ND vs. FSU: Feathers In The Cap And Black Eyes
by Mouth of the South on Dec 30, 2011 12:09 AM EST
Email
Print
It ended as it began. Notre Dame's season began with poor quarterback play, turnovers, missed offensive opportunities, penalties, and a scoreless first half of football. Then it ended with poor quarterback play, turnovers, missed offensive opportunities, penalties, and another (nearly) scoreless half of football. Here are your Feathers in the Cap and Black Eyes.
Feathers
First half defense.
Ben Turk. Whoa. Has Turk been doing nothing but hitting the leg extension machine with one leg? This kid was straight up BOOMING his punts. His hang time was excellent, his punts came down like V2 rockets, and he put one inside the 2-yard line for good measure when the team really needed a big play. Nevermind that they then squandered said big play. That isn't Ben's fault. He had a rough start to the season, but has really turned it around and finished quite strong.
Keivarae Russell. Russell sits down at a table with his Final Four hats laid out before him. The lights go out. The Notre Dame Fight Song booms. The lights return, and.... And Russell is sporting his Notre Dame hat!!! Sick. Just a nasty, nasty way to commit. Best I've seen since Stanley's "Lebron took his talents to South Beach, and I'm taking mine to South Bend." These kids are coming strong with the commitments.
Tommy Rees's Last Pick. This was a good thing. The image will replay itself in Coach Kelly's head time and time again during the offseason. I suspect that he is taking the extra-large eraser to TR's name at the top of the quarterback depth chart as we speak.
Offense with Andrew Hendrix at quarterback. Kind of. The offense moved the ball well when Hendrix was running the zone read play and taking advantage of his mobility. Hendrix obviously needs to work on his ability to read defenses and attack them through the air.
Black Eyes
Quarterback play. This was bad enough that it requires its own category outside of Offense. We are still doing the same awful crap that we were doing at the beginning of the season. Rees throws two picks in the endzone. Hendrix throws the ball right to a Florida State 'backer when we really can't afford to throw it to a Florida State 'backer, cuz, yeah, that scoreboard thingy--when the number next to the other team is more than the number next to our team and the other number says 4 as in 4th Quarter, we need to go ahead and hang on to that oblong spheroid.
Offense. Here is Notre Dame's offensive game plan. Step 1: Kick self in nether regions. Step 2: Repeat. Step 3: Find moderate success. Step 4: Reject the pressures of success and kick self in nether regions. Step 5: Kick self in hind parts. Step 6: Repeat steps 4 and 5 continuously. Come on, guys. EVERYONE knows that the one way to lose the game is to turn the ball over. You have a 14-point lead and they're doing nothing on offense. DON'T TURN THE BALL OVER. Please.
Defense. I know I put these guys in the Feathers column, but we knew that we might need them to win the game for us. We needed someone to take over that game. Clearly it was not going to be a Notre Dame quarterback, so it needed to be Manti Te'o and our defense. They didn't lose the game, but we needed them to win it and they couldn't do it. Offense didn't hold up their end, but after manhandling Florida State's O-line and shutting out the 'Noles in the first half, the defense got no pressure and gave up 18 points and the win in the second half. They can go home and say that they upheld their end of the bargain, but they can't say that they took over the game and closed like champions.
Not throwing the ball to Tyler Eifert more. Have I mentioned this before? I feel like I've said some of these things before.
Defense in Alamo Bowl. This is just annoying.
What say our loyal readers? Hand out your own Feathers and Black Eyes.
193 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ill go...
Good:
Oline: Maybe not statistically, but just from my eyes, the O line played better than I expected. They rarely gave up much ground to a really strong FSU D line.
Front 7: Played really well, I think the drop off in the second half shows the need to continue to bring in guys to rotate on that front. Everyone was pissin’ and moanin’ about Lynch and Tuitt not playing more early in the season, well, this was kinda why. They petered out in the 2nd half, but even so, they played extremely well. Just need reinforcements (which are on the way). Also, the LBs were seldom beat in coverage especially with backs coming out of the backfield like they often were earlier this year. They are clearly improving and this made me a little more optimistic for next year.
Bad:
CBs: Kinda embarrassing. Disappointed in how they regressed their senior year. Good luck to them, but it’s time for new blood.
David Ruffer: As a former Knott Hall interhall-er, good riddance. I always cringed hearing your name.
Michael Floyd: That drop was enormous. That can’t happen from anyone on the roster let alone the future 1st rd WR. And it really sucked that it couldn’t have been you going up in double coverage with the game on the line. I still feel cheated about that.
ND Nation: Good lord, the fan reaction during and after the game has been embarrassing. I sincerely hope that people don’t overreact in their everyday lives like they do regarding ND football. If they do, there are some miserable folks out there.
Interesting season. Best of luck to those leaving the program, particularly Harrison Smith. He was a great great captain for this squad. Other than that, onward and upward, I feel good about the direction of this program (and unlike most, I don’t think the schedule next year is really all that bad). BCS hopes abound in my household!
i concur
Good points. I signed up just to say this.
Also, a big Fuuuuu to nd nation They are the most bitter, smug, self-aggrandizing “fans” in all of college football.. How they can call themselves ND fans is beyond me. Jvan Across, whoever, etc. I hope they enjoy their bitter lives. They make me want to vomit. That is all.
by thespamburger on Dec 30, 2011 1:36 AM EST up reply actions
Fuuuuu back. I was at the game and met a ton of nice Fsu fans, until the game started. Are they all a bunch of drunks or was that just in section 130?? ND fans were all biting their tounges at all the cussing and obnoxiousness coming from them.
by Irish Pride 2 on Dec 30, 2011 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
He meant NDNation the website
Not ND Nation….the fan base.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 30, 2011 12:04 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
we are not all drunks!
I can’t speak to your experience because I was not there. But I go to lots of games and think you should know (not accept, but know) you are going to encounter a bit of immaturity in a mob environment. Please do not lump all fans into that category. I am sure u and your ND friends were respectful and encouraging the FSU fans when you were up 14-0.
by ChiefOceola on Dec 30, 2011 8:18 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
Spamburger, your only problem is that you just now signed up to post a comment at One Foot Down.
Take off your shoes, kick up your feet, and make One Foot Down your internet home.
One Foot Down: It’s where everybody knows your name, and we’re always glad you came…
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 12:44 AM EST up reply actions
I can't stop watching this
Although that is one foamy ass beer.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 31, 2011 3:10 PM EST up reply actions
I too feel that, next year, we'll be better.
Despite what people think about the schedule, I suspect we’ll do better than 8-5. The front seven on D is only going to get better and we’ve got serious depth on the offensive line. We’re building quality depth like I haven’t seen since the Holtz years. And our quarterback play for next year has got to be better than what it was this year. We couldn’t possibly make that many poor decisions two years in a row.
Russell’s commitment (welcome to the family, KeiVarae, you’ve made a great decision that’ll favorably impact your life for the next 40 years) softens the blow considerably. We’ve now got some quality RB depth coming in for the next few years, counting McDaniel and Atkinson.
By the way, didn’t Theo Riddick look decent at RB? And I thought Cierre Wood brought it today.
And, I agree with Lou Hotz. Why did we stop blitzing in the 2nd half?
IF IT TAKES FOREVER!!
by Cubfansince1957 on Dec 30, 2011 1:59 AM EST up reply actions
"IF IT TAKES FOREVER!!"
Every time I see that under your posts it makes me smile. Good stuff Cubfansince1957. Good stuff.
whiskey
www.onefootdown.com
Riddick definitely looked more comfortable at RB...
I don’t see another option for him, even with a crowded backfield. The offense will contine to evolve (am I allowed to use that word) next year.
I don't tweet often--but when I do, you can be sure it isn't important.
@jemiesle
This discussion really merits its own post but....
Hell, who am I kidding. It rates about 20 posts and we will likely write at least that many on this topic between now and next September.
Crikey we need some good QB play like a human needs oxygen. I realize that is the most obvious observation in the history of time but man, this was truly our Achilles heel all season and it was again today.
I realize that the popular movement at the moment is to pile on Kelly but I’m just not convinced he had a “good” option. Unfortunately it happens to the best of programs. Hell the exact same thing is happening at Texas right now. In a perfect world Dayne would have been able to step in and be that guy this season. When he didn’t BK had to choose from Rees’ with a limited skillset and a very raw Hendrix that still had a lot to learn.
I suppose the chief argument this offseason will be whether or not we wasted that “experience” on Rees but we will never really know if we had a better short term option. I sincerely hope that someone currently on campus (11/12/5) cracks the code between now and next Sept. If they can we could have a pretty solid season next year. If they can’t…. I don’t even want to think about that.
On another note kudos to the D. Damn fellas, you deserved more than 8 W’s this season.
whiskey
www.onefootdown.com
Feather
MF3’s touchdown catch. Yes, the drop was terrrrrrrrrrrrrrrible, but that touchdown catch was awesome:
Going up and getting what was really an atrociously thrown ball. Wrestling it away from the DB, preventing what would have been TRees’ 3RD(!) red zone interception, hand eye coordination like whoa, and then holding on through the hit.
Very nice.
Man I miss Floyd already.
He deserved a lot more W’s than he got at ND. He will be very missed.
whiskey
www.onefootdown.com
Someone will step up.
We didn’t know what to do with a Golden Tate when we first got him, and he turned out okay.
I’m worried about defensive secondary, special teams, and QB. Good QB play can compensate for young WR’s. As we saw this year, great WR cannot necessarily save a bad QB (except on that one TD pass).
"HEY! The inspiring speech is my bit, and I'm not going to let some fancypants Nobel Laureate take it away from me."
進者往生極楽 退者無間地獄
Notre Dame Fightin' Irish + Hawaii Warriors
The Japanese History Podcast
by Kelly's Gyros on Dec 30, 2011 2:56 AM EST up reply actions
It would have been Rees's 3rd (1) ENDzone interception, not just red zone.
And I wouldn’t have batted an eye, because when passing in the red zone this season, I was pretty much always confident that we’d throw to the wrong team or inexplicably fumble the ball. Good grief.
Taking back any one of the INTs tonight would have won us the game. So, is the problem really our D not taking away TOs (as per an excellent earlier post here), or is it the O giving them up? Cause tonight, I think it was the O giving them up. (But hurray for the scoop and score! Seemed like luck was swinging our way for a moment, and I’m praying that Zeke Motta transforms like Harrison did and turns it up big time next year.)
by fishoutofwater on Dec 30, 2011 3:00 AM EST up reply actions
I was sick to my stomach
As soon as I heard that Rees was starting this game. Why? Rees sucked big time against Boston College, and damn-neared cost us a game against a pitiful BC team. Then he went out and sucked some more against Stanford, finally getting benched for the 2nd half. So I thought, okay that’s it Rees. He served his purpose during blowouts of Navy, Air Force and Maryland, but now it was painfully obvious he was getting worse by the week, and his limited skill set gives him no margin for error. But then…Kelly names Rees the starter.
There was no reason Hendrix couldn’t have played this entire game. We NEED to get Hendrix out there for an extended period to see what we’ve got. He played the entire 2nd half against Stanford, and it wasn’t bad. Under 50% completion percentage, but he made some impressive plays and showed a nice skill set. There’s no reason he couldn’t have gone the entire way this game, good or bad. If he plays well, that tells us something. If he plays poorly, that also tells us something. Either way, you’ve got game experience to work off of heading into the offseason. We already know what Rees brings to the table, which frankly at this point is absolutely nothing. It’s time to see what Hendrix, in extended game action, can do. If it’s horrific, so be it. It’s time to find out.
