Brian Kelly Revisited (RIP BOZO)

[NDinL.A.]

What do you consider an outlandish opinion? Any that don't align with yours.....

When you say you (edit: not YOU Insanity) want 10 high 4 and 5 star players in the defensive class every year like many other teams are doing (which is complete bs), that's an outlandish opinion.

When you say you not only want high 4 and 5 star starters on defense, but that you want high 4 and 5 star players backing them up at every position when they get hurt, like so many other teams have, that's an outlandish opinion. I mean, think about that. A team like that would have the greatest defensive recruiting classes for 2-4 years in the history of college football, and koon thinks multiple teams have that. Da ****?

Not only do other schools NOT have those things, save for MAYBE Alabama and Ohio State (although, Alabama has killed it with 3 star recruits, and OSU just started a 5 star DL bust who wouldn't even start on ND's d-line today and who ND said no thanks to), that is an impossible standard at a place like ND.

It's not outlandish to think BK and/or BVG should go IMHO, and it's not outlandish to question if he's the right guy IMHO. I don't agree at this time, but I get it. But koon's opinions were absolutely outlandish, and seemingly made for effect, or at the very least, made without thinking it through.

 

[koonja]

Here's my OP:

"I'll give GK this, our defensive recruiting isn't good. From BK's recruits, we're littered with 3-star players, two elite recruits (Jaylon/Redfield), and a few somewhat-big time players such as Trumbetti, Watkins, maybe Morgan and Barajas? I'm going off of the top of my head but there's not a lot of talent on our defense due to BK's recruiting. Championship teams are loaded with high 4-star guys. Most of the few 4-star guys we have come in well under .95 composite ranking."

I was given a list of guys over the past 5 years that BK has gotten on defense, and responded with this:

"You're looking over a 5 year span. Not enough defensive talent IMO to play championship football. Some teams bringing in 10 guys a year that would make your list."

If that OP is outlandish and deserved of a couple of people freaking out, mods, ban me away.

 

[gkIrish]

Ummm, the OP?

Not once.

I may have used the words "fire BK" in a post or two for convenience rather than typing out "fire BK if he doesn't win 9-10 games" but I've made it clear that I'm simply questioning if he is the right guy and IMO he probably isn't but we have to let the season pan out.

 

[irishfan]

Not once.

I may have used the words "fire BK" in a post or two for convenience rather than typing out "fire BK if he doesn't win 9-10 games" but I've made it clear that I'm simply questioning if he is the right guy and IMO he probably isn't but we have to let the season pan out.

If you were Swarbrick and right now you had to decide to fire BK today or extend him 5 years what would you do?

And I realize that's a 100% unrealistic scenario.

 

[NDinL.A.]

Here's my OP:

If that OP is outlandish and deserved of a couple of people freaking out, mods, ban me away.

You have a lot of posts here. Here's just one that I was responding to:

But the defensive side of the ball has lacked talent compared to other ~10 programs and lags behind the offensive recruiting. We're always walking on thin ice when it comes to defensive injuries, whereas some schools lose a senior high-4 star, and just plug in another high-4 star that is simply a year or two younger but just as talented.

And by high-4 star, I'm not talking the .8999 to .91 rankings.

That's outlandish. Name 10 programs that do that. Hell, name 3. So that is why I said the following:

When you say you (edit: not YOU Insanity) want 10 high 4 and 5 star players in the defensive class every year like many other teams are doing (which is complete bs), that's an outlandish opinion.

When you say you not only want high 4 and 5 star starters on defense, but that you want high 4 and 5 star players backing them up at every position when they get hurt, like so many other teams have, that's an outlandish opinion. I mean, think about that. A team like that would have the greatest defensive recruiting classes for 2-4 years in the history of college football, and koon thinks multiple teams have that. Da ****?

Not only do other schools NOT have those things, save for MAYBE Alabama and Ohio State (although, Alabama has killed it with 3 star recruits, and OSU just started a 5 star DL bust who wouldn't even start on ND's d-line today and who ND said no thanks to), that is an impossible standard at a place like ND.

It's not outlandish to think BK and/or BVG should go IMHO, and it's not outlandish to question if he's the right guy IMHO. I don't agree at this time, but I get it. But koon's opinions were absolutely outlandish, and seemingly made for effect, or at the very least, made without thinking it through.

 

[gkIrish]

If you were Swarbrick and right now you had to decide to fire BK today or extend him 5 years what would you do?

And I realize that's a 100% unrealistic scenario.

