ND Oversold on Kelly?

[Irish Houstonian]

Player retention != recruiting.

I sort of disagree, but not for the same "you should have recruited different players" reason. "Recruiting" does not end once the LOI is signed. You're constantly still 'recruiting' to keep them from transferring. They're kids, they're tempermental, impetuous, and at the end of the day, if you or the school can't offer them something worth their while then the only thing keeping them from leaving is the fact that it's a huge pain in the ***.

 

[NDohio]

He was there for 3 years and never saw a full recruiting cycle. He may have made shrewd business moves, Mark Dantonio had as much to do with that programs long term success as Kelly.

He built and maintained GVSU. Nowhere else.

Mark Dantonio at UC

7-5
4-7
7-5

Brian Kelly at UC

10-3
11-3
12-0

 

[tussin]

Mark Dantonio at UC

7-5
4-7
7-5

Brian Kelly at UC

10-3
11-3
12-0

As someone who watched through the Charlie Weis era, you should know that early success does not constitute building a program.

 

[phgreek]

Nick Saban (while tapping his rings on the table)....

Problem is St. Nick at ND would be a tire fire inside 3 years...

he ended up in the best place he could possibly end up. Come on man...when he was anywhere but the SEC, he was just a good coach...why do you think that is?

 

[Buster Bluth]

If it's not possible then we need to schedule teams where it is possible. Our schedule is always too difficult. We need to schedule more Eastern Michigans and less Purdues. The only teams we should have absolute loyalty to are Navy and USC. I could care less about playing Michigan State and Purdue every single year.

But I digress. Scheduling isn't really in Kelly's hands.

Agree 10000%.

 

[IrishLax]

Lynch was the #9 player in the country. Are you saying he wasn't worth a shot? According to 247 they took five DEs in 2011, it's not like they placed all of their eggs in the Lynch basket.

What's your logic here? It's not for me to determine whether or not he was worth a shot. They took a shot, and it failed. Therefor, they are judged by the results. The same as if they had signed some 3 in place of him they'd be judged by those results.

I think the Kelly model has been to try and bring in depth across the board and take fringe five-star guys who will put the program over the top should they make it. Stoops wanted those exceptions, Kelly is taking this smarter route.

Look at the Bryant situation (and I don't think he has maturity problems or whatever), should he leave Notre Dame still has an apparent keeper in Folston (and others), but if he stays and turns out to be a stud, it's a win.

That's been the biggest difference between Weis and Kelly. Kelly is not trying to take depth risks with fringe guys.

Then why has he only signed 2 ILBs in 3 years? A position that puts two bodies on the field... he has only signed Grace and Deeb. We're very shallow at a lot of positions and it has everything to do with recruiting misses.

Prestwood is the only guy to leave the program for obvious grade problems since Kelly started, right? Doesn't seem to me like it's a real problem. It's just going to happen. This program runs on taking guys who couldn't get in anyway and giving them enough discipline and tutoring to graduate, no? That type of situation, which has worked wonderfully, fill not pass 100% of guys.

There have been lots of guys with academic issues. Golson had them for awhile before he finally broke the camel's back. Tee Shephard, Perkins, etc. There are tons of recruits he went after with questionable academics that either couldn't get it done and left a hole on NSD or immediately washed out of ND. But that's not really the point... the point is simply that you have to live with the results of your choices. So when his classes are not as good as their initial rankings because of guys immediately transferring, failing to report, or whatever it simply is what it is and he should be judged by that final result. You can't give credit for "good recruiting" when the top guys that get you that ranking don't stick.

 

[Buster Bluth]

As someone who watched through the Charlie Weis era, you should know that early success does not constitute building a program.

Then look at Grand Valley State, or Central Michigan, or this own damn program.

This program just went from 6-6 to a national championship appearance and all of the pussies come out five games into the next season with Tommy Rees at the helm?! Man up!

