Brian Kelly Revisited (RIP BOZO)

[gkIrish]

You are allowed to criticize him. But, with all due respect, those 12 people are also allowed to criticize your point of view.

11 of the 12 people don't criticize, they just call me names and talk about how negative I am. Criticisms of my point of view (like the rest of your post) are welcomed and valuable.

I still believe that some of your foundational points are not accurate. You argued that teams like Florida State, Ohio State, Auburn, Michigan State, and Alabama (can't recall all of the teams you mentioned...might have added or left one out) do not struggle to beat teams with inferior talent like we do. That's been wrong since you said it and has continued to be proven wrong this year as well. Michigan State struggled against Purdue and Rutgers. Florida State struggled against Wake Forest, Miami, and Boston College. Alabama lost to Ole Miss and struggled some with Arkansas. Ohio State struggled against Northern Illinois (at home) and Indiana. Auburn is a hot mess. Teams with elite talent struggle with inferior teams nearly every week.

You are providing specific examples to disprove a general point that I've supported with facts in other posts. In previous posts, I looked back through our seasons since 2010 and compared them specifically with Alabama and Michigan St. I looked the final scores of every game and calculated how many "wtf" games each team had. ND was miles behind Alabama and a significant margin away from Michigan St. in terms of "wtf" games. Granted, this analysis was before the season. ND has only 1 "wtf" game so far (Virginia) while I'm guessing Michigan St. has 2-4. That makes things closer but there's still a material difference.

I didn't do the analysis for Florida St. or OSU or Auburn but I'll try if I find some time.

You also noted that Brian Kelly teams don't adjust well at halftime. People brought stats to refute that point. It has continued to be untrue this year. We have outscored every single opponent in the second half this year. That includes garbage time points for Georgia Tech, nearly coming back to beat Clemson on the road in a monsoon, a game in which you lost your starting quarterback, and a huge defensive adjustment to beat one of the most talented offenses in the country.

I believe I conceded that the stats did not back up my assertion. If I didn't, I do so now. However, those stats don't tell the whole story as there are many specific games where we went in with a comfortable halftime lead against a highly inferior opponent and we blew it. An elite football program rarely does that. Ohio St. is somewhat often in a close game at halftime but they consistently beat the hell out of teams in the second half.

You make some very fair points. You also sometimes imply that anyone who disagrees with one of your criticisms is a blind homer. That's not always true.

People in this thread find their corners and like to stay there. You said that you avoid the political thread...this thread is pretty much the same thing.

I call out blind homers (or sheep) who come in here and just say "the staff knows better than you so shut up." Or they don't provide any substance and just post nonsense. Those people are sheep. They don't stimulate my brain in any way. This goes for any post in any thread but the purpose of a post should be either to (a) Stimulate others thoughts; (b) Make others laugh; (c) provide information/content for others to analyze (d) ask questions; or (e) make fun of Michigan or USC. If a post doesn't fall into one of those categories (and maybe I'm forgetting something), it's highly unlikely the post is worthwhile.

Posting "Brian Kelly is doing a great job, stop being a negative nancy" is just a worthless, inflammatory post. It provides no value.

 

[kmoose]

I call out blind homers (or sheep) who come in here and just say "the staff knows better than you so shut up." Or they don't provide any substance and just post nonsense. Those people are sheep. They don't stimulate my brain in any way. This goes for any post in any thread but the purpose of a post should be either to (a) Stimulate others thoughts; (b) Make others laugh; (c) provide information/content for others to analyze (d) ask questions; or (e) make fun of Michigan or USC. If a post doesn't fall into one of those categories (and maybe I'm forgetting something), it's highly unlikely the post is worthwhile.

Look, I understand what you are saying here, but I want to address something relevant:

You and I obviously differ on the topic of whether or not Brian Kelly is doing a good job. I said the following:

But here is the problem with your contention:

CJ Prosise had never played RB, nor had DeShone Kizer taken a single DI-A snap. So we didn't know what our talent level would be. You can say that you "knew", and so it was expected by you....... but that's nothing more than either a lucky guess on your part, or an outright fabrication to try to bolster your position.

