Following its 1977 national championship, punctuated by a decisive victory over No. 1 Texas in the Cotton Bowl, the Notre Dame Fightin' Irish slipped in the national rankings. Notre Dame still had good years, and even some campaigns when they were picked to finish quite high -- but by and large, disappointment reigned.
However, jump-started in part by an upset triumph over No. 12 USC in Los Angeles (1986), and a Heisman Trophy winner in Tim Brown (1987) -- the lads of Leahy returned, winning a national championship under Lou Holtz in 1988.
Arguably, from 1988-1993, there was no finer program in college football; only Miami won more national titles than Notre Dame, the first of which was earned by virtue of a dominant win (in Coral Gables) over ND's most talented team in many a year (1989). In that span, the Irish claimed a championship, finished second twice, played in two Orange Bowls, two Cotton Bowls, a Sugar (a gratuity, yes, but they beat the SEC's best), and a Fiesta -- winning all but one. During this 64-9-1 stretch, Notre Dame finished in the top-six in the AP poll five of six times.
The Irish have not sniffed the top-10 since. So ... what happened?
The point here is not to compare the modern Notre Dame Football program with its distant past; the successes of Knute Rockne (.881) and Frank Leahy (.855) will likely never be duplicated. For more than a generation, South Bend stood as the only place, outside of their home state or region, promising recruits seriously considered -- today they go anywhere and everywhere. The pipeline from Chicago (that produced Heisman Trophy winner Johnny Lattner, 1953) and other locales has long dried up.
The proud Irish also endured some setbacks, posting a losing record from 1956-1963 -- but they rebounded, courtesy of Ara Parseghian, and enjoyed a wondrous run of success that culminated in a 24-23 victory over Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, which captured, in this writer's opinion, the most prestigious national championship in the history of college football (1973).
By all measures, Notre Dame stands right on the border; this is usually the point in the interval where the program regenerates and delivers greatness. Their problem, of course, has not been a lack of victories, 29-19 over the past four years is hardly the worst in school history; the problem is that virtually every "big game" for the Irish since Ron Powlus's eye-opening debut in Chicago, IL, has been an unmitigated disaster. They have beaten otherwise 10-2 Michigan teams (1998 and 2002) twice in that span ... anything else? No. Should a win over an otherwise 9-4 team in Tallahassee (34-24 over FSU in 2002) even really count? No.
Notre Dame's recent record has fell short of its recent and gallant past for one reason: they do not receive the players that they once did, or more to the point, they do not admit the same type of players they once did.
Paul Hornung, former ND star and resident broadcaster, was fired for intimating that the Golden Dome has suffered due to a lack of "black kids." By turning it into strictly a matter of race, Hornung lost the argument and allowed a shocked brass to plausibly persuade others that not only were his comments ill-toned, they were erroneous. Race is the not the issue with the Notre Dame Football program, the powers-that-be hired (albeit belatedly) a terrific coach in Tyrone Willingham and his current team would never be confused with Darrell Royal's late-1960s to early-1970s bunch; correct, that Texas team won against tough, though "whitened down," competition. Okay, that was unfair, on several levels.
The point is that over time, the culture of America has changed, even if we are still slow in making progress. Unlike, say the 1930s-1980s, minority children have a bolstered chance in growing up in a poverty-free, if not affluent suburb, environment. Instead of living on the streets with drugs and death staring them in the face, they get to grow up in much nicer housing conditions, and enter into disciplined schools. These are the kids that are provided the education to pass rigorous preparatory courses, score well on aptitude examinations, and figure to do well in the University of Notre Dame's most trying classes, such as Calculus and Physics.
I do not have any empirical evidence to back this assertion (i.e. pure and unfettered speculation), nor do I know if any admissions board actively embraces such as policy, but I see the results on the athletic field. This is admittedly a sensitive issue, blurred by the prejudices of the past and unresolved by the quagmire of some of President Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty failures.
Do scoffed, ignored, betrayed, and otherwise neglected children perform more proficiently on a field of play than their opposites, irrespective of skin color or ethnicity? A correlation may never be found, and motivation cannot really be quantified.
Let us face the facts: children of troubled backgrounds begat national championship teams; I've mentioned Nebraska's similar saga in this space -- but ND is a private university and that makes an enormous difference. The question simply becomes, just how much blood is one willing to tolerate on their national championship ring?
Notre Dame's former recruiting practices that launched their return to dominance of the late-'80s and early-'90s, have been well-documented. At some point, one simply has to be honest, some of those recruits could not have been admitted to the university under its current system. ND was renowned for a stout, disciplined defense (it still possesses that); a power running-attack (work in progress); speed (especially on special teams and for skilled players -- nowhere to be found).
It is altogether hard to believe that, if similar standards existed, Miami, FSU, and now USC would have taken as much as they have. The exclusivity of the Irish gave them the best of both worlds for many, many years -- but the bubble burst in the mid-'90s, and with their recent scheduling announcement (scaling back the competition, regardless of the athletic department's spin), Notre Dame might be inching forward in making a choice; one that could close a door on a remarkable program.
Simply put, Notre Dame has to decide whether or not to follow the actions of the Ivies all those years ago -- that might be an honorable decision, it would certainly lessen the prospects of further tarnishing of the Golden Dome -- but the university cannot have it both ways. It cannot continue to pretend that with a 9-2 record (both losses coming to top-ten teams by twenty points or more); they legitimately deserve a place at the Bowl Championship Series table.
Or, the university can look to the University of Miami for a road to recovery; recruits came back, despite the outlandish successes of rival Floridian schools. But this private academic school/big-time football power hybrid is not working any longer; Notre Dame should be demoted from its current equal standing with the Big 6 Conferences, for this is not your older sibling's Notre Dame.
This is a football program, and a university, in denial.
Full disclosure: I am a fan of the program, ever since the magical qualities of a Rocket on one autumn Ann Arbor afternoon, but I do not feel the program should conduct itself as if the regular laws of college football did not apply to them. In 1949, that perhaps was true; not today. That is why I rooted for USC to dominate Notre Dame in 2002; they did not deserve a BCS bid, proven by their lackluster performance against NC State a few weeks later.
If Notre Dame Football truly wants to compete on a national level with the USCs, Oklahomas, Miamis, and all the rest, they will have to return to the practices of the late-'80s...
To return to that championship level, and everything that, regrettably or not, is associated with it, Notre Dame ought to comprehend what it needs to accomplish. Should they undergo such a change, or should they buck the societal pressure to once again "wake up the echoes"? Whatever they decide may just have long-term ramifications for sports in this country.
Leave a Comment