What I don't get about the ND boards.

[JDAtlanta]

We absolutely give two games away to start the season. We win convincingly against Michigan State. We come from behind to pull out the victory against Pitt. All the boards are downcast more after a two game winning streak than they were after two horrible performances where we handed the opponents the game on a silver platter.

People we won two in a row.

 

[tommyIRISH23]

We absolutely give two games away to start the season. We win convincingly against Michigan State. We come from behind to pull out the victory against Pitt. All the boards are downcast more after a two game winning streak than they were after two horrible performances where we handed the opponents the game on a silver platter.

People we won two in a row.

My man. I could not agree more. This QB nonsense has to stop.

 

[koonja]

My man. I could not agree more. This QB nonsense has to stop.

Do you mean the 3 TOs per game or the debate about who we want to start?

We should be happy about an ugly come from behind win against an average team just to get back to .500?

So we should celebrate mediocrity and pretend like we didn't have high expectations for this team?

 

[ND_HAS_RISEN]

We absolutely give two games away to start the season. We win convincingly against Michigan State. We come from behind to pull out the victory against Pitt. All the boards are downcast more after a two game winning streak than they were after two horrible performances where we handed the opponents the game on a silver platter.

People we won two in a row.

Boston Red Sox have a 5-17 record this past month. If the Sox end up making the playoffs by winning 3-4 in a row, do the fans feel confident that they can still win? I sure as hell don't. I didn't think they had a chance being down 3-0 to the Yanks though either.

Point is, just because they win doesn't mean its all fine and dandy. If you think BK and his staff are content with how things went then you're wrong. Yes, a win on the road is a win, any way you can get it. But to ignore the obvious problems is plain stupid.

 

[IrishLax]

Listen.... here's the problem.

People see a Notre Dame team that was better than Pitt man-for-man at every single position... except maybe QB and RB but I'd take Cierre over Ray Graham by a smidge and I like Tommy a bit more than Tino.

And yet the game turns out to be another 3 point thriller because of mistakes that are not getting fixed. And that frustrates everyone. Our defense is good enough to win us 10 games on their own with a mediocre or bad offense if we just play mistake free football on special teams and offense. But Tommy made about ~6 ridiculously bad throws that could've been picked off by a better team. And our special teams made another handful of mistakes. And the game ends up being a squeaker.

People are getting sick of it because we're not asking Tommy to go Jimmy Clausen/Brady Quinn and throw the ball 60 times a game with no running attack and a porous defense. In those cases I can tolerate mistakes, interceptions, etc. All we want is average quarterbacking from a guy that doesn't suffer from little hands syndrome where he inexplicably fumbles the ball game after game after game in crucial situations. Or that has the arm strength to push the ball down the field more than 15 yards if he has to make the throw a bit late without it being a surefire pick.

Until we see Tommy and our special teams play a mistake free game where they don't hand the other team points/take points off the board for us... ND fans are not going to be tolerant. If we wanted growing pains and a learning year we'd have Golson in. Tommy is supposed to be the cool and collected "gamer" that we are playing to win now. And it's the difference in that mindset between "building" and "winning" that is causing fans so much heartache.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

After the MSU game, a lot of us genuinely felt that we had an outside shot at winning out and securing a BCS berth. After the Pitt game, even though it was a win, it looks like this team's ceiling is much lower than many of us hoped. That's where the negativity is coming from.

I'm hopeful that Rees will make big strides soon in his decision-making. Lord knows he improved tremendously between the Michigan and Tulsa games last year. But I'm not counting on it.

It's becoming clear that Golson is the only QB capable of running Kelly's offense well, and he's not ready. Of the three pro-style guys Kelly inherited from Weis, the least athletic of them has the best grasp of the scheme; makes you wonder what could be if Crist or Hendrix had Rees' perception and understanding.

 

[arrowryan]

IF Kelly decides to take Rees out he should put Golson in. He is the face of our future offense so why not get him started now. We know he can throw and run the ball, out spread offense wont be at full spped until we have a quarterback that can move.

I am going to trust Kelly's decision and if it is to stay with Rees then I am all for it. Rees needs to limit the turnovers NOW. Until Rees is the player that loses the game for us, I want him at quarterback.