Sometimes in life you do get credit for doing what you are supposed to do. And that's almost always when life throws conditions at you that SIGNIFICANTLY hinder your ability to accomplish what you are supposed to accomplish. Swimming a half mile is nothing. But swim a half mile through a hurricane, with 40ft seas? THAT is a tremendous accomplishment.

If you are pleased with Kelly, then why are you looking around to see who else might be a candidate? Or was that just venting?

Whether you agree with my analysis or not, it is obviously not a knee jerk reaction. There's some logic to the position, whether you agree with the assertions or not. Your response to it was:

First, your obsession with the OP is borderline creepy.

I'm not sure what you mean by my "obsession with the OP", because the post you quoted made no reference to the OP. So that seems a little personal, to me.

Second, I personally scout the college coaching landscape all the time. Literally from the first day I started as a student at ND I was scouting. Scouting doesn't mean you are advocating a change. It means you are keeping an eye on things. I've never said I wanted Kelly fired, and he is doing a nice job of improving on a few of things I mentioned in the OP. Kudos to him. But the dude is not God. He is not beyond criticism. Far from it. The sheer amount of devotion to a guy that's won 9 regular season games ONCE since he began here is really crazy IMO.

I watch a ton of college football outside of Notre Dame as well. But I'm not watching other teams and evaluating whether or not their coach would be better than my coach, unless I want my coach gone. So that makes people believe that you are, indeed, wanting Kelly gone, and replaced with one of the guys you have been keeping your eye on.

Everyone needs to relax. Brian Kelly does not write your checks. He does not cook you dinner. He doesn't even know you. I'm allowed to criticize him (and praise him when he deserves it) without getting attacked by 12 different people every time I do it. And 11 of the 12 people have nothing substantive to say.

This is fair enough, but I would also submit that the following is just as fair.

Life's too short to worry about going undefeated, national titles, etc. I mean, would it be great to win a natty? Hell yes. Is that the goal? Hell yes.

At the same time, just enjoy watching the Irish every week. Enjoy it for the moment and not for what happens a few months down the road.

 

[gkIrish]

Look, I understand what you are saying here, but I want to address something relevant:

You and I obviously differ on the topic of whether or not Brian Kelly is doing a good job. I said the following:



Whether you agree with my analysis or not, it is obviously not a knee jerk reaction. There's some logic to the position, whether you agree with the assertions or not. Your response to it was:



I'm not sure what you mean by my "obsession with the OP", because the post you quoted made no reference to the OP. So that seems a little personal, to me.

I meant to also quote your post #1588 which went line by line through my OP again. Half of your posts seem to criticize my OP and ignore the clarifications or subsequent posts I've made in this thread.

I watch a ton of college football outside of Notre Dame as well. But I'm not watching other teams and evaluating whether or not their coach would be better than my coach, unless I want my coach gone. So that makes people believe that you are, indeed, wanting Kelly gone, and replaced with one of the guys you have been keeping your eye on.

When I say I am not advocating firing BK, and people choose to believe something else, that's on them. Do you think I'm afraid to say I want him fired if that's what I actually believe? I've said so many unpopular things in this thread I don't know what lying about my intentions would even accomplish. I don't want him fired, unless we lose 4 games.

By the way, I enjoy watching ND on a weekly basis very much. I love the team as much as anyone. If you watched a game with me you'd know this.

But there are 6 other days in any given week that I like to analyze what happened in the previous week and the season thus far. So I very much agree with Grahambo's post that you quoted but don't ignore the negatives like some people seem to do.

 

[Goldedommer44]

GkIriah, I guess the real question would be is what does Kelly have to do to prove to you he is a good coach or the right coach for this team and do you have the ability to change your point of view? If there is nothing he can do then maybe you are just a troll but if you have the ability to see how MAYBE your point of view is wrong then maybe your not.

But honestly A lot of people on here have provided stats and other points of view to yours and you just blow them off so I don't know if you have the ability to change from the troll that some people think you are.

 

[NDinL.A.]

GkIriah, I guess the real question would be is what does Kelly have to do to prove to you he is a good coach or the right coach for this team and do you have the ability to change your point of view? If there is nothing he can do then maybe you are just a troll but if you have the ability to see how MAYBE your point of view is wrong then maybe your not.

