'11 CA LB Joe Schmidt (Scholarship Earned)

[Irish#1]

I agree that Joe seems to be a step behind many times and wouldn't have a problem with a change. Having said that, maybe Morgan hasn't picked up the defense to the point where BVG & BK feel comfortable with him in there? IMO, it's more loyalty. I think BK sees a guys that has fought and fought and fought just to reach this level and wants to reward him since he's a senior. It's easy for us to judge and make comments, but we aren't emotionally invested with these kids like the coaches. Kind of like when your dog's quality of life isn't what it should be and you need to put them asleep. You've known it for a while and family and friends have been telling you for a long time, but you just can't seem to do it.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Kelly's sentimental and loyal but not THAT loyal that he'd play someone who he really believed gave him a worse chance to win. Kelly's loyalty is expressed at the start of camps when he begins with his veteran starters and veteran back-ups on the first units to give them a chance to grab the opportunity [and also more smoothly run the systems which the younger talent is trying to learn.] But that's it. If it wasn't that way, people like Matthais would have been starting [and in a well-known previous year, Tommy over Everett.] Coach wants to win each game, as a priority, and assumes that all the players will buy that too. [ex. Grace, who could have been FAR less "in" this year and instead is a fountain of upbeat teamsmanship.]

As to Grace: he's ready to play, and Kelly just did it vs Navy. I believe that Grace is not only stronger/heavier than Joe [carries that weight better] but probably has a bit better MLB instincts --- the staff has always said that he is a natural. Maybe they think that Joe has more accurate pass defense drops than Jarrett --- I have no idea. He's the guy I'd like to see us try. But "BVG smarter'n I are."

 

[connor_in]

Kelly's sentimental and loyal but not THAT loyal that he'd play someone who he really believed gave him a worse chance to win. Kelly's loyalty is expressed at the start of camps when he begins with his veteran starters and veteran back-ups on the first units to give them a chance to grab the opportunity [and also more smoothly run the systems which the younger talent is trying to learn.] But that's it. If it wasn't that way, people like Matthais would have been starting [and in a well-known previous year, Tommy over Everett.] Coach wants to win each game, as a priority, and assumes that all the players will buy that too. [ex. Grace, who could have been FAR less "in" this year and instead is a fountain of upbeat teamsmanship.]

As to Grace: he's ready to play, and Kelly just did it vs Navy. I believe that Grace is not only stronger/heavier than Joe [carries that weight better] but probably has a bit better MLB instincts --- the staff has always said that he is a natural. Maybe they think that Joe has more accurate pass defense drops than Jarrett --- I have no idea. He's the guy I'd like to see us try. But "BVG smarter'n I are."

STOP...you're killing the narrative here

 

[irishff1014]

I agree that Joe seems to be a step behind many times and wouldn't have a problem with a change. Having said that, maybe Morgan hasn't picked up the defense to the point where BVG & BK feel comfortable with him in there? IMO, it's more loyalty. I think BK sees a guys that has fought and fought and fought just to reach this level and wants to reward him since he's a senior. It's easy for us to judge and make comments, but we aren't emotionally invested with these kids like the coaches. Kind of like when your dog's quality of life isn't what it should be and you need to put them asleep. You've known it for a while and family and friends have been telling you for a long time, but you just can't seem to do it.

I am sorry but loyalty has a limit in this case. You have players that can play are twice the athletes that he is. I hurts the the team and to a point has to send a bad message to younger guys. I think Kelly is over seeing BVG in the case which is bad news.

 

[Blaise]

I am confused why everyone thinks we play Joe because the coaches think he is a heck of a guy.. If he is playing, I believe because right now he is better than the other guys.. I remember what happened to this defense when he got hurt last year... I'll trust the coaches

 

[pkt77242]

I am confused why everyone thinks we play Joe because the coaches think he is a heck of a guy.. If he is playing, I believe because right now he is better than the other guys.. I remember what happened to this defense when he got hurt last year... I'll trust the coaches

To be fair, right around that time we lost Jones and Day to injuries. So we were dealing with Freshmen MLBs and very young inexperienced DTs. That is a recipe for disaster up the middle. We also lost a few other players right around that time. I think Schmidt was important to the defense last year but I think that his importance is a little over-inflated. Also if BVG did nothing to get someone else ready this past Spring and Fall then they really should be fired.

