cowheard:stop blaming kelly

[Fbolt]

Let's not forget the arrogant fanbase-I also agree with Cowherd on that point too.

 

[Old Man Mike]

I'm constantly staggered by how many of our posters swing to some extreme end of a conclusion where the reality of the issue is somewhere in between. There seems to be no "nuance" brain area in many of us.

Take the commentaries about whether we have talent or not. We obviously have talent. We did not win the games we did without very good talent. Our trouble is that we don't have all the requisite talent in the type of player that we need in every position to deal with every style of play.

When Michigan State rolls into town, our talent, positives and negatives, is not flawed in ways where State can hurt us. When USC rolls into town, we can limit them [defense gave in reality one second half touchdown] but not quite enough, and the offense couldn't make up the difference.

Our offensive line is plenty talented, as are our receivers. Our running backs are fairly talented. Our QB is actually talented too, but not quite enough to deal with certain opposing talent levels and schemes in a game-long consistent way. Talent though is generally there.

Defensively we have talent-full youngsters who don't know how to play. We have some talented oldsters as well, some of whom know. We have almost no one playing linebacker who is really talented AND knows how to play [Te'o usually excluded]. Diaco has been masking this deficiency as well as he can. Thank God for Harrison Smith's speed and intelligence, as he alone stops us from being burned several times per game [watch the lone tackles in the 8-15 yard areas].

Kelly has a lot of talent but not enough at the QB position for certain opponents --- Tommy is plenty good enough for most of them [maybe he'll continue to grow; I in no way am disappointed in him]. Diaco has a lot of talent but not nearly enough at linebacker for certain opponents [I in all ways am disappointed with the linebackers]. Hmmmm....deficits against certain types of teams at QB and linebackers... ? I wonder how THAT would affect winning percentage in a schedule where every game has a quality opponent??

 

[Grahambo]

"He won at Grand Valley State. I'm not sure what that is. He won at the directional Michigan schools..."

That's just funny to me.

Seriously though, the points I have been making Cowherd summed it up.

 

[irishff1014]

I agree that the coach can't be blamed to for the players not execution of hte plays they call. How ever that being said Kelly i always shares the blame with everyon so that not just one person or group has that pressure on them which is great, I know in every thread the should clould woulda happens. Right know we are 4-3 and at the end of the day that isn't good enough. I do believe at time our play calling is rather dumb and i know for a fact that there is nothing one thing in this world i can do about it. All we can hope is these players at someitme start learning for their mistakes.

 

[Aerosmith777]

To be fair, I once heard Cowherd give almost this exact same speech about Charlie Weis in his second year I think it was too (I believe it was after the loss to UM that year), and we all know how that ended.

But along a similar vein, this is the 2nd or 3rd thing I've seen from a major sports outlet on ND fans already jumping ship on BK, and honestly, I don't see where they're getting it from. Looking around, I don't see where this huge group of Irish fans is who are calling for his head already. I know there's some, and obviously Cowherd found one who wrote him a letter about it or whatever it was. But it almost seems like some people in the media are portraying that guy's letter as the general mindset of Irish fans right now, and I honestly don't see it.

 

[adsnorri]

Yea, I'm not calling for bk's head but there is a problem with the coach if we can't get over the 50 yard line in our super bowl... Which it was, until 2 min left in the first half. In which case was sheer momentum after the kick return. Also, if your telling me that they effectively double teamed michael floyd with a linebacker... He is not going to do very well in football if a linebacker can cover him, even in short routes. Thats a joke, just show sarcasm next time with italics. Also, if my simple defensive strategy wouldn't work because we would get gashed up the middle, we mine as well take the olbs off the field cause the team got gashed up the middle anyway. Show some blitzes, doesn't looks or barkley will pick us apart every time... Just like luck is going to. They study our defense and we show them the same exact defense in the game. Usc ran four plays; up the middle handoff, sweep, bubble screen, high low making the olb choose between the 2. We didnt stop any of them and we knew they were going to run these plays because they always do!! Since pete caroll. We have to manufacture some offense and show some different looks on defense with a veteran secondary. Ridiculous. I was at the game and we all were screaming one on one for michael floyd. I understand turnovers but we were geting beat down before that, even though the score was close.

 

[irishtrain]

I might have to reconsider my respect for Kelly's coaching ability if this %$#@head thinks highly of Coach Kelly because this %$#@head is a no nothing blowhard tool.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I might have to reconsider my respect for Kelly's coaching ability if this %$#@head thinks highly of Coach Kelly because this %$#@head is a no nothing blowhard tool.

