Is Kelly a REALLY good coach?

[mick2]

I'm ashamed that this thread has gotten over 240 posts.

 

[wizards8507]

I'm ashamed that this thread has gotten over 240 posts.

I'm ashamed that Northwestern got over 20 points.

I'm ashamed that Golson has over 20 turnovers.

I'm ashamed that over one person thinks 7-5 is "good enough."

 

[Irish Insanity]

I'm ashamed that this thread has gotten over 240 posts.

And you are a contributor

I'm ashamed that Northwestern got over 20 points.

I'm ashamed that Golson has over 20 turnovers.

I'm ashamed that over one person thinks 7-5 is "good enough."

Absofuckinglutely

 

[NDohio]

Kelly's offense would be much more suited for a place like Florida where he could get athletes all over the field. Historically we can't recruit enough speed but what we have no problem recruiting are OL and TE. Would love to see a more power spread with multiple TE's used.

Explain his success at UC.

My frustration over the last couple seasons has been the players seem lost. It doesn't make any sense to me. Players at the University of Notre Dame have a harder time grasping the offense than players at UC? BVG was at Georgia and his players never seemed lost, yet this team's players can't get the scheme down? I am baffled at how ND team's of the Kelly era can't figure these schemes out.

The only logical explanation is that the school workload is too heavy for them to spend the time that other team's players can spend in the film room.

 

[NDRock]

Explain his success at UC.

There is no denying (to me) that Kelly is a good coach, he's had success everywhere he has been including at ND. I just feel that you have to understand your school's strengths and weaknesses and play to them. This isn't Holtz in the 80's where we are the only team on TV every week and we could recruit the #1 class every year. Those days are over.

We're never going to be a team that can play elite football the "basketball on grass (turf)" way. That's fine. What we can do is play elite football with a power based offense. Look at our OL classes the last couple of years. Look at our history of TE success. This is who where the offense needs to be built around. I'm not talking 3 yards and a cloud of rubber pellets but a power based spread that utilizes multiple TEs. Couple that with our dual threat Qbs and solid RB/WRs and we could be great on O.

I think Kelly has learned that we need to make sure we get numbers on the DL, I like what we're doing there. Hopefully special teams will be an area where we make a concerted effort to be elite. We can't afford to be average there.

 

[Hammer Of The Gods]

Explain his success at UC.

My frustration over the last couple seasons has been the players seem lost. It doesn't make any sense to me. Players at the University of Notre Dame have a harder time grasping the offense than players at UC? BVG was at Georgia and his players never seemed lost, yet this team's players can't get the scheme down? I am baffled at how ND team's of the Kelly era can't figure these schemes out.

The only logical explanation is that the school workload is too heavy for them to spend the time that other team's players can spend in the film room.

That's pretty much where i'm at with it. BUT, a good coach would recognize that and adjust the scheme accordingly. That's what frustrates me the most. We don't even run consistently the most basic curls, hooks,and slants with our tight ends. We're not allowed to utilize Greg Bryant because he can't pass block, we can't play Max Redfield because he did something so terrible the media isn't allowed to know what it is.

The Defense really frustrates me. I get what BVG wants to do. But Damn dude, you DO NOT have the players yet. There is way to much going on. Watch Alabama's defense. Do you see them doing all kinds of crazy crap? No. Why is that? In my opinion its just not Necessary. Diaco's Defense annoyed me, But this Defensive Scheme is a USC finger blasting away from sending me over the edge.

 

[IRISH in MT]

I guess my only frustration with Kelly is the fact that he has a 1,000 page playbook but won't dumb it down to a simpler version. He keeps saying "well EG is technically a sophmore in his 2nd year of starting at the QB position." Well, make it easier for him. It worked in 2012 when you didn't ask him to be the hero on offense.

Isn't Auburn on a 2 year offensive tear using a playbook with 3 simple options each play? Fake or give to the RB, throw to an open receiver, or the QB takes off running. Seems like EG could handle this instead of trying to be Manning or Luck at the line and changing/audibling to another play every snap.

We have a young defense so giving simple assignments would make things simpler on that side of the ball as well. Why on earth did we have Niles Morgan trying to cover a slot reciever on 3rd and long?! Take away his coverage responsibilities and let him blitz and tackle.

Bottom line, when you have as much youth playing as we do, the coach's need to make the material easier to understand.

 

[kmoose]

Isn't Auburn on a 2 year offensive tear using a playbook with 3 simple options each play? Fake or give to the RB, throw to an open receiver, or the QB takes off running. Seems like EG could handle this instead of trying to be Manning or Luck at the line and changing/audibling to another play every snap.

