Rockne's Roundtable

No other comments on this question? Disappointing

No.

Well put, IW,

I may put some tangents on this, but hopefully I'll address your points....

1) I think we have to be careful with the part-to-whole comparisons, particularly when talking about our kids. For every Lynch, there's a Manti and Tuitt. Perhaps we're more sensitive to this b/c Lynch comes on the back of Tee, Greenberry and Darby. I'm also at a loss as to who left b/c they couldn't start? Certainly not Lynch. Daniels could start on some teams, he's still here. Golson said, on camera, "If I don't start this year, Ill work hard so I can start next year." Could that be blowing smoke? Certainly, but he sure didn't hesitate. The 3 xfers to Charlies program weren't going to contribute to this years team anyway, so I just wish them well and keep moving. Ham is correct, Lynch certainly should've been on the radar as a guy who would have to grow to love ND, just like Stewart did.

2) To directly answer your question, I think Kelly's position is fine for at least the next 2 years. For all those who think Kelly needs to go, they don't get that Kelly is Swarbricks first major hire as AD; as Kelly goes, so does Swarbrick, and I'm convinced Swarbrick is going to give him every opportunity to succeed or fail. Besides, hiring/firing is a 2-way street, and I'm at a loss as to who Swarbrick could convince to come here after cutting bait with his own guy.

3) As for coddling players, I think Kelly (probably w/Swarbrick's blessing) recognized that some cleaning of house was going to be necessary when he got here, so Swarbrick probably isn't worried about how hard Kelly coaches. Did his Grimace (Happy Meal gang; man am i dating myself) impersonation on the sideline wrankle? Perhaps, but nobody seemed to care when Saban was jumping on his ST guy, in the 4th qtr of the national championship game. That was "Saban as fiery competitor, not wanting to give an inch." As Lou has said, we don't see what happens Sun-Fri; as long as those kids know he's got their back, Kelly can say what he wants to them on Saturdays. TJ didn't mind; Jonas talked about how Kelly was the first guy to lift him up. You get a glimpse of how he really is in the seniors comments on this site. Kelly was a demon, did things different, but got them to play better. As for walking a fine line, Kelly said it best: "You know who my guys are"

4). Toughness...u are correct, and folks stipulate how we are limited compared to Bama, yet continue to think that rebuilding at Notre Dame should be the same as at Alabama, while a team that we play every year, and has POUNDED us, is rarely mentioned. Stanford...tough players that are mean and nasty. That's what we want, right? When Harbaugh got there, that was his focus, tough players. It took him 3 years (4-8, 5-7, 8-5) before the breakthrough. After this year, we should get a better idea of the toughness of this team, as it will be composed entirely of Kelly's players. Im hoping this happens here; the difference is, we went 8-5, 8-5 and.... Interestingly, we rarely hear about xfers at Stanford, either.

5) one final point on toughness/Kelly. Everything we do at ND should be about attaining the winning culture that exists at the elite schools, regardless of who the coach is. Obviously, winning begets winning, but the only person in the program associated with winning at this level is the coach. Face it, no upperclassmen has ever won more than 4 games in a row, by my accounting. So if the only person who has experienced winning at this level is the coach, then he has to teach the team how to win. What's missing, if I may be so bold, is the final 10%. At bama, that's what Saban is working on; the kids in his program do the 90% easy: do your assignments. He's just fine-tuning, attention to details. There's a reason that banners talk about attn to detail; theres a reason Alford tells Riddick fumble and you wont play. These guys say they work hard; everyone is all in, but in moments of crisis, you revert to what you know, and that isn't winning with these kids. Penalties at the wrong times, personal fouls by veterans. These kids think they've arrived b/c they won 4 games in a row, then the expectations and pressure ratchet up, and the kids shrink from the challenge. Winning 7-8-9 games in a row won't come until the team develops the mental toughness required to handle the last 10%. I think Kelly would call that Unconscious competence.

(uh-oh, feelin it here)...many folks think this is just about Kelly or Rees. Folks this has been going on for 5 years. Clausen's 2 red-zone turnovers against Navy, penalties at inopportune times go back to Charlie's tenure, and yet folks are shocked that we still do it. It takes time to weed that out of your program, and frankly, I believe if Kelly is getting push-back, its from those few players who just aren't willing to get that extra 10% of effort required to truly be elite.

Sorry for the long-winded response, just one mans thoughts, splattered out there for everyone to see.

I'm not going to eat up space with a copy of the entire post, because all I'm going to say is that it was a first-tier effort. Hats off to you, J_Law for strong insight and thought-provoking material. Also, a solid follow-up by "13".