I don't want to be a jerk, but you can't misspell the word "know" when you're knocking someone for being uninformed.

Just a friendly jab, my friend.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I might have to reconsider my respect for Kelly's coaching ability if this %$#@head thinks highly of Coach Kelly because this %$#@head is a no nothing blowhard tool.

Kelly was recently a guest on Cowherd's radio show. It's natural for Cowherd to defend him after having met him in person.

It's also a great example of why BK's media tours are good for the university. The talking heads on the WWL are much less likely to attack you if they know you personally.

 

[Aerosmith777]

Kelly was recently a guest on Cowherd's radio show. It's natural for Cowherd to defend him after having met him in person.

It's also a great example of why BK's media tours are good for the university. The talking heads on the WWL are much less likely to attack you if they know you personally.

I understand him defending him, I just question whether he really needs to be defended right now. At least, against the majority of Irish-nation, so to speak. It seems kind of like a straw-man to me at the moment.

 

[Buster Bluth]

if your telling me that they effectively double teamed michael floyd with a linebacker... He is not going to do very well in football if a linebacker can cover him, even in short routes. Thats a joke, just show sarcasm next time with italics.

Well, that's what happened whether it was an OLB or a nickle. Plus the times the Irish got the looks that they wanted, Rees and Floyd had pretty bad rhythm. I don't care if he's Jerry Rice, you can take ONE player away from an offense. Stop acting like Floyd is "uncoverable" by mere mortals. He's doesn't have 4.35 speed and defenses can double him and impact his production.

Also, if my simple defensive strategy wouldn't work because we would get gashed up the middle, we mine as well take the olbs off the field cause the team got gashed up the middle anyway.

No argument there, I agree with that hyperbole. But don't act like the OLB's weren't in position though; they were. Did you not see Fleming and Shembo take turns wiffing on Barkley's boot? That is not how BCS-caliber OLB's play. They choked and USC took advantage of it.

Show some blitzes, doesn't looks or barkley will pick us apart every time... Just like luck is going to. They study our defense and we show them the same exact defense in the game.

Jon Tenuta likes playing a high risk/reward defense all of the time. Jon Tenuta also sucks at coaching.

It's pretty simple though: good defenses start in the interior line. Without a tough front the rest of your defense is at a tremendous defense and you can't do all of the pretty stuff you want. Notre Dame had the luxury of being able to do anything you just suggested against teams when they were forced into one-dimensional situations.

USC's offense thrives off of being balanced, because it's a pro-style offense. Notre Dame obliterated Michigan State because they stopped the run, if you do that against a pro-style offense you win 80% of the time.

Usc ran four plays; up the middle handoff, sweep, bubble screen, high low making the olb choose between the 2. We didnt stop any of them and we knew they were going to run these plays because they always do!! Since pete caroll.

If you think USC's offense consists of four plays, that is a huge disrespect to them and false. Notre Dame "didnt stop any of them" because they choked at crucial times.

Playing defense is a lot like playing poker. You do what works most often and you only take real risks when you need to and when it can't hurt you as much. It's also not about stopping every play but limiting points. Notre Dame gave USC two touchdowns directly via turnovers, and on a number of times when they were in position they missed easy tackles and had personal foul penalties that extended drives.

SERIOUSLY, this wasn't an X's and O's loss. This wasn't last year's Navy game which was almost entirely on the coaching staff. This was on the players and maybe a lack of motivation/concentration.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I understand him defending him, I just question whether he really needs to be defended right now. At least, against the majority of Irish-nation, so to speak. It seems kind of like a straw-man to me at the moment.

It seems that way to us because we hang out in the more enlightened corners of the ND blogosphere. There is a very loud minority that is already calling for Kelly's head, so it probably doesn't hurt to have Cowherd telling them to STFU.

 

[Aerosmith777]

It seems that way to us because we hang out in the more enlightened corners of the ND blogosphere. There is a very loud minority that is already calling for Kelly's head, so it probably doesn't hurt to have Cowherd telling them to STFU.

Yeah, maybe you're right. I just wonder sometimes w/ stuff like this, is ND really all that different than any other fanbase? I mean, the UM fans were calling for RichRod's head in year 1 as I recall.

Sometimes I just feel like some of these guys make it seem like all, or even the majority of ND fans have these crazy expectations and we're all ready to pounce on the coach the moment they don't win a National Championship, which I really don't think is accurate.

But as you said, I'm fine w/ the minority that really are that way being told to STFU.