 

[EddytoNow]

Kelly is a great CEO, but are his current assistant coaches capable of getting us to a BCS game on a regular basis.

His two coordinators get a "C" at best. Martin appears to be in way over his head. Diaco looked like he had things turned around last year, but his defenses give up too many yards and rely on the other team to make mistakes. Last year other teams obliged and we dodged several bullets. In a hard-fought game in which the other team doesn't self-destruct, our defensive scheme is incapable of stopping even the most inept offenses.

Kelly needs to take a serious look at his assistant coaches to determine if they are ready for prime time. The fourth year into the Kelly tenure leaves me wondering if he needs to seek out one of the better offensive minds to lead the offense. And is Diaco the answer as the defensive coordinator?

I am not alone in thinking that both the offense and defense are incapable of implementing the current offensive and defensive schemes. Are the players thinking too much and curtailing their natural aggressiveness?

 

[Ndaccountant]

Problem is St. Nick at ND would be a tire fire inside 3 years...

he ended up in the best place he could possibly end up. Come on man...when he was anywhere but the SEC, he was just a good coach...why do you think that is?

Well, that really isn't going out on a limb there considering his only other college head coaching gig was MSU, where if memory serves, he took over for a program under sanctions.

 

[Emcee77]

There have been lots of guys with academic issues. Golson had them for awhile before he finally broke the camel's back. Tee Shephard, Perkins, etc. There are tons of recruits he went after with questionable academics that either couldn't get it done and left a hole on NSD or immediately washed out of ND. But that's not really the point... the point is simply that you have to live with the results of your choices. So when his classes are not as good as their initial rankings because of guys immediately transferring, failing to report, or whatever it simply is what it is and he should be judged by that final result. You can't give credit for "good recruiting" when the top guys that get you that ranking don't stick.

I agree to a point. This is why Lou Holtz always says that you can't judge a recruiting class until it has graduated.

But if we're grading Kelly, not the recruiting class, should our grading system take into account whether certain guys pan out, or should it only grade based on the probability that they would work out,where you'll tolerate more risk for more talented guys? I mean, on a law school exam, all the prof looks for is a correct legal analysis. The conclusion is unimportant; you never know what a judge is going to do anyway. I think we should grade Kelly similarly: don't ask whether guys like Tee Shepard or Aaron Lynch panned out; instead ask whether it was smart to take a chance on them. I tend to think it was, though I think reasonable people could disagree. I'm not sure Kelly's taken anyone who I feel, trying to avoid hindsight bias, should not have been offered a scholarship.

Personally I really like Kelly's recruiting philosophy, which appears to be to build depth with some lower-ranked guys and swing for the fences by recruiting some elite athletes. I'd give him a much higher grade, probably a B.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Well played.

Still a much better coach than BK, but I suppose it's no matter if he can't fit in at ND.

If your point is that only people better than Saban should be considered good coaches, your list might fit on one hand.

 

[phgreek]

Well, that really isn't going out on a limb there considering his only other college head coaching gig was MSU, where if memory serves, he took over for a program under sanctions.

Toledo...which he did a "good" job for the year he was there. I thought he did a "good" job at MSU.

Regardless...he's not an option for ND IMHO. He will be a legend in the semi-pro league...but I doubt him at Stanford, Northwestern, ND...where there are additional concerns beyond football...

 

[Buster Bluth]

What's your logic here? It's not for me to determine whether or not he was worth a shot. They took a shot, and it failed. Therefor, they are judged by the results. The same as if they had signed some 3 in place of him they'd be judged by those results.

Then judge the results of how the DL has playes since 2010: pretty damn fantastically.

I'd be livid if they didn't sign Lynch because of the chance he'd leave. You'd have to not sign Louis Nix too under that thought process.

Then why has he only signed 2 ILBs in 3 years? A position that puts two bodies on the field... he has only signed Grace and Deeb. We're very shallow at a lot of positions and it has everything to do with recruiting misses.

