Tyrone Willingham said at the beginning of the week that at some point, the media would tire of the angle of his Notre Dame coaching days and move on to something else.

Or maybe not.

This isn't a game with a lot of other compelling story lines, inevitably turning the focus back to Willingham.

So I'll throw out a few more things.

The Notre Dame fan site NDNation.com asked a few of us Seattle media types for our thoughts on Willingham, and presented them here.

For my story on all of this on Wednesday, I talked with Mike Coffey of NDNation.

As our last word on all of this, here's that exchange, some of which was included in Wednesday's story:

Q: Did people close to Notre Dame feel there was as much controversy over the firing of Willingham at ND as was portrayed nationally?

A: The controversy over Coach Willingham's dismissal was a small part of a larger transition. Father Malloy, in his time as president of ND, instituted a number of changes that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way and installed some people in offices that weren't necessarily the right choices for their respective job. We've seen some of the cleanup there in the years since Father Jenkins was elevated to the President's office. So talking about Coach Willingham specifically, I think there was less controversy than portrayed because other internal issues were at the forefront on campus. It was certainly the most public aspect of the change, which is why it may seem magnified.

Q: Do people at UND feel vindicated by what is happening at UW?

A: I can't speak for people at the University as a whole, only for the fans and the people at ND with whom I've interacted.

I don't know if "vindicated" is the right word, because no matter how Tyrone Willingham performed as Washington's coach, his performance as Notre Dame's coach both on the field and in recruiting was unacceptable. We're seeing right now what Year Four of a Tyrone Willingham program is like, and had Notre Dame kept him for that fourth year as some people demanded, the damage would have been even greater.

Besides, no one is holding their breath waiting for all the pundits who vilified Notre Dame at the time he was fired to make any kind of admission of error or apology. Most of those people were serving another agenda. John Saunders isn't about to admit his error because I doubt you could get him to say Coach Willingham should be dismissed from Washington. Jay Mariotti and Dennis Dodd and their ilk were simply banging a drum loudly to get attention, as usual. That they made horrible accusations about a school that has given more than lip service to the advancements of African-Americans, as evidenced by important statistics like graduation rates and assistant coach hirings, only compounds their error, but again, it's not good copy to say you're sorry. As usual, Notre Dame just has to suck it up and move ahead.

Having said that, I can't deny there is a certain schadenfreude to the whole thing.

Q: Do people see any parallels in what happened to him there and what is happening here?

A: There are definitely parallels. At Notre Dame, Coach Willingham had the reputation of being a lackluster recruiter who didn't work very hard at it and expected the kids to come to him (as they had at Stanford). He also seemed to be the kind of coach wholly dependent on his assistants and could only go as far as they'd take him. Finally, he has this nasty habit of blaming anyone but himself for the problems of the team. The same things seem to be holding true at UW, especially the last.

Q: What was the overall impression of Willingham, dealings with boosters, the media, etc.?

A: The people who liked Coach Willingham at ND liked him for non-football reasons. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but that can't factor in when evaluating the performance of the man in his job. The football people with whom he came in contact, including more than a few then-current and former players, didn't have much use for him. They tried to help him and were rebuffed. He didn't make any effort to get to know the alumni, and got the reputation for blowing off or giving half-hearted speeches at alumni
events.

But that factors in to why he failed. I believe the reason Coach Willingham failed at Notre Dame is the same two reasons Bob Davie failed there. Neither man had the proper coaching foundation, and neither was there for the right reasons or ever even tried to embrace the place. Davie replaced all the ND memorabilia in his office with A&M stuff and tried to make Notre Dame into Texas A&M North. Willingham was there to use the spotlight of the position to advance himself, and perhaps because people around him told him he owed it to other African-Americans, both coaches and otherwise.

Charlie Weis is learning on the job as well, and is no doubt finding that ND isn't the place to do that. The difference between him and his two predecessors, however, is his understanding and espousing of what makes Notre Dame special to its students, alumni and fans. It may sound trite, but that and an undeniable work ethic is what brings you goodwill and insulates you from something like a 3-9 season. If Tyrone Willingham had done those things, he might still be at Notre Dame. Then again, as evidenced by the fact his reps were talking to UW long before his final ND season was over, he didn't want to be.

AND FOR A PLAYER'S VIEW OF ALL OF THIS, Rivals.com presented this interview with ND senior Terrail Lambert, one of three Irish players left who played for Willingham at Notre Dame.