 

[tommyIRISH23]

Do you mean the 3 TOs per game or the debate about who we want to start?

We should be happy about an ugly come from behind win against an average team just to get back to .500?

So we should celebrate mediocrity and pretend like we didn't have high expectations for this team?

No. I mean that we should stop complaining about a problem that is not fixable. Dayne Crist, as much as most of you love him, and think he is the worlds greatest, is not the answer, and will not be anymore productive then Tommy Rees, otherwise he would be playing. It's not pride stopping BK from putting Dayne into the game, it's that Dayne is not a better quarterback then Tommy Rees.

Now, do we have a QB problem? Yes. We do. We can do different things to hide it, and take some pressure off the QB.

1. Leprecat- Theo needs the ball more
2. Plays set up for big gains--plays specifcally designed to get Theo/Cierre Wood/ MF..etc the ball in space. We saw more of that last season then this season
3. Change of pace QB. I know some of you swear that is not an option, but Brian Kelly eludes to it, and Urban Meyer supports it. I think having packages for either Golson or Hendrix in specific situations would work well.
4. More Jonas Gray.

Tommy Rees shouldn't be throw 40 passes a game. He shouldn't be throwing more then 25. We have some many weapons, we have to get them more involved. That would make our QB issues less obvious, and would make opposing defensive coordinators think twice about keying in on Tommy Rees

 

[BobD]

I look at it like this,

I love my wife very much, but when she comes out of the room and ask's me "How does this dress look?" I tell her the truth everytime...if it looks great, I tell her so...if it looks hideous, I tell her its hideous. It took her awhile to get use to it, but now she really appreciates that I tell her the truth.

Some guys can't do that because, like me, they love their wife very much, but don't want to hurt her feelings.

In short....Tommy that dress looks hideous no matter what these other guys say : )

 

[AKRowdy]

People we have to remember that Tommy is still basically a young QB and if we put Golson/hendrixs in at QB there will probably more turnovers. This week and last week one of Rees's turnovers were at also at the fault of his left side ofthe line for doing lookout blocks and letting Rees get blindsided which caused the fumbles. Yes the interceptions have to stop and the staring down of Michael Floyd but this is 7th game starting and his record is 6-1 that's pretty good considering none of us expected him to start at ND and be a back up the rest of his career. So please let's stop this debate, I can live with the turnovers as long as we win. Final note I'm pretty sure Tommy has exceeded all of our expectations as a starter at ND so far.
Go Irish!! In Tommy we trust!

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

makes you wonder what could be if Crist or Hendrix had Rees' perception and understanding.

We don't know that Hendrix doesn't have those things - we haven't seen him in a game situation. Some guys don't necessarily show it in practice but just get it when the lights are on. We can't draw any conclusions about Hendrix until he gets a shot.

I prefer your other avatar, BTW...

 

[pkt77242]

We don't know that Hendrix doesn't have those things - we haven't seen him in a game situation. Some guys don't necessarily show it in practice but just get it when the lights are on. We can't draw any conclusions about Hendrix until he gets a shot.

But if you can't show it in practice why in God's name would the coach have confidence to put you into the game? Sigh. This arguement kills me.

 

[pkt77242]

Listen.... here's the problem.

People see a Notre Dame team that was better than Pitt man-for-man at every single position... except maybe QB and RB but I'd take Cierre over Ray Graham by a smidge and I like Tommy a bit more than Tino.

And yet the game turns out to be another 3 point thriller because of mistakes that are not getting fixed. And that frustrates everyone. Our defense is good enough to win us 10 games on their own with a mediocre or bad offense if we just play mistake free football on special teams and offense. But Tommy made about ~6 ridiculously bad throws that could've been picked off by a better team. And our special teams made another handful of mistakes. And the game ends up being a squeaker.

People are getting sick of it because we're not asking Tommy to go Jimmy Clausen/Brady Quinn and throw the ball 60 times a game with no running attack and a porous defense. In those cases I can tolerate mistakes, interceptions, etc. All we want is average quarterbacking from a guy that doesn't suffer from little hands syndrome where he inexplicably fumbles the ball game after game after game in crucial situations. Or that has the arm strength to push the ball down the field more than 15 yards if he has to make the throw a bit late without it being a surefire pick.