I do not think Kelly screwed up in benching Crist. There will probably be some revisionist history on how Crist wasn’t that bad, and Kelly panicked. Well, I remember that first half against USF and it sucked. He missed throws (a 3rd down one-hopper to Floyd where USF was ceding the first down was particularly egregious), played tenatively and threw a terrible bone-headed INT in the end zone. Rees stepped into that game, and was immediately better. But I do blame him for not sticking with Hendrix in this game. It’s just plain stupid to have your defense pitch a shutout for 2 1/2 quarters, but handicap your offense with piss-poor QB play when you’ve got another kid who could possibly do better. I’m not going to sit here and proclaim Hendrix the second coming, because I have no idea how he would do with extended playing time. But that’s exactly why he needs to get in there, so we can see what he can do with the full offense and numerous snaps. We know what Rees can do, which is nothing positive but a whole lot negative.
Rees commits a ton of turnovers, he takes sacks because of his immobility, he throws the ball away with immaculate protection because he simply cannot make something out of nothing, he doesn’t even throw accurately anymore with every completion being outstretched…there isn’t a reason on earth, besides injury, why he should have taken a single snap today. Brian Kelly blew it today, and that cost Notre Dame a bowl victory the defense absolutely deserved. Seeing the defense get blamed because FSU made a few great plays really upsets me. That was a fantastic defensive performance that should have had the game over at halftime.
I hate to jump on the “blame the QB and coach for everything” bandwagon, because usually the answers are much more nuanced, but frankly Rees and Kelly are most culpable for today’s loss. They deserve to be raked over the coals for this, and it pains me to say that.
Okay, this is what doesn't make sense to me.
I do not think Kelly screwed up in benching Crist. There will probably be some revisionist history on how Crist wasn’t that bad, and Kelly panicked. Well, I remember that first half against USF and it sucked. He missed throws (a 3rd down one-hopper to Floyd where USF was ceding the first down was particularly egregious), played tenatively and threw a terrible bone-headed INT in the end zone. Rees stepped into that game, and was immediately better.
Rees sucked big time against Boston College, and damn-neared cost us a game against a pitiful BC team. Then he went out and sucked some more against Stanford, finally getting benched for the 2nd half. So I thought, okay that’s it Rees. He served his purpose during blowouts of Navy, Air Force and Maryland, but now it was painfully obvious he was getting worse by the week, and his limited skill set gives him no margin for error. But then…Kelly names Rees the starter.
There was no reason Hendrix couldn’t have played this entire game. We NEED to get Hendrix out there for an extended period to see what we’ve got.
This whole ND Quarterback Du Jour thing really bothers me. What’s to stop you guys from same the EXACT SAME THING when some new “hotshot” frosh comes in and upstages Hendrix? Or even upstages him on one play?! Then you’re all like “That’s our guy! THAT’S OUR GUY!”
Crist had one bad half against USF and that was it. He comes back against USC, where ND was pretty futile anyway, and the fans are like “Ur dun Dayne.” Now Rees, the Savior of 2010, is making mistakes and you’re all like “REES U SUCK I WANT HENDRX!!1”
What happens when Golson goes in for a play and actually completes a pass? “WOO GOLSON! FFFF UUUU HENDRX!!” And yet somehow no one is perturbed by this. Hendrix is the guy right now because Rees throws an interception. Well, guess what, Hendrix threw one too. The cycle will never end.
And you guys wonder why I’m all like
by Meager Reader on Dec 30, 2011 3:28 AM EST up reply actions
Ahh, playing off the old "the backup QB is always the fan favorite"
This whole ND Quarterback Du Jour thing really bothers me.
Like you’re the only one? Come on, man.
What do you expect when the quarterback play is terrible? Do you expect fans to be patient with Rees at this point? How exactly are you different than the rest of the fans anyway?
Does the quarterback play not bother you?
Or are you saying the fans reaction to said QB play is somehow worse?
What’s your point?
You’re facepalming because fans want to see more of one quarterback when the other one has been playing much more and executing terribly?
How very holy of you to be immune to such desires.
Now Rees, the Savior of 2010, is making mistakes and you’re all like "REES U SUCK I WANT HENDRX!!1"
Who thought Rees was the savior of this team? Even many of those who wanted him to start this year didn’t take it that far.
Again, what do you expect when Rees plays this badly? And it’s not a small sample size anymore, he’s played poorly for a while now.
What happens when Golson goes in for a play and actually completes a pass? "WOO GOLSON! FFFF UUUU HENDRX!!" And yet somehow no one is perturbed by this. Hendrix is the guy right now because Rees throws an interception. Well, guess what, Hendrix threw one too.
Perturbed by what?
It’s not like Rees is some All-American who had a couple bad series and the fans are foaming at the mouth to let the backup play—-but that sounds like the narrative you’re trying write here. We all thought Rees was the savior and the second things go bad (or an entire season—-but whatever) we’re ready to cast him aside and go with another option.
That’s it, right?
I don’t completely agree with Grimes that Hendrix should have started, but I think he should have played a little bit more than he did—-both in this game and prior to.
I just don’t know what you expect though. Were you totally fine with sticking with Rees throughout the entire game? It’s really facepalm worthy to want Hendrix to play more, but it’s not a facepalm-fest to let Rees continue to play and ruin things for the offense??
The cycle will never end.
The cycle will end when Notre Dame finally gets the right quarterback who be a multi-year starter and a difference maker. Let’s not be so ridiculous as to think that Irish fans won’t support someone who comes in and plays at a high level for a long time.
After all, it’s not the restlessness of the fans that’s making the quarterbacks play poorly. Nor are we the ones who will end the cycle.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 30, 2011 8:38 AM EST up reply actions
I just read an interesting article from the SB Tribune about QB's
The author basically said….spring practice is for the developing of team cohesiveness to go into August preparing for the season, but not for ND…the 15 days of spring will be to determine who the QB will be.
I guess I'm just bitter about Crist being benched.
After getting injured, sitting out, recovering, he fights his way back to the starting job, has one off half (it wasn’t just him, by the way), and then Kelly and everyone is all “yea yur dun.”
What do you expect when the quarterback play is terrible? Do you expect fans to be patient with Rees at this point? How exactly are you different than the rest of the fans anyway?
Does the quarterback play not bother you?
Or are you saying the fans reaction to said QB play is somehow worse?
What’s your point?
You’re facepalming because fans want to see more of one quarterback when the other one has been playing much more and executing terribly?
How very holy of you to be immune to such desires.
We obviously will disagree on this, but I believe one of the perennial aspects of “building a foundation” is stability under center. I am apparently much more patient with developing quarterbacks. I thought Crist never should have been stripped of the starting job, regardless of how “terrible” he looked in the opening half of the USF game. The fact that one half makes or breaks a senior quarterback spoke volumes about the now-seemingly insurmountable pressure on Notre Dame (which I had previously and genuinely believed to be a canard) and, in my opinion, that Kelly would do whatever it takes to win each game rather than make decisions long term.
I just don’t know what you expect though. Were you totally fine with sticking with Rees throughout the entire game? It’s really facepalm worthy to want Hendrix to play more, but it’s not a facepalm-fest to let Rees continue to play and ruin things for the offense??
I had accepted that Rees was Notre Dame’s quarterback. I think everyone did. So, yes, in a word, I most certainly want to stick with Rees. I don’t think it’s fair to boot a quarterback who’s struggling as a true sophomore, and whose problem seems to have less to do with talent and more to do with experience. Again, most of this boils down to and goes back to my “bitterness” about Kelly completely turning his back (imo) on Crist, an upstanding guy who deserved more than he got. I’m sick of Kelly changing quarterbacks, and I’m sick of people encouraging it.
The cycle will end when Notre Dame finally gets the right quarterback who be a multi-year starter and a difference maker.
No, you mean the freakin’ perfect quarterback.
I guess the more appropriate question is: what do you expect? You sound like the quarterback at Notre Dame should be as good as f**king Terrelle Pryor. “But, we’re ND! We must have awesome quarterbacks!” Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but that’s not the way it is right now. The quarterbacks are who they are, and all you can do is hope that Kelly can develop the talent they have.
by Meager Reader on Dec 30, 2011 9:05 PM EST up reply actions
x
I guess I’m just bitter about Crist being benched. After getting injured, sitting out, recovering, he fights his way back to the starting job, has one off half (it wasn’t just him, by the way), and then Kelly and everyone is all "yea yur dun."
It wasn’t an easy decision and I was behind Crist before the season started. It’s too bad for Crist, but it is what it is. I think we’ll always wonder what could have happened if Crist got another shot this year.
We obviously will disagree on this, but I believe one of the perennial aspects of "building a foundation" is stability under center. I am apparently much more patient with developing quarterbacks. I thought Crist never should have been stripped of the starting job, regardless of how "terrible" he looked in the opening half of the USF game. The fact that one half makes or breaks a senior quarterback spoke volumes about the now-seemingly insurmountable pressure on Notre Dame (which I had previously and genuinely believed to be a canard) and, in my opinion, that Kelly would do whatever it takes to win each game rather than make decisions long term.
You do have a point, but also, Rees came in and looked much better against USF and played pretty well early in the season. You do need stability at the QB position, but you also need production too—-it does no good playing a crappy quarterback just for stability’s sake. Looking back now, it seems like a waste at how much Rees played, but clearly Kelly thought he was the best option. And even if Crist comes back to start against Michigan—-what if he doesn’t play well, again? We’re right back to instability and Rees usurping Dayne.
And really, Kelly didn’t change QB’s that much this year. Rees played the equivalent of 11 full games give or take a couple series. That’s a lot of development time for one player.
I don’t have a problem with people wanting to see Hendrix get more playing time per se, even though I didn’t think he should start the bowl game. But the coaches have to do something to try and win games, and if the QB is playing well you have to seek out other options.
No, you mean the freakin’ perfect quarterback.
No, I don’t. That’s ridiculous.
I guess the more appropriate question is: what do you expect? You sound like the quarterback at Notre Dame should be as good as f**king Terrelle Pryor. "But, we’re ND! We must have awesome quarterbacks!" Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but that’s not the way it is right now. The quarterbacks are who they are, and all you can do is hope that Kelly can develop the talent they have.
Was that a compliment to Pryor?
Anyway, I’m not sure what your last couple of sentences are supposed to mean.
We don’t have awesome QB’s—-okay, thank you for telling me that.
The QB’s are who they are——who are they???
Hope that Kelly can develop the talent he has—-Yes, and he’s spent a lot of time developing Rees and it might be time to move on.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 30, 2011 9:58 PM EST up reply actions
It’s an interesting dichotomy, isn’t it? You trust Kelly but not his decision on quarterbacks.
Rees came in and looked much better against USF and played pretty well early in the season. You do need stability at the QB position, but you also need production too—-it does no good playing a crappy quarterback just for stability’s sake.
I know I will probably get destroyed for this, but I actually don’t think Tommy Rees is a crappy quarterback (!). I also didn’t think Dayne Crist was crappy either. The quarterbacks at Notre Dame have made mistakes, but so do a lot of quarterbacks around the country. What I don’t like is people throwing in the towel on Crist or Rees and wanting some new “hotshot” guy. I wasn’t arguing for “stability for stability’s own sake,” but I certainly don’t agree with play in a new freshman quarterback du jour every year. No quarterback at ND flat out sucks. They just need better coaching. (That will get me destroyed too.)
Anyway, I’m not sure what your last couple of sentences are supposed to mean.
Very well. Allow me to clarify:
The QB’s are who they are——who are they???
They’re young. That’s the main point, if there is one. Yes, they aren’t awesome—or, at least, they aren’t the RAW TALENT that Notre Dame seems to expect because they expect National Championships right now man. They’re developing. They do have talent.
Was that a compliment to Pryor?
Pryor clearly had issues with character, but you can’t deny his abilities as a raw athlete. I know a few Notre Dame fans who would kill to have someone like Terrelle Pryor (athletically speaking) as the Irish’s quarterback.
by Meager Reader on Dec 30, 2011 11:05 PM EST up reply actions
...
It’s an interesting dichotomy, isn’t it? You trust Kelly but not his decision on quarterbacks.
It’s not really about trust with Kelly when it comes to the QB’s. I don’t think he was dealt a good hand when he came to Notre Dame and he’s struggling trying to find the right piece, just like any coach would (I believe).
