Brian Kelly Revisited (RIP BOZO)

[kmoose]

What's the point you're trying to make? That Joe Schmidt has played good football?

You know a missed tackle when you see it. And I've seen a ton of them from Joe.

My point is that the "Joe Schmidt sucks" movement has taken on a life of its own, based mostly on it's own inertia. We all know that Joe is no All-American, and that he certainly has limits. But the kid is nowhere near as bad as people are trying to make him out to be. He's the third leading tackler on the team! His production is ok, despite his physical limitations.

As an example; there was a play in the 1stQ of the USC game. Joe came up the middle and had a free shot at Kessler. Someone else already had Kessler wrapped up around his knees. Joe took a good angle to the QB, and was just about to lay a serious smackdown on him, when Kessler broke the grip of the defender around his knees. Everyone in the gameday chat was moaning about Schmidt missing ANOTHER tackle. It wasn't Schmidt's lack of athleticism that allowed Kessler to get away(I think Rochell or Day may have gotten to Kessler, anyway, on the play), it was the defender who let Kessler break out of his grip that caused it. But everyone seems to be in this "pile on Schmidt" mode, and so it was automatically Schmidt's fault. Confirmation bias, I believe they call it.

 

[kmoose]

What does this mean... are you saying any stat posted in a thread on IE isn't official??

I was looking for the source of the stat. If the stat originates from an Irishenvy thread, then I'm saying yes, that's not official.

 

[Te'o4Heisman]

What's the point you're trying to make? That Joe Schmidt has played good football?

You know a missed tackle when you see it. And I've seen a ton of them from Joe.

Exactly. Joe against Clemson, 5 missed tackles, 0 tackles. Joe had numerous obvious missed tackles against FUSC. Earlier this year, like all the way back in the mid September there was an online statistic that showed he had 9 tackles and 5 missed tackles. This is not new. He's a two steps too slow, gets caught up in the wash, and misses a LOT of tackles...oh and he can't cover anybody in space. But yea, no need to give somebody else a chance.

 

[ACamp1900]

I was looking for the source of the stat. If the stat originates from an Irishenvy thread, then I'm saying yes, that's not official.

It didn't originate there, it was posted/shared there... I was just saying that's where I remember it being posted...

 

[kmoose]

Exactly. Joe against Clemson, 5 missed tackles, 0 tackles. Joe had numerous obvious missed tackles against FUSC. Earlier this year, like all the way back in the mid September there was an online statistic that showed he had 9 tackles and 5 missed tackles. This is not new. He's a two steps too slow, gets caught up in the wash, and misses a LOT of tackles...oh and he can't cover anybody in space. But yea, no need to give somebody else a chance.

You do know that "missed tackles" is not an official stat? As much as we probably don't think about it, there are criteria for every official stat. If a play meets those criteria, then it is recorded. Without criteria, it's just some guy's opinion. And Schmidt had good coverage, numerous times, against USC.

 

[NDRock]

My point is that the "Joe Schmidt sucks" movement has taken on a life of its own, based mostly on it's own inertia. We all know that Joe is no All-American, and that he certainly has limits. But the kid is nowhere near as bad as people are trying to make him out to be. He's the third leading tackler on the team! His production is ok, despite his physical limitations.

As an example; there was a play in the 1stQ of the USC game. Joe came up the middle and had a free shot at Kessler. Someone else already had Kessler wrapped up around his knees. Joe took a good angle to the QB, and was just about to lay a serious smackdown on him, when Kessler broke the grip of the defender around his knees. Everyone in the gameday chat was moaning about Schmidt missing ANOTHER tackle. It wasn't Schmidt's lack of athleticism that allowed Kessler to get away(I think Rochell or Day may have gotten to Kessler, anyway, on the play), it was the defender who let Kessler break out of his grip that caused it. But everyone seems to be in this "pile on Schmidt" mode, and so it was automatically Schmidt's fault. Confirmation bias, I believe they call it.

I agree with this. What do people expect from an undersized walk-on coming off a major injury? Joe seems to play as hard as he can and get every ounce out of his physical abilities. Any "anger" should be directed at the coaches for the lack of a better choice. Whether it is due to recruiting misses, development issues, or an overly complicated system, the failure is on the staff not Joe.