But honestly A lot of people on here have provided stats and other points of view to yours and you just blow them off so I don't know if you have the ability to change from the troll that some people think you are.

GkIrish is definitely not a troll and it's shortsighted, myopic and ignorant to think that someone who feels negatively towards an aspect of ND and disagrees with the masses is automatically a troll. I don't agree with him in this instance, but he's bringing coherent arguments to the table, conceding certain points, and not attacking anyone (well, other than BK lol).

He went to ND, and has been a contributing member of this site for years. He is most definitely not a troll. I have more issues with the member who said that Kizer is not a D1 QB than anything gk has said...

 

[Bogtrotter07]

11 of the 12 people don't criticize, they just call me names and talk about how negative I am. Criticisms of my point of view (like the rest of your post) are welcomed and valuable.

. . .

You are far ahead of the curve.

Most places they ruin your reputation and lie about your actions.

In some places they cook you and try to eat you.


This thread isn't really about Brian Kelly, Joe Schmidt, Notre Dame Football, statistics, wins losses, or any of the other topics discussed. It is about us.

And when I say that, I want to make it clear. It isn't the way it is, (somewhat combative, etc.,) because of anyone's shortcomings or deficits. It is the way things are because of who we are. Good and bad.

And that in itself is a good thing. A whole bunch of us who are wildly and diversely opinionated, coming together as the 'Fighting Irish!'

So it is okay for a little brolic to get sprayed, and even for some name calling. But at the end of the day, everyone should just take a moment and ask themselves if advancing their own points at the personal expense of others is really worth it; name calling is one thing, dragging someone's character into it, is entirely another.

Go Irish!

 

[gkIrish]

GkIriah, I guess the real question would be is what does Kelly have to do to prove to you he is a good coach or the right coach for this team and do you have the ability to change your point of view? If there is nothing he can do then maybe you are just a troll but if you have the ability to see how MAYBE your point of view is wrong then maybe your not.

But honestly A lot of people on here have provided stats and other points of view to yours and you just blow them off so I don't know if you have the ability to change from the troll that some people think you are.

Prove that 2012 was not a fluke and win 10 games. It's pretty simple.

Which stats or points of view have I ignored? I'll be happy to respond to them if you bring them to my attention, although I doubt there is anything I've completely ignored.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Prove that 2012 was not a fluke and win 10 games. It's pretty simple.

Which stats or points of view have I ignored? I'll be happy to respond to them if you bring them to my attention, although I doubt there is anything I've completely ignored.

I think you're discounting (not necessarily ignoring) the incredible convergence of events related to the quarterback position. The 8-9 win seasons (instead of 10) is largely a function of the craziness at that position. I know you're going to say that Kelly didn't do a good enough job of solidifying the position. I just don't think that's accurate. He brought in good people. But injury (Zaire), a complete inability to play football (Crist, a Weis recruit, but should have been Kelly's first QB), odd transfers (Kiel), and academic issues (Golson) have hamstrung the offense.

 

[Irish#1]

Sanford has been calling plays all year. I actually thought I posted something to that effect awhile ago in this very thread.

You can tell, because play action is being used more and the bubble screen isn't being called every other play.

 

[Irish#1]

First, your obsession with the OP is borderline creepy.

Second, I personally scout the college coaching landscape all the time. Literally from the first day I started as a student at ND I was scouting. Scouting doesn't mean you are advocating a change. It means you are keeping an eye on things. I've never said I wanted Kelly fired, and he is doing a nice job of improving on a few of things I mentioned in the OP. Kudos to him. But the dude is not God. He is not beyond criticism. Far from it. The sheer amount of devotion to a guy that's won 9 regular season games ONCE since he began here is really crazy IMO.

Everyone needs to relax. Brian Kelly does not write your checks. He does not cook you dinner. He doesn't even know you. I'm allowed to criticize him (and praise him when he deserves it) without getting attacked by 12 different people every time I do it. And 11 of the 12 people have nothing substantive to say.

Seems to me your sub-conscientiously expecting failure if you're always looking for that next coach.

MSU's defense ranked 29th, 6th, 2nd and 2nd respectively in each of those years. Scoring enough points to win four years in a row against an elite defense is quite an accomplishment.

But it's not historical!