Given his past history on coaching quarterbacks and having them play at a high level, this QB quandary doesn’t really shake my confidence in Kelly very much. I think there’s a prospect that neither Crist or Rees are that good and that’s the problem.
I know I will probably get destroyed for this, but I actually don’t think Tommy Rees is a crappy quarterback (!). I also didn’t think Dayne Crist was crappy either. The quarterbacks at Notre Dame have made mistakes, but so do a lot of quarterbacks around the country. What I don’t like is people throwing in the towel on Crist or Rees and wanting some new "hotshot" guy. I wasn’t arguing for "stability for stability’s own sake," but I certainly don’t agree with play in a new freshman quarterback du jour every year. No quarterback at ND flat out sucks. They just need better coaching. (That will get me destroyed too.)
Well Crist is gone now, so no need arguing about him.
Rees—-he just doesn’t have it. Look around college football, see how many young quarterbacks play at a high level. If they aren’t putting up great stats, they’re at least wowing people with their skills throughout games.
Yes, sometimes players don’t play well through two years and then breakout as upperclassmen, but in today’s game, it’s much more common for the top QB’s to be so after a year and sometimes less than that. And even more common—-these players breakout (if they struggle as youngsters) because they have NFL potential or some dynamic skill-set (super-fast runner) that makes them difference makers.
Rees is not in any of those categories. He’s not a top recruit and he doesn’t have the skill-set. He doesn’t bring anything to the table outside of his game manager abilities—-and even those have crumbled.
They’re young. That’s the main point, if there is one. Yes, they aren’t awesome—or, at least, they aren’t the RAW TALENT that Notre Dame seems to expect because they expect National Championships right now man. They’re developing. They do have talent.
Rees isn’t young anymore. I’ve made this comparison before, but he’s not much more inexperienced than Matt Barkely was coming into this 2011 season.
Think about that. A year and a half of starting at this level is a long time. He’s thrown twice as many balls as Crist. He’s a veteran already. And where does Rees stand after that?
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 30, 2011 11:38 PM EST up reply actions
I'm afraid I have to disagree again.
It’s not really about trust with Kelly when it comes to the QB’s. I don’t think he was dealt a good hand when he came to Notre Dame and he’s struggling trying to find the right piece, just like any coach would (I believe).
What? Wasn’t Crist on multiple watchlists for the Davey O’Brien Award and whatnot, along with possibly the Heisman? I guess that was just typical ND over-hype.
This is the part where we talk about Kelly’s coaching. Kelly didn’t exactly inherit a great situation at Cincinnati either. Yet he developed fifth-string Tony Pike into a proficient quarterback and a sixth round NFL draft pick. But again, that was when Kelly took his time. If he lost a game at Cincinnati, it didn’t mean he would lose his job.
I’m pretty sure every quarterback (even the one who left, but we shan’t speak his name) on ND’s roster had talent and was better than the quarterback at Cincinnati.
Rees isn’t young anymore. I’ve made this comparison before, but he’s not much more inexperienced than Matt Barkely was coming into this 2011 season.
Key difference: Barkley is comfortable. He doesn’t over-analyze the fact that he’s at USC, even though it’s his dream school. It doesn’t affect him. It also helps that his coach isn’t on the ropes all the time and putting a lot of pressure on him. He’s allowed to just go out and play. Is there scrutiny? Sure, but Kiffin clearly doesn’t make him think about it.
If Kelly and the players would just relax and not think about the fact that they are at the One and Only Notre Dame, then maybe they would play looser and be more comfortable in their own skin. Just go out and play the game as best you can. Have fun.
Instead, and this is very apparent, Kelly and the team are extremely aware of the pressure and expectations of being at Notre Dame. Tommy Rees isn’t just a college quarterback, he’s the Notre Dame quarterback. And obviously that got to him, as it did to the guy before him. No wonder no one wants to come to South Bend. It’s not fun.
by Meager Reader on Dec 31, 2011 7:20 AM EST up reply actions
Crist
What? Wasn’t Crist on multiple watchlists for the Davey O’Brien Award and whatnot, along with possibly the Heisman?
Seriously?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Dec 31, 2011 11:32 AM EST up reply actions
He was in fact listed on multiple preseason watch lists for (at least) the Heisman.
The fair assumption was that he would develop significantly in his second year as a starter and that he had (as Kelly said he did) already developed into a much better quarterback and all-around football player than he had been in 2010. We didn’t see that in the first half v. USF, but he never got a chance after that to show himself, so we’ll never know what “Crist 2011” would have looked like.
by fishoutofwater on Dec 31, 2011 1:08 PM EST up reply actions
But to suggest he was Heisman caliber is a bit much
as his play showed
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Dec 31, 2011 2:57 PM EST up reply actions
Crist was a bust. I happens.
And Barkley isn’t under any pressure at SC? Come on, bro, the spotlight is bright in LA. SC is their pro team.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
....
What? Wasn’t Crist on multiple watchlists for the Davey O’Brien Award and whatnot, along with possibly the Heisman? I guess that was just typical ND over-hype.
Kelly showed up with Crist, two freshmen, and Nate freaking Montana. That’s not a good situation at all, even if you bought the hype around Crist—-which many did not because he was unproven and coming off injury.
This is the part where we talk about Kelly’s coaching. Kelly didn’t exactly inherit a great situation at Cincinnati either. Yet he developed fifth-string Tony Pike into a proficient quarterback and a sixth round NFL draft pick. But again, that was when Kelly took his time. If he lost a game at Cincinnati, it didn’t mean he would lose his job.
It doesn’t really matter what Kelly did at Cincinnati, but he did have a much better situation with the Bearcats. First, he got Mauk as transfer and he was experienced and proven as a pretty decent quarterback. So much so that it allowed Kelly to start Mauk over the previous year’s starter, all while letting Pike develop and learn the system. The next year comes and Pike proves himself good enough to start over Grutza, while Anderson and Collaros could develop.
The situation at Cincinnati was terrific——5th year transfer being backed up by the previous year’s starter with young players developing below that. Crist got hurt in 2010 and it was a sh*t show for Notre Dame.
I’m pretty sure every quarterback (even the one who left, but we shan’t speak his name) on ND’s roster had talent and was better than the quarterback at Cincinnati.
Says who?
Seriously, sometimes other teams just have better players, no matter what the recruiting rankings say. People look at the success of Pike, Gilyard, and Pead and somehow think that Irish players not sharing that kind of success is automatically an indictment on Kelly.
But they don’t want to entertain the thought that maybe those players are just better than Crist, Rees, or whomever.
Key difference: Barkley is comfortable. He doesn’t over-analyze the fact that he’s at USC, even though it’s his dream school. It doesn’t affect him. It also helps that his coach isn’t on the ropes all the time and putting a lot of pressure on him. He’s allowed to just go out and play. Is there scrutiny? Sure, but Kiffin clearly doesn’t make him think about it.
If Kelly and the players would just relax and not think about the fact that they are at the One and Only Notre Dame, then maybe they would play looser and be more comfortable in their own skin. Just go out and play the game as best you can. Have fun.
Instead, and this is very apparent, Kelly and the team are extremely aware of the pressure and expectations of being at Notre Dame. Tommy Rees isn’t just a college quarterback, he’s the Notre Dame quarterback. And obviously that got to him, as it did to the guy before him. No wonder no one wants to come to South Bend. It’s not fun.
It is what it is. We can’t stop being Notre Dame. If players are going to be successful in the blue and gold they are going to have to learn to be mentally strong and be comfortable with the pressure.
In fact, that’s something the recruiting rankings can’t measure and it’s something coaches have to seek out. Maybe Pike and Gilyard would have been very good at Notre Dame because they have those qualities.
All I know is a large part of being a great player is being comfortable under the microscope and under the intense pressure.
There’s only so much a coach can do for a player if he doesn’t have those qualities. Kelly can try and develop players, but what’s he supposed to do when someone like Rees throws into double coverage to John Goodman with the game on the line?
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 31, 2011 3:34 PM EST up reply actions
This is a simplistic answer to the question you pose in your last line, but I'll give it anyway.
What’s Kelly supposed to do when someone like Rees throws into double coverage to John Goodman with the game on the line? Figure out why the QB he’s coached for two years and thrown his full weight behind, who has now started for a season and a half, would continue to make boneheaded decisions like that all season long. Maybe that’s all on Rees, but what about Kelly’s responsibility for developing his QBs?
by fishoutofwater on Dec 31, 2011 3:45 PM EST up reply actions
He likely will figure it out
During the offseason.
And it will result in Goldrix playing in Ireland.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 31, 2011 9:41 PM EST up reply actions
"The QB’s are who they are——who are they???"
They are who we thought they were. Right? Right? Guys?
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 12:04 AM EST up reply actions
MR, I think you missed the point...
Tommy Rees inhibits the offense because he can’t “create” he’s just steady and does what it takes to keep the game under control, in theory. I think many of us would rather have a QB who could use his legs even if he had the same arm and accuracy as Rees because at least then the QB could run for it rather than throwing it up for the defense or out of bounds.
With Crist, he was a senior and needed to have a good start to the season in order to keep his job. Rees and him were battling for the position during the spring and summer and Crist won the job, but he obviously didn’t have a long leash. I was a supporter of bringing in Rees full-time after the USF game because he was a good game manager and AT THE TIME he seemed like the future with the success he was having. Guess what? Defenses caught on to his game, he has no deep ball or intermediate accuracy, throws short constantly, will throw OB when pressured, will take sacks, won’t create with his legs, turnover-prone, throws into double coverage, and is prone to locking in on one receiver without looking off the safety first. As the season progressed and more film was made available, good opponents did an excellent job baiting Rees and forced him to win the game for ND, rather than be a “game manager” to which he is built for.
Now, I’m not advocating Hendrix or Golson will be any better statistically. However, this offense needs a QB who can create when things don’t go as planned. With Rees at the helm, ND doesn’t have that…I think we can all admit that now. I also believe that Kelly needs to give Hendrix or Golson the same unconditional love he gave Rees all season because they are going to take their lumps and we’re all going to get upset. But, personally, I will be much more patient with a QB who can take off when the play breaks down and also takes care of the football all over the field, especially the redzone.
/rant
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
Um...
Rees and him were battling for the position during the spring and summer and Crist won the job, but he obviously didn’t have a long leash. I was a supporter of bringing in Rees full-time after the USF game because he was a good game manager and AT THE TIME he seemed like the future with the success he was having. Guess what?
It sounds like I very much did not miss the point. AT THE TIME you were good with Crist, and then AT THE TIME you were good with Rees. And NOW you’re good with Hendrix. And so on and so forth.
If that’s the point, I’m pretty sure I got it. You can’t just say “you missed the point” if I simply disagree. I understand your point fully; I just don’t share your opinion.
However, this offense needs a QB who can create when things don’t go as planned. With Rees at the helm, ND doesn’t have that…I think we can all admit that now.
You seem to be forgetting the last four games of 2010, when Rees pretty much single-handedly led the Irish to a four-game winning streak and a bowl win. (Or at least that’s how I remember it. He may have been just riding the wave of a resurgent ground game and some great defense.)
Furthermore, if your point is that Notre Dame should go with a mobile quarterback, they had that with Dayne Crist. He created plays out of nothing. Was he a typical drop-back passer? Not necessarily. I think he made several good plays with his feet that everyone seems to forget just because he threw a couple interceptions in the USF game.
Rees does “create when things don’t go as planned.” Every Notre Dame quarterback on the roster does. I think you’re just having a hard time seeing it through the mistakes. Rees is making a ton of mistakes. So did Crist. So did/will Hendrix. So will Golson. That’s the way it goes.
I think ND fans just want a quarterback who is awesome all the time.
by Meager Reader on Dec 30, 2011 9:22 PM EST up reply actions
x
You seem to be forgetting the last four games of 2010, when Rees pretty much single-handedly led the Irish to a four-game winning streak and a bowl win.
False.
(Or at least that’s how I remember it. He may have been just riding the wave of a resurgent ground game and some great defense.)
Yes, you did not remember correctly. It was the defense mostly.