Well I would never fire a coach before the end of a season. That's just asking for trouble. But the answer is fire him if you mean the end of a season. I would then hire a head coach with lots of potential (Names pending lol...Jim McElwain was my guy, btw. But Florida jumped on that).

Edit: didn't mean Whittingham but I like him too...

 

[koonja]

You have a lot of posts here. Here's just one that I was responding to:

But the defensive side of the ball has lacked talent compared to other ~10 programs and lags behind the offensive recruiting. We're always walking on thin ice when it comes to defensive injuries, whereas some schools lose a senior high-4 star, and just plug in another high-4 star that is simply a year or two younger but just as talented.

And by high-4 star, I'm not talking the .8999 to .91 rankings.

That's outlandish. Name 10 programs that do that. Hell, name 3. So that is why I said the following:

That's fine man, but that was not my point. My point is that I don't think the defensive recruiting is up to par. Someone listed like 15 players who are 'big time defensive talent' by my definition (~.95 ratings), and I pointed out that 15 (or whatever the number was) looks good on paper, but spread over 5 years, it's not enough big time talent to win championships.

You're right that I shouldn't have said some teams get '10 players a year that would make that list' - that was something I said quickly, but it's probably more like ~6ish that Bama/OSU are getting. But my point remains, if you'll give me that elite programs are pulling ~6 ~.95 guys a year on defense, clearly we're not keeping up with the Jones'. That discrepancy may seem somewhat small, but spread it over 4 years time and it becomes a big gap in talent and quality of depth.

And if it's impossible for ND to recruit to the level of Bama/OSU, so be it, that's a different discussion. But we're doing really well on offense as opposed to defense, which is why I say defense has been sub par. We can't accept everybody, but we still are a premier program and have things to offer that others can't, so we should be getting more elite talent on defense (I think offense is about right).

Regardless, I think we can all agree this site would be wayyy more enjoyable if the group of people that don't like me wouldn't go off whenever they get a chance when I'm clearly being civil and not trying to start anything.

 

[woolybug25]

Regardless, I think we can all agree this site would be wayyy more enjoyable if the group of people that don't like me wouldn't go off whenever they get a chance when I'm clearly being civil and not trying to start anything.

Who exactly "went off"? I certainly didn't. I never insulted you or got angry a single time. You called me a jerk, not the other way around. Everything is outlined pretty succinctly.

Again.... constantly starting trouble in threads and then acting like a victim. You are not a victim.

I won't even address the "goal post shifting" you just did again....

 

[dad4aa]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Why isn't Nyles Morgan playing?

"Joe Schmidt's better," BK deadpans.</p>— Nick Ironside (@nironside247) <a href="https://twitter.com/nironside247/status/643826575323041793">September 15, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">simple answer for why Nyles Morgan not getting onto the field, Kelly: "Joe Schmidt is better." says he loves Nyles but can't take Joe off</p>— Angelo Di Carlo (@angdicarlowndu) <a href="https://twitter.com/angdicarlowndu/status/643826808522211328">September 15, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

you're assuming what better means. Better overall I would agree with. Nyles seems faster, stronger, etc. but in regards to reading the offense, adjusting the defense, making sure we are where we need to be it is not even close. Overall Joe is better.

 

[Wingman Ray]

I get tired of hearing how BK "only" led us to one championship game in 5 years. If we remember, Golson was kicked out after our championship run which hurt us drastically in 2013.

Then we were going to make a run in 2014 and we lost the frozen five. Regardless of that, we still had a strong run going up through the FSU game and then all of the injuries started adding up on top of the frozen five and we just didn't have the personnel or experience to continue the run.

Now we come to 2015 and a lot of hype surrounding ND football and, once again, disaster strikes and we lose 5 starters by our second game...yet we are still undefeated.

None of this has to do with coaching (sure people can speculate that players aren't being developed but that is purely speculation with no facts to back it up). We have student athletes here that are held accountable. BK cannot follow all of them around and make sure they stay eligible and do their own work. We also cannot put bubble wrap on our players so they don't get injured. It is a part of the game.

In regards to the other complaints like playing Schmidt over Morgan...none of us know the reason. Rees played over Golson and spelled Golson during our championship run because Golson struggled to learn the offense and there were times in 2012 Golson could not read the defense to make the proper audibles. I have never heard BK say Schmidt is playing because he is better than Morgan...only that he is the one that gets the defense into the right position. If that is required of his role and Morgan cannot do that, then Morgan does not replace him, period. Joe is the QB of the defense and his replacement needs to be able to take over the reins and run the defense.