 

[irishff1014]

I am confused why everyone thinks we play Joe because the coaches think he is a heck of a guy.. If he is playing, I believe because right now he is better than the other guys.. I remember what happened to this defense when he got hurt last year... I'll trust the coaches

This is a flat out lie. We had injuries to the DL as well that hurt the team. Our safeties were god awful and against passing teams they were exposed.

 

[gkIrish]

I've made two points before in other threads that I'll repeat here:

1) Kelly put himself in a difficult position when he named Joe a captain. Not saying he didn't deserve it. But when you name a starter a captain and then bench him, that looks really bad. Farley was never a starter in the first place so his situation is very different.

2) Our defense hasn't played two halves of good football other than the Texas game. I could live with Joe if the defense as a whole was playing better. But they aren't. So either (a) he is the reason we don't give up 30+ points per game and we have serious issues or (b) there's no reason not to give someone else a try.

 

[Irish Insanity]

I am confused why everyone thinks we play Joe because the coaches think he is a heck of a guy.. If he is playing, I believe because right now he is better than the other guys.. I remember what happened to this defense when he got hurt last year... I'll trust the coaches

This is a flat out lie. We had injuries to the DL as well that hurt the team. Our safeties were god awful and against passing teams they were exposed.

This

And Golson couldn't stop giving the other team the ball and eventually quit on the team.

 

[Luckylucci]

I know some might not agree but I wouldn't mind it one bit seeing Grace or Martini start at Mike on Saturday

Martini is my guy and its not even close. He seems to have a very good grasp on the defense. Is quick at diagnosing plays and most importantly has the athleticism to finish the play off. Even Grace last week was rusty with some of his reads versus the option and got stuck inside on a couple and wasn't fast enough to make up for it.

 

[koonja]

I've made two points before in other threads that I'll repeat here:

1) Kelly put himself in a difficult position when he named Joe a captain. Not saying he didn't deserve it. But when you name a starter a captain and then bench him, that looks really bad. Farley was never a starter in the first place so his situation is very different.

2) Our defense hasn't played two halves of good football other than the Texas game. I could live with Joe if the defense as a whole was playing better. But they aren't. So either (a) he is the reason we don't give up 30+ points per game and we have serious issues or (b) there's no reason not to give someone else a try.

Kelly, at least in the beginning, needs to let Joe start the game, but let the other guys slowly consume the reps. I love how fast Morgan is, but I really don't care which of him/Martini/Grace replace Joe for snaps. It just has to be someone who doesn't get bullied by a team like Navy. If this is a slow, gradual transition, not only will BK be able to pick his spots, but it'll be less of a shock to your point.

 

[Luckylucci]

I am confused why everyone thinks we play Joe because the coaches think he is a heck of a guy.. If he is playing, I believe because right now he is better than the other guys.. I remember what happened to this defense when he got hurt last year... I'll trust the coaches

I don't think anybody is really saying that he's playing because he's a heck of a guy. I think most realize what Schmidt brings to the D. However, when does that become less of a factor as others grow in the D and he still can't make plays?

Its very very apparent that from an athletic standpoint he isn't capable of making some plays. If you disagree, watch the Navy game and key on Schmidt or even the Clemson game. It started at play 1 against Clemson. I think most fans frustration is that we aren't even giving many guys the opportunity to see what they can do, at least thats mine.

I could debate this with you for days but I don't actually think Schmidt was as big of a problem as the scheme that BVG forced down this teams mouth. Schmidt became important because BVG refused to flex his D. If we line up and just play some zone coverages, allow our athletes to make plays in front of them, lay off the blitzes, and for heavens sake stop stunting the damn DL everydown. Let the DL just hit NW's OL in the mouth, then I bet there is a different result. Regardless, of Joe Schmidt being in there.

 

[ulukinatme]

Grace's injury effected his play and he hasn't bounced back. Martini or Morgan. I like Joe he seems like an awesome person but the talent just isn't there.

On the contrary. Grace was out there for part of the Navy game, especially when Tillery went out, and he was making plays. In a very limited role he was only a few stops short of Schmidt's numbers, and he had the same number of stops as Jaylon (Minus the recovery). He looked like he was fired up and excited to be out there. I'm not sure if Grace has the same understanding of the defense as Schmidt does, but he was starting in front of him prior to the leg injury.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

I've made two points before in other threads that I'll repeat here:

1) Kelly put himself in a difficult position when he named Joe a captain. Not saying he didn't deserve it. But when you name a starter a captain and then bench him, that looks really bad. Farley was never a starter in the first place so his situation is very different.