Furthermore, if your point is that Notre Dame should go with a mobile quarterback, they had that with Dayne Crist. He created plays out of nothing. Was he a typical drop-back passer? Not necessarily. I think he made several good plays with his feet that everyone seems to forget just because he threw a couple interceptions in the USF game.
Crist was certainly an improvement over Rees in terms of mobility, but he’s still probably average or below average overall. Already Hendrix has shown a significant advantage in his running abilities, and Golson is likely even a step further up the mobility food chain.
Rees does "create when things don’t go as planned." Every Notre Dame quarterback on the roster does. I think you’re just having a hard time seeing it through the mistakes. Rees is making a ton of mistakes. So did Crist. So did/will Hendrix. So will Golson. That’s the way it goes.
Rees is really bad at improvising or creating when things break down.
His pocket awareness needs much improvement, and he has stone feet. Whenever he faces above-average athletes on defense, Rees is almost incapable of moving around in the pocket to buy time. He panics and doesn’t shuffle his feet to move up in the pocket and away from oncoming pressure.
If you watch pro-style “statue” QB’s who are successful, they are very good at making subtle moves in the pocket to elude a defender and buy that extra second to make a throw. Rees simply does not do this and it’s probably worse than his lack of ability to run the ball himself.
I think ND fans just want a quarterback who is awesome all the time.
We just need better. Much better.
3,284 yards, 21 TD’s and 17 INT’s with a below average YPA and middling quarterback rating is pretty bad when looked at within a vacuum. When you add in great line play, strong running game, and two AA players to throw the ball to—-it’s almost awful.
There’s nothing wrong with fans complaining when there’s that lack of production.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 30, 2011 10:23 PM EST up reply actions
Couldn't have said it better myself, E...
I’ll add a few things…MR, looks like you need to hop off DC’s balls and move on. Furthermore, TR is simply not the answer at QB for ND. If you can’t get over those two facts, then you are going to try to justify your “points” for the rest of your life. Me thinks you won’t get very far with other ND fans if you choose that path…
TR is not ideal for the offense that BK wants to run, and even TR’s strengths aren’t really strengths at all. He’s had enough time to develop, I realize he’ll only be a junior next year, but not many QBs can say they’ve had a year and a half of development time by their junior year with a top-flight program. He can say that and hasn’t made any strides (no pun intended). He has a disgustingly good line and a pair of backs who were great (Wood is still great) and not to mention Floyd and Eifert to throw to all day long and he still couldn’t remain consistent. Sorry, it’s time to move on.
I wanted DC and TR to succeed, I want stability at the QB position, but at this point it seems like you just want stability for stability sake rather than finding the best man for the job. If that’s the case, we are right back where we started from then, hmmm? If you don’t mind below-average play from the most important offensive player while he has gobs of talent around him, then be my guest, love TR till the end of time. But, I want ND to make a BCS Bowl and be ranked in the top 5 each year and TR WILL NOT afford us that opportunity, ’nuff said. * drops microphone *
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
I would hardly say
I was or am “in love” with Dayne Crist. I didn’t think he got a fair shake, but what happened happened. Obviously it’s in the past now. So, yes, it’s time to move on. Let us never speak of Dayne Crist again.
Furthermore, TR is simply not the answer at QB for ND. If you can’t get over those two facts, then you are going to try to justify your "points" for the rest of your life. Me thinks you won’t get very far with other ND fans if you choose that path…
This pretty much sums up a pointless debate that will drag on for days. We disagree, and we will not sway the other. So… you know… pointless.
I don’t think Rees is below average. I think he’s young. I think he’s learning. Two years ago he was in high school. Now he’s Notre Dame’s quarterback. Of course, you all expect ND quarterbacks to be demi-gods.
But, I want ND to make a BCS Bowl and be ranked in the top 5 each year and TR WILL NOT afford us that opportunity, ’nuff said. * drops microphone *
BCS or bust. Typical.
by Meager Reader on Dec 30, 2011 11:17 PM EST up reply actions
And by "pointless" I mean "meaningless"
I know there’s going to be the insufferable douche out there who makes the predictably literal argument (“haha point-less because u have no point”). Good points have been made on both sides, just none that have or apparently will convince me that every year should see a new quarterback. (I say “new,” you say “better.”)
by Meager Reader on Dec 30, 2011 11:30 PM EST up reply actions
x
I said “better opportunity”, which doesn’t exactly mean AH or EG are better, but their skill set is more conducive for this type of offense. The statue and deer-in-headlights look (TR) isn’t a good fit for BK’s style.
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
Okay, that's a valid point.
Tommy definitely has that look:
by Meager Reader on Dec 31, 2011 7:41 AM EST up reply actions
I was looking for deer in headlights look online and that same picture came up...hahahaha
Oh TR…you show no emotion at all. He always looks scared, at least it’s humorous.
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
I'm not seeing the resemblance.
Is “he looks like a deer in headlights” a generic criticism lobbed at any QB who plays sub-par? I know people threw that one at Crist all of the time when they were mad at his performance, and before the season, everyone contrasted TR with that expression as “proof” that he was Mr. Cool-Gamer-“All I Do is Win”. Now TR is the deer?
I’m pretty sure we’re over-valuing our ability to decipher a guy’s interior emotional life through the look on his face when he throws a football.
by fishoutofwater on Dec 31, 2011 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
I think you may be over-analyzing, fish...
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
Rees' biggest problem is that he's too chill
A lot of people thought he was that calm and cool guy under pressure, and maybe he is to an extent, but I can’t stand how much non-emotion there is from him.
Crist wasn’t any better either.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 31, 2011 3:40 PM EST up reply actions
Really, MR? Really
BCS or bust. Typical.
As a fan, I’m not allowed to be disappointed that we didn’t make a BCS bowl given the talent level at ND right now and that every national pundit and the writers here thought we had the talent to make it there? I guess your expectations are low, my friend. I’m not all for firing people because we didn’t get there. I believe we are on the right track with BK at the helm, despite what you seem to think.
Of course, you all expect ND quarterbacks to be demi-gods.
So all of the sudden it’s ok to have below average QB play each and every game? TR got worse as the season progressed, it’s obvious he doesn’t have the tools that are right for this particular offense. Not sure what you’re seeing that I’m not.
To sum up what you’re saying, I shouldn’t expect my favorite team – who has gobs of talent – to make a BCS game and I shouldn’t expect or wish for good QB play right now because we have a young QB. Am I reading that right?
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
Yes, really.
As a fan, I’m not allowed to be disappointed that we didn’t make a BCS bowl given the talent level at ND right now and that every national pundit and the writers here thought we had the talent to make it there?
I guess your expectations are low, my friend.
I suppose they are. Should you, as a fan, expect your team to win every game? Certainly. You wouldn’t be much of a fan if you didn’t, right? However, being a fan and having realistic (and rational) expectations are two different things. That means sometimes facing the hard facts that your team is not as good as you thought.
To sum up what you’re saying, I shouldn’t expect my favorite team – who has gobs of talent – to make a BCS game and I shouldn’t expect or wish for good QB play right now because we have a young QB.
You can expect whatever you like, root for your favorite team to your heart’s delight. But me, personally, I don’t see Notre Dame being BCS bowl level for a while. They don’t play with what I would call SEC-level dominance. (I should note that not every team in the SEC is a dominant one, e.g. Ole Miss, Vandy, Kentucky.) I’m just somewhat perturbed that ND is considered a better team than it actually is because tradition alone seems to be keeping it in the national conversation. That’s why pundits always mention Notre Dame. They have to. There are simply too many “Subway Alumni” for them to ignore.
But is ND really relevant? That’s a good question.
ND is talented, but does it have “gobs of talent”? Um, not really. It has good players at skill positions, and there’s always defense, but it’s not the type of talent that sweeps the board. Then the main issue I have (that everyone seems to disagree with) is my take on Kelly’s approach to Notre Dame. I see a lack of discipline. Evidence? USF, USC, and Stanford. I even predicted they would struggle in the FSU game, and they did.
I used to think that I had realistic expectations. I wagered with a buddy that Kelly would win a Natl. Championship at Notre Dame within five years. That was back in 2009. So—2014 would be the year. Now people are saying that those expectations were too lofty. I don’t know. Maybe they were. It certainly looks that way now, doesn’t it?
by Meager Reader on Dec 31, 2011 6:57 AM EST up reply actions
I have realistic expectations...
I think with a QB with decent legs and even with TR’s (atrocious) accuracy, ND can make it to at least 10 wins and at least #14 in the country, which would yield a BCS bowl bid. I don’t think that’s not being unrealistic, especially with the schedule they had this year. Regular season losses to USF, Michigan, USC and Stanford were all close where ND was one or two possessions changed that particular game. ND was in all of those games and a very few possessions from being 11-2 on the year (if FSU-4 points, Michigan-4 points, USF-3 points turned to wins, each of which were one possession of winning…I can concede that USC and Stanford controlled their respective games against ND, both won by 14 each).
Point being, ND wasn’t blown out of any game, unless you think they were against Stanford…even that game they were in it in the second half. So I don’t think a BCS bowl bid is as far off as you think…
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
Keep DC's balls out of it, please.
After the balls comes the… well, you know…. Just leave balls out of it. Unless we’re talking those of the oblong variety.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 12:12 AM EST up reply actions
My bad, MotS
Sorry MR, we’re still friends, right?
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
Good...
Now, I can go back to destroying your points…hehehehe
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
Just havin some fun, dog.
Can’t be all respect and tolerance around here. That’s no fun either.
by Mouth of the South on Jan 1, 2012 12:36 AM EST up reply actions
"Destroying"? Um, no.
The hehehehe and dropped microphone notwithstanding, your counterpoints mainly get support because everyone here agrees with you. Or it might be more appropriate to say that you’re simply adding to the general narrative in this thread. There are plenty of other Notre Dame forums where you would be called an idiot and get all the HUHs and I would get all the predictable Indeed-like “Agreed.” comments.
So, I’d say “don’t get cocky,” but it won’t really do anything at this point. I’m in the minority on this issue, at least on this particular blog.
by Meager Reader on Dec 31, 2011 9:35 PM EST up reply actions
c'mon, MR...
We are community that likes to have fun and joke with each other. I’m not being serious about all the dropped microphone and hehehe’s. Take it easy. If it is that important for you to win, then I concede, every point of yours is valid and all mine suck. YOU WIN!
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
Just to take your last point
ND fans would gladly take a quarterback who was a true game manager and just minimized mistakes this year. Adequate would be a welcome improvement.
Rees accounted for 19 turnovers himself this season without showing improvement. And too many of those were in the redzone.
Here's the thing with that
I would bet Golson (if he plays all of 2012) would come close to that many turnovers.
But when you factor in his running ability, his ability to buy time and scramble, and all the positive effects it has on the offense—-it’s an improvement over what we get with Rees.
I hope that Kelly finally decides to go to the up-tempo offense full-time too, because that will aid the offense as well.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 30, 2011 11:17 PM EST up reply actions
Would have been 22
Had Floyd not gone into beast mode on his touchdown catch and taken the ball away from the FL State cornerback who was, by the look of it, the intended receiver
Even the Pope hates the Trojans
by Publius2010 on Dec 31, 2011 12:51 AM EST up reply actions
True this.
Floyd definitely did this for one play:
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 1:01 AM EST up reply actions
Adequate would indeed be an improvement.
Irishane, give us an injury report on Floyd. Any effect on his draft status?
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 12:46 AM EST up reply actions
He'll be fine from what I read
I’m still only seeing it reported as an ‘upper body injury.’ Likely means a contusion from how he took a hit. No effect on draft status.
Let me know if you’ve seen any different diagnosis reported and I can give you the skinny on it. I couldn’t find any news articles updating the diagnosis though.
I'm going to show you how good of a leader I am.
I’m delegating! Your mission, should you choose to accept it: be on the lookout for injury updates and FanPost it, B.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 11:53 AM EST up reply actions
Huh???