If Golson running is one third of your offense, or even just one of only three options, then you are pretty much sunk. I don't know where Golson got this reputation as a good runner, because he's not. He's mobile, and scrambles well, but he is NOT a very good runner. Add in his penchant for putting the ball on the ground and you realize that asking Golson to be a runner is a really ineffective, if not bad, idea.

 

[Hammer Of The Gods]

I guess my only frustration with Kelly is the fact that he has a 1,000 page playbook but won't dumb it down to a simpler version. He keeps saying "well EG is technically a sophmore in his 2nd year of starting at the QB position." Well, make it easier for him. It worked in 2012 when you didn't ask him to be the hero on offense.

Isn't Auburn on a 2 year offensive tear using a playbook with 3 simple options each play? Fake or give to the RB, throw to an open receiver, or the QB takes off running. Seems like EG could handle this instead of trying to be Manning or Luck at the line and changing/audibling to another play every snap.

We have a young defense so giving simple assignments would make things simpler on that side of the ball as well. Why on earth did we have Niles Morgan trying to cover a slot reciever on 3rd and long?! Take away his coverage responsibilities and let him blitz and tackle.

Bottom line, when you have as much youth playing as we do, the coach's need to make the material easier to understand.

You and I my friend are on the exact same page

 

[IRISH in MT]

If Golson running is one third of your offense, or even just one of only three options, then you are pretty much sunk. I don't know where Golson got this reputation as a good runner, because he's not. He's mobile, and scrambles well, but he is NOT a very good runner. Add in his penchant for putting the ball on the ground and you realize that asking Golson to be a runner is a really ineffective, if not bad, idea.

My point was to dumb things down for EG. He is failing at his presnap reads and staring down his intended receiver. Putting 5 wide on the field is making EG 100% of your offense and that isn't working either!!! I never asked for EG to get 100 yds rushing each game. Running to the sidelines to pick up a first down has worked at times this year and in 2012 as well. He needs to simply stop carrying the football so loosely.

 

[kmoose]

My point was to dumb things down for EG. He is failing at his presnap reads and staring down his intended receiver. Putting 5 wide on the field is making EG 100% of your offense and that isn't working either!!! I never asked for EG to get 100 yds rushing each game. Running to the sidelines to pick up a first down has worked at times this year and in 2012 as well. He needs to simply stop carrying the football so loosely.

I agree. I was just responding to your comparison to the Auburn offense. Sorry if it came across wrong.

 

[IRISH in MT]

I agree. I was just responding to your comparison to the Auburn offense. Sorry if it came across wrong.

All we need is two 1,000yd rushers at RB and we are fine lol.

 

[IrishFaninTX]

I guess my only frustration with Kelly is the fact that he has a 1,000 page playbook but won't dumb it down to a simpler version. He keeps saying "well EG is technically a sophmore in his 2nd year of starting at the QB position." Well, make it easier for him. It worked in 2012 when you didn't ask him to be the hero on offense.

The problem with that is Golson did not have to score 30+ points in 2012 so Kelly was able to dumb it down for him and make him a game manager instead of a leader. Our scoring defense was in the top 5 and avg around 12 points/game during the regular season. This year Golson has to be able to score close to 40 points to win every game and cannot afford to make any mistakes because we have to almost score on every drive. We have the players but Golson isn't able to play a complete game without any mistakes. I give the kid credit. He battles back after making mistake after mistake and has come close in the 4 losses of winning in the end. If he can cut out his own mistakes then he can win the shootouts we have been in lately. But dumbing things down like 2012 wouldn't be the answer this year. With a defense that is young and having trouble stopping even the most putrid offenses, Kelly has to have a QB who can lead and an offense that can put up a lot of points. He basically needs a Baylor offense this year and he doesn't have it.

 

[Irish#1]

I guess my only frustration with Kelly is the fact that he has a 1,000 page playbook but won't dumb it down to a simpler version. He keeps saying "well EG is technically a sophmore in his 2nd year of starting at the QB position." Well, make it easier for him. It worked in 2012 when you didn't ask him to be the hero on offense.

Isn't Auburn on a 2 year offensive tear using a playbook with 3 simple options each play? Fake or give to the RB, throw to an open receiver, or the QB takes off running. Seems like EG could handle this instead of trying to be Manning or Luck at the line and changing/audibling to another play every snap.

