setting up a straw man.

Everyone should hope that Kelly will turn this around. But I think he's got to change things, because what he's doing, right now, isn't working. This start is historically awful by ND standards. That is a reality.

I don't know if he's going to fail or succeed, but what is happening, right now, isn't working. We shouldn't confuse stating the fact that we're off to an awful start, by ND standards, with having certainty about Kelly's prospects. Suggesting that we also accept that there is a chance that Kelly could crash and burn, doesn't imply certainty either.

Claiming that people are certain Kelly will fail doesn't advance the discussion one iota. Comparing him to Lou or Weis/Davie/Willingham is an exercise in futility. Finally, we're not in a good place right now, and people are right to be pissed off/angry/sad.

http://www.ndnation.com/boards/showpost.php?b=football;pid=235908;d=this

See the first line. There are many others.

I obviously didn't read the post the same way you did. Where are the "many others"? I want examples, lots of them. A single post, which is saying those who are certain Kelly is the answer are beyond hope, isn't really supporting your claim.

BeijingIrish: "It starts with a discreet chat Swarbrick has with Kelly alerting him that Stanford will be his last game."

Any others?

I want people saying, specifically, Kelly will fail, with certainty, and that we need a new coach, right now.

That's not being said, and we both know it.

But hey, keep responding to something that isn't there.

This is kind of a silly pissing match, but with all due respect, I think you are the one employing a red herring. Here's what I said:

"Much of the discord here stems from reactions by people who feel this way to posters who seem to conclude, with certitude, that Kelly is doomed to follow the path of Davie, Willingham, and Weis."

"Yet many posts on this board (not yours) reflect a conclusion that there is simply no way Kelly will turn this around."

Here is what you suggested I was looking for: "I want people saying, specifically, Kelly will fail, with certainty, and that we need a new coach, right now."

There's a significant gulf there. I've never claimed people have said we need a new coach, right now. But the posts I've highlighted say, respectively, we need a new coach at the end of this season, and, anyone who thinks Kelly might still succeed is so far gone as to not be reasoned with. I think that both reflect a certainty on the part of the poster that Kelly will fail. If not, why replace him at the end of this year, and why say posters who think he could still succeed are not worth considering?

I know this is silly, but I just don't get how one could read the board and not conclude that there are several posters who appear to be certain that Kelly will fail.

Brian Kelly will fail at Notre Dame. There is still time for those changes to be made, but I have no faith he will make them. If he doesn't, I am fully convinced that he will fail and would prefer that we immediately begin searching for a replacement.

This qualifier is important

"There is still time for those changes to be made, but I have no faith he will make them"

It allows for the opportunity to fix things. I'd be curious what the original poster says.

I'll say this, Kelly cannot keep doing what he's currently doing, it isn't working.

is that it is at least more reasonable than concluding that Kelly is bound to fail, period. I happen to think it's premature to conclude that he will fail unless he makes dramatic overhauls, but I could understand at this point why someone would disagree with that.

to be (nearly) universally the position of those you suggest are certain Kelly will fail.

I will say this, I think we've all been beaten down way too much, and Cross is right. This is sad and getting old. I had a good converstation with a life long friend who went to ND as well. We have memories of the good times, but they are distant, very distant, and getting more so with each passing day.

I really am getting tired of all of this, it really does suck for everyone.