Time to hand the reigns back to Tommy Rees

[tadman95]

That was the third time that EG was running around our endzone trying to find a receiver in that game. How many times have you seen Rees do that? None, that's how many. The reason why is that Rees would either throw it away or check out of the play. That's the thing that some people are having trouble understanding about Rees. It's easy to see the athletic difference between EG and Rees, it's a lot harder to see the difference between the ears. When Rees checks out of a play that EG would have got sacked on, it goes unseen by almost everyone.

Furthermore, Rees is a year older now. Everyone keeps using "last year" as some type of barometer for what Rees is this year. What about EG last year? He wasn't even good enough to suplant Tommy. He was our scout team QB. Both of these guys are different players than they were last year. Most people on here only want to believe that EG is different, while Rees couldn' possibly of improved. It's silly.

As I said, I think EG should still start. But if he doesn't improve, then Rees has shown that he is more than capable of being a solid QB for us.

Well said!

 

[Chris P. Bacon]

I know that the kid routinely gets slammed on these boards. However the truth of the matter is that the offense just runs so much better when he is at the helm. It's just time to make a permanent change.

Bottom line is that you play to win the games. Maybe Golson will further develop and be a star at some point. Unfortunately that time hasn't arrived yet.

Tommy needs to be the man behind center right now. Especially if we have any hopes of BCS games.

I'm at work, so I don't have time to read all of the posts, but in my opinion, we're 6-0 with Golson being the "Starter". Let's not forget, it's not necessarily the offense/tommy/golson winning these 6 games for us, it's the defense. Tommy may be able to make adjustments at the line better than golson, but he lacks the arm and leg.

So again, we are 6-0, don't see the desperate urgency to change our offense due to a close game against a top 20 school, who just recently beat USC. Stanford is a great team and they showed it, Tommy has not shown he can play for 4 quarters, yeah he can handle a drive here or there, a quarter this game, two quarters that game, but we've seen what he can do with 4 quarters, and he's as much of a turnover concern as Golson.

After the navy game we were all thrilled and happy with Golson, Purdue we praised Tommy, Mich St we were back on the wagon with Golson, Mich we fell back in love with Tommy again, Miami was Golson's turn again, Stanford was Tommy, now I assume at this rate BYU Golson will be the fan favorite again, and then Tommy again against OKLA. So far it's been a pretty nice trend so far, every other game we switch which QB we root for based on their performance. Kelly knows what he's doing, and Golson has definitely made strides from Navy to last week. Give the brotha a chance. All his mistakes from last week are all coachable. running out of bounds, throwing the ball out of bounds when there's nothing there. He did those things perfectly the first few weeks, now things are getting a little more in depth for him, the playbook, the reads. Give him some time to balance things out in practice, I'm guessing he's going to have a surprisingly great game against OKLA, IMO.

 

[JoeyGetherall]

Forget this noise let's put in Gunner. If he fumbles or makes a mistake let's try and bring in Malik early. Wait can we still get Dayne to come back? If he can't handle BK's offense Jimmy always has the year of eligibility right!? No, no, no wait I've got the perfect solution Zombie QB: Harry Stuhldreher. You know that guy isn't gonna fumble and nobody would dare blitz him in the first place.

 

[aaronb]

Tommy doesn't need to get away from the rush, he anticipates it during his pre snap read and avoids it. EG puts himself in a lot of the situations he gets into by not reading the defense correctly or breaking the pocket too early. I too have found myself saying "Tommy cant do that" several times a game while watching EG, but I have also been realizing that Tommy probably wouldn't have been sacked in the endzone (nor fumbled the ball) and would have checked out of many of the broken plays EG escapes.

I'm not saying Rees should start (although, if EG has concussion symptoms still, its a no-brainer), what I am saying is that the door is certaintly not closed for Tommy. Some of you act like EG has been playing awesome, he hasn't. Our offense is mediocre at best right now and we will need to get better if we want to compete for championships.

This is pretty much where I come out on this subject as well.

