is recruiting...and the 2nd most important thing is recruiting

So, coaching has to come into play somewhere in there.

Not less...we are a top 8-15 recruting team and generally that is where Kelly/ND has finished - sometimes we finish a little higher and sometimes a little lower.

He's only finished in the composite top 8 once individually.

He's a 11-15ish recruiter. Your point stands that's about where we land when it's all said and done.

His average composite ranking is 12.6. He's done better than 12th, 4 times in 10 years.

#5 in 2013
#10 in 2017
#10 in 2018
#11 in 2014

He's finished outside the top 15 3 times in 10
#17 in 2020
#16 in 2019
#17 in 2012

We're in Northern Indiana, and it sometimes smells like stale beer when the wind blows just right. You don't see the sun for large swaths of the winter.

We expect you to go to class, even if it's just American Studies.

The campus is not diverse


But you know what, that's always been the case. Always. Yet other coaches have managed to get it done, because they could sell kicking people's asses, excellent coaching and development and getting to the NFL.

If Charlie Weis can sign (prepare the Brian Hardin logic) three straight top 6 classes, there is no excuse for any fucking Notre Dame coach not to recruit well.

That Brian Kelly, in a decade of coaching at ND, has signed exactly one top 6 class, in 2013, following a season where we played for a title because of recruits signed by Weis is fucking tragic.

His recruiting in the past 10 years has not been better than Weis or Davie, it's been on par with those guys. Davie was consistently a 15 to 10 type of recruiter with the occasional splash. Even BK 2.0 isn't getting it done with recruiting.

But here we are, and I'm sure people will roll out the excuses for him, like they always do. The reality is, he's simply not good enough, and never will be. He doesn't suck which is cool if that's what you're going for. But if you want championship football, there isn't a single metric anywhere on the planet that suggests he'll ever win a title at ND, ever. He's not capable of it. Full Stop.


Table Source 247 Composite Rankings (sorry I forgot the class we just signed at 17, which is about what we can expect from BK 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 or whatever iteration you want to label it)

But its bullshit to say its hard to recruit at Notre Dame - relative to other universities, it's extremely easy. And while I may agree with your overall assessment of Kelly - to say there isn't a single metric anywhere on the planet that suggests he'll ever win a title at ND, ever is complete bullshit. Making the College Football playoff (only 4 teams can make it each year) is certainly a metric that suggests he can win a title...and certainly making the championship game is a metric that suggest he can win a title.

And actually winning the games as correlative.

Right now, he has to beat two top 4 teams in consecutive games to win a title.

Being one of the four teams, while never winning that type of game, ever, doesn't mean he is capable of winning such games two games in a row.

In fact, he's never beaten a top 4 team, ever. So no, simply participating isn't evidence or suggestive that he can actually win two of those games, which is the requirement to win the title. The fact that he's never done it, ever, let alone twice in a row, suggests that he won't win a title at ND ever.

He might get lucky, but that's not measurable (and given he hasn't done it in 10 years, I'm inclined to think luck won't work for him).


Also, I didn't say it was hard to recruit at ND, I said it was harder. I think the fact that Weis recruiting 3 straight top 6 classes is evidence it's not hard. I was admitting it's harder, but those excuses don't make it hard. I was arguing quite the opposite, that while it may be harder than some places, that doesn't mean it's hard to recruit at ND.

12-0 twice and earning your way to participating in the BCS are indicators

That the guy who licked his fingers to pull off his SB ring in front of HS kids and coaches is/was a better recruiter than Brian Kelly.

Yet, here we are. Program buildin'

We make fun of Weis for being 400 pounds, but the man worked his ass off. By all accounts, he worked as hard as any head coach on the recruiting trail. And yes, that includes Urban and Saban.

His problems were many, in other areas, but recruiting effort wasn't one. If he could've won big games and run a perennial top 10 team, he would've had a top 3 class every year.

I'm Captain obvious here, but Holtz would not have achieved what he did with classes ranked 15th. The fact that Charlie Weis and Gerry Faust couldn't build sustainable success at Notre Dame with the highly acclaimed recruiting classes says a lot about each one's coaching acument (or lack of it)

That said, I do not believe Kelly would win a national championship even if he had four straight #1 classes. He'd find a way to %&$# it up in the playoffs...or to Stanford on the road.

Saban...really good coach at Michigan State but never a national championship threat. He goes to LSU with much better talent and wins...goes to the NFL where parity reigns and quit to get back to college. He's a helluva coach...but again, he'd be nowhere near the pinnacle if he didn't recruit 365 days per year.

I had some free time this AM, so I created a spreadsheet listing the recruiting rankings from 247 Sports from 2000 to 2020 and compared those rankings to national championships and playoff appearances.

From 2000 through the 2020 recruiting cycle:
Clemson won two national championships and made 5 playoff appearances, but did not have a top 5 class (they had 5 top-10s) until this year.

Georgia has ranked in the top 10 in recruiting 18 times and in the top 5 6 times. They have made one playoff appearance. They have won zero national championships.

Washington did not have a top ten recruiting class. They made one playoff appearance.

USC has had 12 top-five recruiting classes over that stretch. They made one two playoff appearances, winning one.

Oregon has had one top-10 recruiting classes and zero top 5 classes, yet has made two playoff appearances.

Oklahoma is tied with Notre Dame for most top-five recruiting rankings (3), but is tied with Alabama for most playoff appearances (8.)

My point in all this: recruiting is important, but it's not everything. Success seems to be a combination of the following:
1.) Recruiting
2.) Program/Player Development
3.) Scheme/ Game Planning/ Game Day Coaching
4.) Scheduling/ Conference Affiliation
5.) Luck/ Timing

You have to excel in most categories to be great. You can be sub-par in one if you're good enough in the others (for example, Pete Carroll was a horrific game day coach, but he was an outstanding recruiter and program builder,) but you can't be a great team just on the basis of recruiting rankings.