Brian Kelly Revisited (RIP BOZO)

[wizards8507]

You are completely mischaracterizing the context. It's not just that the team has not quit. It's also that Kelly has gone 6-1, and kept the team together, despite what should be crushing losses to injury and/or transfer.

6-1 against whom? I'm tired of hearing that the best we can do is beat the teams we're supposed to beat. When was the last time we beat a team we weren't supposed to beat? Even with injuries, we've been favorites in all of those victories except Georgia Tech (over whom we would have been favorites if everyone knew how bad they'd turn out to be).

ND is literally on pace to have CJ Prosise shatter the rushing records, and will approach offensive production records. That's the definition of historic.

First, that's Prosise being historic. Brady Qinn set the world on fire, that doesn't mean Charlie Weis was a historically good coach. Second, it's not a credit to the coach that you have to rely on a featured back so heavily.

What would the team have to do to make you feel good?

I'm very happy and I do feel good. My objection is to the description of BK's year as historically good. Beating the teams you're supposed to beat is not historically good, it's just "good."

 

[Irish Insanity]

Yeah, please quote the stats of EG through seven games last year and this year.

He's currently the leading player in TO's with action plays. He has 0 in something like 240 plays. Since 2004 only 10 teams have gone without and INT thru 6 games. This year he was added to the list.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

That article sets such a low bar for Notre Dame football that any halfway decent coach would be "historically good" by their metrics. They're all jazzed that the team hasn't quit, and that we're 6-1 with wins over bad UMass, bad Georgia Tech, Navy, bad Texas, USC in turmoil, and bad Virginia. If the standard for "historically good" coaching is that your team doesn't quit and you beat garbage opponents, then what's the point?

F*ck off with this, wizards. It's inarguable that we've sustained more critical injuries than any other playoff contender this season. And we've played the 11th toughest schedule to date; the next best team with a superior record is LSU, at 6-0 vs the 24th hardest schedule.

If that doesn't jive with your "eye ball" test, perhaps you'd be more comfortable discussing how having the Irish enter our stadium through tunnel smoke is beneath our program over at ND Nation?

 

[kmoose]

Kizer was a decently rated QB coming in. Let's not act like he was a 2 :star:

Who was 3rd on the depth chart coming into the season. No one ever said that Kizer was a no talent hack that Kelly turned into an offensive juggernaut. The point was that Kizer has played extremely well for a kid with NO experience at the collegiate level outside of holding a clipboard at practice.

and was CJ converted because the coaches saw the potential, or was that more of a this guy is good find a spot somewhere for him.

For fvck's sake.......... that's the whole point!! The coaches did a masterful job of spotting his talent, and then coaching him up to the point where he is performing like an All-American at a position that he has never before played.

 

[irishff1014]

I will say that I said a few things now that even I don't agree with. Kelly has done exactly what everyone here wanted him to do. Build depth so that when players get hurt you don't really miss a beat. Kelly is WINNING that battle.

 

[koonja]

6-1 against whom? I'm tired of hearing that the best we can do is beat the teams we're supposed to beat. When was the last time we beat a team we weren't supposed to beat? Even with injuries, we've been favorites in all of those victories except Georgia Tech (over whom we would have been favorites if everyone knew how bad they'd turn out to be).


First, that's Prosise being historic. Brady Qinn set the world on fire, that doesn't mean Charlie Weis was a historically good coach. Second, it's not a credit to the coach that you have to rely on a featured back so heavily.


I'm very happy and I do feel good. My objection is to the description of BK's year as historically good. Beating the teams you're supposed to beat is not historically good, it's just "good."

Schematically historic.

 

[BeauBenken]

I'm very happy and I do feel good. My objection is to the description of BK's year as historically good. Beating the teams you're supposed to beat is not historically good, it's just "good."

What would make it historically good?

 

[wizards8507]

F*ck off with this, wizards. It's inarguable that we've sustained more critical injuries than any other playoff contender this season. And we've played the 11th toughest schedule to date; the next best team with a superior record is LSU, at 6-0 vs the 24th hardest schedule.

If that doesn't jive with your "eye ball" test, perhaps you'd be more comfortable discussing how having the Irish enter our stadium through tunnel smoke is beneath our program over at ND Nation?

I'm not complaining.

There's a vast chasm between "fire Brian Kelly" and "Brian Kelly is HISTORICALLY EPICLY AMAZING AT COACHING!!!!!!1!1!!"

Just because I'm not lining up to fellate the guy doesn't mean I think he's doing a bad job. I just think we need to hold our horses before we go overboard with the hyperbole of dubbing his an all-time great performance.