Until we see Tommy and our special teams play a mistake free game where they don't hand the other team points/take points off the board for us... ND fans are not going to be tolerant. If we wanted growing pains and a learning year we'd have Golson in. Tommy is supposed to be the cool and collected "gamer" that we are playing to win now. And it's the difference in that mindset between "building" and "winning" that is causing fans so much heartache.

This is the best arguement for frustration that I have seen. Reps

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

But if you can't show it in practice why in God's name would the coach have confidence to put you into the game? Sigh. This arguement kills me.

Who says he hasn't? You're just speculating, of course. We don't know anything, regardless of what you think you are extrapolating from vague references in old press conferences.

 

[Dizzyphil]

We don't know that Hendrix doesn't have those things - we haven't seen him in a game situation. Some guys don't necessarily show it in practice but just get it when the lights are on. We can't draw any conclusions about Hendrix until he gets a shot.

I prefer your other avatar, BTW...

Maybe the coaches do know and that's why his not in. Maybe he fumbles snaps alot, maybe they want him studying game plays... who knows - we don't. Just have to wait I guess.

Diz

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

Maybe the coaches do know and that's why his not in. Maybe he fumbles snaps alot, maybe they want him studying game plays... who knows - we don't. Just have to wait I guess.

Diz

But thats just my point. The coaches DO NOT KNOW. It is not possible for them to know, because the man has never played in a game. No human on the face of the earth knows what Hendrix can do until he plays in a game. They may have hunches and guesses, but from what I've observed over many years of watching football, even the best coaches and GMs don't really know what they've got half of the time. Bill Polian is a great example, h admits all the time they just don't know what they have until they are in a game.

 

[nd1989]

Listen.... here's the problem.

People see a Notre Dame team that was better than Pitt man-for-man at every single position... except maybe QB and RB but I'd take Cierre over Ray Graham by a smidge and I like Tommy a bit more than Tino.

And yet the game turns out to be another 3 point thriller because of mistakes that are not getting fixed. And that frustrates everyone. Our defense is good enough to win us 10 games on their own with a mediocre or bad offense if we just play mistake free football on special teams and offense. But Tommy made about ~6 ridiculously bad throws that could've been picked off by a better team. And our special teams made another handful of mistakes. And the game ends up being a squeaker.

People are getting sick of it because we're not asking Tommy to go Jimmy Clausen/Brady Quinn and throw the ball 60 times a game with no running attack and a porous defense. In those cases I can tolerate mistakes, interceptions, etc. All we want is average quarterbacking from a guy that doesn't suffer from little hands syndrome where he inexplicably fumbles the ball game after game after game in crucial situations. Or that has the arm strength to push the ball down the field more than 15 yards if he has to make the throw a bit late without it being a surefire pick.

Until we see Tommy and our special teams play a mistake free game where they don't hand the other team points/take points off the board for us... ND fans are not going to be tolerant. If we wanted growing pains and a learning year we'd have Golson in. Tommy is supposed to be the cool and collected "gamer" that we are playing to win now. And it's the difference in that mindset between "building" and "winning" that is causing fans so much heartache.

I would probably take Pitt's DEs over ours also.

 

[military_irish]

Maybe I am in the fan minority or the only one but I just go with the flow. I am just as big of an ND fan as the next guy but us as fans can not do anything unless your name is Brian Kelly. I understand the whole "well I just need to vent" but what does that change besides your heart rate?

I believe ND can win every game they play no matter the personnel but when they lose I get down just like anyone else but I have the understanding that I can not change anything the past is the past. The Pitt game is in the past and they won in terrible fashion. All of Pitt's players are on scholarship too, if you think they would have just rolled over because "Big Bad ND" was coming to town well that was obviously wrong.

I guess my bottom line statement is, we as fans should be behind who ever plays because they need us to be loud screaming even after a TO. That's what I do anyways

 

[BeauBenken]

Edit: I took out an argument because I've decided I really don't feel like trying to argue.