We have a young defense so giving simple assignments would make things simpler on that side of the ball as well. Why on earth did we have Niles Morgan trying to cover a slot reciever on 3rd and long?! Take away his coverage responsibilities and let him blitz and tackle.

Bottom line, when you have as much youth playing as we do, the coach's need to make the material easier to understand.

If Golson running is one third of your offense, or even just one of only three options, then you are pretty much sunk. I don't know where Golson got this reputation as a good runner, because he's not. He's mobile, and scrambles well, but he is NOT a very good runner. Add in his penchant for putting the ball on the ground and you realize that asking Golson to be a runner is a really ineffective, if not bad, idea.

If you watch, you'll see that BK has called a few read option plays and Golson struggles to make the read quickly. Given his rate of fumbles per carry, I'm not sure I want him running the ball.

 

[IRISH in MT]

If you watch, you'll see that BK has called a few read option plays and Golson struggles to make the read quickly. Given his rate of fumbles per carry, I'm not sure I want him running the ball.

That is why you can still hand off to the RB or hit a quick throw to an open receiver. With 5 WR and no RB I haven't been impressed with his throwing decisions either. More INT's than fumbles... In other words, don't make EG the star of the offense.

 

[Guest]

There is no denying (to me) that Kelly is a good coach, he's had success everywhere he has been including at ND. I just feel that you have to understand your school's strengths and weaknesses and play to them. This isn't Holtz in the 80's where we are the only team on TV every week and we could recruit the #1 class every year. Those days are over.

We're never going to be a team that can play elite football the "basketball on grass (turf)" way. That's fine. What we can do is play elite football with a power based offense. Look at our OL classes the last couple of years. Look at our history of TE success. This is who where the offense needs to be built around. I'm not talking 3 yards and a cloud of rubber pellets but a power based spread that utilizes multiple TEs. Couple that with our dual threat Qbs and solid RB/WRs and we could be great on O.

I think Kelly has learned that we need to make sure we get numbers on the DL, I like what we're doing there. Hopefully special teams will be an area where we make a concerted effort to be elite. We can't afford to be average there.

This may be one of the best analysis in the thread. Where you have recruiting disadvantages, you adjust your scheme. Examples include Navy or Stanford. They stick to a simple scheme and maximize what they have. Everyone wants ND to be this perfect combination of new age offense and defense, but given their academic restraints, will that actually ever happen?

 

[zbikowski88]

Florida: The Gainesville Sun’s Pat Dooley says to cross off Brian Kelly, Bob Stoops and Mike Gundy among potential candidates at Florida.

 

[Irish Insanity]

#FreeMax

 

[tankjeep]

Kelly is a very very good coach [I find using the word "great" for anything to be almost indefensible]. Brian van Gorder shows me all the signs of being a very very good DC. Kelly still needs his kind of quarterback rather than just a fabulous athlete who remains confused every other play. Van Gorder still needs a year or two more to settle into his magical confusion show with healthy players who understand it. This is particularly true for his linebackers and safeties. "Confusion" is good for the defense's system, but whereas BVG is a Good Master-of-Confusion, we can't have a QB who is one. It is not just turnovers which stop Notre Dame drives.

Though this is as unpopular as any random fan opinion can be, I am waiting desperately for our now-spectacular/now-horrifying athlete-playing-QB to graduate. I am looking at a rose-colored future with some quarterback walking onto the field who has the look in his eye that says "I got this!" rather than "What IS this?" I'm looking forward to the future where the quarterback can actually see the middle of the field immediately and deliver. I'm looking for the future wherein the quarterback is so understanding of the pre-snap situation that we can actually run an up-tempo offense. In that future suddenly Kelly will magically become the Supercoach in people's minds that he already is in professional football-person's.

As to BVG: the system is complex but ANY modern defense which hopes to cope with modern spread offenses must be complex. What do we want?: go simple and get our brains beat out by high-flying speed systems?, or try to gear up an actual defense which might strategically stop them, even though the youth of who we must play causes some terrible growing pains. BVGs defense has been good enough for us to win ten out of the eleven games as it is --- the defeats are largely on the giveaway erratic offense. [and kicking].

Any reasonable near-future which does not have Brian Kelly as head coach and Brian van Gorder as DC is a nightmare in my vision of it.

this....well said.

and isn't this team's record closer to what most here predicited? and saying injuries are a sad excuse...really? you take a mlb quarterback for the defense off the pitch and replace with a true frehsman....how can you even think there shouldn't be a drop off? and missing strong dlinemen bec of either suspension or injury plays a major role in our struggle.

i'm perplexed by the negative reactions. the expectations before injuries abound were some what warranted, but now with the fallen and wounded, we still expect the same output? unfair and not logical.