On the bombs skewing the offensive figures. If we take those out, we have to take out the big runs by CJ as well. Here's the problem with play calling. All OC's have their tendencies and plays they love to call. It's human nature. It is very rare to find a coach who calls such a diverse game that he rarely calls the same play twice in a game. Coaches call plays against a defenses weaknesses and/or tendencies. The play action bomb to fuller was perfect to open the game. Sanford knew USC would be hyped up and ready to attack. They bit big time. Look at Bill Walsh. He was considered an offensive genius, yet he loved to hit Roger Craig coming out of the backfield over and over. Sometimes plays are called to set up coming plays even when they know a play isn't going to get many yards. I get frustrated at times seeing the jet sweep, but I have a feeling it's on the play list for a reason.

 

[gkIrish]

I think you're discounting (not necessarily ignoring) the incredible convergence of events related to the quarterback position. The 8-9 win seasons (instead of 10) is largely a function of the craziness at that position. I know you're going to say that Kelly didn't do a good enough job of solidifying the position. I just don't think that's accurate. He brought in good people. But injury (Zaire), a complete inability to play football (Crist, a Weis recruit, but should have been Kelly's first QB), odd transfers (Kiel), and academic issues (Golson) have hamstrung the offense.

Offense hasn't really been the big problem. Playcalling is often bad but we never lack talent on offense. Defense and special teams have been the biggest issues since 2012.

 

[yankeeND]

GkIrish is definitely not a troll and it's shortsighted, myopic and ignorant to think that someone who feels negatively towards an aspect of ND and disagrees with the masses is automatically a troll. I don't agree with him in this instance, but he's bringing coherent arguments to the table, conceding certain points, and not attacking anyone (well, other than BK lol).

He went to ND, and has been a contributing member of this site for years. He is most definitely not a troll. I have more issues with the member who said that Kizer is not a D1 QB than anything gk has said...

This is an excellent post. gk is definitely not a troll, and I, like you, am not in agreement with him in this instance, but can still appreciate some of the things he is saying. As a fan, I do not like to harp on the bad things, but rather, I like to look at the entire body of work. Yes gk, I hated to lose to Navy, Tulsa, and Northwestern. The excessive turnovers by our QB's in all but 2012 have been frustrating as well. Some of the play calling decisions were head scratchers during his tenure, and some of the crazy scenes on the sidelines, and scandals we have had, made me really uneasy. The thing is, Kelly continues to do things to correct his mistakes with each passing year. Things like recruiting both lines for depth and impact, cleaning up his sideline demeanor and becoming more of a player's coach, and going out and hiring a guy like Mike Sanford truly show me that he understands what needs to be done to get us over the hump. We may never get there with him, but it won't be for lack of trying. He has done the best job by far since Holtz, and we continue to improve in many aspects as he learns what it is to be the coach at ND. You have your concerns, and that is completely understandable, but all I see here is a guy who has helped Notre Dame do an about face to become a great program again. There is still work to be done, but we are definitely moving in the right direction imo.

 

[kmoose]

Offense hasn't really been the big problem. Playcalling is often bad but we never lack talent on offense. Defense and special teams have been the biggest issues since 2012.

Notre Dame is #16 in Total Offense
#19 in scoring
#8 in yards per play.

Your tailback, who has never played the position before this year, is averaging 7+ yards per carry, and is on pace for 1500 yards and 19 TDs.

Your first year starter Sophomore QB is on pace for 2300+ yards, with 17 TDs and 7 INTs.

Seriously........... the play calling can't be "often bad" when you are getting that kind of offensive production.

 

[gkIrish]

Notre Dame is #16 in Total Offense
#19 in scoring
#8 in yards per play.

Your tailback, who has never played the position before this year, is averaging 7+ yards per carry, and is on pace for 1500 yards and 19 TDs.

Your first year starter Sophomore QB is on pace for 2300+ yards, with 17 TDs and 7 INTs.

Seriously........... the play calling can't be "often bad" when you are getting that kind of offensive production.

1) BK has been the coach for 5 seasons prior to this one. We aren't just talking about 2015 otherwise this thread truly would be pretty pointless.