I'm absolutely positive that if we had a QB who gave us a better chance to win, he would be playing. End of story.

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

You just back handed your own argument. First you said maybe he would get it if we just threw him in even though he hasn't shown it in practice, but then you say, well maybe he HAS shown it in practice. Which is it?

I'm absolutely positive that if we had a QB who gave us a better chance to win, he would be playing. End of story.

I did nothing of the sort. We're all talking hypotheticals here, and everyone is speculating Hendrix is bad in practice, so my first comment was coming from that perspective. If you want, I'll start each sentence by saying "IF YOU BUY THE ARGUMENT THAT HENDRIX IS BAD IN PRACTICE", but I'm guessing that would get tiresome to read.

And to answer your question, I honestly have no idea which is is. I don't know if he's bad or good in practice. Nor am I calling for him to start. I'd like to see him get a couple series during a competitive game to see what the kid has.

 

[Dizzyphil]

But thats just my point. The coaches DO NOT KNOW. It is not possible for them to know, because the man has never played in a game. No human on the face of the earth knows what Hendrix can do until he plays in a game. They may have hunches and guesses, but from what I've observed over many years of watching football, even the best coaches and GMs don't really know what they've got half of the time. Bill Polian is a great example, h admits all the time they just don't know what they have until they are in a game.

Brother, your arguement doesn't hold any water. What makes one think if a qb is so-so in practice, the qb will be different in real game situations? Sorry man, not making any sense.

Diz

 

[BobD]

Edit: I took out an argument because I've decided I really don't feel like trying to argue.

I'm absolutely positive that if we had a QB who gave us a better chance to win, he would be playing. End of story.

I don't see it as arguing, I see it as people discussing and venting. I'd only be concerned if we all agreed.

 

[Dizzyphil]

I don't see it as arguing, I see it as people discussing and venting. I'd only be concerned if we all agreed.

+1

Just like me and mr. shamrock. this debate we are having is just that, debateable - not hate or detriment. He has his thoughts and I have mine.... so be it.... He has outstanding points and I hope I do as well.....

not going to send any hitmen just yet to see him......but we'll see


Diz

 

[BeauBenken]

I did nothing of the sort. We're all talking hypotheticals here, and everyone is speculating Hendrix is bad in practice, so my first comment was coming from that perspective. If you want, I'll start each sentence by saying "IF YOU BUY THE ARGUMENT THAT HENDRIX IS BAD IN PRACTICE", but I'm guessing that would get tiresome to read.

And to answer your question, I honestly have no idea which is is. I don't know if he's bad or good in practice. Nor am I calling for him to start. I'd like to see him get a couple series during a competitive game to see what the kid has.

Damn you're fast. I took out my argument like immediately after I posted because I don't want to argue. lol

But like I said, if we had a QB that gave us a better chance to win, he would be playing.

 

[koonja]

No. I mean that we should stop complaining about a problem that is not fixable. Dayne Crist, as much as most of you love him, and think he is the worlds greatest, is not the answer, and will not be anymore productive then Tommy Rees, otherwise he would be playing. It's not pride stopping BK from putting Dayne into the game, it's that Dayne is not a better quarterback then Tommy Rees.

Now, do we have a QB problem? Yes. We do. We can do different things to hide it, and take some pressure off the QB.

1. Leprecat- Theo needs the ball more
2. Plays set up for big gains--plays specifcally designed to get Theo/Cierre Wood/ MF..etc the ball in space. We saw more of that last season then this season
3. Change of pace QB. I know some of you swear that is not an option, but Brian Kelly eludes to it, and Urban Meyer supports it. I think having packages for either Golson or Hendrix in specific situations would work well.
4. More Jonas Gray.

Tommy Rees shouldn't be throw 40 passes a game. He shouldn't be throwing more then 25. We have some many weapons, we have to get them more involved. That would make our QB issues less obvious, and would make opposing defensive coordinators think twice about keying in on Tommy Rees

So you won't question our starting QB based on the fact that BK chose Tommy to start, therefore Tommy is the best QB for our team.