 

[Te'o4Heisman]

My point is that the "Joe Schmidt sucks" movement has taken on a life of its own, based mostly on it's own inertia. We all know that Joe is no All-American, and that he certainly has limits. But the kid is nowhere near as bad as people are trying to make him out to be. He's the third leading tackler on the team! His production is ok, despite his physical limitations.

As an example; there was a play in the 1stQ of the USC game. Joe came up the middle and had a free shot at Kessler. Someone else already had Kessler wrapped up around his knees. Joe took a good angle to the QB, and was just about to lay a serious smackdown on him, when Kessler broke the grip of the defender around his knees. Everyone in the gameday chat was moaning about Schmidt missing ANOTHER tackle. It wasn't Schmidt's lack of athleticism that allowed Kessler to get away(I think Rochell or Day may have gotten to Kessler, anyway, on the play), it was the defender who let Kessler break out of his grip that caused it. But everyone seems to be in this "pile on Schmidt" mode, and so it was automatically Schmidt's fault. Confirmation bias, I believe they call it.

Its almost impossible for your MLB to NOT be in the top 3 tacklers on your team. That doesn't excuse the insane amount of plays he misses. Your MLB should also be one of, it not THE most sure tackler on your team...Joe is not even close. Stop being an apologist and open your eyes. There is a reason literally the high majority of ND fans, social media, gameday commentators, analysts, and sports media are all seeing the same thing. Joe Schmidt is not a capable MLB for this defense, and is a VERY big reason the defense is struggling. There were at least 2 drives against USC that the defense would have been off the field if he could wrap a guy up in the hole and make a tackle.

 

[kmoose]

I agree with this. What do people expect from an undersized walk-on coming off a major injury? Joe seems to play as hard as he can and get every ounce out of his physical abilities. Any "anger" should be directed at the coaches for the lack of a better choice. Whether it is due to recruiting misses, development issues, or an overly complicated system, the failure is on the staff not Joe.

I'm not sure he should even be on the bench. His production has been good. Maybe Morgan or Martini doesn't miss as many tackles, but doesn't make as many either, and also can't be a coach on the field, causing other players' production to go down as well? It's not as simple as most people would like us to believe.

 

[kmoose]

Its almost impossible for your MLB to NOT be in the top 3 tacklers on your team. That doesn't excuse the insane amount of plays he misses. Your MLB should also be one of, it not THE most sure tackler on your team...Joe is not even close. Stop being an apologist and open your eyes. There is a reason literally the high majority of ND fans, social media, gameday commentators, analysts, and sports media are all seeing the same thing. Joe Schmidt is not a capable MLB for this defense, and is a VERY big reason the defense is struggling. There were at least 2 drives against USC that the defense would have been off the field if he could wrap a guy up in the hole and make a tackle.

No one is saying that Joe is overachieving by being the 3rd leading tackler. I'm saying that he is a productive MLB. Which two drives were those?

 

[yankeeND]

Joe is a great representative of the team, but the coaches need to get Nyles or Coney, or Martini prepared to take some reps from him to see which can get the job done better. These three guys are major upgrades physically and they need to be ready to take the reigns soon. Love what Joe has accomplished, but he just looks outmatched a lot of the time this year.

 

[dublinirish]

be interested to see now with the schedule coming up will BK/BVG have one eye on the future and aim to get the likes of Bonner, Morgan, Coney, Blankenship, Trumbetti more reps.

 

[kmoose]

be interested to see now with the schedule coming up will BK/BVG have one eye on the future and aim to get the likes of Bonner, Morgan, Coney, Blankenship, Trumbetti more reps.

Coney has been getting plenty of reps. He's been in on goal line situations since at least the Clemson game. I saw Trumbetti on the field quite a bit vs USC as well.

 

[kmoose]

Joe is a great representative of the team, but the coaches need to get Nyles or Coney, or Martini prepared to take some reps from him to see which can get the job done better. These three guys are major upgrades physically and they need to be ready to take the reigns soon. Love what Joe has accomplished, but he just looks outmatched a lot of the time this year.

Coney is not a Mike.........

 

[yankeeND]

Coney is not a Mike.........

The other two are more likely, but I think he could do it. That kid is a STUD!