Also, if Koon or I told someone to "fuck off to NDNation," we'd be shown the door immediately.

What would make it historically good?

Beating Clemson would have been a good start.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Who was 3rd on the depth chart coming into the season. No one ever said that Kizer was a no talent hack that Kelly turned into an offensive juggernaut. The point was that Kizer has played extremely well for a kid with NO experience at the collegiate level outside of holding a clipboard at practice.



For fvck's sake.......... that's the whole point!! The coaches did a masterful job of spotting his talent, and then coaching him up to the point where he is performing like an All-American at a position that he has never before played.

Like I said, everyone can manipulate the discussion to fit their narrative.

 

[ACamp1900]

Wow, this thread really went places...

 

[NDohio]

He's currently the leading player in TO's with action plays. He has 0 in something like 240 plays. Since 2004 only 10 teams have gone without and INT thru 6 games. This year he was added to the list.

I don't want this to turn into an EG thread. Let's just agree that EG had a great first half of the year last year and didn't have a complete stud at RB to take the pressure off of him like he does this year.

Jimbo is not doing this incredibly greater coaching job with EG over BK. The circumstances are way different.

 

[IrishLax]

First, that's Prosise being historic. Brady Qinn set the world on fire, that doesn't mean Charlie Weis was a historically good coach. Second, it's not a credit to the coach that you have to rely on a featured back so heavily.

OK so the coaches who literally taught him the position, and coached him up from a player who had never played RB at any level to one of the elite players in college deserve no credit? Got it.

Whenever players do bad, its on the coaches. Whenever players do good, coaches get not credit. That's what's wrong with people like you. It's not just tiresome, it's flat out ignorant.

 

[IrishLax]

Part of the reason I started this thread was to prevent injuries from being used as a generic excuse if we lost a bunch of games again. I specifically mentioned that in the OP.

Vegas lines are fine and dandy as a general measure of success. But here's the problem...if you compare the healthy players on the team right now to the healthy players on the teams we have played, 6-1 is the absolute worst record we should have at this juncture. Should our current team have beaten UMass, Navy, a terrible Georgia Tech team, and a bad Texas team (which was before our injuries). Hell yes. Clemson and USC are the only two games where you can't say for sure that we should have beat those teams. You would expect to go 1-1 at worst, 2-0 at best. So we went 1-1. Great.

Everyone completely ignores how DECIMATED Clemson was heading into our game with them. The team they put on the field wasn't the team they hoped they would put on the field during spring ball, same as us.

The spectrum of acceptable records for this team, this year, against these opponents is either 6-1 or 7-0. 5-2 would have been embarrassing. So we are within acceptable parameters. We aren't having a "miracle season." That's ridiculous.

Are we really at the point where doing what we are supposed to do is praised as miraculous? That's an embarrassment to the history of this University.

They were missing one truly elite impact player, and then a couple of lineman people thought might get beat out anyways. Unless I'm missing some starters from my memory, that's not even comparable.

 

[Irish Insanity]

I will say that I said a few things now that even I don't agree with. Kelly has done exactly what everyone here wanted him to do. Build depth so that when players get hurt you don't really miss a beat. Kelly is WINNING that battle.

That was the point of this thread. But the blind supporters have pushed the narrative that anyone not blindly supporting is calling for his firing.

 

[BeauBenken]

Beating Clemson would have been a good start.

Heh. I agree, but seriously, what would the team have to do for this to be seen as a historically good season by you?

 

[wizards8507]

OK so the coaches who literally taught him the position, and coached him up from a player who had never played RB at any level to one of the elite players in college deserve no credit? Got it.

Whenever players do bad, its on the coaches. Whenever players do good, coaches get not credit. That's what's wrong with people like you. It's not just tiresome, it's flat out ignorant.

Thats. not. what. I. said.

I DO give him credit. I DO think he's doing a good job, particularly this season. I DO think that "historically good" is overboard. Good? Yes. Very good? Sure. Historically good? Slow down.

Please stop trying to frame this up like I'm saying he's doing a shit job and should be canned.

Heh. I agree, but seriously, what would the team have to do for this to be seen as a historically good season by you?

This program, the University of Notre Dame football program, has won eleven national championships in its history. We've gone undefeated eleven times. To be a historical season, we need to do one of those things.

AGAIN, for Lax and Whiskey and moose and anyone else struggling to understand what I'm saying... you can fall short of an undefetated, national championship season and still have had a great season. But that season is not historic by the standards established by this program throughout its history.