Sure we have been able to go 6-0 with Golson as our primary starter. However without Tommy Rees' relief efforts. We'd be 3-3 and most of you same folks would be wanting to fire the coach and hire coach Flavor-O-Week right now.

We've gotten by the weaker part of our schedule with the Golson/Tommy bullpen set-up.

I just don't think we can stay undefeated by starting out in such a hole against every good team we play.

 

[JoeyGetherall]

This is pretty much where I come out on this subject as well.

Sure we have been able to go 6-0 with Golson as our primary starter. However without Tommy Rees' relief efforts. We'd be 3-3 and most of you same folks would be wanting to fire the coach and hire coach Flavor-O-Week right now.

We've gotten by the weaker part of our schedule with the Golson/Tommy bullpen set-up.

I just don't think we can stay undefeated by starting out in such a hole against every good team we play.

In a hole? This was the first game we we're down at half.

I think everyone is getting a little greedy. At the beginning of the season if you of said we would be 6-0 an and #5 BCS right now I probably would laughed given our schedule.

 

[woolybug25]

In a hole? This was the first game we we're down at half.

I think everyone is getting a little greedy. At the beginning of the season if you of said we would be 6-0 an and #5 BCS right now I probably would laughed given our schedule.

And yet everyone continues to use the "6-0" reasoning against Rees, without giving Rees credit for bailing us out in half of them. Without Rees, we wouldn't be 6-0 right now. That argument works both ways.

 

[anarin]

EG is a starter because of potential, plain and simple. Also, he is NOT a freshman.

Tomatoe tomato

He's a redshirt freshman

 

[JoeyGetherall]

And yet everyone continues to use the "6-0" reasoning against Rees, without giving Rees credit for bailing us out in half of them. Without Rees, we wouldn't be 6-0 right now. That argument works both ways.

I could also make a pretty reasonable assumption based on historical evidence that if TR was the starter all year we wouldn't be 6-0.

 

[woolybug25]

I could also make a pretty reasonable assumption based on historical evidence that if TR was the starter all year we wouldn't be 6-0.

Really? Again, you are assuming that Tommy wasn't capable of improving from last year, but I digress.

I'm not sure that even if you use "historical evidence" (read; hyperbole) as your basis, that your opinion makes sense. Rees led ND to victories in his first four starts at quarterback, including upsets of Utah and USC. He then bailed us out of our two most meaningful wins this year. If anything, "historical evidence" is on Tommy's side, not Everett's.

 

[North Buffalo Irish]

And yet everyone continues to use the "6-0" reasoning against Rees, without giving Rees credit for bailing us out in half of them. Without Rees, we wouldn't be 6-0 right now. That argument works both ways.

Based on what? Golson hasn't left a game while trailing. Tommy has not come in and rallied the team from a losing position.

Goodman made the play against Purdue. The defense did it all against Michigan. Riddick and TJ made the amazing catches on Saturday. Rees is not some panacea for the offense.

 

[woolybug25]

Based on what? Golson hasn't left a game while trailing. Tommy has not come in and rallied the team from a losing position.

Goodman made the play against Purdue. The defense did it all against Michigan. Riddick and TJ made the amazing catches on Saturday. Rees is not some panacea for the offense.

I guess Tommy didn't throw the ball, or make the read at the line, or anything else for that matter. We could have had ACamp in there and it would have been the same result. I'm sure ACamp would have checked out of the run play against scUM when he saw single coverage on Eifert too.

We may not have been down, but if Tommy wouldn't have executed, we were in position to lose every game he has came into. Christ, is OT not stressful of a situation for your taste?

 

[North Buffalo Irish]

I guess Tommy didn't throw the ball, or make the read at the line, or anything else for that matter. We could have had ACamp in there and it would have been the same result. I'm sure ACamp would have checked out of the run play against scUM when he saw single coverage on Eifert too.

We may not have been down, but if Tommy wouldn't have executed, we were in position to lose every game he has came into. Christ, is OT not stressful of a situation for your taste?

You're getting really upset.