I don't exactly think Joe has done horrible either, but at times has looked more like a walk-on rather than team captain. Personally, I would still start him, but for the remainder of the year I would look into splitting time with one or two others to see who my guy is there for the future. Maybe in the process we get a switch sooner, or we solidify that Joe is just simply the best option. Either way, I think it is a legitimate concern at the moment that deems being reassessed.

 

[gkIrish]

I agree with this. What do people expect from an undersized walk-on coming off a major injury? Joe seems to play as hard as he can and get every ounce out of his physical abilities. Any "anger" should be directed at the coaches for the lack of a better choice. Whether it is due to recruiting misses, development issues, or an overly complicated system, the failure is on the staff not Joe.

Not one person is angry at Joe. We are angry at the staff for playing him. He is trying his best, but should not be on the field.

 

[Luckylucci]

I'm not sure he should even be on the bench. His production has been good. Maybe Morgan or Martini doesn't miss as many tackles, but doesn't make as many either, and also can't be a coach on the field, causing other players' production to go down as well? It's not as simple as most people would like us to believe.

His production has not been good or efficient. He has that number of tackles because he's tasked with those opportunities. Now, thats not his fault, that'd be the DC's fault but that doesn't excuse his play or lack thereof. Total numbers of tackles is a very misleading statistic. When over two games you have 9 tackles but 11 missed that is not being a productive player. I don't know what a reasonable % is for tackles made in relation to opportunities but it definitely isn't under 50%. He has 13 tackles over the last 3 games. Thats an avg. of 4.3/game, thats not productive.

 

[gkIrish]

His production has not been good or efficient. He has that number of tackles because he's tasked with those opportunities. Now, thats not his fault, that'd be the DC's fault but that doesn't excuse his play or lack thereof. Total numbers of tackles is a very misleading statistic. When over two games you have 9 tackles but 11 missed that is not being a productive player. I don't know what a reasonable % is for tackles made in relation to opportunities but it definitely isn't under 50%. He has 13 tackles over the last 3 games. Thats an avg. of 4.3/game, thats not productive.

Also let's not forget that he is on the field for close to 100% of the snaps. Guys like Onwualu or the safeties won't be able to accumulate as many total tackles because they aren't on the field as much.

 

[BGIF]

Not one person is angry at Joe. We are angry at the staff for playing him. He is trying his best, but should not be on the field.

He wouldn't be on the field if there was someone who did the job better. NOT someone who is just a better athlete but who DOES the job better and make the defensive team a better unit.

The position coach tell the coordinator who's ready to go. The coordinator picks his people to fit his scheme. If the position coach and/or the coordinator felt there was someone who did the job better they'd have him there.

 

[gkIrish]

He wouldn't be on the field if there was someone who did the job better. NOT someone who is just a better athlete but who DOES the job better and make the defensive team a better unit.

The position coach tell the coordinator who's ready to go. The coordinator picks his people to fit his scheme. If the position coach and/or the coordinator felt there was someone who did the job better they'd have him there.

How does anyone know that his replacement won't do better? No one has been given the opportunity. Practice is one thing, but some players just turn it on under the bright lights (i.e. Malik Zaire). All that anyone is asking is that a different player be given an opportunity to play a significant amount of snaps to see how they perform in a game. That's all.

Are you satisfied with Joe Schmidt's play on the football field? Forget about effort. Forget about what the coach's think. Has his actual performance been acceptable to you?

 

[Luckylucci]

He wouldn't be on the field if there was someone who did the job better. NOT someone who is just a better athlete but who DOES the job better and make the defensive team a better unit.

The position coach tell the coordinator who's ready to go. The coordinator picks his people to fit his scheme. If the position coach and/or the coordinator felt there was someone who did the job better they'd have him there.

As stated so many times over and over again. This assumption would mean that the coaches are perfect. Bill Belichick, largely regarded as one of the best coaches of all time, needed Drew Bledsoe to be knocked out of the game prior to playing Tom Brady. How'd that work out?

 

[irishff1014]

He wouldn't be on the field if there was someone who did the job better. NOT someone who is just a better athlete but who DOES the job better and make the defensive team a better unit.