I said try. I didn't say he's been perfect.

the point is simply that you have to live with the results of your choices. So when his classes are not as good as their initial rankings because of guys immediately transferring, failing to report, or whatever it simply is what it is and he should be judged by that final result. You can't give credit for "good recruiting" when the top guys that get you that ranking don't stick.

I judge him by what he can control. 2013's quarterback issues are the result of a perfect storm that I can't fault Kelly for. This program needed better QBs and he got them here and in a position to succeed.

I don't blame Kelly that Neal got his girlfriend pregnant mere weeks after signing with Notre Dame (and beating out Ohio State in the process).

So few of these transfers are on Kelly. I don't think they're all necessarily bad kids or bad fits for Notre Dame, it just didn't work out. We have no idea if this is the crest or the trough to the wave that is transfers out of a given program.

Simply saying, it gets a "keep on eye on it" from me, but it's not keeping me up at night. Not after 2013 is filled with kids who mostly adore Notre Dame and 2014 looks to be the same. They're solving their problems from my view.

 

[CarrollVermin]

When you give a lesson by comparing things isn't it appropriate to compare things on the same basis?

I pointed out the '94 season (when you were on campus) because that disaster followed a one loss year. Kelly's 12-1 year was a cornerstone for your argument.

I noted that Holtz was in his 9th season. He was't still having to overcome the shortcomings of his predecessor, was he?

You responded with Holtz was 64-9-1 while Kelly is 25-11. Holtz did that in years 3 through 8 NOT the 1 through 3 you used for Kelly. On a similar basis of the first 3 years, Holtz was 25-10 while Kelly was, OMG, 28-11! Kelly has the higher winning percentage at .718 to .714.

After going 64-9-1 or .872 in his glory years, Holtz fell 23-11 in his next 3 seasons or .676.

After Kelly going 12-1 in his glory year, Kelly is now 3-2 or .667. Wow .009 difference.


I'm not saying Kelly is as good as Holtz. I'm saying your response was BS!


WakeUpEchoes asked what were your expectation for this season after Golson took himself out. You responded:



N.B. Emphasis added.

"9 or 10" because people "oversold" you. The consensus here was 8-4. Once again it solds like you overbought.

And 8 would be soooo far from your 9. Sigh.


Looking back. I don't recall anyone in 2010 proclaiming Kelly was the next Rockne, Leahy, Parshegian, Devine, or Holtz. To the contrary many noted while he had an outstanding winning precentage it was all done at small time programs. He didn't got undefeated at BC, win at ASU, or ARK. Grand Valley State, Directional School Michigan, and Big Least's Cinncinati didn't face a diet of Michigan, Southern Cal, and other formidable programs.

There were people who questioned seriously if he was as good as his mediocre predecessors.

There was also serious concern about his recruiting, he was on a national stage now not the greater metro area.


He won 12 games last year and most knowledgable fans realize there were several close games there and now Manti, KLM, Eifert and a number of other key players were gone. Then there was Golson.


Overbought not oversold.

I can give you that...perhaps I did overbuy and there is a good chance that a large majority of the fan base did as well. I say chance because I don't want to speak for all of them.

Crazy enough, there is a large difference in perception when it comes to 8, 9, and 10 win seasons. 10 seems to be what "great" coaches are measured against, the number of double digit wins. I think subconsciously we all want to get to double digits when it comes to adding in the bowl game.

The first year, I was thrilled with where we were. The second year, the way we lost left a very sour taste in my mouth, but was happy with the progress we had made and the understanding that we were building for the future. Last year was indeed a dream season, but anyone that understood sports, as you have pointed out, knew that we were good, but not great/elite, and had some very fortunate bounces that helped along the way (and you need those in order to be successful).

