We are slow, Longo must go?

[koonja]

I can't wait for Tommy to graduate just so I don't have to see his play debated in every f'ing thread on this board, especially threads that have nothing to do with Tommy.

Watch him get hurt this week and get a medical RS.

 

[Cackalacky]

You're conveniently missing a character that makes a big difference, that being the '?'.

.

Maybe dshans can correct me but you start with a declaration, "We are slow" add a comma, and then state "Longo must go" and then add a question mark.

Maybe it would be better if you had typed "We are slow, must Longo go?"

 

[koonja]

Maybe dshans can correct me but you start with a declaration, "We are slow" add a comma, and then state "Longo must go" and then add a question mark.

Maybe it would be better if you had typed "We are slow, must Longo go?"

Who needs dshans? You nailed it!

 

[PANDFAN]

I can't wait for Tommy to graduate just so I don't have to see his play debated in every f'ing thread on this board, especially threads that have nothing to do with Tommy.

except he graduates and becomes a grad assistant and continues to be blamed

 

[koonja]

except he graduates and becomes a grad assistant and continues to be blamed

With how fast and strong Tommy's gotten, maybe he can be our S/C coach?

 

[palinurus]

except he graduates and becomes a grad assistant and continues to be blamed

A grad assistant to Longo.....

 

[Cackalacky]

except he graduates and becomes a grad assistant and continues to be blamed

Lol. He stays and teaches the playbook to Golson.

 

[PANDFAN]

With how fast and strong Tommy's gotten, maybe he can be our S/C coach?

it's the steroids....heard he met w/ a florida doc over summer...

 

[BleedBlueGold]

You're conveniently missing a character that makes a big difference, that being the '?'.

We have beaten one ranked team in November in the last 3 years (could be further back too, but I only checked 3 years). Our November is our easiest stretch. That one ranked team we did beat was Utah who just came off of a 40 point beating and finished unranked.

Our November opponents:

2010: Utah, USC, Army (all unranked)
2011: Wake Forest, Maryland, Boston College, Stanford (loss), all unranked besided Stanford.
2012: Pittsburg, Boston College, Wake Forest, USC (all unranked).

Why bother asking the question? Why bother making that the thread title? You basically pulled a modern blogger who purposely mislabels an article just to get clicks.

And you conveniently left off CW's 2009 team that went 0-4 in November which most people largely contributed to poor health, loss of weight, and loss of strength over the course of the season. And btw, you just pointed out that ND is 10-1 in November under BK...regardless of opponent, that's impressive.

 

[koonja]

Why bother asking the question? Why bother making that the thread title? You basically pulled a modern blogger who purposely mislabels an article just to get clicks.

And you conveniently left off CW's 2009 team that went 0-4 in November which most people largely contributed to poor health, loss of weight, and loss of strength over the course of the season. And btw, you just pointed out that ND is 10-1 in November under BK...regardless of opponent, that's impressive.

Because I'm not sold on Longo and I'm ignorant as to how the S/C coaches are reviewed. Why are any threads started? Because I didn't want to Longo-bomb another thread. What are you missing?

So Weis is our measuring stick? Anything > Weis automatically means we cannot do better?

Sure is, but let's not act like it's a tough part of our schedule. It's been our softest month.

 

[Ironman8]

The premise was flawed IMO, Kuehnja, because you started with a blanket subjective statement to start your argument that was inherently flawed in terms of the questions you say you were trying to pose.

We are slow? Slower than teams that throw out, like Purdue, lower ranked kids according to recruiting services? I'd like to know what percentage of our team you honestly think is slower.

Are our ILBs slower than most WRs, RBs and TEs we face, yes. Probably ditto for our safeties we are starting right now. Who else is slow, to the point of having to debate firing a well respected S&C coach? Further, for one who has harped on the 'poor angles' our tacklers take a good amount of the time, how much do you think that has to do with a perceived lack of speed while watching in the heat of the moment?

Certainly not our WRs, who have proven to be as deep and explosive a unit as we have had in long, long time.

Not our RBs, with a possible exception of Cam, who displays other traits that make him valuable to the team besides straight speed.