2) Opponents total defense ranks:

Clemson: 10

Navy: 41

Georgia Tech: 52
USC: 76
Virginia: 82
Texas: 113
UMass: 115

That's an average of the 70th best defense in the country. Let's keep that in perspective.

We are going to play #1, #13, and #17 in the upcoming weeks. Let's see what happens.

 

[gkIrish]

Scoring Defense of our opponents:

Clemson: 14
Navy: 30
USC: 34
Georgia Tech: 74
Texas: 103
Virginia: 111
UMass: 114

68.5 on average. We aren't facing the 1985 Bears folks....

 

[gkIrish]

Notre Dame is #16 in Total Offense
#19 in scoring
#8 in yards per play.

Your tailback, who has never played the position before this year, is averaging 7+ yards per carry, and is on pace for 1500 yards and 19 TDs.

Your first year starter Sophomore QB is on pace for 2300+ yards, with 17 TDs and 7 INTs.

Seriously........... the play calling can't be "often bad" when you are getting that kind of offensive production.

#82 in Red Zone offense. That's a big complaint I've always had (and I'm not the only one). Need to improve on that.

 

[woolybug25]

GK, I think what is rubbing people the wrong way is that you seem to be grasping for any straw that you can spin as a negative towards BK. A TON (go back through the thread and really read the responses) of the "facts" you have gave have been debunked. Then you simply shrug it off and move onto the next scraped up complaint.

The moral of the story is this... one day, you had a "light-bulb moment" where you decided that simply because of a few 8 win seasons, you were done with BK. That's fine... but let's be intellectually honest about the argument. Let's not keep bringing up manufactured arguments that not even Saban or Meyer could hold up.

Just be straight... you aren't happy with 8 win seasons. End thread/

 

[gkIrish]

GK, I think what is rubbing people the wrong way is that you seem to be grasping for any straw that you can spin as a negative towards BK. A TON (go back through the thread and really read the responses) of the "facts" you have gave have been debunked. Then you simply shrug it off and move onto the next scraped up complaint.

The moral of the story is this... one day, you had a "light-bulb moment" where you decided that simply because of a few 8 win seasons, you were done with BK. That's fine... but let's be intellectually honest about the argument. Let's not keep bringing up manufactured arguments that not even Saban or Meyer could hold up.

Just be straight... you aren't happy with 8 win seasons. End thread/

Which facts were debunked? Be specific. If you want to accuse me of that it's on you to prove it. I'm not going to go back and read every post.

What arguments have I manufactured? Be specific.

I've conceded a few points and conceded that BK has improved on certain areas this season (punt returns, lack of "Plan B" come to mind). If I really wanted to I could quote about 20 posts where I brought up a valid point and received no response.

What's your response to the total and scoring defense stats I just posted? Does that perhaps explain why our offensive stats are so good?

 

[kmoose]

1) BK has been the coach for 5 seasons prior to this one. We aren't just talking about 2015 otherwise this thread truly would be pretty pointless.

That's fair enough. But you did say "is", not "has been" or "was", so it was kind of natural to infer that you were speaking of the present?

1)
2) Opponents total defense ranks:

Clemson: 10

Navy: 41

Georgia Tech: 52
USC: 76
Virginia: 82
Texas: 113
UMass: 115

That's an average of the 70th best defense in the country. Let's keep that in perspective.

We are going to play #1, #13, and #17 in the upcoming weeks. Let's see what happens.

These numbers would be relevant, IF someone were making the argument that Kelly's play calling has been masterful, or even really good. No one is making that argument, though. What *is* being contended is that Kelly's play calling has not been terrible. You keep insisting that it has been, even in the face of the tremendous offensive success that ND is having. It's time for some people to just suck it up and admit that "I don't like the play call" DOES NOT = "The play calling is really bad".

 

[woolybug25]

Which facts were debunked? Be specific. If you want to accuse me of that it's on you to prove it. I'm not going to go back and read every post.

What arguments have I manufactured? Be specific.

I've conceded a few points and conceded that BK has improved on certain areas this season (punt returns, lack of "Plan B" come to mind). If I really wanted to I could quote about 20 posts where I brought up a valid point and received no response.

What's your response to the total and scoring defense stats I just posted? Does that perhaps explain why our offensive stats are so good?

