Many fans are already taking the time to highlight the second quarter play where Eric Olsen was driven thirty-five yards into the backfield and actually used to tackle James Aldridge, like the old stories where Lawrence Taylor would use opposing running backs trying to chip him as javelins in an attempt to take out the quarterback with style.  Fans do this because they accurately feel this is a pretty good representation of the line play the last two and a half seasons, but I'd point to a play a little later in the quarter to best understand what Notre Dame football is right now.

A first and ten draw play to Asaph Schwapp.

I'm not sure how that pops into anybody's mind as something we should try.  Of all the running backs on that Notre Dame sideline, Schwapp is somewhere around the fifth or sixth person you'd want taking that carry.  It's not that Schwapp did a poor job - getting positive yardage on a running play was a great success on Saturday night - but it just confirms that there's absolutely zero consistency to anything going on with the team.  One drive, the game plan involves getting the ball to Michael Floyd and Golden Tate as much as possible (for the record, these drives always work the best).  Other times, it's like the team doesn't have wide receivers.  Running backs switch every play to the point no one can establish a rhythm and I'm beginning to think Jimmy Clausen is stuck in a weird quarterback version of Face/Off where it isn't actually him back there, but instead Christian Ponder.

The worst part about last night was how much it was like 2007.  By halftime our apartment had lost any sense of hope and relied on the only ointment that helps to soothe these disastrous Irish losses the last few weeks, Graham Harrell to Mike Crabtree.  The team had less fight than it did last year in the Eagles game, where a much better Boston College team played a much worse (well, at least we thought it was coming into the game) Notre Dame team and had a significantly tougher time pulling out the victory, even with your 2008 NFL Rookie of the Year playing quarterback.  People want to blame Charlie Weis - and yes, everyone should certainly be blaming anyone roaming the sideline for that loss, especially Weis because seriously, what the hell was that - but at what point do the players take some responsibility for seeming not to care?  It's not every player, and it's not every play, but there seems to be a decided lack of fire, swagger, self-motivation or desire from a lot of the team.  Perhaps that is Weis' biggest flaw, a coach who really only knew the NFL used to professionals stepping out there and doing their job didn't realize twenty-year olds are a different beast.  I don't know what sort of pep talks other coaches give, but watching a dozen other games every week lead me to believe that other teams care a lot more than Notre Dame does, or at least they play like they do.

I was going to write last week that watching Notre Dame lose to Pitt followed by the Texas Tech upset of Texas was a telling contrast in being comfortable in your own skin and still having no consistency in Year Four of Weis.  Even though the most successful offenses of 2005, 2006 and 2008 all revolve around the spread no-huddle, Notre Dame is hesitant to do it for any sort of consistent period of time.  The fact of the matter is that for the second week in a row, the Irish defense played really well.  Against Pitt, they went four overtimes without giving up a touchdown after some struggles with containing McCoy in regulation.  Against Boston College, they gave up a whopping ten points, even with the offense and special teams continually gift-wrapping bonus possessions for Chris Crane.  As much as people like to point to size up front or a lack of big plays, this loss falls on the offense - just like Pitt, and just like Michigan State.  And the offense is still calling swing passes on third-and-long and fourth-and-short, and it's still rotating in running backs like a merry-go-round, just to make sure no one gets into any sort of groove, and it's still somehow gone from a lethal quarterbacking machine for three games in a row to one that's sputtering, at best.  The most frustrating part is, as bad as Notre Dame played, if there's no pick six and no fumbled punt to start the second half, that's a 3-0 game and the Irish have the ball at midfield.  In some ways, it's a lot more comforting to know you never have a chance.