TEs? Pretty sure I remember seeing Niklas out run the secondary of Temple in week one for an impressive score.

OLBs? Shembo, Councell and Jaylon all move extremely well, especially Jaylon. Ishaq has good straight line speed for his size, but has limited horizontal abilities (which is why I disagree with the way he is being used, but that's another argument)

CBs? Both Bennett and Russell run well, as evidenced by them both running with Lee last year in deep routes step for step. Do they have shortcomings in other areas, yeah, but they both undoubtedly have the athleticism and speed to play the position.

 

[koonja]

]The premise was flawed[/B] IMO, Kuehnja, because you started with a blanket subjective statement to start your argument that was inherently flawed in terms of the questions you say you were trying to pose.

We are slow? Slower than teams that throw out, like Purdue, lower ranked kids according to recruiting services? I'd like to know what percentage of our team you honestly think is slower.

Are our ILBs slower than most WRs, RBs and TEs we face, yes. Probably ditto for our safeties we are starting right now. Who else is slow, to the point of having to debate firing a well respected S&C coach?

Certainly not our WRs, who have proven to be as deep and explosive a unit as we have had in long, long time.

Not our RBs, with a possible exception of Cam, who displays other traits that make him valuable to the team besides straight speed.

TEs? Pretty sure I remember seeing Niklas out run the secondary of Temple in week one for an impressive score.

OLBs? Shembo, Councell and Jaylon all move extremely well, especially Jaylon. Ishaq has good straight line speed for his size, but has limited horizontal abilities (which is why I disagree with the way he is being used, but that's another argument)

CBs? Both Bennett and Russell run well, as evidenced by them both running with Lee last year in deep routes step for step. Do they have shortcomings in other areas, yeah, but they both undoubtedly have the athleticism and speed to play the position.

Not to be a douche, but it wasn't a premise. It was a question. A premise is a claim that supports a claim I believe. Ex, 'Tommy wears mustache, therefore Tommy IS the heisman'. Not, 'Tommy wears mustache, so should Tommy be heisman?'.

My point is team-speed and specifically special teams athleticism. Sure you can point to a dozen players who are athletic. When you recruit the way we do, it's a given.

Bama played 23 players on defense in the 1st quarter of a game they were losing and you didn't see a difference in athleticism. That is serious team athleticism, top to bottom.

There are teams that recruit in the 50s that field more athletic special teams, teams (Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, OK St., etc).

If you wanted to watch 1 minute of football and could watch any of the three teams play to try and determine a team's athleticism, you'd no doubt watch special teams. Ours hasn't been impressive in Longo's time IMO.

This was a lazy response, but I don't want to repost everything I've already said in pages past.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Because I'm not sold on Longo and I'm ignorant as to how the S/C coaches are reviewed. What are you missing?

So Weis is our measuring stick? Anything > Weis automatically means we cannot do better?

I'm helping you become less ignorant if you read my posts better. Look at it as a whole and comparing to a previous staff is logical here because a lot of the players were coached under numerous S/C coaches but made their biggest gains under Longo.

I vividly remember CW's teams getting knocked for being slow and he tried fixing the problem by hiring different S/C coaches. I believe Mendoza was held in highest regard (but I could be mistaken). CW's teams notoriously came up short in the 4th quarter and late in the year. There's also reports of players losing weight and having poor eating habits. BK brought in Longo, a team dietician, and a training table. How many times did you see BK's team (with alot of those same players) collapse late in the game or late in the season? Rarely. In fact, some of their wins were because of their superior s/c and dieting and just out-lasting the opposing team.

As stated earlier, Longo has been with BK for a very long time. He knows his system better than any assistant coach on the staff besides maybe Martin. With the rules limiting the amount of time coaches can spend with players in the off-season, Longo's status and knowledge pays huge dividends in other ways beyond S/C.

I'm not sure why you're not sold on Longo. If it's solely based on the fact that this year's defense seems slow (hello! most of the guys on this defense were on last year's defense) then I don't know what to tell you. Because there's more to S/C than just team speed. Personally, I don't see a problem with team speed. Hell, most of these guys can run a sub 4.5. How many other teams have a roster of speedsters like that?