Did you watch Tommy in the Michigan game? No production. How about on 3rd & 2 at the end of the game yesterday? We ran the ball so Rees couldn't give the game away. There's a reason Rees isn't the starter. There's a reason Coach Kelly is being so persistent with Golson. Golson brings a different dimension to the offense. Kelly CLEARLY favors Golson's skillset over Rees' experience.

Is trailing by a touchdown not pressure? Golson leads a touchdown drive to tie it. He also had the offense driving (again) when he was knocked out of the game. Until Golson's play is costing you a game -- like Tommy's play did at times in 2011 -- you stick with him.

 

[woolybug25]

You're getting really upset.

Did you watch Tommy in the Michigan game? No production. How about on 3rd & 2 at the end of the game yesterday? We ran the ball so Rees couldn't give the game away. There's a reason Rees isn't the starter. There's a reason Coach Kelly is being so persistent with Golson. Golson brings a different dimension to the offense. Kelly CLEARLY favors Golson's skillset over Rees' experience.

Is trailing by a touchdown not pressure? Golson leads a touchdown drive to tie it. He also had the offense driving (again) when he was knocked out of the game. Until Golson's play is costing you a game -- like Tommy's play did at times in 2011 -- you stick with him.

I'm not upset at all. I guess the humor went over your head.

Rees had no production in the Michigan game? He had our longest down field pass of the game with the strike to Eifert (which he checked into out of a run play) to seal the win. I guess you may not see that as production, but I certainly do.

Again, you act like Golson's play is the primary reason we are winning, which it certainly is not. His production hasn't been very good this season. I am sure he will improve and he certainly has an electric athletic skill set. But the fact remains that when it has came down to crunch time (ie 2-min drill against scUM, OT against Stanford) we had Tommy behind the wheel.

Golson's play hasn't cost us a game yet because Tommy has been able to close out games for him. So you are right, we should stick with what has gotten us here. That includes Tommy.

 

[JoeyGetherall]

Really? Again, you are assuming that Tommy wasn't capable of improving from last year, but I digress.

I'm not sure that even if you use "historical evidence" (read; hyperbole) as your basis, that your opinion makes sense. Rees led ND to victories in his first four starts at quarterback, including upsets of Utah and USC. He then bailed us out of our two most meaningful wins this year. If anything, "historical evidence" is on Tommy's side, not Everett's.

Ok if you want to take history out of the equation I tend to believe 1.) BK has forgotten more football than we know and 2.) opposing D coordinators would game plan differently against Rees and he would struggle. There's plenty of tape on how to stop ND when TR is at the helm.

 

[woolybug25]

Ok if you want to take history out of the equation I tend to believe 1.) BK has forgotten more football than we know and 2.) opposing D coordinators would game plan differently against Rees and he would struggle. There's plenty of tape on how to stop ND when TR is at the helm.

Haha, I didn't bring up "history", you did. I just showed you why it didn't make sense.

 

[North Buffalo Irish]

I'm not upset at all. I guess the humor went over your head.

No need to be condescending. When you use the Lord's name in vain, it appears that your emotions are not in check.

Rees had no production in the Michigan game? He had our longest down field pass of the game with the strike to Eifert (which he checked into out of a run play) to seal the win. I guess you may not see that as production, but I certainly do.

He played over half the game, and in that time the offense scored 3 points. The fans who want Rees to take over the starting role are acting like Tommy is going to step in and start zinging the ball over the place, scoring 30+ points a game against any defense in the country.

Again, you act like Golson's play is the primary reason we are winning, which it certainly is not.

I never said that, or anything that comes even close to that.

Golson's play hasn't cost us a game yet because Tommy has been able to close out games for him. So you are right, we should stick with what has gotten us here. That includes Tommy.

Fair enough. If there is a time that calls for Rees to come into the game -- at the discretion of Coach Kelly -- then so be it. The formula we are using has gotten us to 6-0.

But let's not act like Golson has been inept. He was terrific up at Michigan State. He helped the offense totally cruise past Navy and Miami. It should be every ND fan's hope (and maybe expectation, given the two blowouts against sub-par opponents) that Rees won't factor into the equation against BYU next week, or in the three "easy" games that come after Oklahoma.