I, like many others posting in this thread, am still optimistic about our chances. Good teams find a way to win. They also catch some breaks. Hopefully the football gods will smile on us the rest of the season and we will be injury free. But we are undefeated and until we have knocked ourselves out of the playoff picture, I will have hope.

This is my question...why cant the rest of NDs defense figure out how to play their position and the defense? I mean, I would like to believe these are all fairly intelligent guys and they cant remember where to line up or what to look for in shifts? Ive never heard of a defense falling apart because one guy wasnt there to tell them what to do. That is either 1) extremely stupid players 2) extremely bad coaching that rather than teaching the players, focuses on one field general to do his job for him or 3) a scheme so very complexed that the average ND player cant figure out YET OPPOSING COACHES CAN!

Im gonna go with door #2

 

[Emcee77]

Not once.

I may have used the words "fire BK" in a post or two for convenience rather than typing out "fire BK if he doesn't win 9-10 games" but I've made it clear that I'm simply questioning if he is the right guy and IMO he probably isn't but we have to let the season pan out.

Sure, I understand that you aren't saying that BK should be fired right now, but it was still disingenuous of IrishInsanity to act like GoIrish's post was way off-base or apropros of nothing in the thread. Your OP stated that if things don't improve, we should think about a replacement for Kelly. GoIrish said that things will improve, so nobody will be calling for BK's head. GoIrish's post was not a non sequitur.

Just don't want to see the convo derailed by semantics. It mars a good debate when one side takes a slight rhetorical license and objects to the other side doing the same. Both sides have made many good points.

I'm personally still on the fence on this one. I'm trying to maintain the optimism I've had throughout the Kelly era, but I'm also starting to doubt whether Kelly can put it all together. He's done a lot of great things during his tenure at ND, but there's always been something lacking in some aspect of the end product.

 

[Riddickulous]

Well I would never fire a coach before the end of a season. That's just asking for trouble. But the answer is fire him if you mean the end of a season. I would then hire a head coach with lots of potential (Names pending lol...Kyle Whittingham was my guy, btw. But Florida jumped on that).

Whittingham is still at Utah.

 

[gkIrish]

Whittingham is still at Utah.

My bad good catch. I meant Jim McElwain mixed up the name.

 

[RDU Irish]

We should win 10 games with this team as it stands right now, 50/50 on whether we need a bowl game to get there. USC, GT and Clemson are a tough row to hoe and I still think we win at least two of them. If we walk out the USC game 6-1 we are still in the hunt with a VERY good shot at finishing 11-1. By the end of the season that one loss is two months removed which makes for good poll calculus moving us into the Top 5. MOST LIKELY there are enough 2 loss conference champs to give us the edge in making the playoffs.

We finish 9-4 this year I think Kelly's seat rightfully starts getting warm. I really don't think we do worse than 10-3 though.

 

[Irish Insanity]

We should win 10 games every year

FIFY

 

[RDU Irish]

FIFY

I would like to win 13 or 14 periodically, I find 10 wins every year unacceptable.

 

[Irish Insanity]

I would like to win 13 or 14 periodically, I find 10 wins every year unacceptable.

I'm talking a regular season floor of 10 wins. Anything less would be completely unacceptable. And more wins, on a regular basis, should be expected.

 

[kmoose]

I'm talking a regular season floor of 10 wins. Anything less would be completely unacceptable. And more wins, on a regular basis, should be expected.

You really are insane...

 

[woolybug25]

I'm talking a regular season floor of 10 wins. Anything less would be completely unacceptable. And more wins, on a regular basis, should be expected.

Would you say that a decade of football that didn't result in an average of ten wins a year would be below your expectations?

 

[Irish Insanity]

You really are insane...

Am I?
In the last 5 years, how many teams that were debatably better than us did we play a year? How any games did we lose that we should've won?

Last year we won 8 games. We should've easily won 10. Louisville and Northwestern.
2013 we won 9. We shouldn't easily won 10. Pitt.
2011 we won 8. We should've easily won 10. UofM and USF.

Am I insane for seeing 10 as a floor, or are some insane for accepting mediocrity.

 

[ulukinatme]

I'm talking a regular season floor of 10 wins. Anything less would be completely unacceptable. And more wins, on a regular basis, should be expected.

10 wins every regular season? Maybe if our schedule looked like the Big 10 West. Ain't hard for Nebraska/Wisconsin to look pretty till conference championships when your in conference opponents are Illinois, Iowa, Northwestern, Minnie, and Purdue.

