'15 OH CB Shaun Crawford (Notre Dame Signed NLI)

[NDohio]

I disagree, but whatevs.

It seems silly to me to put in a true freshman when you could simply slide Coleman into one of the corner spots and slide either Luke or Crawford into the slot. Keeping our three best corners on the field. That's also what you have been seeing the staff do at practice. Why would they practice that in spring and then just completely ignore it later?

Numbers?

For the record I do think Luke will play a little bit of slot, but spring is a good time to experiment and with the low numbers of corners currently at camp, I can see why they would have players practice at positions where they won't necessarily get much playing time.

 

[woolybug25]

The true freshman would be a backup to a sub package in this case (Luke, Watkins/Coleman at corner, Crawford at nickel). So basically never play unless Crawford were injured or have to move to corner for some reason.

We went to the NC with one of our best defenses ever with a true freshman starting at nickel. In this scenario we'd be relying on a true freshman to be back up nickel.

For whatever reason, nickel seems like an easy transition from HS to immediate playing time. Plus Luke tackles like a sissy, which you cannot do when playing nickel.

Again... if the scenario comes where Crawford is a corner, then why... oh why... would we put a freshman in the game in sub packages and leave one of our best three (check that... four) best corners on the bench?

We had to play a freshman at nickel in '12 because we didn't have anyone better. It actually was the same philosophy that i'm talking about. Putting Shumate there allowed us to get KRuss, Jackson, Slaughter and Motta on the field. Our five best secondary players.

You're entitled to your opinion, but i'm going to go off of what they are actually doing in practice and what they have historically done.

 

[woolybug25]

So, Luke and Crawford are both gonna be on the field at all times. In nickel and dime situations, one of them slides inside and Watkins/Butler/Coleman/freshman comes on to play outside?

That's what we have been seeing in Spring, but that stuff can always change I suppose.

Please no Butler...

 

[koonja]

Again... if the scenario comes where Crawford is a corner, then why... oh why... would we put a freshman in the game in sub packages and leave one of our best three (check that... four) best corners on the bench?

We had to play a freshman at nickel in '12 because we didn't have anyone better. It actually was the same philosophy that i'm talking about. Putting Shumate there allowed us to get KRuss, Jackson, Slaughter and Motta on the field. Our five best secondary players.

You're entitled to your opinion, but i'm going to go off of what they are actually doing in practice and what they have historically done.

Who said Crawford will be a starting corner? That's a scenario, sure. Not one I think happens.

Even if it's him and Luke at corner, they're not putting Luke in nickel when that package comes in. He's not a good tackler and the nickel has to provide much more run support than a corner.

So 1) I don't think Crawford is the starting corner (ISD said he looked like the best corner in practice, that doesn't mean he's going to be starting corner). I think Crawford stars in the nickel.

2) Even if Crawford did start full time at corner, he'd move inside before Luke did to nickel IFF they decided to move a corner rather than bring someone in to play it, since Crawford is the best tackling defensive back we have, and Luke is probably one of the poorest.

All my opinion, but I see no way Luke plays nickel over Crawford whether Crawford is full time nickel and nickel only, or if they choose to slide a starting corner into nickel, I assume it'll be Crawford that slides.

 

[woolybug25]

Who said Crawford will be a starting corner? That's a scenario, sure. Not one I think happens.

This entire debate has been hypothetical. Where have you been?

Even if it's him and Luke at corner, they're not putting Luke in nickel when that package comes in. He's not a good tackler and the nickel has to provide much more run support than a corner.

So he's became a worse tackler than when the staff trusted him playing the position as a true freshman in game situations?

So 1) I don't think Crawford is the starting corner (ISD said he looked like the best corner in practice, that doesn't mean he's going to be starting corner). I think Crawford stars in the nickel.

Fair opinion.

2) Even if Crawford did start full time at corner, he'd move inside before Luke did to nickel IFF they decided to move a corner rather than bring someone in, since Crawford is the best tackling defensive back we have, and Luke is probably one of the poorest.

I think that would depend on who we are playing. If we are up against USC and they have Adoree, JuJU and Rogers on the field... then we better have our three best cover corners on the field. Tackling be damned.

 

[koonja]

This entire debate has been hypothetical. Where have you been?



So he's became a worse tackler than when the staff trusted him playing the position as a true freshman in game situations?



Fair opinion.



