Race Baiting

Notre Dame endured a tremendous amount of scrutiny for the firing of coach Ty Willingham last year. Willingham, a distinguished black coach who had a promising first year for Notre Dame (10-3 record, National Coach of the Year), then followed with two very subpar seasons, especially for a school that through its tradition attracts some of the best players in the country. Although he had a successful first year, Notre Dame felt as if Willingham wasn't their guy, and let him go. Immediate cries of racism ensued.

Notre Dame hadn't sat on top of the world for quite some time. After the Lou Holtz era, Bob Davies brought the Fighting Irish into Notre Dame's "Era of Malaise." Something needed to be done, and done quickly. Davies was fired and the bumpy road continued with the embarrassing hiring and firing of George O'Leary for padding his resume (he was a dubious hire anyway).

This is the background surrounding this race-baiting column by Jason Whitlock. This week, Willingham's successor, Charlie Weis signed a contract extension for 10-years between $30 and $40 million. According to Whitlock, Charlie Weis was offered this extension not because of his ability to coach football, but because he is white:

I believe it was the great Negro philosopher Don King who best summarized Charlie Weis' Notre Dame contract extension: "Only in America."

Because only in the land of apple pie, baseball and hypocrisy would a major sports organization have the audacity to give a white football coach a record contract for winning five of his first seven games just a few months after prematurely firing a black coach who won his first eight.

You have to be impressed with Notre Dame's arrogance.

First, it is really hard to take a column seriously that starts out, without the slightest hint of facetiousness, calling Don King the "great Negro philosopher." Bit of a non-sequitur, but an interesting anecdote nonetheless.

He continues on by saying that Charlie Weis' relative performance to Ty Willingham, in their respective first years, was much less impressive due to the poor record of the teams that Weis has beaten this year. Whitlock then deduces that because Willingham didn't receive a contract extension at the end of his outstanding year, Notre Dame applied different, and more difficult, standards to him than to Charlie Weis.

Jason doesn't go much further in comparing their first years as the headcoach of Notre Dame. Too bad, since the story plays out a little differently when put into context beyond just his first year at Notre Dame. Here is was Willingham's record as a head coach:

1995 Stanford (Liberty Bowl) 7-4-1
1996 Stanford (Sun Bowl) 7-5
1997 Stanford 5-6
1998 Stanford 3-8
1999 Stanford (Rose Bowl) 8-4
2000 Stanford 5-6
2001 Stanford (Seattle Bowl) 9-3
2002 Notre Dame (Gator Bowl) 10-3
2003 Notre Dame 5-7
2004 Notre Dame (Insight Bowl)6-5

Willingham has clearly tasted success in his life, but his record has been FAR from consistent. I think that the Notre Dame administration took a big risk in hiring Ty. Wedged between a Rose Bowl appearance in 1999 (which Stanford lost), were two seasons where he went a combined 8-14. In ten years, only twice did he follow up a winning season with another. Additionally, in the successful season Whitlock keeps referring to, he lost 28-6 to NC State in the Gator Bowl.

Weis's career is hard to compare since he never coached in the college ranks. However, Weis has 3 NFL Superbowl rings in 4 appearances as an assistant (he would of had a fourth had he turned down the Notre Dame job stuck around last year). Objectively, the man has had success at the highest level. Subjectively, does this necessarily translate to long-term success for the Notre Dame football team? Notre Dame, much to my lament as a Hoosier, has one of the richest traditions college football, and they were desperate for a return to the top. They rolled the dice again, and bet on a guy who filled his fingers with Superbowl rings, instead of a moderately successful college coach who had never displayed any consistency.

The 10 year contract was rather insane, in my opinion. However, that doesn't make Notre Dame racist. If it doesn't play out, it just makes them dumb. When guys like Whitlock play the race card, they aren't just baiting a bunch of white guys in suits (or in Notre Dame's case, clerical collars); they are specifically doing Ty Willingham and all black coaches a disservice. Administrations are going to be more reluctant to hire black coaches, knowing that they could be labeled as racists for making a coaching change, especially at top schools where there is little-to-no toleration for losing. Who wants Jessie Jackson putting you in the crosshairs of his extortion ring?

Jason, how about a little turnabout from your great Negro philosopher:

"You go for the quality of the performance, not the longevity of it."

The same could be said for the quality of sports columns too.

Posted by 10 fingers 6 strings at November 1, 2005 03:04 PM | TrackBack