In year four, I was not looking for a team that has an identity problem. You know how to practice, you know the system, there should not be any issues with who or what you are. The expectations were built in by Kelly himself, in branding the BCSNCG into the schedule and talking about winning championship (this was after Rees became starter, and I understand that it is coach talk). Four years in you expect a "succession plan" for the talent you know that you are going to lose, and expect those guys to fill in. I never imagined our D being this bad, and certainly did not expect our offense to be unable to be consistent. Not four years in. Year one and two, yes, but not when you have established your foundation.

That is where I think Kelly "oversold" us...the expectations that in year four we would be a consistent winner with the "Next Man In" mantra...and it has not, to date, been the case.

 

[Emcee77]

Then judge the results of how the DL has playes since 2010: pretty damn fantastically.

I'd be livid if they didn't sign Lynch because of the chance he'd leave. You'd have to not sign Louis Nix too under that thought process.



I said try. I didn't say he's been perfect.



I judge him by what he can control. 2013's quarterback issues are the result of a perfect storm that I can't fault Kelly for. This program needed better QBs and he got them here and in a position to succeed.

I don't blame Kelly that Neal got his girlfriend pregnant mere weeks after signing with Notre Dame (and beating out Ohio State in the process).

So few of these transfers are on Kelly. I don't think they're all necessarily bad kids or bad fits for Notre Dame, it just didn't work out. We have no idea if this is the crest or the trough to the wave that is transfers out of a given program.

Simply saying, it gets a "keep on eye on it" from me, but it's not keeping me up at night. Not after 2013 is filled with kids who mostly adore Notre Dame and 2014 looks to be the same. They're solving their problems from my view.

Right.

 

[NDohio]

As someone who watched through the Charlie Weis era, you should know that early success does not constitute building a program.

I agree completely. That is why I feel different with BK. I never felt like our previous three coaches had a clue on how to build a program.

I lived in Cincinnati during the MD and BK years. The changes BK made were far and away above what MD did. He was on a path of building a program.

His offense was not the reason ND hired him.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Kelly is a great CEO, but are his current assistant coaches capable of getting us to a BCS game on a regular basis.

His two coordinators get a "C" at best. Martin appears to be in way over his head.

Based on? Oh, TOMMY REES. Brilliant idea to judge a man off five games with Tommy Rees. No really, the logic is just overwhelming.

Diaco looked like he had things turned around last year, but his defenses give up too many yards and rely on the other team to make mistakes. Last year other teams obliged and we dodged several bullets. In a hard-fought game in which the other team doesn't self-destruct, our defensive scheme is incapable of stopping even the most inept offenses.

The entire concept of coaching a defense is to get other teams to make mistakes...

I don't want to make excuses, because I see the defense getting better every week, but of the starting lineup...

DE: Tuitt
NG: Nix
DE: Schwenke
DOG: Smith
MIKE: Grace
WILL: Calabrese
CAT: Shembo
CB: Jackson
CB: Russell
S: Collinsworth
S: Shumate


...the bold weren't primary starters last year, and it's clear as day that Tuitt is on the long road to recovery from off-season surgery. Moral of the story: basically four returning starters from 2012.

Kelly needs to take a serious look at his assistant coaches to determine if they are ready for prime time. The fourth year into the Kelly tenure leaves me wondering if he needs to seek out one of the better offensive minds to lead the offense. And is Diaco the answer as the defensive coordinator?

I am not alone in thinking that both the offense and defense are incapable of implementing the current offensive and defensive schemes. Are the players thinking too much and curtailing their natural aggressiveness?

And Kelly knows 1000000000000000x more than anyone on here.

 

[IrishLax]

Then judge the results of how the DL has playes since 2010: pretty damn fantastically.

I'd be livid if they didn't sign Lynch because of the chance he'd leave. You'd have to not sign Louis Nix too under that thought process.

You clearly aren't grasping what I'm saying. So I'll try to make it more clear, and then we can drop it. You seem caught up in the singular example of whether or not to take a chance on Aaron Lynch and how the DL is performing and then somehow equating that to the recruitment of Nix which wasn't even done by Kelly....