2) Our defense hasn't played two halves of good football other than the Texas game. I could live with Joe if the defense as a whole was playing better. But they aren't. So either (a) he is the reason we don't give up 30+ points per game and we have serious issues or (b) there's no reason not to give someone else a try.

I think the biggest question that likely keeps Morgan et al from taking the starter spot revolves around their big playability vs. lapses in recognition.

Would there be more blown assignments that resulted in big plays? If so, would they be counterbalanced by more negative plays? or TOs?

The coaches have to believe the other players are a greater liability who have plenty of athleticism but not enough to make up for their missed assignments.

I wish it weren't true because it is downright painful to see Joe swallowed in the middle before a big run.

 

[Irish Insanity]

So if Joe is our best option, why is he our best option. At this point there isn't a legit reason that he is our best option.

 

[connor_in]

So if Joe is our best option, why is he our best option. At this point there isn't a legit reason that he is our best option.

See this post

I think the biggest question that likely keeps Morgan et al from taking the starter spot revolves around their big playability vs. lapses in recognition.

Would there be more blown assignments that resulted in big plays? If so, would they be counterbalanced by more negative plays? or TOs?

The coaches have to believe the other players are a greater liability who have plenty of athleticism but not enough to make up for their missed assignments.

I wish it weren't true because it is downright painful to see Joe swallowed in the middle before a big run.

 

[Luckylucci]

So if Joe is our best option, why is he our best option. At this point there isn't a legit reason that he is our best option.

The understanding is he knows the defense better than anyone else and is consistently communicating to and lining up the front 7. Which obviously the staff views as more important than what he's lacking in physically making plays. And I could go along with that, IF we started using Joe in a different fashion. I'd also question why we have so many guys in our front seven that still need that on field coaching. Its my expectation that our DC, after this long, should be able to get these guys coached up to where he can play his best players without needing an extension of himself out there.

 

[BGIF]

As a coach, I play not my eleven best, but my best eleven.

Knute Rockne


A fundamental concept that continues to be ignored by the arm chair crowd.

If Rockne had been a fan, he might have said stupid shit about the coach favoring playing less talented seniors but he would have realized the two deep contradicts that.

 

[gkIrish]

I think the biggest question that likely keeps Morgan et al from taking the starter spot revolves around their big playability vs. lapses in recognition.

Would there be more blown assignments that resulted in big plays? If so, would they be counterbalanced by more negative plays? or TOs?

The coaches have to believe the other players are a greater liability who have plenty of athleticism but not enough to make up for their missed assignments.

I wish it weren't true because it is downright painful to see Joe swallowed in the middle before a big run.

But all that is meaningless considering our defense hasn't played that great. How much worse can it be without him?

 

[Irish Insanity]

See this post

I was meaning more towards why do we not have anyone else ready. He's a 5th year Sr walk on. It's really inexcusable.

 

[Luckylucci]

Knute Rockne


A fundamental concept that continues to be ignored by the arm chair crowd.

If Rockne had been a fan, he might have said stupid shit about the coach favoring playing less talented seniors but he would have realized the two deep contradicts that.

Haha, Knute Rockne had an of Overall record: 105–12–5, while winning 4 national championships. I think if we were in the middle of that run, there'd be less questioning going on.

Back to topic, you watch the games right? So you see the blown tackles or lack of ability to make plays right?

So what you're saying is lets trust that coach Kelly has spoken to Knute Rockne's ghost?

 

[gkIrish]

The idea that a decision is correct because a coach made it and they know more than us is absurd. How many times have we seen a backup QB come in after an injury to the starter and go on to keep the job because he was better than the original starter. Happens all the time. It de facto means the coach made the wrong initial decision.

 

[connor_in]

The idea that a decision is correct because a coach made it and they know more than us is absurd. How many times have we seen a backup QB come in after an injury to the starter and go on to keep the job because he was better than the original starter. Happens all the time. It de facto means the coach made the wrong initial decision.

I seriously do not mean to get into an argument of this topic as I am not necessarily real big on JS the player (as opposed to JS the person), but I do not really get your statement.