The position coach tell the coordinator who's ready to go. The coordinator picks his people to fit his scheme. If the position coach and/or the coordinator felt there was someone who did the job better they'd have him there.

I like your post BGIF but this one i personally think is wrong. Tf was way better then Cam and Cam was taking touches away from him.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

He wouldn't be on the field if there was someone who did the job better. NOT someone who is just a better athlete but who DOES the job better and make the defensive team a better unit.

The position coach tell the coordinator who's ready to go. The coordinator picks his people to fit his scheme. If the position coach and/or the coordinator felt there was someone who did the job better they'd have him there.

Maybe the coordinator needs to reevaluate the complexity of his system if that many players can't learn it and master it after two years. Being forced to play Joe because "he's a coach out there" is ridiculous two years into this system. Farley and Redfield are in the same boat as Morgan/Martini and Schmidt. The difference is that Farley doesn't mess up as often as Joe has recently. I think people are just tired of seeing the same results (definition of insanity). I hope the bye week is utilized to get more out of Morgan/Martini and Redfield (among others).

 

[gkIrish]

Another subject I think is worthy of discussion is Everett Golson. He has no turnovers. How does one explain? You would think if he was as bad at protecting the football as people made him out to be his issues would carry over to a new team.

So is this a coaching thing? Is Jimbo simply coaching him up to protect the football? Does their scheme fit his talents better?

 

[ACamp1900]

One aspect of that is that BK is just a river boat gambler at times, 'better get used to it,' it's in his nature to take shots.... there are positives and negatives to this... a new environment may have also simply turned on a few light bulbs for EG... who knows.

 

[kmoose]

His production has not been good or efficient. He has that number of tackles because he's tasked with those opportunities. Now, thats not his fault, that'd be the DC's fault but that doesn't excuse his play or lack thereof. Total numbers of tackles is a very misleading statistic. When over two games you have 9 tackles but 11 missed that is not being a productive player. I don't know what a reasonable % is for tackles made in relation to opportunities but it definitely isn't under 50%. He has 13 tackles over the last 3 games. Thats an avg. of 4.3/game, thats not productive.

Joe Schmidt has 41 tackles and only 3 missed tackles. Compare that with Jaylon Smith's 56 tackles and 29 missed tackles. Joe Schmidt is productive.

 

[Luckylucci]

Another subject I think is worthy of discussion is Everett Golson. He has no turnovers. How does one explain? You would think if he was as bad at protecting the football as people made him out to be his issues would carry over to a new team.

So is this a coaching thing? Is Jimbo simply coaching him up to protect the football? Does their scheme fit his talents better?

He was asked to do too much last year. Kelly envisioned him differently than what he was clearly capable of at the time or in those moments. FSU runs the ball well and plays consistent defense. Jimbo isn't asking him to win games for him nor is he asking him to do more than he's comfortable with. BK specifically said last year that there were games where the offense was supposed to win them. Meaning he went into the game with a preconceived notion that we had to score a lot of points to win. That in turn, very easy to see, changed how games were called. It also didn't help that our D really did give up a ton of yards and points.

 

[ACamp1900]

kmoose, where are you getting the 3 missed tackles stat...?

 

[gkIrish]

kmoose, where are you getting the 3 missed tackles stat...?

He's making up the missed tackles stat to prove his point that there is no such thing as an official missed tackle. It's stupid.

 

[Luckylucci]

Joe Schmidt has 41 tackles and only 3 missed tackles. Compare that with Jaylon Smith's 56 tackles and 29 missed tackles. Joe Schmidt is productive.

Where on earth did you come up with these numbers for missed tackles?

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Another subject I think is worthy of discussion is Everett Golson. He has no turnovers. How does one explain? You would think if he was as bad at protecting the football as people made him out to be his issues would carry over to a new team.

So is this a coaching thing? Is Jimbo simply coaching him up to protect the football? Does their scheme fit his talents better?

Pretty common knowledge BK put way too much on EG shoulders last year. I don't think it's a coincidence that BK's teams are better when there's a new QB starting. He simply dials back the QB responsibilities and lets his defense, OL, etc carry the load. Had he continued to do that with EG (who was coming off a year long suspension btw), I think last year's team is night and day better, even with the injuries. That is a legitimate gripe I have with BK.