 

[kmoose]

6-1 against whom? I'm tired of hearing that the best we can do is beat the teams we're supposed to beat. When was the last time we beat a team we weren't supposed to beat? Even with injuries, we've been favorites in all of those victories except Georgia Tech (over whom we would have been favorites if everyone knew how bad they'd turn out to be)

But we WERE the underdog against Georgia Tech, and we beat them. And we were an underdog to LSU last season as well. So there are two wins against teams that we weren't supposed to beat, in the last year. But the point isn't who we have or have not beaten. Because no one is saying that Kelly has this team playing at a sky high level. The accomplishment is in the team not tanking, despite the odds being very good that they should have.

But, screw it........... all of the Kelly haters can continue to deny that Kelly does ANYTHING right. I can just imagine how miserable you people must make the others around you, with your constant doom and gloom.


And I thought *I* was cynical..........

 

[wizards8507]

But we WERE the underdog against Georgia Tech, and we beat them. And we were an underdog to LSU last season as well. So there are two wins against teams that we weren't supposed to beat, in the last year. But the point isn't who we have or have not beaten. Because no one is saying that Kelly has this team playing at a sky high level. The accomplishment is in the team not tanking, despite the odds being very good that they should have.

Beating Georgia Tech who was favored at the time is not worth much if it turns out that the only reason they were favored is because nobody knew how bad they really were. I'll say the exact opposite about USC. If they win out and go 9-3 with a few blowouts, I'll be extremely impressed with our victory over them.

But, screw it........... all of the Kelly haters can continue to deny that Kelly does ANYTHING right.

You can imagine a world in which Kelly can do a lot of things right without being "historically" good, right? You see the tiny bit of nuance there?

 

[BleedBlueGold]

For fuck sake: GK, Wiz, and Irish Insanity...you guys can piss off with this irrational stuff. I've supported a lot of posts in this thread, but you guys are being ridiculous with your recent posts against LAX's article. You're literally nitpicking the hell out of it in trying to defend your stance to an absolute fault. Stop. Seriously.

CJ is on pace to shatter a record from 1979. That's the definition of historical relevance. And why is it that when a player does great, it's on the player. But when a player fucks up, it's the coach's fault? The staff put CJ in position to do what he's been doing every weekend. The staff built the OL. The staff called the plays. CJ is executing.

Kizer SUCKED in the spring and almost quit over the summer, yet here he is playing really well. Give the staff some fucking credit for that.

No one is suggesting this is history in the making because ND is beating the teams they should. But LAX is giving credit to the staff for 1) keeping this team from imploding in the face of adversity 2) continuing to win the games they're supposed to win 3) being the only team in the country to have covered the spread in every game they're favored in accept one. THE ONLY TEAM IN THE COUNTRY.

They are winning the games they are supposed to win IN SPITE of injuries. Take off your fucking blinders and see that the staff is getting a hell of lot out of these players (and backups).

 

[Te'o4Heisman]

To me it seems like the majority of the BK hate really centers around some of the playcalling, and from there it becomes about stubborn pride to never fully acknowledge the way the man has rebuilt this football program. I tend to think some of that has to do with the fact that we all watch ND football far more closely than we watch other teams. If we were literally tuned in to every snap of every game of even the alabamas or Baylors of the world, we would be able to identify faults in playcalling over a prolonged period of time as well.

 

[yankeeND]

That was the point of this thread. But the blind supporters have pushed the narrative that anyone not blindly supporting is calling for his firing.

I don't think that is true. You are entitled to your observations and complaints, I just don't understand what people are wanting here. We score as much in the red zone on par with the other teams in the top ten, we are 6-1, and with the youth gaining experience, we should play better into the second half of the season. What do you want Kelly to do? He is on his 3rd string QB and RB, lost several key guys on defense, and he has changed his approach with these kids, at least on the surface, to look like a more player friendly coach. Criticism is fine, but it is also important to point out the good things as well. Sure, there are times when I wonder what is going on, but the whole body of work has been very good up to this point as he has turned this program around. You say the point of the thread was to be competitive with our depth after losing players right? Well...

 

[IrishLax]

Thats. not. what. I. said.

I DO give him credit. I DO think he's doing a good job, particularly this season. I DO think that "historically good" is overboard. Good? Yes. Very good? Sure. Historically good? Slow down.

AGAIN, for Lax and Whiskey and anyone else struggling to understand what I'm saying... you can fall short of an undefetated, national championship season and still have had a great season. But that season is not historic by the standards established by this program throughout its history.

See dude... this is NOT what you said, and if you had said that I wouldn't even have responded to your post.