That's not at all what this about it. This is about judging how good the classes are that he is signing. Not WHY or SHOULD or his rationales. I don't care what strategy he uses if it gets the job done and there is an 85 man roster filled with talent. The point is that you cannot give credit for "good recruiting" if the prospect doesn't sign, report, or immediately washes out of the program. Alternatively, you should give lots of credit for a transfer in like Amir Carlisle.

So when you look back at Kelly's classes, 2011 drops out of the top 10 when you subtract the gem of Lynch. 2012 is a just a joke without Kiel, Neal, etc. And 2013 that was ranked #3 and everyone was stoked about... when you subtract the points for Vanderdoes backing out of his LOI (which the services have done so you can look it up), we're somewhere between 5th and 7th.

I said try. I didn't say he's been perfect.

I judge him by what he can control. 2013's quarterback issues are the result of a perfect storm that I can't fault Kelly for. This program needed better QBs and he got them here and in a position to succeed.

I don't blame Kelly that Neal got his girlfriend pregnant mere weeks after signing with Notre Dame (and beating out Ohio State in the process).

So few of these transfers are on Kelly. I don't think they're all necessarily bad kids or bad fits for Notre Dame, it just didn't work out. We have no idea if this is the crest or the trough to the wave that is transfers out of a given program.

Simply saying, it gets a "keep on eye on it" from me, but it's not keeping me up at night. Not after 2013 is filled with kids who mostly adore Notre Dame and 2014 looks to be the same. They're solving their problems from my view.

You think Neal transferred because of his girlfriend? I agree that they did much "better" in the 2013 class in terms of identifying the right types of kids versus 2012. But both RBs they signed... one tried to defect on NSD to Auburn and the other may or may not have a foot out the door right now. Vanderdoes is just a ridiculous situation if I've ever seen one. There are still a lot of gambles that they took. 2014 seems to be built much like 2013 and that is encouraging. So I totally agree that they're getting better at it. You just can't say they've done an above average job of recruiting to this point with the tire fire of 2012 and the good-but-not-great rankings of the other classes. I don't know how you can argue that a C -- e.g. average -- is an unfair mark.

 

[tussin]

I can give you that...perhaps I did overbuy and there is a good chance that a large majority of the fan base did as well. I say chance because I don't want to speak for all of them.

Crazy enough, there is a large difference in perception when it comes to 8, 9, and 10 win seasons. 10 seems to be what "great" coaches are measured against, the number of double digit wins. I think subconsciously we all want to get to double digits when it comes to adding in the bowl game.

The first year, I was thrilled with where we were. The second year, the way we lost left a very sour taste in my mouth, but was happy with the progress we had made and the understanding that we were building for the future. Last year was indeed a dream season, but anyone that understood sports, as you have pointed out, knew that we were good, but not great/elite, and had some very fortunate bounces that helped along the way (and you need those in order to be successful).

In year four, I was not looking for a team that has an identity problem. You know how to practice, you know the system, there should not be any issues with who or what you are. The expectations were built in by Kelly himself, in branding the BCSNCG into the schedule and talking about winning championship (this was after Rees became starter, and I understand that it is coach talk). Four years in you expect a "succession plan" for the talent you know that you are going to lose, and expect those guys to fill in. I never imagined our D being this bad, and certainly did not expect our offense to be unable to be consistent. Not four years in. Year one and two, yes, but not when you have established your foundation.

That is where I think Kelly "oversold" us...the expectations that in year four we would be a consistent winner with the "Next Man In" mantra...and it has not, to date, been the case.

I generally agree with this. Elite programs don't rebuild, they reload. When the UFs and OSUs of the world have 8-9 win seasons, you can generally tell they are close to getting near that NC level. The talent is there, the athleticism is there, but one or two things are off for some reason or another.

