ESPN CALLS KETTLE BLACK....AGAIN

If you log on to espn.com right now (2:55 a.m. Eastern time...and what are you still doing up?), you can hit the NCAA link and find not one but two pieces written in the past 24 hours about a 6-5 college football team. That program, of course, is Notre Dame. So now the countdown begins as to how soon we'll read a story on espn.com in which the author expresses irritation, even outrage, at how Notre Dame always hogs the spotlight. As if John Heisler puts these scribes up to posting these columns.

Gene Wojciehowski, based out of Chicago, parrots the argument that the five-year commitment that Notre Dame once gave its coaches (and followed through on) is what made the school different. "Now it's like everyone else," he writes.

So, apparently, everyone else has a 94% graduation rate for its football team, as the latest NCAA Graduation Success Rates state that Notre Dame does.

Apparently everyone else does not offer football scholarships to junior-college transfers.

Or one-year prep school transfers.

Apparently everyone else does not offer majors such as "General Studies" (which, when you think about it, is a paradox, since a major is by definition a concentrated field of study, but hey, why allow logic to interfere with a good thing?).

So, yes, Gene, if that is all true, then Notre Dame is exactly like everyone else.

Tyrone Willingham was a good man and a sub-par head coach at Notre Dame. Recent reports out of Seattle suggest that that scouting report is still accurate. Notre Dame had never fired a head coach before his five-year contract expired, but after three seasons, with the performances declining nearly as swiftly as the caliber of the recruiting classes, Notre Dame decided it had seen enough. Why waste two more seasons of everyone's time? And, I'm sorry, but they did pay him for those two years still on his contract, didn't they? And Willingham even landed another job while he was collecting that severance pay. It was like the Peter Principle on steroids.

Charlie Weis is not a minority and he can be somewhat of a blowhard at times (as can I) and so it's easy for many a columnist to imply, without coming right out and alleging it (unless you're Jason Whitlock), that Notre Dame has a racial insensitivity problem. Before they do that, they may want to read this book.

But, okay, that was a long time ago. What about now?

What about now? Well, about now athletic director Jack Swarbrick and the power apparatus that make such decisions have one mandate: To do what's best for the future of their school's football program in adherence with the school's principles. It isn't to appease sportswriters, many of whom (let's face it, guys) have a thinly veiled bias against the school, as if firing Charlie will convert any of them anyway.

And I imagine that Swarbrick is more concerned with creating an environment of academic and athletic excellence (right now they're batting .500) than with making sure a coach gets all the years on his contract.

Pat Forde ends his column with a similar call to arms:

Notre Dame fans have piously and pugnaciously insisted for four years that their school dealt with Ty Willingham fairly in firing him after three seasons. Well, it's time for deeds to back up words, and for Weis to be treated to the same fairness Willingham was. 

Pat Forde is a friend of mine (and he really is dashing!), but I just fail to find the logic in that. Here's an analogy: You're the head coach. Your starting quarterback tosses eight interceptions in his first three games and you decide to bench him. His replacement shows similar signs of struggle but you feel that he has greater potential. You have seen enough to convince you that he's the quarterback to lead your team in the future.

Now, what happens when your new quarterback tosses his eighth interception in just his third start? Must you bench him? After all, that's what you did to the other QB? Or do you say to yourself, "Is benching this quarterback in the best interests of my team?"

If it isn't, then are you really doing your job as head coach to bench that player simply to silence your critics?

Understand me: I'm not saying that Notre Dame should not examine terminating Weis after this season. And I imagine the volume on this topic is going to be turned up to Max after Saturday night as opposed to it subsiding. Because all signs point to this being a rout.

But you base that decision on what is in the best interests of your program. And the next time you fall in love (10-year deal, ahem), maybe you go on a few more dates before you get married.