I think that would depend on who we are playing. If we are up against USC and they have Adoree, JuJU and Rogers on the field... then we better have our three best cover corners on the field. Tackling be damned.

Don't sweat it, Trumbetti and Rochelle will be great dropping into coverage against USC.

 

[Shamrock Theories]

Don't sweat it, Trumbetti and Rochelle will be great dropping into coverage against USC.

And...thread

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I can only read so much of this. (Koon, Rochell not Rochelle!)

But I am wondering :

Why can't Crawford play corner, then move to nickel back, and replaced by the number three corner?

• I have heard consistently that Pride will come ready to play, in fact, I believe Kelly said all the backs this year would challenge to play (however he has modified his assessment of Perry to include some developmental work.) Why couldn't one of the freshmen come in and play nickel?
• Hasn't ND had good luck with freshmen including Elijah Shumate?
• Which corner does Cole play this spring?
• Is Luke's problems as referred to earlier because he is wide side corner, and our W's (wide side receivers) are that good?
• Should he play boundary?
• Should Crawford move to the wide side?
• Could some of the problems be changes in the personnel and the way they play in the defensive backfield, as in the other players in the defensive backfield are playing assignment correct?

 

[IrishLion]

I didn't think the defense played "field" and "boundary" any more... I thought the corners lined up as basic left and right now.

 

[Luckylucci]

I loved Crawford as a prospect and was bummed when he went down last year. However, I had no idea he was or could be this important.

- Cole Luke's quotes.

“Shaun is physical and can cover,” Luke said. “That’s what makes him special. We can play Nickel every down and distance if it were my choice. He is adding an aspect to our defense now that he is back. He gives us a competitive edge.”



- Here's Kelly on the importance of Crawford

“Playing post safety requires you to play man coverage,” Kelly said. “The first thing you have to be able to do is play inside-out man against a skilled No. 2 receiver and we believe that we can do that with Shaun Crawford. So it all evolves around the ability to play a NICKEL in a man situation.”

“We feel like we can with the corners outside; now we feel better about the first nickel and the second nickel that can play man coverage.”

 

[rocket66]

Love hearing this. The secondary will be a strength on the team this year. Haven't said that in a long time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tko]

I want to see some guys pick off some passes and take it to the house. I hope this talk means the "give the receiver a 7 yard catch all the way down the field" style is done.

 

[GBdomer]

Remember when Diaco didn't want him

 

[Sherm Sticky]

Just got to hope they all can stay healthy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ThePiombino]

Remember when Diaco didn't want him

Remember when our defense was still decent?

 

[GBdomer]

Remember when our defense was still decent?

I would take Bobby D back in a heartbeat but he was wrong about Crawford. That's all I was getting at. Plus the year he had his almighty defense there was a ton of talent on that defense. Probably as much as last years defense and look what BVG did. I will not get into another BVG rant so I will now shut up

 

[ulukinatme]

I would take Bobby D back in a heartbeat but he was wrong about Crawford. That's all I was getting at. Plus the year he had his almighty defense there was a ton of talent on that defense. Probably as much as last years defense and look what BVG did with a ton of second/third stringers. I will not get into another BVG rant so I will now shut up

FIFY

 

[Crazy Balki]

FIFY

Preach. BVG gets a lot of hate, and a bit of it justifiable due to some of his questionable play calls (particularly Stanford), but Diaco did him no favors by leaving a pathetically thin depth chart on defense, to the point where we're playing a converted WR at SAM and a former walk-on at MIKE. Not to mention the massive departure from a player-style and philosophical perspective between the two, I don't know why some many people are surprised that the transition has been a bumpy one.

 

[GreyWorm]

I think you could see Luke and Crawford be the "starters" in your "traditional" two cornerback base defense.

However, when they do to nickel they have to figured out whether they are better off with Luke/Watkins outside and Crawford in the nickel or Luke/Crawford outside and have Coleman/Pride/Watkins in the nickel.

The wildcard is if Studstill can play the nickel spot. I don't know if that's still an option and the defenses are different, but Elijah Shumate worked at nickel his freshman year and had some success. Now, Studstill and Shumate are different players and the defenses have different objectives, but I would tend to go with Studstill is a better cover guy than Shumate.

There are quality options at cornerback and that's good news for Notre Dame. Hopefully they can get a rotation going and keep guys fresh for a change.