Everyone wants to focus on the quarterback, but I'm more worried about Riddick's featured role despite averaging less than 4.0 ypc. I'm more worried about getting Wood and Atkinson more involved in the offense. I'm more worried about utilizing the speed and playmaking ability we have on our offense so that it's not all up to the quarterback.

It's not all about Golson, and it sure as hell isn't all about Tommy Rees.

 

[aaronb]

Ok if you want to take history out of the equation I tend to believe 1.) BK has forgotten more football than we know and 2.) opposing D coordinators would game plan differently against Rees and he would struggle. There's plenty of tape on how to stop ND when TR is at the helm.

How about we compare the offensive numbers from last year to this year?

Rees completed almost 10% more of his passes than Golston, and had a significantly higher QB rating.

This year the disparity is even greater.

The reason that we have been successful this year is almost entirely a credit to a much improved defense. Trying to pretend its anything else is frankly just not being truthful.

Notre Dame Fighting Irish 2012 Statistics - Team and Player Stats - College Football - ESPN

 

[woolybug25]

No need to be condescending. When you use the Lord's name in vain, it appears that your emotions are not in check.


He played over half the game, and in that time the offense scored 3 points. The fans who want Rees to take over the starting role are acting like Tommy is going to step in and start zinging the ball over the place, scoring 30+ points a game against any defense in the country.


I never said that, or anything that comes even close to that.


Fair enough. If there is a time that calls for Rees to come into the game -- at the discretion of Coach Kelly -- then so be it. The formula we are using has gotten us to 6-0.

But let's not act like Golson has been inept. He was terrific up at Michigan State. He helped the offense totally cruise past Navy and Miami. It should be every ND fan's hope (and maybe expectation, given the two blowouts against sub-par opponents) that Rees won't factor into the equation against BYU next week, or in the three "easy" games that come after Oklahoma.

Everyone wants to focus on the quarterback, but I'm more worried about Riddick's featured role despite averaging less than 4.0 ypc. I'm more worried about getting Wood and Atkinson more involved in the offense. I'm more worried about utilizing the speed and playmaking ability we have on our offense so that it's not all up to the quarterback.

It's not all about Golson, and it sure as hell isn't all about Tommy Rees.

You do realize that I haven't been advocating for Golson to be replaced, right?

PS - Thicken your skin a bit homie, I say way worse stuff than "the lord's name in vein" when my emotions aren't in check. This isn't 1930.

 

[FLDomer]

How about we compare the offensive numbers from last year to this year?

Rees completed almost 10% more of his passes than Golston, and had a significantly higher QB rating.

This year the disparity is even greater.

The reason that we have been successful this year is almost entirely a credit to a much improved defense. Trying to pretend its anything else is frankly just not being truthful.

Notre Dame Fighting Irish 2012 Statistics - Team and Player Stats - College Football - ESPN

SWEET LORD!!! Can people stop fvcking up the spelling of this kids name!! Its G-O-L-S-O-N!

 

[JoeyGetherall]

How about we compare the offensive numbers from last year to this year?

Rees completed almost 10% more of his passes than Golston, and had a significantly higher QB rating.

This year the disparity is even greater.

The reason that we have been successful this year is almost entirely a credit to a much improved defense. Trying to pretend its anything else is frankly just not being truthful.

Notre Dame Fighting Irish 2012 Statistics - Team and Player Stats - College Football - ESPN

Really entirely defense? TO's have nothing to do with it? That seemed to be a pretty big issue last year. See SFla, Mich, USC, FSU.

I've said it before and I'll say it again TR struggled at times last year even when he had an All American first round draft pick playing WR. I don't think he would fair much better without that gentleman's services this yr.

 

[North Buffalo Irish]

You do realize that I haven't been advocating for Golson to be replaced, right?

Yes, which is where I agreed with you about the successful formula Kelly has used to get to 6-0. Most of my points are directed at fans, like aaronb, who use completion percentage to justify making a change at quarterback.