 

[Ironman8]

Not to be a douche, but it wasn't a premise. It was a question. A premise is a claim that supports a claim I believe. Ex, 'Tommy wears mustache, therefore Tommy IS the heisman'. Not, 'Tommy wears mustache, so should Tommy be heisman?'.

My point is team-speed and specifically special teams athleticism. Sure you can point to a dozen players who are athletic. When you recruit the way we do, it's a given.

Bama played 23 players on defense in the 1st quarter of a game they were losing and you didn't see a difference in athleticism. That is serious team athleticism, top to bottom.

There are teams that recruit in the 50s that field more athletic special teams, teams (Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, OK St., etc).

If you wanted to watch 1 minute of football and could watch any of the three teams play to try and determine a team's athleticism, you'd no doubt watch special teams. Ours hasn't been impressive in Longo's time IMO.

This was a lazy response, but I don't want to repost everything I've already said in pages past.

Your premise was a blanket statement that we are slow, 'that we're less athletic than a team that thrives on 1/2 star players', and that this is 'common'. That premise allowed you to then question if Longo should be fired or otherwise held accountable for your premise.

I think that the original premise is flawed. Not your question. The two are not mutually inclusive. What is unclear about that?

 

[koonja]

I'm helping you become less ignorant if you read my posts better. Look at it as a whole and comparing to a previous staff is logical here because a lot of the players were coached under numerous S/C coaches but made their biggest gains under Longo.

I vividly remember CW's teams getting knocked for being slow and he tried fixing the problem by hiring different S/C coaches. I believe Mendoza was held in highest regard (but I could be mistaken). CW's teams notoriously came up short in the 4th quarter and late in the year. There's also reports of players losing weight and having poor eating habits. BK brought in Longo, a team dietician, and a training table. How many times did you see BK's team (with alot of those same players) collapse late in the game or late in the season? Rarely. In fact, some of their wins were because of their superior s/c and dieting and just out-lasting the opposing team.

As stated earlier, Longo has been with BK for a very long time. He knows his system better than any assistant coach on the staff besides maybe Martin. With the rules limiting the amount of time coaches can spend with players in the off-season, Longo's status and knowledge pays huge dividends in other ways beyond S/C.

I'm not sure why you're not sold on Longo. If it's solely based on the fact that this year's defense seems slow (hello! most of the guys on this defense were on last year's defense) then I don't know what to tell you. Because there's more to S/C than just team speed. Personally, I don't see a problem with team speed. Hell, most of these guys can run a sub 4.5. How many other teams have a roster of speedsters like that?

Why do you keep comparing to Weis at ND? That's in the past. Outside of 5th year seniors (just Zack Martin??), there are NO Weis players on this team.

Longo isn't competing against whatever Weis was doing at ND. He's competing against what Bama/AM/USC/Stanford/Michigan/Georgia are doing.

Disclaimer - I stopped reading your post once you started talking about Weis, so sorry if I missed some good points. Will read later.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I bet if you made a list of the guys that played on ST and then looked into their 40 times, you'd be shocked. This is probably one of the fastest rosters top to bottom, ND has ever had.

Ironman made a good point. Poor angles can make a player look slower than he actually is. Also, a player thinking too much rather than reacting will make a player seem slower than he really is. Neither of these are S/C related.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Why do you keep comparing to Weis at ND? That's in the past. Outside of 5th year seniors (just Zack Martin??), there are NO Weis players on this team.

Longo isn't competing against whatever Weis was doing at ND. He's competing against what Bama/AM/USC/Stanford/Michigan/Georgia are doing.

Disclaimer - I stopped reading your post once you started talking about Weis, so sorry if I missed some good points. Will read later.

Longo has been around since 2010. I'm simply pointing out that alot of the same guys who were coached under Weis' S/C coach were also coached under Longo for the first few years. During this time they have made significant gains. You're questioning Longo based on 3 games this season. I'm defending him based on 3 seasons.

 

[Luckylucci]

Not to be a douche, but it wasn't a premise. It was a question. A premise is a claim that supports a claim I believe. Ex, 'Tommy wears mustache, therefore Tommy IS the heisman'. Not, 'Tommy wears mustache, so should Tommy be heisman?'.