 

[arrowryan]

I think you could see Luke and Crawford be the "starters" in your "traditional" two cornerback base defense.

However, when they do to nickel they have to figured out whether they are better off with Luke/Watkins outside and Crawford in the nickel or Luke/Crawford outside and have Coleman/Pride/Watkins in the nickel.

The wildcard is if Studstill can play the nickel spot. I don't know if that's still an option and the defenses are different, but Elijah Shumate worked at nickel his freshman year and had some success. Now, Studstill and Shumate are different players and the defenses have different objectives, but I would tend to go with Studstill is a better cover guy than Shumate.

There are quality options at cornerback and that's good news for Notre Dame. Hopefully they can get a rotation going and keep guys fresh for a change.

I would be surprised if this isn't the route they go. That's 3 good cover corners in our nickel defense; when is the last time we could say that? I wonder if Studstill comes in for Tranquill in obvious passing situations and plays aside Redfield.

 

[rocket66]

Preach. BVG gets a lot of hate, and a bit of it justifiable due to some of his questionable play calls (particularly Stanford), but Diaco did him no favors by leaving a pathetically thin depth chart on defense, to the point where we're playing a converted WR at SAM and a former walk-on at MIKE. Not to mention the massive departure from a player-style and philosophical perspective between the two, I don't know why some many people are surprised that the transition has been a bumpy one.

Honestly BVG probably isn't bad, but he lived and died with Joe Schmidt and it's going to take a few years to erase that from ND fans' minds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[zelezo vlk]

Honestly BVG probably isn't bad, but he lived and died with Joe Schmidt and it's going to take a few years to erase that from ND fans' minds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Was it ever confirmed that Nyles had an injury in the second half of last season?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[STLDomer]

Remember when Diaco didn't want him

I would take Bobby D back in a heartbeat but he was wrong about Crawford. That's all I was getting at. Plus the year he had his almighty defense there was a ton of talent on that defense. Probably as much as last years defense and look what BVG did. I will not get into another BVG rant so I will now shut up

Diaco wasn't just bad at recruiting, besides Ishaq, he was just so weirdly stubborn about it. The first time Crawford and his Dad met Diaco, his Dad left wondering why they were even there. Completely wasted there time.

I think you could see Luke and Crawford be the "starters" in your "traditional" two cornerback base defense.

However, when they do to nickel they have to figured out whether they are better off with Luke/Watkins outside and Crawford in the nickel or Luke/Crawford outside and have Coleman/Pride/Watkins in the nickel.

The wildcard is if Studstill can play the nickel spot. I don't know if that's still an option and the defenses are different, but Elijah Shumate worked at nickel his freshman year and had some success. Now, Studstill and Shumate are different players and the defenses have different objectives, but I would tend to go with Studstill is a better cover guy than Shumate.

There are quality options at cornerback and that's good news for Notre Dame. Hopefully they can get a rotation going and keep guys fresh for a change.

I would be surprised if this isn't the route they go. That's 3 good cover corners in our nickel defense; when is the last time we could say that? I wonder if Studstill comes in for Tranquill in obvious passing situations and plays aside Redfield.

I would watch out for Elliott in NB possibly too.

I just want guys to be covering guys they actually can cover. CBs covering WRs. Tranquill/Onwualu on TEs. LBs on RBs. Effective NBs is a big part of that. Otherwise your left watching LBs and Tranquill running around trying to cover WRs, not good.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Diaco wasn't just bad at recruiting, besides Ishaq, he was just so weirdly stubborn about it. The first time Crawford and his Dad met Diaco, his Dad left wondering why they were even there. Completely wasted there time.





I would watch out for Elliott in NB possibly too.

I just want guys to be covering guys they actually can cover. CBs covering WRs. Tranquill/Onwualu on TEs. LBs on RBs. Effective NBs is a big part of that. Otherwise your left watching LBs and Tranquill running around trying to cover WRs, not good.

Brilliant post. So glad you are back!

Anyone who sees Diaco as not sucking canal water as a recruiting coordinator compared to Elston is really tempting a reality implosion. In my mind, you cannot effectively evaluate a recruit as a 'ND Fit,' unless you can get along with them. From Anzalone, to Taylor, to Crawford, there are tens of guys with whom Diaco had less than a relationship. This guy was an unsustainable burden from the recruiting side as a defensive coordinator, let alone as recruiting coordinator specifically.