This team just seems miles away. Even if they win 9 games this year, I really don't think they are ANYWHERE near competing for a NC in the next 3-4 years. I mean honestly, if ND played Oregon, what would they lose by? 30, 40 points?

 

[NDohio]

I can give you that...perhaps I did overbuy and there is a good chance that a large majority of the fan base did as well. I say chance because I don't want to speak for all of them.

Crazy enough, there is a large difference in perception when it comes to 8, 9, and 10 win seasons. 10 seems to be what "great" coaches are measured against, the number of double digit wins. I think subconsciously we all want to get to double digits when it comes to adding in the bowl game.

The first year, I was thrilled with where we were. The second year, the way we lost left a very sour taste in my mouth, but was happy with the progress we had made and the understanding that we were building for the future. Last year was indeed a dream season, but anyone that understood sports, as you have pointed out, knew that we were good, but not great/elite, and had some very fortunate bounces that helped along the way (and you need those in order to be successful).

In year four, I was not looking for a team that has an identity problem. You know how to practice, you know the system, there should not be any issues with who or what you are. The expectations were built in by Kelly himself, in branding the BCSNCG into the schedule and talking about winning championship (this was after Rees became starter, and I understand that it is coach talk). Four years in you expect a "succession plan" for the talent you know that you are going to lose, and expect those guys to fill in. I never imagined our D being this bad, and certainly did not expect our offense to be unable to be consistent. Not four years in. Year one and two, yes, but not when you have established your foundation.

That is where I think Kelly "oversold" us...the expectations that in year four we would be a consistent winner with the "Next Man In" mantra...and it has not, to date, been the case.

Have you not seen this year's defense improve each week? Didn't the defense actually play pretty well against OK save for two drives(well, one drive and one long play)? Would Danny Spond be a great help to this defense? Is his loss on Coach Kelly?

Do you not see the Freshman getting more and more playing time each week and seeing their improvement? Did you not see GAIII have the best game of his career last week?

................

 

[tussin]

Have you not seen this year's defense improve each week? Didn't the defense actually play pretty well against OK save for two drives(well, one drive and one long play)? Would Danny Spond be a great help to this defense? Is his loss on Coach Kelly?

Do you not see the Freshman getting more and more playing time each week and seeing their improvement? Did you not see GAIII have the best game of his career last week?

................

Dude, we gave up 450 yards last week. The posters on this board expected a top D nationally and now we are content with "improvement" to those team numbers? I don't think that is a good example.

 

[Buster Bluth]

You clearly aren't grasping what I'm saying. So I'll try to make it more clear, and then we can drop it.

Classic Lax...

You seem caught up in the singular example of whether or not to take a chance on Aaron Lynch and how the DL is performing and then somehow equating that to the recruitment of Nix which wasn't even done by Kelly...

I think it's best to judge on individual situations over generalizing. Nix was signed by Kelly, and by your logic they should have known he would be homesick and consider leaving. We can't take that chance can we?!

That's not at all what this about it. This is about judging how good the classes are that he is signing.

In your view. I presented a different one.

So when you look back at Kelly's classes, 2011 drops out of the top 10 when you subtract the gem of Lynch. 2012 is a just a joke without Kiel, Neal, etc. And 2013 that was ranked #3 and everyone was stoked about... when you subtract the points for Vanderdoes backing out of his LOI (which the services have done so you can look it up), we're somewhere between 5th and 7th.

Which doesn't take into account possible studs like Fuller, Robinson, Butler, etc. So again not even remotely fair until we're four years out from signing.

I don't know how you can argue that a C -- e.g. average -- is an unfair mark.

I don't think it comes even close to presenting a fair picture of what's going on, and I don't know how you can disagree with that.

 

[CarrollVermin]

Dude, we gave up 450 yards last week. The posters on this board expected a top D nationally and now we are content with "improvement" to those team numbers? I don't think that is a good example.

88th in total offense and 46th in total defense...no...that is not what I expect at ND.