You seem to be forgetting the last four games of 2010, when Rees pretty much single-handedly led the Irish to a four-game winning streak and a bowl win. (Or at least that’s how I remember it. He may have been just riding the wave of a resurgent ground game and some great defense.)
Your memory card needs to be replaced. The defense and the running game (Hughes) led the way. They won pretty much in spite of TRees.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Dec 31, 2011 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
"HUUUUHHHHHHH!?!??!?!!?!??!!?!???!?!!??!!"
I’m getting really sick of this typical response. Yes, it’s obvious you all conclude that Tommy Rees sucks a healthy heaping of dung, but to overlook the four-game winning streak and act like it never happened or that Rees had nothing to do with it is quite annoying. “HUH? WHAT R U TALKING ABOUT MR!?! REES WAS NEVR GOOD!”
Well, there’s this…
Via Eric Murtaugh, circa January 2011:
Quarterback: A
You have to hand it to Tommy Rees because he is 4-0 as starter, plays so smart and is wise beyond his years.
This is after the bowl win over Miami. It was tempered with the usual “cautious optimism” that Rees’s limited mobility was “not the future.” But there’s still a healthy helping of praise here. The running back situation got a grade lower at A-.
Via Eric Murtaugh, circa December 2010:
Quarterback: A-
This was just an incredible performance from the young freshman Tommy Rees.
He had two balls batted down at the line of scrimmage and made a couple poor throws, but otherwise Rees played about as well as you could have expected for a kid in his first career start.
Rees didn’t turn the ball over, threw three clutch touchdown passes and once again exhibited good knowledge of the offense with a calm, cool demeanor that is rarely seen from an 18 year-old.
This was after the Utah upset. Running backs got a B+.
This from one of Rees’s biggest critics. Then, of course:
Okay, let’s start with the QB. Rees has to start. There’s no way Kelly can go back to Crist after Rees operated the offense so much more efficiently.
And then Kelly’s Gyros:
Now, as far as Tommy goes, yeah, I agree with what you wrote about the decision process. If you’ve got two equally bad choices, you go with the one that you hope will learn and get better.
Although, to be fair, KG has been consistently on Hendrix:
I don’t think it’s important if it’s Golson or Hendrix, but one of the more mobile QB’s needs to come in and run the spectrum of plays that Tommy can’t run, in order to add it to our play book and get the rest of the team comfortable with it. Come in, run a series or two against Purdue, but as a package and not as a threat to Tommy as starter. I say Hendrix, because I don’t want to waste a year of Golson’s eligibility.
And from another critic:
If the QB controversy continues, BK gonna have some ‘splainin to do. It can’t be anybody but Tommy at this point and he should have put full weight behind him during the whole offseason.
From whiskeyOFD, at Michigan-Notre Dame:
Rees looks outstanding tonight
He is seeing the field great, picking up the pressure and distributing the football. We can win a ton of games with Tommy under center.
Obviously all of this comes when Notre Dame wins. (Although the Michigan game was a loss.) Notre Dame loses and it’s all “O TOMMY WHY U MAKE ERRORS!” The point is that I’m seeing a lot of “selective amnesia” from you guys. It’s possible that Rees had a lot of help from a resurgent running game and an actual defense, but to say “they won in spite of Tommy Rees” is just total B.S. and you know it. You were high on him at the time, don’t deny it.
Hindsight is a funny thing, and that’s why you do the “cautious optimism” when things start going well. ND fans didn’t know exactly how good Rees was back in late 2010, but they were happy to see him take over the USF game in 2011.
My memory is not broken and I really get irritated when someone makes comments that are in direct conflict of what they said a season ago. The constant “HUH?!?!” thing is also unnecessary.
by Meager Reader on Dec 31, 2011 9:27 PM EST up reply actions
Just to be clear, while reactions to Tommy have been a bit of a wild ride for most, correlating to his performance, there are a good number of Notre Dame fans who are not just enjoying the benefit of hindsight. I could pull up a mess of quotes from late 2010 and throughout TR’s strongest performances this year arguing that he shouldn’t be starting at QB for a host of reasons, critiquing his play, his future at the position, etc.
Contrary to your assertion, not all “ND fans . . . were happy to see him take over the USF game in 2011.” I’m sure a significant majority were, but far from all. I thought it was a suspect and disappointing move at the time and that Rees shouldn’t get the start against UM the next week. I was berated for arguing that at the time (not here – elsewhere), and I’m not being disingenuous for stating the same now, when we have a lot more evidence by which to evaluate those decisions.
by fishoutofwater on Dec 31, 2011 9:43 PM EST up reply actions
There's a difference between
Grading a true freshman thrown into the starting role and also grading someone when he does play well.
Against Utah the offense really didn’t look very good for most of that game, but Rees played fine giving his lack of experience. That was over a year ago and things are different now.
Even though Rees received high grades and high praise back then, there was never this euphoria that “Oh my god, Rees has stepped in and is carrying this offense!!”
However, we were saying that about the defense. There’s no revisionist history in there. Rees played well for an inexperienced freshman (except against USC) but the team was winning because of the defense.
ND fans didn’t know exactly how good Rees was back in late 2010, but they were happy to see him take over the USF game in 2011.
Why were ND fans happy to see Rees take over the USF game?
A) Crist wasn’t getting the job done
B) The QB race was close
C) Look at the results
Seriously, I was never a believer in Rees but how can you argue with what you saw against USF? I know I couldn’t.
I certainly wasn’t buying the hype or was high on Rees….and quoting a post-game recap when he plays well isn’t evidence of that fact.
Pretty much all of the questions surrounding Rees (many which I believed in) have turned out to be correct. But it wasn’t really fair to crap on him a year ago (when he looked okay given the circumstances) and rail against him as the future before he got a real chance.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 31, 2011 9:57 PM EST up reply actions
So...
if it’s something you disagree with, it’s “revisionist history.” If it’s something you agree with, it’s “hindsight’s 20/20.”
by Meager Reader on Dec 31, 2011 9:59 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah...
You…..got me….I guess?
I don’t even know what you’re trying to say.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 31, 2011 10:09 PM EST up reply actions
Neither revisionist history nor 20/20 hindsight are anything to be proud of.
Even with the benefit of hindsight, I can’t say that Kelly could have handled the QB derby any better than he did, and I was one of the guys who was reminding anyone who would read that Rees did everything he could to lose the USC game last season.
Crist spit the bit in the USF game. There’s no disputing that rationally (if you want the evidence, see Keith Arnold’s analysis of his performance after the opening drive). Once Kelly went to Rees in that game, the die was cast.
by Mr Wednesday on Dec 31, 2011 10:18 PM EST up reply actions
I think the die was cast when he didn’t go back to Crist to start against UM. (Like he went back to Rees after benching him against Stanford.)
by fishoutofwater on Dec 31, 2011 10:58 PM EST up reply actions
This is getting confusing...
I’m no longer sure who’s making what point, who’s for Crist, who’s for Rees, or what the hell we’re arguing over, but are you saying that Kelly should have gone back to Crist? If you look at how each guy played, Rees made the better case, don’t you agree?
by Mouth of the South on Jan 1, 2012 12:43 AM EST up reply actions
Yes, Rees played better v. USF, clearly. No dispute.
But the first game of the season was explicitly not a QB tryout.
Crist was named the starter. You need to bench him for half a game, you bench him. He doesn’t lose his starting job for a bad half. If he is horrible in the first half against UM, play Rees, then “reopen” the QB battle and start Rees the next week and if he’s your guy, stick with him. Thus Rees starting v. FSU after Stanford. (I realize that this is a bit different because Rees had also played through the current season.)
This is what I thought at the time and through the season. It would have allowed Kelly to avoid some of the criticism and controversy over the short leash/long leash treatment, the “what could Crist have been if he’d been allowed to keep playing?” talk, the “Kelly has no confidence in his own decision making process” stuff, and Jonas Gray’s really unfortunate and publicly expressed feeling that it was his fault that Crist was benched for the season.
by fishoutofwater on Jan 1, 2012 12:11 PM EST up reply actions
Rees played well for a true freshman, but he tried to give away USC.
And he just stopped improving and never got over his turnover troubles as a soph.
I was having a little fun at your expense on the memory card thing. Don’t get bent out of shape. I thought that it was pretty clear that our resurgent D, running game, and special teams were much bigger factors in last season’s four-game win streak than was TR’s play. If you disagree, then that’s just like, your opinion, man, but I’m going to go out on a limb and say that you’re in the minority.
by Mouth of the South on Jan 1, 2012 12:46 AM EST up reply actions
Comments like Rees singlehadedly lead ND to the four consecutive wins in 2010
make you look pretty silly. Your memory might not be broken, but you may have a virus. Rees played adequately for a true frosh thrown into the starting job, but he did not lead the team to victory. He did manage to not lose those games, but that is about as far as you can go with giving him credit. The defense and the running game carried the team.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 1, 2012 11:26 AM EST up reply actions
Gotta love LDR.
He always gives you both barrels of his unvarnished opinion. I enjoy this. Sometimes tact and diplomacy are just overrated.
by Mouth of the South on Jan 1, 2012 12:48 PM EST up reply actions
Meager Reader, I strongly disagree with your views on the quarterback situation.
But I will defend to the death your right to express those views here. I appreciate guys like you and Lookingdeadred. I respect your willingness to go against the mainstream. It’s not any fun and it’s completely unhealthy if we agree all the time.
I disagree that we need to be more patient with Rees, and I disagree that the writers and commenters at One Foot Down have been excessively critical of or impatient with ND’s quarterbacks or Coach Kelly’s handling of the quarterback situation this year. But I do respect your courage to express and defend your views.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 12:39 AM EST up reply actions
That was far too respectful of a comment...
I… I don’t know how to react to someone who… encourages actual discussion…
by Meager Reader on Dec 31, 2011 7:56 AM EST up reply actions
That's how we roll around here.
Healthy discussion is well……….healthy.
We all agree to disagree sometimes but we really do try to encourage all viewpoints. It keeps all of us more well rounded.
whiskey
www.onefootdown.com
Actually I've found this blog to be very closed off.
It’s pretty much whatever Eric says goes and people give 80+ comments that don’t boil down to anything other than “Agreed.” and “Well said Eric.”
The discussions don’t even get interesting when I chime in because most of the commenters (and article contributors) here don’t respect an opposing point of view. Mouth of the South’s comment above seems to be an aberration of the OFD norm.
So, please, don’t piggy-back on Mouth of the South and go all “That’s how we roll here” right after you up and insult me. (P.S. Mouth of the South took a shot at me with a nice, mature gif. Again, his respectful remark seems to be an aberration.)
by Meager Reader on Dec 31, 2011 9:43 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, please
You’re welcome to say whatever you want to say as long as you’re not being a troll, which clearly you’re not.
Being closed off would mean deleting your comments or people shouting you down and people being very disrespectful and making personal attacks.
As far as I can see we’re mostly trying to debate and argue with you.
Don’t try to play it off that no one respects an opposing point of view because that’s just silly.
If not many people are agreeing with you and also not going all NDNation on you, well…what do you want us to do?
May I suggest making better arguments?
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 31, 2011 10:08 PM EST up reply actions
Being closed off would mean deleting your comments or people shouting you down and people being very disrespectful and making personal attacks.
Okay, yes, comments aren’t being deleted, although with the point of view you take that would be quite fitting, but there’s a considerable amount of disrespect here. The frequent "Huh"s are a virtual equivalent to being shouted down. Or at least you would think so if it was you. Okay, yes again, it’s not as bad as NDnation. But you get my point. Well, actually, you probably don’t.
You also hardly seem wanting a debate. Most of your points against mine eventually reach an impertinent “you just don’t make any sense” point. Then there’s the whole “your memory card needs to be replaced.” And you personally dismissing all of this as “silly.”
You are the main contributor on this blog and so naturally most of the comments are from people who agree with you. You could go so far as to call me a moron and as a response you would get an applauding Citizen Kane gif and a million recs. That might be humorous, but it hardly says “we respect you, opposing POV.”