In the field of financial advice, are you going to believe the professional financial advisor who has been tracking the market or my Aunt Jean who watches the financial minute on the local morning news (and stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night). You are more likely to get richer following #1 because of their knowledge. However, you may hit a home run on Aunt Jean's advice, it happens. However, the odds are generally better listening to the professional,

 

[Irish Insanity]

I seriously do not mean to get into an argument of this topic as I am not necessarily real big on JS the player (as opposed to JS the person), but I do not really get your statement.

In the field of financial advice, are you going to believe the professional financial advisor who has been tracking the market or my Aunt Jean who watches the financial minute on the local morning news (and stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night). You are more likely to get richer following #1 because of their knowledge. However, you may hit a home run on Aunt Jean's advice, it happens. However, the odds are generally better listening to the professional,

But in that same world if you're watching that investment handicap you're portfolio as a whole, do you still keep it? Or do you find a better option? If your advisor has been at it for that long he'll likely have another suitable option. So should we. We don't.

 

[NDRock]

I don't think anybody is really saying that he's playing because he's a heck of a guy. I think most realize what Schmidt brings to the D. However, when does that become less of a factor as others grow in the D and he still can't make plays?

Its very very apparent that from an athletic standpoint he isn't capable of making some plays. If you disagree, watch the Navy game and key on Schmidt or even the Clemson game. It started at play 1 against Clemson. I think most fans frustration is that we aren't even giving many guys the opportunity to see what they can do, at least thats mine.

I could debate this with you for days but I don't actually think Schmidt was as big of a problem as the scheme that BVG forced down this teams mouth. Schmidt became important because BVG refused to flex his D. If we line up and just play some zone coverages, allow our athletes to make plays in front of them, lay off the blitzes, and for heavens sake stop stunting the damn DL everydown. Let the DL just hit NW's OL in the mouth, then I bet there is a different result. Regardless, of Joe Schmidt being in there.

Sounds like we need Diaco back

 

[connor_in]

If we could get great DB and S play, we could play Narduzzi defense and go get em

 

[gkIrish]

I seriously do not mean to get into an argument of this topic as I am not necessarily real big on JS the player (as opposed to JS the person), but I do not really get your statement.

In the field of financial advice, are you going to believe the professional financial advisor who has been tracking the market or my Aunt Jean who watches the financial minute on the local morning news (and stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night). You are more likely to get richer following #1 because of their knowledge. However, you may hit a home run on Aunt Jean's advice, it happens. However, the odds are generally better listening to the professional,

Your argument assumes that I, or _____ poster is similar to Aunt Jean. I'd like to think that many of us are really good at evaluating football players and are really tuned into the football program. Our knowledge is not the equivalent of watching the financial minute. You don't see reporters writing columns about how great Joe Schmidt has been on the field. Every metric out there has made it clear how bad he has been.

The only question is whether someone else can do better, not whether he is a good football player. So do we trust the head coach, who can have a multitude of biases towards Joe and against any other player (one example being that he named him captain) or do we trust our eyes?

 

[Guest]

Sounds like we need Diaco back

That type of defense works. Blitzing is sexy but it can be a boom or bust defense, which is what I think we see week to week from the team. I am ok with blitzing in general, but there are many articles on NFL teams that prove teams who blitz less and only strategically through the game have more overall success and consistency than teams that live to send their LBs, Safeties, and CBs at the QB.

 

[Luckylucci]

Sounds like we need Diaco back

Not necessarily but there are definitely games/teams where I think this style of play is relevant or at the very least dial it back from what we saw last year.

 

[gkIrish]

I seriously do not mean to get into an argument of this topic as I am not necessarily real big on JS the player (as opposed to JS the person), but I do not really get your statement.

In the field of financial advice, are you going to believe the professional financial advisor who has been tracking the market or my Aunt Jean who watches the financial minute on the local morning news (and stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night). You are more likely to get richer following #1 because of their knowledge. However, you may hit a home run on Aunt Jean's advice, it happens. However, the odds are generally better listening to the professional,

Furthermore, is your statement a blanket statement about all head coaches or just Brian Kelly? Are you saying Charlie Weis knew better than everyone else? Did Steve Sarkisian know better? When does a head coach's decision warrant questioning? Serious question.