 

[Cackalacky]

I wish Whiskey would come in here and carpet bomb this thread. It needs a statistical kick in the arse.

This basic makeup of the team changed significantly between January to August.

 

[NDohio]

Dude, we gave up 450 yards last week. The posters on this board expected a top D nationally and now we are content with "improvement" to those team numbers? I don't think that is a good example.

Nope, not content.

I just think that this thread is ridiculous and that it is waaaaaay too premature to start questioning the coaching staff in the manner they are being questioned this early in the season. A season that was preceeded by a NCG appearance. And a very good Freshman class with another good class lining up behind them.

If I didn't see improvement with this team, I would be on the bandwagon of questioning if BK is right for the job. If this season falls apart then I can see the point of a thread like this. Right now ND is 3-2 with an opportunity to go into the bye week with a good win.

Go Irish

 

[CarrollVermin]

I wish Whiskey would come in here and carpet bomb this thread. It needs a statistical kick in the arse.

This basic makeup of the team changed significantly between January to August.

It did change indeed, but what happened to the "Next Man In" idea...that everyone is ready all of the time? Player development...

It should also say that if you look at the whole of our schedule, we will improve dramatically as the season goes on because the level of competition will drop. Numbers may be skewed one way now, but will continue to do so later. May not be that we "improved" its that we are playing Air Force and Navy.

 

[IrishLax]

Classic Lax...



I think it's best to judge on individual situations over generalizing. Nix was signed by Kelly, and by your logic they should have known he would be homesick and consider leaving. We can't take that chance can we?!

That's not even close to my logic. I really don't even get how you've gotten to this point. I agreed with just about everything you said in post #97, except that player retention and recruiting are unrelated. They're two sides of the same coin. Of course Kelly can't control the actions or decisions of every player that steps on campus... but he picks the players, and if they aren't a fit for ND and don't stick, how can you absolve him of that? I don't expect him to be psychic, and I don't hold him accountable for any singular specific case. But he's responsible stocking a roster full of talent and without holes, and when you have a dumpster fire like the 2012 class and are continually playing with a roster of about ~75 scholarship players because of a large quantity of signees can't hack it at ND, that has to fall on his shoulders to a certain level.

By your logic, if he signed the top 10 players in the country and #1 class... but then 5 of the 10 couldn't get past admissions, another 2 asked out of their LOI, another got busted for drugs and kicked out of school over the summer, and the final 2 decided to transfer before the end of year 1... he would've still done a good job of recruiting because he signed them and he can't control their actions/academics/decisions. I think that's totally bogus.

Most reasonable people would say that your recruiting is judged by the prep rankings of the players who enroll and stick, and your player development is measured by how well these players meet or exceed their expectations.

 

[WakeUpEchoes]

It did change indeed, but what happened to the "Next Man In" idea...that everyone is ready all of the time? Player development...

It should also say that if you look at the whole of our schedule, we will improve dramatically as the season goes on because the level of competition will drop. Numbers may be skewed one way now, but will continue to do so later. May not be that we "improved" its that we are playing Air Force and Navy.

 

[BobD]

I would rather have a BK led 8-4 Notre Dame team, than a 12-0 Nick Saban semi-pro college team that can't spell.

Notre Dame wins everyday, not just on Saturdays.

 

[tussin]

That's not even close to my logic. I really don't even get how you've gotten to this point. I agreed with just about everything you said in post #97, except that player retention and recruiting are unrelated. They're two sides of the same coin. Of course Kelly can't control the actions or decisions of every player that steps on campus... but he picks the players, and if they aren't a fit for ND and don't stick, how can you absolve him of that? I don't expect him to be psychic, and I don't hold him accountable for any singular specific case. But he's responsible stocking a roster full of talent and without holes, and when you have a dumpster fire like the 2012 class and are continually playing with a roster of about ~75 scholarship players because of a large quantity of signees can't hack it at ND, that has to fall on his shoulders to a certain level.