I think it's BS that you put the onus on everyone else to go back and re-read the entire thread to categorize your arguments, instead of defending them yourself. But i'll play.

- Good coaches don't play close games against poor competition. Debunked

- Our roster depth isn't deep (we are 6-1 with a backup QB, 3rd string RB and multiple other injuries) Debunked

- Offensive playcalling is bad (we have top ranked offense in almost every statistic) Debunked

- We are "consistently outcoached in the locker room at halftime" (we outperformed almost every team on our schedule after halftime) Debunked

That's just perusing the first 6 pages of the thread. I am not going to go through 42 pages to outline every single argument. Hopefully the above will suffice, but if not, feel free to go through the rest and show me all of the points you brought up that weren't debunked. I think most posters are saying the exact same thing about this thread that I am. So the onus isn't on us to form your premise for you. If you haven't proven your point after 42 pages of different arguments, then i'm not sure there is an actual point.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Scoring Defense of our opponents:

Clemson: 14
Navy: 30
USC: 34
Georgia Tech: 74
Texas: 103
Virginia: 111
UMass: 114

68.5 on average. We aren't facing the 1985 Bears folks....

Are you considering that ND (a top 20 offense) played these teams, thus making their ranking worse?

 

[gkIrish]

That's fair enough. But you did say "is", not "has been" or "was", so it was kind of natural to infer that you were speaking of the present?



These numbers would be relevant, IF someone were making the argument that Kelly's play calling has been masterful, or even really good. No one is making that argument, though. What *is* being contended is that Kelly's play calling has not been terrible. You keep insisting that it has been, even in the face of the tremendous offensive success that ND is having. It's time for some people to just suck it up and admit that "I don't like the play call" DOES NOT = "The play calling is really bad".

The argument has been made that the offensive performance has been "historic." My position is that the playcalling prior to this season had been horrible. It's much better this year....because Sanford is calling the plays...

 

[BleedBlueGold]

The argument has been made that the offensive performance has been "historic." My position is that the playcalling prior to this season had been horrible. It's much better this year....because Sanford is calling the plays...

If you said Red Zone play calling was horrible in the past, I'd agree. It's a legitimate gripe. But overall, BK's offense is legit between the 20s and has been almost his entire time at ND.

The offensive performance this season is historic when you consider the pace of production for Fuller, Kizer, and especially Prosise. CJ is on pace to break a record from 1979. That's the definition of historic.

The hiring of Sanford, imo, isn't getting enough recognition. The dude has helped the QBs and offense immensely. Credit BK for the hire, no?

Edit: You did say Red Zone. So yea, I agree with the below:

#82 in Red Zone offense. That's a big complaint I've always had (and I'm not the only one). Need to improve on that.

 

[Irish Insanity]

GK, I think what is rubbing people the wrong way is that you seem to be grasping for any straw that you can spin as a negative towards BK. A TON (go back through the thread and really read the responses) of the "facts" you have gave have been debunked. Then you simply shrug it off and move onto the next scraped up complaint.

The moral of the story is this... one day, you had a "light-bulb moment" where you decided that simply because of a few 8 win seasons, you were done with BK. That's fine... but let's be intellectually honest about the argument. Let's not keep bringing up manufactured arguments that not even Saban or Meyer could hold up.

Just be straight... you aren't happy with 8 win seasons. End thread/

The problem is this thread has turned into something completely different than it was from the OP. BK didn't have a 'few 8 win season', he's averaging barely over that at ND. Nobody ever said they were done with BK, that's a narrative pushed by the blind supporters towards those that have concerns. And nobody has manufactured arguments, several of the blind supporters take issue with the those who don't share the same thoughts. Any time GK, or anyone else, gives a response to a question or comment they're 'grasping at straws' or 'manufacturing arguments' when in reality so many people in this thread simply can't allow someone else to have a differing opinion.

I could be wrong but I don't think the topic was ever meant to be 'revisit GK' or 'revisit anyone who doesn't blindly support BK' or even 'revisit anyone who's opinion differs from mine on BK'.
Wasn't this thread created to revisit Kelly? I mean if a poster isn't wanting to revisit Kelly, why are they even in this thread....