You said:

any halfway decent coach would be "historically good" by their metrics

I'm curious what other coaches have turned a guy who has never played RB before in his life into a record-setting rusher. I'm curious what other coaches have lost the starters ND has and still put out a top 5ish offense. I really don't think there are many (if any at all) but I also can't say that for certain as I didn't research 120+ teams for the past 20+ years to verify that it DEFINITELY hasn't happened before. But I'll settle for a single example of a coach in the past 20 years... much less "any halfway decent one"... that has done something like that.

The season isn't "historic"... that's never what is said. It's the coaching job aforementioned above -- putting out an offense that is going to challenge most ND records despite the attrition to key starters -- that is historic, as similar feats have rarely (if ever) been replicated by other coaches at ND or elsewhere.

The article was precise in mentioning exactly what was historic: the production of Prosise, the success of the offense overall under Kizer, and how ND is performing against projections/expectation/lines on a weekly basis. All of those things are extremely rare.

 

[kmoose]

Second, it's not a credit to the coach that you have to rely on a featured back so heavily.

They are called a "feature" back for a reason............ because you feature them in your offense. In other words, you rely on them to be a major part of the offense. This is a standard thing in football at all levels. It's not even remotely a basis for criticizing or diminishing the accomplishments of a coaching staff.


Will Fuller is on pace for about 1200 yards receiving. Your own company's Josh Moyer wrote an article in May about the lack of 1,000 yard receivers in college football: Where have all the 1,000-yard receivers gone? - College Football Nation Blog - ESPN

So I would say that perhaps Kelly's offense is not relying on CJ Prosise as much as you would like us to believe.

 

[Te'o4Heisman]

Beating Georgia Tech who was favored at the time is not worth much if it turns out that the only reason they were favored is because nobody knew how bad they really were. I'll say the exact opposite about USC. If they win out and go 9-3 with a few blowouts, I'll be extremely impressed with our victory over them.


You can imagine a world in which Kelly can do a lot of things right without being "historically" good, right? You see the tiny bit of nuance there?

How can you see with absolute certainty that GTs season has not gone in the tank as a result of the demoralizing defeat they suffered to ND, and possible some of the ways NDs defense exposed their offense and ways to stop it? I would think it is possible, if not likely, that GT is still rolling along right now if not for the ND game earlier this year. To take credit away from what the team did, because it sent GT into a downward spiral doesn't make sense. That would be like taking credit away from FSU last year for beating a very good ND team at the time just because we had more injuries, and seemed to lose some fight for the rest of the season after that heartbreaking lose to them.

 

[Irish Insanity]

That's what I don't get, I don't see much if any BK hate. Nobody calling for his firing. Nobody saying he's the wrong guy. But again, that narrative continues to be pushed by the blind supporters. We should be able to give criticism of someone without it meaning the above. Which, again, is the reason I believe the thread was started.

 

[yankeeND]

How can you see with absolute certainty that GTs season has not gone in the tank as a result of the demoralizing defeat they suffered to ND, and possible some of the ways NDs defense exposed their offense and ways to stop it? I would think it is possible, if not likely, that GT is still rolling along right now if not for the ND game earlier this year. To take credit away from what the team did, because it sent GT into a downward spiral doesn't make sense. That would be like taking credit away from FSU last year for beating a very good ND team at the time just because we had more injuries, and seemed to lose some fight for the rest of the season after that heartbreaking lose to them.

I was actually just getting ready to say the exact same thing. Get out of my mind!

 

[gkIrish]

If we are going to use Vegas lines as a measure of our success let's dive in a little bit:

Combined Record ATS of teams we faced: 18-22-2

Texas: 2-3-1
Virginia: 2-3-1
Georgia Tech: 2-5
UMass: 2-4
Clemson: 3-3
Navy: 4-1
USC: 3-3

If you want to take out our 6-1 record against them the overall combined record is 17-16-2 if I did my math right. So basically, our opponents don't cover the spread almost exactly half the time they play anyone at all. They certainly aren't world beaters ATS.

 

[koonja]

I hope BK stays for at least a few more years. But I have large issues with his handling of red shirts, some play calling, and not giving guys behind a personal favorite a chance to play.

And I'm totally fine with discussing these things in this thread even though I'm certain I want BK here.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Wait so Kizer and Prosise success is in part because of the coaches. Yet Golson's at FSU compared to here isn't?

 

[Irish Insanity]

I hope BK stays for at least a few more years. But I have large issues with his handling of red shirts, some play calling, and not giving guys behind a personal favorite a chance to play.

And I'm totally fine with discussing these things in this thread even though I'm certain I want BK here.

.