The stories at UC are better and more out in the open than the ones at ND are. Cats don't necessarily change their spots. And this is one scary cat . . .

Just a quick one; how do you rank Love, Jones, Pride, Vaugh, and the rest of the freshmen not oft mentioned as nickel backs?

 

[NDRock]

Brilliant post. So glad you are back!

Anyone who sees Diaco as not sucking canal water as a recruiting coordinator compared to Elston is really tempting a reality implosion. In my mind, you cannot effectively evaluate a recruit as a 'ND Fit,' unless you can get along with them. From Anzalone, to Taylor, to Crawford, there are tens of guys with whom Diaco had less than a relationship. This guy was an unsustainable burden from the recruiting side as a defensive coordinator, let alone as recruiting coordinator specifically.

The stories at UC are better and more out in the open than the ones at ND are. Cats don't necessarily change their spots. And this is one scary cat . . .

Just a quick one; how do you rank Love, Jones, Pride, Vaugh, and the rest of the freshmen not oft mentioned as nickel backs?

The thing is, BVG isn't exactly a recruiting stud. So far he's been a slightly better version of Tenuta both on the field and off (recruiting). I do think (hope) we see a big jump with the D this year. Was Diaco the recruiting coordinator when he was here? I really don't remember.

 

[arrowryan]

The thing is, BVG isn't exactly a recruiting stud. So far he's been a slightly better version of Tenuta both on the field and off (recruiting). I do think (hope) we see a big jump with the D this year. Was Diaco the recruiting coordinator when he was here? I really don't remember.

I thought it was Alford

 

[STLDomer]

Brilliant post. So glad you are back!

Anyone who sees Diaco as not sucking canal water as a recruiting coordinator compared to Elston is really tempting a reality implosion. In my mind, you cannot effectively evaluate a recruit as a 'ND Fit,' unless you can get along with them. From Anzalone, to Taylor, to Crawford, there are tens of guys with whom Diaco had less than a relationship. This guy was an unsustainable burden from the recruiting side as a defensive coordinator, let alone as recruiting coordinator specifically.

The stories at UC are better and more out in the open than the ones at ND are. Cats don't necessarily change their spots. And this is one scary cat . . .

Just a quick one; how do you rank Love, Jones, Pride, Vaugh, and the rest of the freshmen not oft mentioned as nickel backs?

From the freshman group DB, when I think NB I immediately go to Elliott and Love, though I don't think Love plays this year. Vaughn and Pride definitely outside guys, Pride could play as a 3rd or 4th CB on the field if needed.

Weird note on Vaughn, anyone else catch that he was listed as a Safety on the roster? BK corrected it saying he's a CB but just interesting. I think he ends up as a FS.

Like Arrow alluded to I'd probably prefer to have Studstill playing as a high FS.

Lastly you have the LB/S hybrids in Morgan and Perry. One probably ends up a LB IMO. Both could be effective as NBs, believe you call them JACKs in some defenses, in the right sub-package. Probably not this year though.

 

[Luckylucci]

I think you could see Luke and Crawford be the "starters" in your "traditional" two cornerback base defense.

However, when they do to nickel they have to figured out whether they are better off with Luke/Watkins outside and Crawford in the nickel or Luke/Crawford outside and have Coleman/Pride/Watkins in the nickel.

The wildcard is if Studstill can play the nickel spot. I don't know if that's still an option and the defenses are different, but Elijah Shumate worked at nickel his freshman year and had some success. Now, Studstill and Shumate are different players and the defenses have different objectives, but I would tend to go with Studstill is a better cover guy than Shumate.

There are quality options at cornerback and that's good news for Notre Dame. Hopefully they can get a rotation going and keep guys fresh for a change.

I agree with the general breakdown. I'd bet Crawford is essentially the second CB and then Watkins/Coleman battle it out for the next CB spot. Whether that means Crawford stays outside and Coleman goes to NB, or Crawford slides inside and Watkins is outside, they'll use camp to figure that out. I do know, Lyght made mention in the Spring that one goal will be to get Crawford closer to the ball. Which would insinuate he'll be playing NB and not stayin outside.

 

[NDRock]

I thought it was Alford

I thought so too but wasn't sure for how long.

 

[Rizzophil]

Torn Achilles. Done for year.