 

[IRISH in MT]

There is no denying (to me) that Kelly is a good coach, he's had success everywhere he has been including at ND. I just feel that you have to understand your school's strengths and weaknesses and play to them. This isn't Holtz in the 80's where we are the only team on TV every week and we could recruit the #1 class every year. Those days are over.

We're never going to be a team that can play elite football the "basketball on grass (turf)" way. That's fine. What we can do is play elite football with a power based offense. Look at our OL classes the last couple of years. Look at our history of TE success. This is who where the offense needs to be built around. I'm not talking 3 yards and a cloud of rubber pellets but a power based spread that utilizes multiple TEs. Couple that with our dual threat Qbs and solid RB/WRs and we could be great on O.

I think Kelly has learned that we need to make sure we get numbers on the DL, I like what we're doing there. Hopefully special teams will be an area where we make a concerted effort to be elite. We can't afford to be average there.

Great points! In the first few years BK was exceptional in recongnizing where his talent was and using it effectively. Look at how he played Robert Hughes and Jonas Gray late in the season. Eifert was our main receiver and redzone plays designed just for him.

Now since EG is mobile he is forcing his spread offense on the team. I am still miffed why we don't put in McGlinchy and Luatua at TE in goalline packages and just ram the ball in?! Sick of shotgun formation on 10 yard line. Looking at risk, an INT can be thrown, EG can fumble, the WR can drop the pass, the pass can be deflected. Running the ball on goalline you worry that the RB fumbles or gets stuffed. Much less risk.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

We're never going to be a team that can play elite football the "basketball on grass (turf)" way. That's fine. What we can do is play elite football with a power based offense. Look at our OL classes the last couple of years. Look at our history of TE success. This is who where the offense needs to be built around. I'm not talking 3 yards and a cloud of rubber pellets but a power based spread that utilizes multiple TEs. Couple that with our dual threat Qbs and solid RB/WRs and we could be great on O.

I think there's a strong argument for this. Many here have called for Kelly to emulate Auburn instead of Baylor, Clemson and aTm. Not to mention that Zaire and Kizer would probably be better suited to a "power" run-first spread than what we've seen under Golson.

Now since EG is mobile he is forcing his spread offense on the team. I am still miffed why we don't put in McGlinchy and Luatua at TE in goalline packages and just ram the ball in?! Sick of shotgun formation on 10 yard line. Looking at risk, an INT can be thrown, EG can fumble, the WR can drop the pass, the pass can be deflected. Running the ball on goalline you worry that the RB fumbles or gets stuffed. Much less risk.

Pass-first spreads excel between the 20s because they force opposing defenses to account for a large area. The flipside of that is they naturally struggle in the redzone when the field contracts. You gain more explosive plays, but your redzone production suffers. Every scheme has drawbacks.

That said, Malzahn's "power" spread doesn't have that issue. But this isn't the sort of transition that can happen mid-season. If Kelly wants to make a change, it'll start getting installed in Spring Camp. But I don't see him changing things up while Golson is our QB.

 

[wizards8507]

Pass-first spreads excel between the 20s because they force opposing defenses to account for a large area. The flipside of that is they naturally struggle in the redzone when the field contracts. You gain more explosive plays, but your redzone production suffers. Every scheme has drawbacks.

That's why you need more than one scheme. Last week, Jonas Gray had 200 rushing yards on 40 carries because the Colts suck at stopping the run. This week, Jonas Gray sat on the sidelines and Tom Brady threw the ball over 50 times because power running against the Lions is a terrible idea. I think that's my biggest problem with Kelly's "scheme." It's virtually unchanged based on opponent, weather, score, personnel, or in-game situation.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

That's why you need more than one scheme. Last week, Jonas Gray had 200 rushing yards on 40 carries because the Colts suck at stopping the run. This week, Jonas Gray sat on the sidelines and Tom Brady threw the ball over 50 times because power running against the Lions is a terrible idea. I think that's my biggest problem with Kelly's "scheme." It's virtually unchanged based on opponent, weather, score, personnel, or in-game situation.

Because everyone can coach as well as Belichik, amirite? No one else in the NFL demonstrates his ability to win with hybrid schemes and motley personnel (though having Brady at QB helps a lot). For everyone else, whose programs are run by mere mortals, core competency is important. If you try to run power one week and then air it out the next, you're going to end up sucking at both.