My point is team-speed and specifically special teams athleticism. Sure you can point to a dozen players who are athletic. When you recruit the way we do, it's a given.

Bama played 23 players on defense in the 1st quarter of a game they were losing and you didn't see a difference in athleticism. That is serious team athleticism, top to bottom.

There are teams that recruit in the 50s that field more athletic special teams, teams (Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, OK St., etc).

If you wanted to watch 1 minute of football and could watch any of the three teams play to try and determine a team's athleticism, you'd no doubt watch special teams. Ours hasn't been impressive in Longo's time IMO.

This was a lazy response, but I don't want to repost everything I've already said in pages past.

I said this already and I'm not sure what your not getting. Just because a kid isn't highly rated doesn't mean he can't be athletic. Ex. Mckenzie he's a 3 star athlete that is an electric athlete. Ratings have a lot to do with projection, skill set, and measurables not only athleticism. So it is and should be very common for those schools to find kids that are extremely athletic as well. This isn't a new phenomenon that just starting happening since Longo came to ND. Why are FCS schools beating FBS schools this year? Because there S&C coaches suck, NO. Because their are going to be exceptional athletes and players that are missed and end up at places like Eastern Washington. Personally I had some fun with this topic yesterday but you can't keep beating a dead horse.

 

[koonja]

I bet if you made a list of the guys that played on ST and then looked into their 40 times, you'd be shocked. This is probably one of the fastest rosters top to bottom, ND has ever had.

Ironman made a good point. Poor angles can make a player look slower than he actually is. Also, a player thinking too much rather than reacting will make a player seem slower than he really is. Neither of these are S/C related.

Longo has been around since 2010. I'm simply pointing out that alot of the same guys who were coached under Weis' S/C coach were also coached under Longo for the first few years. During this time they have made significant gains. You're questioning Longo based on 3 games this season. I'm defending him based on 3 seasons.

1) 40 times isn't my point. 2) You're still talking about comparing Longo's progress to teams of the past. He's not competing against Weis! He's competing against the SEC, Michigan, OSU, Stanford, etc.

That's fair. But if that's the case, how are we so poor at thinking and taking strong angles? I have a hard time believing that ND players are really athletic, but don't think fast and just happen to take poor angles. It sounds like a convenient excuse, no offense.

No, I am not. I've been skeptical of the Longo-hype for years because of special teams play and lack of depth. But I thought it was only fair to wait until he's been here a few years to say something.

 

[koonja]

I said this already and I'm not sure what your not getting. Just because a kid isn't highly rated doesn't mean he can't be athletic. Ex. Mckenzie he's a 3 star athlete that is an electric athlete. Ratings have a lot to do with projection, skill set, and measurables not only athleticism. So it is and should be very common for those schools to find kids that are extremely athletic as well. This isn't a new phenomenon that just starting happening since Longo came to ND. Why did are FCS schools beating FBS schools this year? Because their S&C coaches suck, NO. Because their are going to be exceptional athletes and players that are missed and end up at places like Eastern Washington. Personally I had some fun with this topic yesterday but you can't keep beating a dead horse.

Yes, he is. But he's the exception not the rule. 4/5 star players are better athletes than 2/3 star players, on average.

I agree with you and there are definitely exceptions, but for every 3-star Mckenzie, there's a Bruce Heggie, Kendall Moore, Daniel Smith, Jalen Brown, John Turner, etc.

 

[koonja]

Hypothetically, if you believe that Longo must be the best we can do because:

1) We're better than we were in the Weis era and
2) It'd be unfair because as many 2-3 star players are as good of athletes as 4-5 star players,

then how can a S/C be reviewed? Serious question? The way it sounds, it's a position that won't end until a S/C coach steps down, much like a judge.

 

[koonja]

Your premise was a blanket statement that we are slow, 'that we're less athletic than a team that thrives on 1/2 star players', and that this is 'common'. That premise allowed you to then question if Longo should be fired or otherwise held accountable for your premise.