Also, it's really asinine to say that Golson never audibles or changes plays, and that only Rees is capable of these things. Obviously Rees is more experienced and further along in his intellectual development, but to totally discount Golson and act like he can only run what's called is not accurate.

I think there needs to be more focus put on why the offense isn't scoring a lot, and why Golson isn't always successful. Where are the screen passes? Why don't we run bubble screens? Why don't we run slants? Why is Riddick getting the majority of touches out of the backfield when others are outplaying him? Why doesn't Koyack have any potential?

 

[ulukinatme]

Let's just bench them both and start Gunner.

No, no, no, bench them all and switch Massa back to QB!

 

[woolybug25]

Yes, which is where I agreed with you about the successful formula Kelly has used to get to 6-0. Most of my points are directed at fans, like aaronb, who use completion percentage to justify making a change at quarterback.

Also, it's really asinine to say that Golson never audibles or changes plays, and that only Rees is capable of these things. Obviously Rees is more experienced and further along in his intellectual development, but to totally discount Golson and act like he can only run what's called is not accurate.

I think there needs to be more focus put on why the offense isn't scoring a lot, and why Golson isn't always successful. Where are the screen passes? Why don't we run bubble screens? Why don't we run slants? Why is Riddick getting the majority of touches out of the backfield when others are outplaying him? Why doesn't Koyack have any potential?

Actually, Kelly has stated that Rees has more flexibility than Golson to change the play, so it's not just based on opinion. You can also clearly see when a QB checks out of a play, Golson rarely does it. Which is fine, but just wanted to clarify that.

I never want to see a bubble screen ran at Notre Dame ever again. But totally with ya on the rest of the stuff (especially Koyak's potential).

 

[North Buffalo Irish]

Actually, Kelly has stated that Rees has more flexibility than Golson to change the play, so it's not just based on opinion. You can also clearly see when a QB checks out of a play, Golson rarely does it. Which is fine, but just wanted to clarify that.

I know what Kelly has said. And I also wouldn't say "rarely" for Golson making calls at the line.

I never want to see a bubble screen ran at Notre Dame ever again. But totally with ya on the rest of the stuff (especially Koyak's potential).

Why the hell not? Every good offense in the country runs them. When you have better athletes than the guys trying to cover them, all you need to do is get the ball out into space and let your guys get yards. What corner is going to tackle Eifert 1v1? Who is going to stop GA3 after he breaks a tackle or makes a defender miss? Why aren't we getting the ball into the hands of Brown, Neal, etc and seeing if they can make plays?

I think Kelly needs to come up with more ways to move the football than running Theo Riddick behind a pulling Mike Golic, Jr. on every other play.

 

[woolybug25]

I know what Kelly has said. And I also wouldn't say "rarely" for Golson making calls at the line.

I would. I see him call coverages, call out the Mike, etc. But I rarely, if ever, change up the ailignment of the offense. He goes to the line with 2-3 options on every play (that's almost how every offense works nowadays), but actually changing the play would usually require a new alignment or blocking designation. These are both clear as day when a QB does it. I can only remember Golson checking into his other options. Rees changes the entire alignment on what he sees and has more freedom to do so.

Why the hell not? Every good offense in the country runs them. When you have better athletes than the guys trying to cover them, all you need to do is get the ball out into space and let your guys get yards. What corner is going to tackle Eifert 1v1? Who is going to stop GA3 after he breaks a tackle or makes a defender miss? Why aren't we getting the ball into the hands of Brown, Neal, etc and seeing if they can make plays?

I think Kelly needs to come up with more ways to move the football than running Theo Riddick behind a pulling Mike Golic, Jr. on every other play.

Just my opinion. I hate the bubble screen. It's slow developing and allows the defense jump it. It also leaves the WR open for a big hit. I agree that a ton of teams run it, but I just personally despise the play.

I prefer traditional route trees, power running with sprinkled screens. Just me, though.

 

[GoldenDomer15]

Don't fix what's not broken. There's a reason we are in this forum and not on the sidelines. Trust the process and the coaches. We are 6-0, not too many people in here thought this was a possibility in the beginning of the season. Keep Calm, and Go Irish!