And about Tommy throwing 40 passes a game, when in your opinion, he should only be throwing 25, are you questioning BKs play calling? If you can question BKs gameplan, why can't we question his judgement in a starting QB?

Let's look at your 1-4 then.

1) You say Theo needs the ball more, via wildcat. Well, if the wildcat was good for the offense, don't you think BK would have ran it by now?

2) Obviously BK must be seeing something in practice that shows we can't get our playmakers in space, so why do you think ND should do that?

3) If BK eludes to it, why haven't we seen it? There must be a reason, right?

4) Why more Jonas Gray? Are you questioning BKs personnel? If BK only gives him 8 carries a game, there must be a reason for it, right? Perhaps Jonas can't handle 12 carries. How can you question the # of carries Jonas gets when BK is in charge of his carries?

Why isn't BK making the changes that you apparently think he should? He must be right, so I don't even know why you'd bring it up.

See how that sounds? We're asking for a different QB than one that throws 3 TOs per game and requires the rest of the team to play perfect, just to have a chance in the 4th quarter.

Maybe BK is wrong and should start Crist or Hendrix and he does make the change. Then, were we still wrong to call for it a week early?

Don't tell me that we should not ask for a different QB when you're asking for certain players to see the ball more and for the game plan to change.

 

[pkt77242]

Who says he hasn't? You're just speculating, of course. We don't know anything, regardless of what you think you are extrapolating from vague references in old press conferences.

Logic says if Hendrix was playing lights out in practice he would be playing already. Heck if they (they being any of our other abs) were outplaying Rees in practice don't you think we would have seen one of them?

Typing on the phone at the store but I will add more later.

 

[Dizzyphil]

I did nothing of the sort. We're all talking hypotheticals here, and everyone is speculating Hendrix is bad in practice, so my first comment was coming from that perspective. If you want, I'll start each sentence by saying "IF YOU BUY THE ARGUMENT THAT HENDRIX IS BAD IN PRACTICE", but I'm guessing that would get tiresome to read.

And to answer your question, I honestly have no idea which is is. I don't know if he's bad or good in practice. Nor am I calling for him to start. I'd like to see him get a couple series during a competitive game to see what the kid has.

The only, and I mean only, problem I see with this is if the kid gets hurt. I know that chances are slim to none but, it's there. I see your points bro and they aren't taken lightly. I would love to know that Hendrix could come in and be the next T. Rice. Every person on IE would love that. But the coaches know something - have to or I would hope that he would be running a play or two as you say.

Diz

 

[PJWhitfield]

Some of Rees' turnovers weren't his. I can think of at least three that weren't Rees' doing this season: The bounce off the receiver's helmet because the receiver isn't looking at the QB, the receiver who doesn't come back to the ball but lets the defender step in front of him, the receiver who runs the wrong pattern. I'm bothered more by special-team failures. Kicking the ball out of bounds on the kickoff so Pitt gets great field position; a bad hike that screws up a FG attempt; and so on. I don't know how BK fixes those because teams generally drill on those things again and again. It's only BK's fault if there is a better talent on the bench, and I have no way of knowing that.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I am going to trust Kelly's decision and if it is to stay with Rees then I am all for it. Rees needs to limit the turnovers NOW. Until Rees is the player that loses the game for us, I want him at quarterback.

Agreed. Rees is playing because Kelly believes we can win now.

We don't know that Hendrix doesn't have those things - we haven't seen him in a game situation. Some guys don't necessarily show it in practice but just get it when the lights are on. We can't draw any conclusions about Hendrix until he gets a shot.

Kelly's job depends on winning. I'm certain Hendrix, Golson, or Crist would have seen playing time against Pitt if Kelly thought there was a decent chance any of them could have managed the game better than Rees.

I prefer your other avatar, BTW...

Tim had a good run, but Walter's back by popular demand.

 

[Me2SouthBend]

I would probably take Pitt's DEs over ours also.

And you'd have a lesser defense as a result. The conservative play calling BK is forced to run is making opposing defenses better. We can't run from the QB position and we can't throw downfield and teams know it. D Coordinators are stacking the box as a result and it makes their line play better as a result. We have more bodies to account for at the LOS than we would if we had the ability to stretch the field.