I think that the original premise is flawed. Not your question. The two are not mutually inclusive. What is unclear about that?

So you're disagreeing with my bolded above? I have no problem with that. That was an in the moment, overreaction (not to mention alcohol was involved). But the gap is too close compared to the success we have in recruiting IMO.

 

[Luckylucci]

1) 40 times isn't my point. 2) You're still talking about comparing Longo's progress to teams of the past. He's not competing against Weis! He's competing against the SEC, Michigan, OSU, Stanford, etc.

That's fair. But if that's the case, how are we so poor at thinking and taking strong angles? I have a hard time believing that ND players are really athletic, but don't think fast and just happen to take poor angles. It sounds like a convenient excuse, no offense.

No, I am not. I've been skeptical of the Longo-hype for years because of special teams play and lack of depth. But I thought it was only fair to wait until he's been here a few years to say something.

Do you even watch the football games on saturdays? There are so many examples of poor tackling that I have lost track. There is no speed issue except for at ILB (IMO) and thats not something Longo can do anything about. That needs to addressed in recruiting, again something that I already commented on.

 

[koonja]

Do you even watch the football games on saturdays? There are so many examples of poor tackling that I have lost track. There is no speed issue except for at ILB (IMO) and thats not something Longo can do anything about. That needs to addressed in recruiting, again something that I already commented on.

If you don't watch enough other teams (mentioned above) and notice their depth and especially special teams are noticeably fielding better athletes than we do, then can we stop pounding our chests and just agree to disagree? Sure, it could be as simple as 2/3 star athletes are as athletic as 4/5, but I don't think that's true.

I have no problem with you disagreeing with me, nor does it make me think 'you're automatically an idiot because you don't see what I see'.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

1) 40 times isn't my point. 2) You're still talking about comparing Longo's progress to teams of the past. He's not competing against Weis! He's competing against the SEC, Michigan, OSU, Stanford, etc.

1) Then you need to be more clear when talking about a team being slow. This is a very athletic group of kids. And they are physically fast. If you're talking about reaction times, etc being slow then you need to clarify. 2) If you don't get my point when comparing the same players under two different coaches and making huge gains under the current S/C coach, then I can't help you with that either. You're talking about not being sold on Longo in general as a S/C coach...my comparison is absolutely relevant.

That's fair. But if that's the case, how are we so poor at thinking and taking strong angles? I have a hard time believing that ND players are really athletic, but don't think fast and just happen to take poor angles. It sounds like a convenient excuse, no offense.

It's already been mentioned once by BK that sometimes complex schemes can hinder a player by making them think too much and not just play. It's not an excuse. It's reality. Some kids have better reaction times. Some kids have to think too much. Does that have anything to do with Longo whatsoever? No.

]No, I am not. I've been skeptical of the Longo-hype for years because of special teams play and lack of depth. But I thought it was only fair to wait until he's been here a few years to say something.

ST play has been bad (mostly on punt return) in large part due to 1) not having a true punt returner 2) blocking schemes and 3) BK not having faith in the unit and calling for fair catches. Again, nothing to do with S/C. Depth along the interior is probably better than it ever has been. In part because of S/C but mainly due to recruiting.

 

[Luckylucci]

Yes, he is. But he's the exception not the rule. 4/5 star players are better athletes than 2/3 star players, on average.

I agree with you and there are definitely exceptions, but for every 3-star Mckenzie, there's a Bruce Heggie, Kendall Moore, Daniel Smith, Jalen Brown, John Turner, etc.

You clearly don't follow the ratings system very closely. Andrew Trumbetti 250 DE returns a kickoff for a TD, extremely athletic for that size(3star), Chris Brown extremely athletic (3star). According to rivals Mark Andrews is the #13 best WR in the country and Terry Mclaurin is #41. Now if you've watched either of these guys play you could easily tell that Terry is more athletic than Mark, in fact he dominated the Sparq challenge at the opening. So why is Mark rated higher? It's simple better measurables, better refined skill set, and projection at said position WR. This isn't a hard concept to get and if you go look at the rankings and put your opinion aside you'll see it. Does athleticism factor in to these ratings of course but its not a majority of the decision, not even close. Lastly if you spend some time and listen to the guys that put the ratings together you'll see that athleticism is a very small part of it.

