POINT: Parting ways would be a Weis decision.

Here's a relevant nursery rhyme:

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.

Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.

All the King's horses and all the King's men

Couldn't put Humpty together again.

In the case of the storied Fighting Irish of Notre Dame, we all know who Humpty Dumpty is. We all know where in Indiana the wall is located. And we all should know recognize that the pieces can't be mended. Humpty is fucked, and he's bringing the wall down with him.

Now I am not a Notre Dame fan. In fact, I don't like them at all. But it does kill me to see the most storied program in college football crumbling before our very eyes. One thing became plainly obvious in the press conferences and body language following the heartbreaking 24-23 loss to Syracuse last week. Let's pause a minute...they lost to Syracuse. Wow.

Students were pelting their players. The team was booed. Charlie Weis has lost his fans. Now he needs to get lost.

I am of the opinion that Weis simply isn't the man for the job at Notre Dame. He has talent on that team--that is to say, there are less or equally talented teams that have better records than Notre Dame this year (see the ACC, Nebraska). And yet, Weis has lost control. He has 9 wins--NINE!--over the past two seasons at a program that historically is, to put it lightly, used to winning.

Why isn't he the man for the job? Simply, he is not inspiring, he is arrogant, and he's not automatically a great head coach, even with great experience. We can look at these three in reverse order.

- He's not automatically a great head coach, even with great experience. He was never a head coach prior to his tenure here, and there might be a reason. He had been in the NFL as an assistant/offensive coordinator for 15 years without even being seriously considered a coach, and he was game-planning for 4 Super Bowl Champion teams during his tenure. Yet if you look at the personality of those teams, they were laid back, silent-assassins--a great way to be in the NFL, but not the right mindset for college athletes. They need to stay hungry and be aggressive. The point here is that even though Weis was a proven winner as an assistant and a coordinator, he was never even a finalist for a coaching job until he went to his alma mater. And there, he became a savior, even though the only thing he is truly interested in saving is room for dessert.

- He is arrogant. Picture this (and this is reported to have actually happened). Your son is a star high school football player, and he already has offers from Mack Brown, the classiest coach in the league and Urban Meyer, the hungriest coach in the league. Now look who waddles into your living room--Charlie Weis, the head ball coach at Notre Dame. He's soft spoken, but has this air of "we are Notre Dame, you should want to come here" about him. But does he tout his University? Perhaps a little, but he truly ices the cake when he takes his hand out of his pocket. He places his hand on the table so that everyone in the room can get a good look at his Super Bowl rings. "Look at what I won," he thinks to himself. That's not the way a Notre Dame football coach should behave. Past coaches were humbled by the opportunity to coach there--Weis almost gives off the aura that it is his right, not his privilege.

- We always talk about great athletes and how they have "It." Nobody can quite say what "It" is, but you know when your player has it. I also believe that great coaches have "It" as well. They can rally the troops when they need to. They always seem to make the right decisions. Notre Dame has a history of coaches who had "It." Ara Parseghian did, Knute Rockne did...heck, even Lou Holtz did (though he seems to have lotht it now). Now Weis seems to be less like those three and more like a Gerry Faust (allegorical connections aside), the guy who came in and was supposed to return them to prominence and whose greatest accomplishment was a 7-5 season and the Alamo Bowl. Faust left the Irish to be the head coach at the University of Akron. He didn't have "It" and Weis doesn't either. He's lost games, the fans and perhaps even his players (a lot of transfers are now rumored).

I think Weis could be a great guy, but he has to go. He might even be a great coach somewhere else. But not Notre Dame. The school deserves better than him. They need someone who can really put the 'Fight' back in Fighting Irish.

COUNTERPOINT: YOU'RE AN IDIOT

Where to begin? I'll start with your personal attack on Weis. You claim that part of Weis' problem is that he's arrogant because he wears his Super Bowl rings when he recruits. If you have a problem with this, that's fine, but don't make idiotic comparisons to other coaches. You juxtapose Weis with Urban Meyer. Let's remember that Urban Meyer had rings made for his 2004 Utah team that had "The Real National Champions." Apparently, "Fuck You, Pete Carrol" didn't come in the font he wanted. So the thought that he isn't wearing that ring and his 2007 National Title ring during his recruiting visits is stupid. He does the exact same thing as Weis. The only difference is Meyer can promise recruits the chance to be the next Alex Smith. Weis can promise them the chance to be the next Tom Brady. Tough Call.

You also bring up Mack Brown, and make the claim he's the classiest guy in college coaching. Yep, pretty much, that's all I think of when I think of Mack Brown. Class. You read that score right. In the 2005 Big 12 Championship game, Mack Brown hung the classiest 70 points on a traditional opponent that college football has ever seen. Man, he really is a super guy, and isn't now trying to play the "classy" card because his team can't score more than 35 on Kansas. Great point. I would also like to point out that I think Charlie Weis carries his body quite well, thank you very much.

But Mack Brown is actually a good reason why Charlie Weis shouldn't be fired from Notre Dame this season (key point, I think he gets one more year). Mack Browns first four years at UNC had records of: 1-10, 1-10, 6-4-1, 7-5. Why did they stick with him after that? Because they were a terrible program, and it takes a while to rebuild. The reason Ty Willingham was fired in the first place was because his recruiting had tailed off. NOTE: this does not mean it was always bad, it meant that it had suddenly turned bad. So yes, Charlie Weis won early with another coaches players, but it was because the juniors and seniors on the team were talented. Fast forward to last year: all those terrible freshmen and sophomores that Weis inherited were now juniors and seniors. So, he had the option of playing his freshmen recruits (which was considered a top 5 class) or playing upper classmen that were awful. Which do you choose? And are you surprised this team goes 3-9? Let's see what Texas' record would be if they were not allowed to play any of their upper classmen. Just because freshmen are talented doesn't mean they are ready to contribute on every play. Now let's look at this year. Still, you have no upperclassmen, you just have a bunch of talented freshmen and sophomores. What would you expect this team to look like? Show some moments of great promise, some moments of complete ineptitude, but overall steady improvement? I think that's what you've gotten out of the Irish this season. Why didn't UNC fire Mack, or Texas for that matter when he was getting owned by Bob Stoops from 2000=2004? Because it takes time to overhaul a roster and he was still recruiting effectively. I think Weis is doing both at Notre Dame thus far, so he deserves another year. Granted, if he still can't win 8-9 games with his players as upperclassmen, he should be shown the door.

And then there's the issue about the whole "contract" thing. When one source with knowledge the terms of the deal describes his buyout as "stupefying" in 2008 college football terms, you have to pause for a moment of reflection. To fire Weis, it is believed that you would have to immediately write him a check for somewhere between $10 million and, wait for it, wait for it, wait for it, 32 MILLION DOLLARS. Want to put that in perspective? According to the New York Times (see article here), Notre Dame's entire athletic budget is $13.5 million this year. So, Notre Dame, would you rather have Charlie Weis coach your team next year, or would you rather pay him and not have any team, in any sport, for the next 1-3 years? It's easy to say "uuuuh, I'm drunk and angry about a loss, fire the coach." It's a lot harder to do when you see the actual money involved.