If someone feels disrespected, the person doing the disrespecting can’t say “Well I don’t know what your problem is because I clearly respect you and to say anything else is just silly.” Well, the person can say that, but it only proves the point against them.
And you don’t debate. You dismiss. The only person who’s really had a true blue debate with me that I can see is Kelly’s Gyros. And he severely disagrees with me.
by Meager Reader on Dec 31, 2011 10:32 PM EST up reply actions
I wouldn't take all that stuff so personally
You won’t be called names. The gifs are in fun and I wouldn’t take those personally either.
Some people here will disagree with your points of course. But you’re absolutely welcome here.
One thing I’ve found comforting here is that people will actually admit when they’re wrong on something. And if they feel strongly they will fight for their opinion. But there’s no malice intended.
And at the end of the day your opinions won’t be deleted. And even if things were to get heated, we’d gladly have a beer with you at an ND tailgate. There’s no hard feelings here.
I wouldn't put up with Murtaugh calling you a moron, and I don't think he'd do that.
We may say “huh” and make fun of your memory card. You should feel free to make fun of us in kind. Maybe we should get to know you better before we jab you too hard, but we don’t mean any disrespect.
by Mouth of the South on Jan 1, 2012 12:56 AM EST up reply actions
You make plenty of good points...
but also many truly awful ones. If you are gonna stick your neck out there with unpopular opinions, then expect people to dismiss you or criticize you or pile on against you. You write multiple paragraph posts that are truly all over the place and often take the role of dissenter seemingly for the sake of dissenting. You give out just as many dismissive comments as you feel you receive (you even condescendingly started this whole debate by attributing opinions to “you all” that no one actually had). You don’t relent (admirable as that may be), you drift in and out of arguments that no one has brought up, and you are just as disrespectful as you claim everyone else to be.
I don’t share the apologetic tone that many are now (probably rightfully) giving you. No one has mistreated you. But no one agrees with most of what you are saying. We won’t stop you from saying it, but no one is going to come out and back you up every time you bring up something, particularly if, you know, no one agrees with it. Honestly, if this blog, the nicest of all blogs I’ve come across, is just too inflammatory for you, then perhaps you should rethink your role and how you go about participating.
I never reply to anything you say, but now you start whining about how mistreated poor, innocent Meager Reader is just for your polite discourse. Give me a break. You are practically asking for it. There is plenty of debate going on here and plenty of dissenting opinions; the only person that seems to have much of a problem with the debating around here is you.
Ah, yes, the expected "I'm not sorry, Get over yourself" comment
Expected. So expected.
You make plenty of good points… but also many truly awful ones. If you are gonna stick your neck out there with unpopular opinions, then expect people to dismiss you or criticize you or pile on against you.
I never said I had a problem with people disagreeing with me. Quite to the contrary: “The only person who’s really had a true blue debate with me that I can see is Kelly’s Gyros. And he severely disagrees with me.”
It’s not about me wanting to be right or liked or anything else that you might think I’m “whining” about. In fact, this started because I was surprised that Mouth-of-the-South said something too respectfully. I’ve traversed this blog before I started posting, so I was fully aware that “dissenting opinions” aren’t treated nicely. I fully expected the lack of respect. whiskey’s comment of “Well, that’s just how we roll” thing just gave me an opportunity to call the blog out on it. Did I complain about the service before then? No.
With the exception of the ever-respectful Eric’s “Oh, please,” the main contributors (Mouth of the South, especially) have been both courteous and gracious now that the issue has been raised. I appreciate that. If anyone feels like I’ve disrespected them, let me know I’ll try to make it up to them.
But more to the point of what you were saying:
I don’t fear disagreeing points. I welcome them. I certainly wouldn’t expect anyone to apologize for taking a different point of view. That has WTF written all over it.
The whole point of a debate is to engage in differing points of view. Yes, part of taking a side in a debate is persuading the other person your side is correct, but with something as inexact as college football, that’s almost never going to happen. Especially when those two sides are diametrically opposed. So, again, you can feel free to hate and disagree with my points all you like. But there’s a difference between disagreeing and being disrespectful about it. For instance, “I don’t see your point” is much different than “You make no sense whatever.” I apparently make sense to some people, and I am speaking rudimentary English. (See, I can have fun too.)
I never reply to anything you say, but now you start whining about how mistreated poor, innocent Meager Reader is just for your polite discourse. Give me a break. You are practically asking for it.
Well, that’s nice. Yes, I’m the instigator. Don’t tread on me.
Or, perhaps to use something more contemporary:
by Meager Reader on Jan 1, 2012 8:25 AM EST up reply actions
That summed up what I wanted to say
Thank you alstein.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Jan 1, 2012 11:33 AM EST up reply actions
This forum is TAME. You should head over to LoneStarBall.com
and see how that sbnation blog “rolls”. You’d be bombarded with every swear word known to man, some not known to man, pictures of dino-penis’s, double rainbows, and everything else that could offended you. All of that is when they LIKE you. Nobody has been hostile towards you that I’ve seen on here.
I was having some fun with you, man.
This is the internet. Immature gifs are par for the course, welcome, and fun.
I’m sorry you find the blog to be closed off, but we make damn sure that you have the freedom to voice a view like that. There are places where comments critical of the people who run the blog would be censored or excised. Not here. You’re in the minority on the quarterback issue. It happens. I don’t think you should get bent out of shape as a result.
Murtaugh’s analysis tends to be sound, he does his homework, and he works hard. He also defends his views fiercely—much like you do. So I don’t think it’s odd that people agree with him a lot. I let Eric when I disagree with him, and you should keep doing the same. I welcome you to do the same, but don’t take it so seriously that you can’t enjoy a funny gif, brother.
by Mouth of the South on Jan 1, 2012 12:53 AM EST up reply actions
And I will admit that I have had a heavy hand with the gifs of late.
I don’t have much to do this weekend. Sue me.
by Mouth of the South on Jan 1, 2012 12:57 AM EST up reply actions
I am steadily getting used to gifs.
They’re a little rough on the eyes, especially when they’re HUGE, but I know they’re all in good fun. ;-)
by Meager Reader on Jan 1, 2012 8:27 AM EST up reply actions
Wow, you really are not paying attention
or you let your panties get into such a twist because several of us find your comments in the thread to be dubious to laughable.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 1, 2012 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
Diaco is the reason they lost...look at first half D when he blitzed the crap out of Manuel.
Manuel was flushed from the pocket, getting hit, getting sacked could never set to throw….then for some unbeknow reason he deceids 2nd half to do his usual conservarive thing and thusly Manuel had all day to throw. Like Holtz said aftter the game…“reason they lost is because they stopped blitzing the 2nd half.”
Just hope that Golson has some upside because Rees is well…Turnover Tommy and Hendtix lacks the “voodoo” so he no longer deserves the name Voodoo Child. Gilmore said Hendrix reminds him of Tebow…and thats not bad, Tebow was awesome in college but I’m hoping that Golson shows a comparison to RGIII
We still win if we kick
FGs instead of turning the ball ove in the red zone. I do not disagree, we should have stayed aggressive. I don’t understand how we looked tired on Dline instead of their Oline.
I don't believie in the "if" things, the other team can do just as many "if's"
“If’s are usually reserved for the losing team…if we did this, if we did that, etc. All the “if’s” that happen are part of football…drops, turnovers, missed fg’s etc. I prefer facts of the game. This team on defense has an elite front 7 and has some elite DB’s coming in for 2012 and the Irish have a chance to be an elite defense. I just have my doubts wheather ND has an elite DC. He showed to me last night that in the first half he was that elite DC but in the second half he reverted to his soft D…conservative, bend but dont break attitude. Will Diaco change his way of thinking, I dont know, but I sure hope so.
I've said it a lot and I'll say it again...
the difference in the second half was not the game plan. They brought 3, 4, and 5 guys the same amount as they did in the first. The difference was that #19, 7, 9, and 90 couldn’t get pressure on every play like they did in the first. It showed the importance of continuing to bring in elite DL to constantly rotate in. It justifies why Tuitt and Lynch didn’t play more when everyone was bitching about it earlier this season. Well, they obviously can’t handle more than 50% of the snaps without being tired late in the game (yet).
Watch the game tape, I guarantee the blitzing changed very little. The deep play on the sideline that should have been incomplete out of bounds? That was a 5 man blitz including Manti, yet somehow EJ had plenty of time. They brought 4 on both TDs, and those plays were just quick one reads for EJ. They just couldn’t generate pressure like they did in the 1st half.
It’s simple, cover people, even the fast ones. Those successful passing plays didn’t even take that long to develop. You gotta keep up with these guys. Gray and Blanton didn’t live up to their billing this season, and I’m incredibly disappointed in that. They had NFL aspirations, and I just don’t see it.
I watched the two big drives for FSU again...
there are really only a couple plays where ND had 3 guys rushing. It was 4 (mostly), 5, or 6. It’s not that hard to see. Watch it again. I know what it seemed like, but it just seemed like it because the D line wasn’t getting back there anymore. There were just as many successful plays against the blitzes as there were on 3 or 4 man rushes.
Also, Zeke Motta played an atrocious 2nd half, and his poor play seems to be a running theme throughout the season. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him work his way out of the starting lineup next season.
Also of note, it seemed like they employed Manti as more of a spy on EJ Manuel in the 2nd half, and I don’t think he performed very well in that role as seen on a couple of EJ’s scrambles. He probably could’ve been better utilized at times.
So if the D-line (and LBs?) were tuckering out in the second half,
where were guys like Troy Niklas and Chase Hounshell, who had a lot of work as pass rushers (and Niklas, at OLB) in the second half of the season? I was shocked that they didn’t play (did they? did I miss them somehow?). For the LBs, why not throw Spond or K. Moore in there a bit to keep everybody fresh?
by fishoutofwater on Dec 30, 2011 2:45 PM EST up reply actions
I think this is a much better question...
if you want to look at the coaches’ performance yesterday.
I do want to look at the coaches' performance, indeed.
I would love to read an analysis of the defensive performance, because it was particularly perplexing to me. The offense was the inconsistent bizarro-fest I was expecting. The D was destructively dominant in the first half, then seemed so changed in the second, and everybody’s got different explanations as to what shifted.
The change was surprising because all year, we saw the Irish D come out and totally rule the third quarter, almost always shutting teams out. Instead, they went 7-0 in the first half and 0-18 in the second. The coaches didn’t play a bunch of guys who could have helped out big time. Manti’s game seemed very different. What happened?
by fishoutofwater on Dec 30, 2011 3:05 PM EST up reply actions
This
Burger (I think)-
Can you do a rundown/analysis of how their offense (the four baby OL) changed from first half to second half and how we changed defensively? I know the obvious answer is, we stopped blitzing and rushing more than 3 or 4, but seems like this would be fertile ground.
Also, how did the Irish attack (and how could we have differently attacked) a defense that lost its top two corners?
Thanks for the suggestion.
I’m on it. I’ll probably have something up in the next week or two.
One Foot Down
On teh Twitterz
by burger23 on Dec 31, 2011 11:00 AM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
I know everyone under the sun is saying it...
but that doesn’t make it true. Go watch it again. Seriously. You keep repeating it but you haven’t actually watched it again. I don’t care who is saying it, I don’t agree. I watched it again. They brought 4 for the most part and brought 5 and 6 on a couple of plays in which DBs still got beat. Sure, they brought 3 a couple of times, but they did in the first half too and it worked just fine. They varied their looks plenty, they moved around the DL, LB, and S personnel pre-snap, and came at the OL from different angles and gaps.
If Gray can’t cover anyone for a second and a half and Motta completely ignores his cover 2 responsibilities, then it doesn’t matter what the other 9 or 10 guys are doing. I agree, there was no pass rush, because the DBs were already beat before they had a chance to get to Manuel and because they were understandably slowed a step by fatigue from playing all the snaps.