 

[yankeeND]

The argument has been made that the offensive performance has been "historic." My position is that the playcalling prior to this season had been horrible. It's much better this year....because Sanford is calling the plays...

Isn't that a big part of it though? Kelly is making the necessary adjustments. I think Wooly made a great point, 8 wins is not enough, and none of us are happy with that number. You want more just like the rest of us, I get it. The thing is, I feel like you are not acknowledging the fact that Kelly is making the improvements necessary to do just that. It's Sanford's first year here, Kizer is a first time starter rushed into action, Prosise is on pace for a historic season, etc. We still have 5 regular season games to go, let them play out. Let's see if the can get through those games unscathed. I don't want to see us drop a game we shouldn't like in years past. From what I have seen, we are better than the next 4 opponents, but history tells us to be weary. At the end of the day, wins and losses is the stat that matters the most, if we are at 10 wins by Stanford, then we have killed two birds with one stone. We would have won all the games we were supposed to, and also made it to the 10 win mark. This next month will go a long way into answering a lot of your question marks.

 

[gkIrish]

I think it's BS that you put the onus on everyone else to go back and re-read the entire thread to categorize your arguments, instead of defending them yourself. But i'll play.

If someone is going to accuse me of something, they should back it up. How would you feel if I said "You make stupid arguments. Go back and read through the posts and you'll see what I'm talking about." That's not fair at all.

- Good coaches don't play close games against poor competition. Debunked

Prime example of someone twisting my argument. My argument is great coaches don't play close games against poor competition often. It would be ridiculous to argue that OSU, Bama, MSU, etc. never play a close game because that's clearly false. But they don't do it at the rate we do. I proved it with Bama and MSU.

- Our roster depth isn't deep (we are 6-1 with a backup QB, 3rd string RB and multiple other injuries) Debunked

I've conceded that our depth is better than the previous few seasons. However our MLB is a glaring disaster. I still maintain that our D-Line, Safety, and LB depth is relatively weak going forward if we want to be a top 10 team.

- Offensive playcalling is bad (we have top ranked offense in almost every statistic) Debunked

Providing a statistic that we are the 16th Ranked total offense in the country does not "Debunk" the position that our playcalling has been bad the last 5 years and at some points in this current season. I just provided a very valid reason why our offense is statistically so good. Because we play dogshit defenses

- We are "consistently outcoached in the locker room at halftime" (we outperformed almost every team on our schedule after halftime) Debunked

I conceded the stats don't back that position up from a bird's eye view. I do think specific games were mismanaged horribly though.

That's just perusing the first 6 pages of the thread. I am not going to go through 42 pages to outline every single argument. Hopefully the above will suffice, but if not, feel free to go through the rest and show me all of the points you brought up that weren't debunked. I think most posters are saying the exact same thing about this thread that I am. So the onus isn't on us to form your premise for you. If you haven't proven your point after 42 pages of different arguments, then i'm not sure there is an actual point.

It will be impossible to change anyone's mind. Too many people are too devoted. And that's not even my goal. My goal is not to get everyone to want to fire BK, because that's not even my personal goal.

My goal is to raise objective criticisms of the coaching staff and provide an ongoing evaluation of their performance. I've had to defend myself a lot which makes people think I have ulterior motives but I don't.

 

[IrishLion]

The argument has been made that the offensive performance has been "historic." My position is that the playcalling prior to this season had been horrible. It's much better this year....because Sanford is calling the plays...

Questionable at times? Yes. But that's an argument that can be made about every single coach in the country.

Personally, I find it hard to say that playcalling prior to this season was horrible when you consider the effectiveness BK got from Tommy Rees, a statue with a noodle arm, and from Golson as a first year starter in '12.

BK's playcalling in 2010 was good when Crist was healthy, and it was great when Rees had to take over late in the year.

Playcalling in 2011 was decent, considering the amount of success Rees had between the 20's. The argument could be made that it was actually much more than "decent," when you consider Rees' limitations.

Playcalling in 2012 was fantastic, IMO. They protected the young QB, but allowed him to make big plays just enough to keep defenses honest. They really called good games for Golson late in the season when he started to turn it on and take over.

Playcalling in 2013 was the same as 2011. Decent, but probably more than decent considering Rees was back in charge.