 

[wizards8507]

Because everyone can coach as well as Belichik, amirite? No one else in the NFL demonstrates his ability to win with hybrid schemes and motley personnel (though having Brady at QB helps a lot). For everyone else, whose programs are run by mere mortals, core competency is important. If you try to run power one week and then air it out the next, you're going to end up sucking at both.

You don't need to rewrite the playbook, but pick and choose what you do WITHIN the playbook based on opponent and situation. I'm not saying run ABCDE one week and VWXYZ the next week. I'm saying keep ABCDE as your playbook, but run a lot of A and B against Florida State, D and E against Northwestern, and a heavy dose of C and D when you're up by 13 in the fourth quarter.

 

[Crazy Balki]

Explain his success at UC.

My frustration over the last couple seasons has been the players seem lost. It doesn't make any sense to me. Players at the University of Notre Dame have a harder time grasping the offense than players at UC? BVG was at Georgia and his players never seemed lost, yet this team's players can't get the scheme down? I am baffled at how ND team's of the Kelly era can't figure these schemes out.

The only logical explanation is that the school workload is too heavy for them to spend the time that other team's players can spend in the film room.

Very much so. I still don't understand why in year 5, Kelly is still having trouble utilizing the fullest extent of his playbook? Why hasn't the success at UC translated here with a vastly higher amount of athletes?

BVG I can forgive, because it's year 1 for him and he's being forced to play with almost all freshmen and sophomores.

 

[GoldenToTheGrave]

That's why you need more than one scheme. Last week, Jonas Gray had 200 rushing yards on 40 carries because the Colts suck at stopping the run. This week, Jonas Gray sat on the sidelines and Tom Brady threw the ball over 50 times because power running against the Lions is a terrible idea. I think that's my biggest problem with Kelly's "scheme." It's virtually unchanged based on opponent, weather, score, personnel, or in-game situation.

When you have a good offensive line and a HOF caliber QB (or NC caliber QB in the case of college) you can run any kind of scheme. Last year NE went up against a Colts team that could get after the passer, so they run LeGarrette Blount and Steven Riddley for 218 yards and 6 TDs. And that's why they're super bowl contenders every year.

 

[wizards8507]

When you have a good offensive line and a HOF caliber QB (or NC caliber QB in the case of college) you can run any kind of scheme. Last year NE went up against a Colts team that could get after the passer, so they run LeGarrette Blount and Steven Riddley for 218 yards and 6 TDs. And that's why they're super bowl contenders every year.

Well that's kind of my point. Don't we, as Notre Dame fans, want to be the college equivalent of "super bowl contenders every year?"

 

[Whiskeyjack]

You don't need to rewrite the playbook, but pick and choose what you do WITHIN the playbook based on opponent and situation. I'm not saying run ABCDE one week and VWXYZ the next week. I'm saying keep ABCDE as your playbook, but run a lot of A and B against Florida State, D and E against Northwestern, and a heavy dose of C and D when you're up by 13 in the fourth quarter.

We do that already. What we can't do, as a pass-first spread, is just hammer one thing repeatedly because it appears to be "working" from the cheap seats. The scheme is predicated on forcing the defense to account for a large area, and then taking what they give us. If there's 5-6 guys in the box, Golson is supposed to call a run. If there's 7-8 guys in the box, he's supposed to pass. Just because Folston ripped off a few successful rushes on that drive doesn't mean the smart play is to continue feeding him the ball regardless of what the defense is showing.

The advantage of Kelly's current scheme is that, assuming the QB can make the right calls, the defense is always wrong on standard downs. The downside is that we don't have a trump card to play in condensed yardage situations.

 

[wizards8507]

The advantage of Kelly's current scheme is that, assuming the QB can make the right calls, the defense is always wrong on standard downs. The downside is that we don't have a trump card to play in condensed yardage situations.

Ay, there's the rub.

 

[Guest]

You don't need to rewrite the playbook, but pick and choose what you do WITHIN the playbook based on opponent and situation. I'm not saying run ABCDE one week and VWXYZ the next week. I'm saying keep ABCDE as your playbook, but run a lot of A and B against Florida State, D and E against Northwestern, and a heavy dose of C and D when you're up by 13 in the fourth quarter.

That's what winning teams do. We need to stop making excuses for play calling. The coach needs to adjust the play calling between games and within games to consistently win. The team should practice and be familiar with several types of sets in the event they get called during a game.