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

Assuming all he said was true, so what? by tdiddy07

I don't discount anything said in the letter about the reasons for the improvement from 2016 to 2017. I don't think many on here do either. I assume all of that to be true. The point is, what does that get us? It's year 8, Kelly just wasted a historically dominant offensive line and had a good but not great season. Kelly is still the guy who commanded the most underachieving season in Notre Dame history. And realizing the sins of his ways improved the program to simply an underachieving season.

How does anything that he said point toward continued improvement in the future? In the end, even in one of Kelly's best seasons, the team was ill-prepared against the stiffest competition. Yay, we're back to being just run of the mill underachievers. Nelson quickly glossed over our colossal failures under the brightest lights. But that's the most important part of the season with respect to predicting future performance under Kelly.

He also erected straw men to support his argument in support of Kelly's future. I don't care about insight to the program. The insinuation that the only improvements that ND can get from Kelly are Saban and Meyer is just plain dumb. It takes no special insight to the program to appropriately rank Kelly's performance and reputation in the industry against his peers. And I can guarantee you that I've spent more time than Nelson has looking at the historical performance of college coaches. For all the things I assume he's right about concerning Kelly's approach to this season, he's just dead ass wrong about where Kelly stacks up against his peers.