Playcalling in 2014 is the biggest gripe, but I still wouldn't consider it to have been horrible. Golson couldn't protect the ball, and BK could have done a better job of accounting for this via playcalling, but the offense was still greatly effective when it wasn't turning the ball over.

Playcalling in 2015 has been outstanding, IMO. Everyone points to spreading the field on 3rd and 2 or using too many stretch plays in short-yardage situations, but I think both of these gripes are mitigated by the fact that Kizer is at a great advantage as a runner in short yardage when the defense is spread out (we saw it a few times against USC where it worked), and that Prosise's most effective runs have been stringing it out and finding the right time to hit the speed-burst button on the edge.

So to call playcalling "horrible" prior to this year is not right... IMO.

 

[woolybug25]

What's your response to the total and scoring defense stats I just posted? Does that perhaps explain why our offensive stats are so good?

Here are the top three teams and the scoring offenses they have played.

Baylor
SMU - 125
Lamar - N/A
Rice - 108
TxTech - 122
Kansas - 123
WV - 74
Avg - 110

Texas Tech
Sam Houston - N/A
UTEP - 117
Arkansas - 45
TCU - 73
Baylor - 61
Iowa St - 111
Kansas - 123
Avg - 88

TCU
@
Minnesota - 27
Stephen F. Austin - N/A
SMU - 125
Texas Tech - 122
Texas - 113
Kansas State - 90
Iowa State - 111
Avg 98

We have played significantly better defenses than these teams, and they are each even getting a bump for playing a team that isn't even ranked in the NCAA total defense. So again, your argument isn't consistent with what is actually going on with the rest of college football. Another manufactured argument for you to disregard and move on to another.

C'mon man...

 

[kmoose]

The problem is this thread has turned into something completely different than it was from the OP. BK didn't have a 'few 8 win season', he's averaging barely over that at ND. Nobody ever said they were done with BK, that's a narrative pushed by the blind supporters towards those that have concerns. And nobody has manufactured arguments, several of the blind supporters take issue with the those who don't share the same thoughts. Any time GK, or anyone else, gives a response to a question or comment they're 'grasping at straws' or 'manufacturing arguments' when in reality so many people in this thread simply can't allow someone else to have a differing opinion.

I could be wrong but I don't think the topic was ever meant to be 'revisit GK' or 'revisit anyone who doesn't blindly support BK' or even 'revisit anyone who's opinion differs from mine on BK'.
Wasn't this thread created to revisit Kelly? I mean if a poster isn't wanting to revisit Kelly, why are they even in this thread....

There's so much wrong with this that I don't even know where to start, but I will make an effort:

I am going to try not to quote from the OP, because it appears that responding to comments about the OP by quoting from the OP indicates some kind of obsession on my part:

But in the OP, gk stated that he was always a BK supporter, but now he isn't sure he can continue to support him, so he is surveying the CFB landscape for better options. Does that sound more like someone is wanting the coach to stay, or wanting them to get fired? So that's not "a narrative pushed by the blind supporters". You can say it is as often as you like, but that doesn't make it true. It wasn't true when you said it yesterday, and it still isn't true today. But the bottom line for me is; I don't care if he is, or isn't calling for Kelly to be fired. I take issue with his emotional, irrational take on Kelly's tenure as coach.

Differing opinions are fine. But have some logic, for Pete's sake. You can't say, "the playcalling is terrible", then have someone point out that the offense is working really well, and say "Well, it's been terrible the last 5 years, and it's only good this year because we are playing crappy defenses." Guess what? Even the crappiest DI-A defense is going to do some damage to you, if your playcalling is horrible. These aren't Jr High kids we're playing against. I've questioned some of Kelly's play calling in the past. But it has NOT been a long term problem with him, in my opinion. He hasn't been a GREAT play caller, but neither has been a TERRIBLE one. You seem to be doing more defending of gk than anything else in this thread. If you aren't here to revisit Brian Kelly, then why are you here?

 

[gkIrish]

Are you considering that ND (a top 20 offense) played these teams, thus making their ranking worse?

Are you considering that our opponents (averaging the 70th best defense) played us, thus making our ranking better?

It goes both ways. That's why you just take it on its face.