Seriously, for a larger point, the “ZOMG it’s so obvious why didn’t the coach do this?!?!?!” mentality is seldom correct because nothing in their job is obvious. It’s much harder to call a game then just “BLITZ MORE!” or “PASS MORE!” or “RUN MORE!”. The defense got burned on a handful of plays, some were blitzes and some were not, most were plays in which Manuel got rid of it pretty quickly. The common thread in all those plays was the inability of the DBs to cover effectively.
I'm with you, Al. To me it seemed like the pressure just wasn't getting home.
Reinforcements, please. We need some fresh bodies for the d-line.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 12:51 AM EST up reply actions
Any ideas why Niklas and Hounshell didn't play on the line?
Or why Spond and Moore weren’t rotated in at LB? (I didn’t see any of them play all game – maybe I missed them.)
by fishoutofwater on Dec 31, 2011 2:59 AM EST up reply actions
No idea.
I saw Ishaq in there late, but no. I have no insight and I’d like some, please.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
I'd love to know if Gary Gray has been playing hurt this year
He does not look anything like the player he was last season, and I can’t for the life of me think why.
Even the Pope hates the Trojans
by Publius2010 on Dec 31, 2011 12:53 AM EST up reply actions
Brian Smith tweeted that Gary Gray was incredibly sick the night before the game
when he spoke with him on the phone – that he was really surprised Gray was playing and looking lively out there. Is this perhaps why Bennett got more time at corner? Doesn’t explain Gray’s season, of course. I did see him on campus limping pretty seriously about a third of the way through the season, but never heard if he was actually hurt or injured or just sore.
by fishoutofwater on Dec 31, 2011 3:01 AM EST up reply actions
To me it seemed like we were still blitzing, but just weren't getting there.
We couldn’t cover para nada.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 12:47 AM EST up reply actions
A bowl game is not the time to make a QB change to a frosh qb!
When at the Pitt ND game with my buddy (an avid ND hater), he asked me about Rees. Here’s what I told him “Rees is a decent QB who is pretty accurate with short throws, most of his long completions are because of WRs making good plays, he locks onto Floyd WAY to much, he can’t escape pressure and is good for at least 2 turnovers per game. With that said, I don’t think we have another legitimate option ready this year”
I liked most of what I saw from Hendrix this year and certainly would liked to have seen a lot more of him in some games (vs. Maryland) but it was also obvious that he wasn’t ready to run the offense full throttle. While Rees locked onto Floyd, I don’t remember Hendrix throwing to him at all (maybe against Stanford, can’t remember).
I will fully admit that through most of the year I was a supporter of Rees. I have seen plenty of people on this site point to his flaws and say he was holding back the O, and honestly, didn’t believe them. After the last 4 or so games, I will concede to their beliefs. Rees just doesn’t throw it down field enough and when he does it usually only works when Floyd or Eifert make a great catch!
I kind of agree that the bowl game is not the time to change your starter.
But the bowl game is meaningless unless it’s a BCS game or the national championship, right? I know the fans won’t like this, but why not use the extra practices and live reps to get next season’s starter ready?
I agree that it may put too much pressure on the new guy to name him the starter before the bowl game, but I wanted to see more Hendrix.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 1:04 AM EST up reply actions
Actually a bowl game like this one (non elite)
is the perfect time to see what you have for next season. Starting Hendrix would have been a great idea.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Dec 31, 2011 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
I think there are two schools of thought.
1. Don’t put a bunch of pressure on the backup by naming him starter for the bowl game.
2. Let the best guy play. It will be less pressure if the new guy knows that he’ll be starting, because he’ll know exactly what to expect.
I hate to waffle, but I go back and forth. Before the game I waivered between 1 and 2 but was mostly in the 2 camp. I think I am now more firmly in the 2 camp.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 11:58 AM EST up reply actions
While I was not surprised Rees started
I was disappointed. His increasingly poor play gave BK the perfect opportunity to start Hendrix. BK had extended time to prepare him for FSU and it would have given BK a chance to see if Hendrix has what it takes. Oh well, water under the bridge.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Dec 31, 2011 1:06 PM EST up reply actions
The playing time distribution is a bigger deal than who started, I think.
I like the decision to start Rees. It let him take the media spotlight and kept some pressure off of Hendrix. I don’t like the distribution of snaps within the game, especially given that Hendrix looked solid throwing the ball in his first series (including a nice downfield toss that TJ Jones dropped).
by Mr Wednesday on Dec 31, 2011 4:50 PM EST up reply actions
Don't forget that the running game clicked with Hendrix at the helm.
And I say that if he’s going to play most of the snaps—which he should have but didn’t—let him know what to expect by naming him the starter.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 6:09 PM EST up reply actions
This Year
was a wasted one as far as QB play. I don’t know what Kelly should have or could have done about it. Tommy Rees is not going to put this team over the hump. Andrew Hendrix’s lack of PT can only mean Kelly has little faith in him. If Everet Golson doesn’t step up next year we’re F’d. Devin Fuller has become a big get in recruiting IMO.
Would
our QB situation for next year be worse off if Kelly had stuck with Crist for a longer stretch? Might it be better? Would we be worse than 8-5 this season? Sobering stats, we lead CFB in turnovers in the red zone…..had 6 games with 3 or moe turnovers and lost 5.
I would have loved to see Crist get a little longer leash...
But, I do remember at the time when we lost to USF I wanted Rees in there because he was “steady” and I thought that’s what the team needed at the time. I don’t think Kelly made a wrong decision in starting Rees from there on out, I think his hands were tied, really. I’m sure he knows that Rees isn’t the ideal man for his offense, but Rees presented the best opportunity for ND to win now. As fans, we want it both ways (win now and continued development of a better option), but in most cases, it doesn’t work out like that, we have to take one or the other right now.
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
This
This year was a wasted one as far as QB play. I don’t know what Kelly should have or could have done about it.
You said it and you said it succinctly. Salud.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 1:14 AM EST up reply actions
this season was a lot like '08
given their talent/schedule, the fact that this was easily their best defense since 2002, and the way that some of these games (5 TOs vs. USF, blowing the lead in the last 28 sec vs. UM, 18 unanswered for FSU) played out, 8-5 is absolutely unacceptable.
as much as i argued for Rees to be the starter after doing what he did in the final few games last year (trip to L.A. aside), it seems pretty clear that he isn’t the answer for them at QB. for someone to be about 15 starts into his career and still make the poor decisions/throws that he makes is troubling. there are high school QBs that know not to force the throw he did to Goodman which essentially sealed yesterday’s game.
i’m really worried about 2012. the schedule – at Oklahoma, Miami in Chicago, BYU, at SC, at Michigan State – gets ridiculous. they’re losing a talented, and in my opinion underrated, senior class that was full of solid players. Gray is gone leaving Wood as the only proven back. Floyd is gone as a security blanket, and Eifert may be gone too. as much as we have all lauded Kelly for his defensive recruiting, the skill position stars (QB, RB, WR) that were all over the field during the Weis regime (basically the only thing that he did well) are gone. next year feels like a transition year which will decide not only the future at QB, but the direction of the program.
i still have faith, as i always do, that things will eventually return to where they were pre-Davie. but, there’s no sugarcoating the fact that 2011 was a blown opportunity and a major disappointment. the table was set for a BCS appearance, and instead a loss to the Big East’s worst team, and 1-4 record against teams with a pulse, along with maddening, sloppy play was the result.
Ewing with the step...YES! and the foul!
by Anthony Masons Haircut on Dec 30, 2011 9:12 AM EST reply actions
That schedule...
is really not that bad. Miami is down in a bad way right now. BYU has no big wins to speak of in the last couple years, so tough but not that tough (see: Utah, 2010). MSU loses a ton on offense and their best player on defense. ND always has a tough matchup with USC and Michigan, there is nothing new there, just shut up and beat them. Oklahoma was awful once Broyles went down, we should be at their level if we can solidify QB play by then with EG. Stanford loses a ton. Navy, Purdue, Pitt, BC, WF…yes please.
If the upward trajectory on this team is headed like I think it is, next year’s schedule really doesn’t scare me and is actually about appropriate for what it should be every year. 3-4 really good tough games, a bunch of more middle of the road games, and a couple teams that are simply heading nowhere.
No, it is that bad
Next year is loaded with teams that were good this year and aren’t expected to collapse (OK, SC, that whorish team from Ann Arbor), good teams that might struggle a bit in a rebuilding year ( Stanford, Michigan State), and then a slew of mediocre but still bowl elegiable teams, give or take a couple. Can we beat all those teams with a good game? Yes, but can all those teams beat us if we don’t show up? Also yes. The problem is playing those good teams and then not having as much of a break against teams that can beat you if you don’t show up, and the team still hasn’t shown an ability to not shoot themselves in the goddamn foot.
Even the Pope hates the Trojans
I don't worry as much about the skill position guys.
A strong to quite strong returning front seven and the return and (hopeful) improvement of Slaughter and Zeke will ease the burden on the secondary. So front seven should be good, which should help secondary, so I’m not freaking out about defense.
As for offense, we’ll have Eifert, Koyack, Golic, and Welch, so we’ll have some weapons at tight end. Riddick and Wood, with moderate dosages of GAIII, Run CMC, and (hopefully) CamRob—not to mention Will Mahone and Keivarae Russell—and I’m optimistic about our running backs. We lose two offensive linemen, but we’re not replacing them with freshmen, and this staff has shown the ability to develop offensive linemen. I am worried about wide receiver, but Toma and TJ Jones have plenty of experience. Toma has shown us that he’s reliable when called upon, and maybe TJ will step up and break out. Here’s hoping that DD, D-Smith, or one of the freshmen will really show up at wide receiver, but I am worried about this position. I’m expecting vastly-improved qb play, though, which should help the entire offense.
The schedule? I agree with Al AND Publius. The schedule isn’t striking fear into me, but there are a lot of teams that can beat us. Still, we’ll have the talent advantage on almost everyone.
Anthony Masons Haircut said:
there’s no sugarcoating the fact that 2011 was a blown opportunity and a major disappointment.
Damn this stings, but damn if it ain’t true.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 1:25 AM EST up reply actions
Oh, and I forgot about dual incoming 5-star cornerbacks.
I know you never want to play anyone right away, but these guys should add quality depth from day 1.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 1:26 AM EST up reply actions
It will be great when the offense and defense are together....this year great D...so-so O.
Next year should be an excellent D. The O is going to have one RB with a bunch of unproven RB’s, at QB we have Rees and 2 unproven QB’s, if Eifert goes we have unproven TE’s, and we have a WR group like Jones that hasnt shown a lot, Riddick is ok, Toma did ok in limited playing time and the rest are a bunch of unproven freshmen….that all doesnt sound like a kickass offense to me….it seems more like its going to be more of a rebuilding year for the O, instead of one thats in place ready to go…like the D is.
It's college football...
every team loses their best players and has unproven players that need to contribute. That’s no excuse and it doesn’t mean they won’t succeed next year. They are talented and they have good coaches on that side of the ball. If one of the QBs steps up (big if), I really don’t see a reason why they can’t be successful next season.
Agree.
We have the talent. We should be able to reload, not rebuild.
Bill, I didn’t say we’d have a kickass O.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
Mots, i didnt say you...that was my opinion of what so far on paper
doesnt look like a kickass O next year…..its going to come down to the QB which absolutely has to be in place by the end of spring. Listen to Coach D on this past Fridays PH, he gets right into next year.
I gotcha. Just clarifying.
And I agree for the most part. I’m just a little more optimistic that we’ll be better on offense if we get better qb play.
by Mouth of the South on Jan 1, 2012 10:17 AM EST up reply actions
To be succesful next year BK is going to have to have a QB in place
in the spring…not the fall and have another fiasco like last year.
Not a recruitnik so I'm asking those of you on here...
will our secondary get better next year? I can’t take another year of such horrible CB play! I can’t watch our CBs be in “decent” position and NEVER make a play on the ball and give up big catches! PLEASE TELL ME WE HAVE AT LEAST ONE ELITE CB COMING IN NEXT YEAR!! Is Lo Wood as good as originally advertised? Can he step up next year?