A lot of people want to write off this season as another disappointing lesson learned and fire Weis sometime this afternoon  Last time I checked, there are still three games left (and then maybe a bowl game; who knows), and we should probably use them to fully evaluate everything about the program.  Two blowout wins over Navy and Syracuse followed by a dogfight with Southern Cal that goes into the last minutes of the game, then a convincing bowl win?  That's one thing.  Navy running their streak to two, the Orange pulling off the upset then the Trojans making one of their final cases for the mythical national championship game with a primetime skull-crushing?  That's a completely different beast.  There are three games left, and before we burn Dayne Crist's redshirt or start packing up Weis' office, let's just see how things are through the trip to Los Angeles.  Maybe wholesale changes need to be made in the offseason (if you put a gun to my head, I would be siding with Rob on this, but I'm trying to let everything settle), or maybe we just need to tweak a few position coaches and regroup for 2009.  There's no need to sign any pink slips just yet, as angry as many of you are now.

Pat over at BlueGraySky had a relatively short but sweet post last night I'll put up in full because it is that relevant:

The past few years that I have done the pre-season position previews, I've been valuing veteran players more and more, at times over more highly recruited rookies. Every year we get excited about the new shiny toys out on the field, but for the most part it is the guys that have been there before that keep getting the job done. Certainly there are exceptions, but in college football there isn't much of a better teacher than experience. You make a mistake, you learn, you improve and move forward. Wash, rinse, repeat. And this isn't a week by week process normally, but rather a season by season one.

And that brings me to this. Notre Dame has the following on the sidelines:

A defensive coordinator in his second year as a defensive coordinator.

A offensive coordinator in his first year as an offensive coordinator.

A head coach in only his fourth season as a head coach.

Putting aside every other issue for the moment (and there are plenty), Notre Dame should never ever again find itself in a position where the top three coaches for the football team have so little experience at their current position. Notre Dame football is not a place for on-the-job training, especially such widespread on-the-job training.

People can debate all of the other issues back and forth all they want, but I firmly believe that experience is invaluable and irreplaceable. It all starts there.

~

Also, a few comments on some of the general themes, or just insane suggestions, thrown out by Irish fans since the soul-sucking carnage of last night:

Fire Weis Right Now and Everything Will Be Better!: Do you remember how long it took to hire Weis?  This is going to be an offseason with openings at Clemson, Tennessee, Washington and perhaps Auburn and Penn State.  These are all programs with history and great resources that make them attractive targets for any prospective coaches.  You want to fire Weis, that's fine, but just be prepared for another Counting Crows-style Long December.  And while we're on the subject, do tell me, who exactly are those possible coaches that will be riding into the save the day?  Is Brian Kelly coming for sure, just like Urban Meyer was coming for sure?  Are you certain Kelly is the man for the job?  Although, who needs boring ol' Brian Kelly when. . . .

Bob Stoops and Jon Gruden are always interested!: No, they're not.  Stop it.

Burn Dayne Crist's Red Shirt!: Yes, throwing a freshman into the fire will solve all of our problems, because a month ago we weren't all saying Jimmy was ahead of Brady at this point in their sophomore seasons.  This option makes perfect sense, reeks of no short-sighted desperation and should be explored like Ferdinand fing Magellan.

If you've gone to Notre Dame the last fifteen years, you're taking this losing too lightly and don't understand tradition!: I'm pretty sure I understand the difference between winning and losing, thanks.  You're also probably the same tradition-obsessed asshole who made fun of Mike Leach and his signal-callers for the last half decade for being "too gimmicky" or "system quarterbacks" but now drool over him coming to Notre Dame.  Or you might still think that the only way to win is to try and emulate Frank Leahy, because that worked really well at the time and only makes sense to just try it again.  Just because I'm not trying to hang myself after a loss doesn't mean I don't "get" Notre Dame football or aren't a great fan; it just means I'm putting things into perspective and realize we haven't won a national championship in twenty goddamn years and haven't really been that close consistently for the last fifteen.

All this negative talk will hurt recruiting!: More than getting shut out on national television by a half-decent ACC tea,?  I love the internet, but let's not great crazy here.

~

I know Rob and Matt also have strong feelings on this, so you may get those extended thoughts over the next few days, plus we'll parse the post-game press conference for some sort of reasoning for that debacle, maybe take the time to rewatch the game and start looking ahead to Navy this weekend (a game I was planning on attending, but who knows at this point; at least they'll be tailgating and Wire references).