 

[koonja]

1) Then you need to be more clear when talking about a team being slow. This is a very athletic group of kids. And they are physically fast. If you're talking about reaction times, etc being slow then you need to clarify. 2) If you don't get my point when comparing the same players under two different coaches and making huge gains under the current S/C coach, then I can't help you with that either. You're talking about not being sold on Longo in general as a S/C coach...my comparison is absolutely relevant.


It's already been mentioned once by BK that sometimes complex schemes can hinder a player by making them think too much and not just play. It's not an excuse. It's reality. Some kids have better reaction times. Some kids have to think too much. Does that have anything to do with Longo whatsoever? No.



ST play has been bad (mostly on punt return) in large part due to 1) not having a true punt returner 2) blocking schemes and 3) BK not having faith in the unit and calling for fair catches. Again, nothing to do with S/C. Depth along the interior is probably better than it ever has been. In part because of S/C but mainly due to recruiting.

Who's doing that? Making these huge gains and have had both coaches? What gains are you talking about? 40 times? bench press reps? 20 yard cone drill? Where do you get that information? Kids that are 20 years will become bigger, faster, stronger; it's them growing. Just because said-player gained 10 pounds in a year does not mean Longo is the best S/C coach we can get our hands on.

You talk about thinking too much, there's not much thinking on special teams coverage, which is my biggest point. We do not field an athletic special teams team, especially when you factor in how well we recruit.

I'll ask again, everyone's 'you cannot touch Longo, it's not his fault'. Ok, sure. So how DO you judge the performance of a S/C coach? Or do they reach tenure once hired?

 

[koonja]

You clearly don't follow the ratings system very closely.

Andrew Trumbetti 250 DE returns a kickoff for a TD, extremely athletic for that size(3star),

Chris Brown extremely athletic (3star). According to rivals Mark Andrews is the #13 best WR in the country and Terry Mclaurin is #41. Now if you've watched either of these guys play you could easily tell that Terry is more athletic than Mark, in fact he dominated the Sparq challenge at the opening. So why is Mark rated higher? It's simple better measurables, better refined skill set, and projection at said position WR. This isn't a hard concept to get and if you go look at the rankings and put your opinion aside you'll see it. Does athleticism factor in to these ratings of course but its not a majority of the decision, not even close. Lastly if you spend some time and listen to the guys that put the ratings together you'll see that athleticism is a very small part of it.

I'm no expert.

Andrew is a 4-star on ESPN, Scout, 247, and 247 composite.

Exception /= rule.

Mark Andrews is listed as a TE by 2/4 sites. He's very athletic for a TE.

I agree that athleticism isn't all they're rated on, and size/frame are important, but you're kidding yourself if you don't think athleticism is a major factor.

 

[Luckylucci]

Who's doing that? Making these huge gains and have had both coaches? What gains are you talking about? 40 times? bench press reps? 20 yard cone drill? Where do you get that information? Kids that are 20 years will become bigger, faster, stronger; it's them growing. Just because said-player gained 10 pounds in a year does not mean Longo is the best S/C coach we can get our hands on.

You talk about thinking too much, there's not much thinking on special teams coverage, which is my biggest point. We do not field an athletic special teams team, especially when you factor in how well we recruit.

I'll ask again, everyone's 'you cannot touch Longo, it's not his fault'. Ok, sure. So how DO you judge the performance of a S/C coach? Or do they reach tenure once hired?

You just have to take the time to read interviews and updates with these players. Harrison Smith who didn't have much time with him, specifically gave him credit for his late career revival.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

A lot of the things you bring up have nothing to do with the s/c coach. If you want a deeper, more athletic team then you should've started a thread about that and questioned recruiting (which is ridiculous too, but you see my point).

You can absolutely judge the performance of a s/c coach by looking at the gains players are making in the off season and the longevity of their overall health throughout a season.

And if ST is what you're really getting at, you should've mentioned that from the very beginning. I don't agree, but what's the point in defending it. You seem to have your mind made up that it's all Longo's fault.