 

[BGIF]

I know what Kelly has said. And I also wouldn't say "rarely" for Golson making calls at the line.

You may know what Kelly has said but you don't post like you do in this thread.

Why the hell not? Every good offense in the country runs them. When you have better athletes than the guys trying to cover them, all you need to do is get the ball out into space and let your guys get yards. What corner is going to tackle Eifert 1v1? Who is going to stop GA3 after he breaks a tackle or makes a defender miss? Why aren't we getting the ball into the hands of Brown, Neal, etc and seeing if they can make plays?

The discussion was on Rees and Golson and how Kelly had used them both to achieve a 6-0. Record. You've really got an axe to grind with Kelly, don't you? 6-0 against one of the toughest schedules and Kelly doesn't throw enough bubble screens or getting the ball into the hands of Brown, Neal, ETC "and seeing if they can make plays?"

Joey Getherall got to start in first game as a true freshman WR because he arrived on campus knowing how to run a precise route, being focused, making the read and being where he was supposed to be so the QB didn't have to find him. Golden Tate arrived on campus as a running back, undisciplined as a WR. He was taught to run fly patterns and incredibily no mater where the ball was thrown, long or short, left or right, he managed to catch almost everything. Julius Jones arrived as a highly touted RB but didn't get to play until his 6th game because as he openly acknowledged the game was so different from high school. He didn't know the audibles, he couldn't block much less read a blitz was coming. He was a danger to his QB until he learned enough to hold his own.

This year ND has a new QB, who hasn't learned to read defenses despite being on campus for a year and a half, who rarely calls an audible because he's not allowed to - because he can't read the defenses. And you want to put more guys on the field that can't do that either. Keyston Cops.

I think Kelly needs to come up with more ways to move the football than running Theo Riddick behind a pulling Mike Golic, Jr. on every other play.

Ah another "I don't like Kelly" tangent unrelated to Golson and Rees. And, like many of your statements is baseless hyperbole.

ND has run 409 plays. 242 running plays, 59%, and 167 passes. Of those 242, Riddick has rushed 80 times. That's 19.6% of the total plays. Considering Wood was benched for the first two games, Riddick got 42.5% of his carries. Since Wood has been back he's actually carried the ball one more time than Riddick, 47 to 46. In the Miami game Wood had 18 carries to Riddick's 5.

Unlike you, I didn't guess based upon my misconceptions. Just like the guy that posted the passing stats, I looked them up because your statements sounded bogus and they were.

Like the QBs, Kelly or Martin, as the OC picks the personal he wants, is managing the backs in the game and not on a union basis. Riddick and Wood get most of the work and it's not mostly behind any one OL. They run left and right, inside and out. Then, like Hotlz used Rocket they bring in GA in spot areas not as a bell cow.

 

[Woneone]

I know what Kelly has said. And I also wouldn't say "rarely" for Golson making calls at the line.

A perfect example of why you're wrong with this statement was brought up on Irish Power Hour.

I believe Notre Dame tried running the "Chest Pass" to GAIII twice against Stanford. I'll be going from memory now, so if I misremember, someone please feel free to correct, but I believe on both occasions both Eifert and Nikklas were lined up on one side.

Stanford knew what was coming and overloaded that side. Basically, it was 2 on 4.

It wasn't disguised or hidden. It was in plain sight for Golson. He didn't check, he ran GAIII right into it.

If he doesn't have the "permission" to check out of a basic read like that, do you think he has it in many other situations?

 

[koonja]

FWIW, Herbstreit just said on CFB Live that our O-line is not good enough to have Rees in for 4 quarters and that it'd be a major mistake to start him. Matt Millen agreed.

 

[woolybug25]

FWIW, Herbstreit just said on CFB Live that our O-line is not good enough to have Rees in for 4 quarters and that it'd be a major mistake to start him. Matt Millen agreed.

Yikes... the astounding insight of Herbsreit and Millen. What is EsPN trying to do, kill us with truth?