Also, why does it seem our safeties only make play in the middle of the field and are never there for support on the sideline throws? Am I just imagining this or just have selective memory?
We have two 5* CB's in Darby and Shepard coming in.
They could make an impact immediately but they still are freshman so the learning curve is still there.
assuming either do actually come to ND
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Dec 30, 2011 2:14 PM EST up reply actions
You're not buying the SC propoganda, are you?
Haven’t both Tee and D said that they’re 100% in?
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 1:27 AM EST up reply actions
I am not fully buying the ND propaganda either
these are teenagers, anything can happen, and USC can look like a pretty good option, as good if not better than ND, especially to two kids from a couple hundred miles away
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Dec 31, 2011 11:39 AM EST up reply actions
Collectively we are not buying any propoganda, so we're a good team.
We compliment each others’ strengths and weaknesses. Kind of like:
.jpg)
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 12:01 PM EST up reply actions
Or...
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
Better than you and Meager Reader:
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 12:14 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
True story...
hey I made a new friend though, right?
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
You did. It's a beautiful thing, friendship.
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 12:33 PM EST up reply actions
Friendship is pretty awesome.
Bestest best friends.
by Meager Reader on Jan 1, 2012 8:42 AM EST up reply actions
YES!!! There ya go, MR...
"Although I really thought that you were 'Anti Internet-Tough-Guy.' But no, you’re a tough guy who’s against the internets? I see." Mouth of the South
outstanding!
BRAVO!!!
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Dec 31, 2011 1:07 PM EST up reply actions
Rec'd.
That was actually pretty funny. Nicely done.
by Meager Reader on Jan 1, 2012 8:39 AM EST up reply actions
That is kinda creepy
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Dec 31, 2011 1:08 PM EST up reply actions
I predict...
RS FR Jalen Brown (from Texas) to start next year, and I have very high hopes for him. Without being prompted, Floyd has raved about him numerous times, and so has the coaching staff. Between Jackson and Wood, they have some experience there and were good athletes coming into the program.
And then, as stated, Darby and Shepard (so long as ND holds onto them) with hopefully one or two more elite guys yet to commit or committed elsewhere (Wright, Poole, Rios) should be added to the mix.
I think the position will become a strength in short order.
I think you see a healthy rotation at CB next fall...
which was sorely missing for the last two years. There was a three man rotation in 2010, and basically just Gray and Blanton this year. Its amazing that neither one missed any significant portion of the season due to injury.
Bennett Jackson came on strong late in the year for just having moved over to CB from WR. Brown and Josh Atkinson will definitely contribute. Eilar Hardy will be back from injury and could play a hybrid role (Jamoris Slaughter part 2). Add to that Darby and Shepard, along with another one or two and I completely agree—this will become a strength quickly.
I don't tweet often--but when I do, you can be sure it isn't important.
@jemiesle
Why didn't we see more of a rotation this year?
Is it because Wood and Jackson just weren’t ready, and we didn’t want to burn anyone else’s redshirt?
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 1:28 AM EST up reply actions
In a word--Yes
This is where missing out on CBs in 2008-09 really hurts.
I don't tweet often--but when I do, you can be sure it isn't important.
@jemiesle
My Feathers and Black Eyes
Feathers:
1. The defense — I echo the sentiments above that this defense deserved more than 8 wins this year. They played well enough that this game should have been over by halftime. The fact of the matter is, it’s a lot of pressure on a defense when it knows that it can only give up 7 points or fewer for the team to win. That sentence was grammatically terrible. You know what I mean.
2. Ben Turk — Has gotten better all season; pinned FSU at the 1 at a crucial time in the game.
Black Eyes:
1. Brian Kelly — Kelly gets them all, because Tommy Rees is just a kid and it’s not like he did anything last night that we didn’t expect. He stunk, but anyone who has watched the last 5 games knew that he would. And I’m not saying that Kelly should be fired or anything, so please don’t banish me to NDNation. He has been successful everywhere else, and he will be successful at Notre Dame. (Frankly, if he’s not, then the problem is Notre Dame and not Brian Kelly.) He gets the black eyes for play selection and personnel decisions not just last night, but for the entire season.
In terms of play selection, let’s just talk about last night. How many screens did he call? I recall one, to Toma that netted 6 yards, and wasn’t called until the 4th quarter. Why not try a few screens to take advantage of FSU’s aggressiveness? It’s not as if our running game was particularly strong. Plus, Rees can throw the screen most of the time. When Hendrix was in, why not run the option? It’s a look that FSU hasn’t seen a lot of or practiced a lot against, and Hendrix has shown that he is more than adept at running it. In fact, it’s probably the look Hendrix is most comfortable with (though he also throws a nice seam route to the TE).
In terms of personnel, Kelly ignored numerous opportunities this year to get Hendrix experience in low-pressure situations (e.g., Purdue, Maryland, Navy). I don’t know if this would have helped against Stanford and FSU, but it certainly could not have hurt. Pull Rees, let Hendrix play the last quarter or so.
Kelly seems to bench the hot hand just for the sake of changing things up. Take the USC game — Crist goes in for an injured Rees, goes 4/4 and takes the team to like the USC 3. And Kelly pulls him out and puts in a cold Hendrix? Let Crist finish the drive! I don’t get it. Same thing last night. Hendrix moves the team to the FSU 6(?), and then Kelly puts Rees in. As soon as Rees came on the field, I told my wife, “He’s going to throw an interception on this play.” And he would have, if not for a Floydian effort by…Floyd.
Finally, I give Kelly a black eye as a leader for not letting Crist start on Senior Day. He did everything he was asked to do. He accepted his role with grace and maturity. He deserved to play on Senior Day, even for only one series. Kelly should have let him have that moment.
That felt good to get that out. Thanks.
by The Guys Get Shirts! on Dec 30, 2011 10:21 AM EST reply actions
very bad timing
His timing of switching QBs seemed terrible yesterday. Only Hendrix moved the ball well, and really only on one drive, but Rees gets the ball (at the end of that drive) and for the next drive too. Way to reward the hot hand. His pick was horrible, but he should have been playing many more drives by that point. The main thing I wondered was whether Hendrix was checking out of option run plays to pass plays on his earlier drives. It didn’t look like it, but I can’t believe our coaching staff didn’t call the option against them more.
by DenverIrish on Dec 30, 2011 10:53 AM EST up reply actions
I should have been clearer
When I wrote “option,” I meant, like, the old-school Tony Rice-style option. Not you kids with your fancy zone-read fullback-less nonsense that would never have worked in Ara’s day.
/harrumphfullbacks
//get off my lawn
by The Guys Get Shirts! on Dec 30, 2011 2:53 PM EST up reply actions
Of course we knew what you meant.
We don’t allow any of that commie spread-option nonsense talk here.
/5 harumphers harumphing
by Mouth of the South on Dec 31, 2011 1:31 AM EST up reply actions
In the spirit of the season
It would clearly be 5 Golden Harumphers.
I don't tweet often--but when I do, you can be sure it isn't important.
@jemiesle
Hendrix did run the read option...
he misread it horribly both times. He needed to be scrambling more on designed pass plays. I would’ve liked to see more of that. Agree that he should’ve seen more time but I don’t think the switching was the problem, those were our most successful drives. He just should’ve started more drives, but Kelly clearly did not trust him deep in ND’s own territory, as they often were in the 2nd half.
Disagree strongly on Crist starting senior day. Send the message that this game should be easy and we can start our backups? No thanks. This isn’t a sentimental game. And if you start Crist, why not start Anthony McDonald, and Dan McCarthy, and Brandon Newman etc etc? They were all great representatives of Notre Dame during their 4 years and were often doing the same charity events Dayne was and handled themselves with the same grace and maturity Dayne did. Do they not deserve that moment too?
The thing about the Hendrix pick is...
that you can see Floyd had a step on his man deep. Too bad he wasn’t option #1 on that play.
I don't tweet often--but when I do, you can be sure it isn't important.
@jemiesle
Argh, you noticed that too?
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Dec 30, 2011 2:18 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks for reminding me of that.
Jerks!
Kidding. There were a lot of those yesterday. I am torn between trying to erase them all from my memory and constantly revisiting the “what ifs” over and over.
whiskey
www.onefootdown.com
In real-time of all things...
guess I developed Rees Syndrome, where you can only lock on a receiver wearing #3. Hopefully, scientists will discover a cure before September…
I don't tweet often--but when I do, you can be sure it isn't important.
@jemiesle
Ok, why *not* start all of them?
I would have been psyched for Kelly to have started them all. Let them play one series or one drive. If they’re playing well, let them keep playing. I don’t think that would have sent a message that the team could be complacent or have been insulting to BC. Frankly, that game should have been easy, and, once again, Tommy and the offense made sure all the pressure was on the defense to deliver the win.
by The Guys Get Shirts! on Dec 30, 2011 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
Then I guess you can question all coaches every year...
because no one does this. Because it’s insane.
Yeah...
I know you’re right. I kinda took a position there and felt like I had to keep defending it. Maybe not all the seniors. Maybe just the ones where there isn’t a big dropoff compared to the starters. Like Crist and McDonald.
by The Guys Get Shirts! on Dec 30, 2011 9:58 PM EST up reply actions
I would have loved for them all to play a bit, but at the end of a blow out, like last year v. Utah.
No reason at all to start the seniors on senior day, but Kelly showed last year he’s willing to end with them, once a W’s secured. Unfortunately, they didn’t get a chance this year because the offense went comatose and kept what should have been a big win against a poor opponent a horrendously close game. I felt bad for the seniors as the game drew to a close, but you shouldn’t risk any game that isn’t in hand simply to honor the players. They were honored before the game began.
by fishoutofwater on Dec 30, 2011 3:09 PM EST up reply actions
ALL THE BOOTLEGS
…is what I would have liked to see, but I don’t recall much of that with Hendrix in the game. Sigh.
Even the Pope hates the Trojans
Feathers/Eyes
Feathers:
The usual suspects, as previously discussed above. Additionally, I think Te’o played one of his better games (now that he was healthy) and Slaughter officially introduced himself to the world. Watch out for next year.
Black Eyes:
Gilmore and Tessatore in the booth. Is there really a good reason why Rod Gilmore does college football? Did he watch any film prior? If he talked about speed and the FSU defense one more time…
Abandoning the run in the 3rd quarter. There was a point where it looked (to me) that they would just pound out the win on the ground, after getting bigger gains from Wood and Riddick. It just shows you what one negative play did to the offense with the poor QB play.
Beyond that I would just be rehashing what was already said.
A few other thoughts:
1. Motta played well in the first half, and then regressed in the second half. No idea why.
2. I think the offense missed Molnar in the booth from a playcalling standpoint. The offense never seemed to get into a rhythm. Part of this was due to the FSU defense, but more due to strange play call selection.
3. Finally, a big thank you goes out to the seniors who played their last game for Notre Dame last night. While some would point out that they didn’t live up to expectations, they played through a ton of adversity and did it with class. Best of luck to all of them, where ever they might end up.
I don't tweet often--but when I do, you can be sure it isn't important.
@jemiesle
Good points Jim
Motta regressed in the second half because Manuel suddenly had all day to throw. Instead of bringing 4-6 on most every play and shutting down the FSU offense like we did in the first half, we started bringing 3-4, which both put more pressure on the DB’s and tired out the DL. Poor decisions.
And I also want to say a big thank you to the senior class. Those of us out here in fan-blog-world like to think we know everything, and critique as if the ND football programs OWES is something, but in reality it’s these kids who work full class loads at a top academic institution, and then turn around and put in 30-50 hours a week for football, which we all thrive on. Thanks guys, all the best to you in your next chapter. Make the most of your last semester on campus – all us old guys out here would give our rickety left hip for one more semester back at ND.
You can't spell SUCK without SC or UK.
Just saw the 2012 schedule.
Follow @TomahawkNation
Tomahawk Nation Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on One Foot Down
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE ONE FOOT DOWN STORE