 

[RDU Irish]

Opening the season debating whether we are playoff bound with one loss or if we have to go undefeated seems like the bar has been set pretty high to me. 10 wins this year would be a disappointment to me before Zaire went down, my new floor is 9 based on that new info. Last year going into FSU I would have said 10 wins to finish was a complete disappointment. 2013 with Golson out, 10 wins would have been miraculous. 2012, didn't see those 12 wins coming but apparently they didn't count for much.

 

[kmoose]

Am I?
In the last 5 years, how many teams that were debatably better than us did we play a year? How any games did we lose that we should've won?

Last year we won 8 games. We should've easily won 10. Louisville and Northwestern.
2013 we won 9. We shouldn't easily won 10. Pitt.
2011 we won 8. We should've easily won 10. UofM and USF.

Am I insane for seeing 10 as a floor, or are some insane for accepting mediocrity.

You're insane because you think that the more talented team should always win. I don't know how long you have been watching football but it isn't just that easy. Even Lou Holtz lost to teams that he shouldn't have.

 

[woolybug25]

Am I?
In the last 5 years, how many teams that were debatably better than us did we play a year? How any games did we lose that we should've won?

Last year we won 8 games. We should've easily won 10. Louisville and Northwestern.
2013 we won 9. We shouldn't easily won 10. Pitt.
2011 we won 8. We should've easily won 10. UofM and USF.

Am I insane for seeing 10 as a floor, or are some insane for accepting mediocrity.

Let me put it this way.

1) There are zero teams in college football that have averaged 10 regular season wins over the past decade.
2) There is only one active coach in all of football that has an 83%+ (10 wins) winning percentage. That is Urban Meyer.
3) Only 17 coaches in the entire college football history have had an 83% winning percentage.

So your "floor" is pretty rare air, my friend.

 

[RDU Irish]

That team should change their mascot to the Unicorns or something.

 

[Irish Insanity]

10 wins every regular season? Maybe if our schedule looked like the Big 10 West. Ain't hard for Nebraska/Wisconsin to look pretty till conference championships when your in conference opponents are Illinois, Iowa, Northwestern, Minnie, and Purdue.

I know ours it typically tougher than most. It always starts at the top, and as the year goes we end up much lower on that list. It's not like we're playing a top 25 team every week. The majority of our schedule we are playing teams with lesser players than ours. I mean USF, Pitt, NW....we shouldn't lose to those teams.

Would you say that a decade of football that didn't result in an average of ten wins a year would be below your expectations?

A decade is a long measuring stick. How many programs hold the same coach for that long. Not many. I do see something wrong for being ok with 8 or 9 wins at year 5 for a coach. With the players we pull.

 

[ACamp1900]

That team should change their mascot to the Unicorns or something.

Leprechaun, Unicorn..... just sayin....

 

[ulukinatme]

Am I?
In the last 5 years, how many teams that were debatably better than us did we play a year? How any games did we lose that we should've won?

Last year we won 8 games. We should've easily won 10. Louisville and Northwestern.
2013 we won 9. We shouldn't easily won 10. Pitt.
2011 we won 8. We should've easily won 10. UofM and USF.

Am I insane for seeing 10 as a floor, or are some insane for accepting mediocrity.

Louisville is no gimmie anymore, they made it a game for FSU (Although a lot of teams did last year it seems).
Pitt probably should be a gimmie, but it never is. You could also make the case that we won a game that we really shouldn't have against Michigan State that year. Their offense was completely anemic at the start of the season, and we probably were gifted one or two crucial pass interference penalties. Beating USC that year was a miracle too. If Hendrix plays that whole game, we lose.
I'll give you USF in 2011, we probably should have started Tommy from the start, but that was a flukey game to start with given the rain delays. 2011 Michigan? We probably should have won it, but Diaco went conservative as hell in the 4th quarter and got away with what had been working up till then. We just as easily could have been 5-7 that season too, we played close games against BC, Wake, and Pitt.

Not saying 10 wins a regular season isn't possible, but you can go the other way too and say we could have been far worse than an 8 win team some of those years.

 

[Irish Insanity]

You're insane because you think that the more talented team should always win. I don't know how long you have been watching football but it isn't just that easy. Even Lou Holtz lost to teams that he shouldn't have.

Without looking back at it, I doubt multiple a year, and often struggling against opponents they shouldn't have on a regular basis.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Not saying 10 wins a regular season isn't possible, but you can go the other way too and say we could have been far worse than an 8 win team some of those years.

My problem is we seem to have lost more games we shouldn't have then win games we shouldn't have.
If your coach is giving you an advantage, you should be winning those games. If we aren't, are we really gaining an advantage with our coach?