 

[JoeyGetherall]

Kelly was recently a guest on Cowherd's radio show. It's natural for Cowherd to defend him after having met him in person.

It's also a great example of why BK's media tours are good for the university. The talking heads on the WWL are much less likely to attack you if they know you personally.

This aaaannd

It seems that way to us because we hang out in the more enlightened corners of the ND blogosphere. There is a very loud minority that is already calling for Kelly's head, so it probably doesn't hurt to have Cowherd telling them to STFU.

This

 

[irishtrain]

Kelly was recently a guest on Cowherd's radio show. It's natural for Cowherd to defend him after having met him in person.

It's also a great example of why BK's media tours are good for the university. The talking heads on the WWL are much less likely to attack you if they know you personally.

Of course kelly did a fine job with his espn tour. The guy is a great coach and great with the media. I do like like Cowherd and do not respect his opinions. The problem at Notre Dame is not Brian Kelly and it was not Charlie Weis. They have let the football culture lapse into Wake/Northwestern/Syracuse/Maryland etc status. They meaning the administration and now they want Brian Kelly to come in on his golden stallion and win 10 games a year with no depth/no real talent depth and no across the board tough minded football personel. They want LSU/Ala players who conduct themselves like Ivy League students-it ain't happening!

 

[adsnorri]

Buster; 41 yards rushing and 28 receiving yards for michael floyd. Do we not have other receivers? Can we not run on this younger* defense with our experienced and talented oline and running backs? We didn't gameplan it. I'm not trying to pick a bone with you, just kind of thinking on a keyboard...

Our receivers are just as good as usc. However I will agree they have barkley. This system is supposed to rid that weakness. I will agree that our players didnt execute very well but the plan looked to not be very good as well.

We gave them some points but we were down 17-0 before the kick return. You can't go down that much without being either untalented or outcoached. I have to say our o-line could block usc, our receivers are as good as usc, our top 2 running backs are as good as usc. Why can't we score or get over the 50?

Our defense starts in the trenches and were young there. Our lbs are very experienced as well as talented as usc. Our secondary is experienced and I would give the talent edge to usc but not huge. Why cant we get them off the field on every 3rd down? Were not that far in regards to talent.

I can answer those questions , we were outcoached on both sides of the ball. They had a better gameplan, period.

 

[Al H.]

Colin Cowheard's a jack ***. Anyone who thinks they can summarize an entire team based on the performance of a single game in a single season is a jack ***. Worse, it's what that jack *** does for a living. I give him no credence. More like Colin `Blowhard'.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Buster; 41 yards rushing and 28 receiving yards for michael floyd. Do we not have other receivers? Can we not run on this younger* defense with our experienced and talented oline and running backs? We didn't gameplan it. I'm not trying to pick a bone with you, just kind of thinking on a keyboard...

Our receivers are just as good as usc. However I will agree they have barkley. This system is supposed to rid that weakness. I will agree that our players didnt execute very well but the plan looked to not be very good as well.

Notre Dame's receiving corp isn't close to USC's. It really isn't. Notre Dame's isn't bad at all--I think it's fine and all, but USC's is dripping with talent at all of their skill positions.

USC has speed all over the place and Rees has demonstrated that against teams with speed he will struggle a bit.

Why wouldn't Notre Dame run the ball? Ask Wood. He has 1 yard a carry. I think the 17-0 deficit also took some run plays off the chart.

We gave them some points but we were down 17-0 before the kick return. You can't go down that much without being either untalented or outcoached. I have to say our o-line could block usc, our receivers are as good as usc, our top 2 running backs are as good as usc. Why can't we score or get over the 50?

Says who? Here's how that happened: Notre Dame made this their Superbowl and got a -8.5 from Vegas and a 4-1 Southern Cal team full of HS All-Americans was enraged. One team went into that stadium with incredible anger and ready to roll, and the other looked like they were waiting for USC to lay down.

It's really as simple as that. Stop looking too far into it.

Our defense starts in the trenches and were young there. Our lbs are very experienced as well as talented as usc. Our secondary is experienced and I would give the talent edge to usc but not huge. Why cant we get them off the field on every 3rd down? Were not that far in regards to talent.

I can answer those questions , we were outcoached on both sides of the ball. They had a better gameplan, period.

Two horrible wiffs by "experienced as well as talented as usc" linebackers on third and fourth down plays. Did you and your friends not see those from the stands?

How about Carlo Calabrese taunting the Southern Cal player like a fool, giving them a first down and fifteen yards, did you see that one?

Bad gameplan, my ***. You are making way too many assumptions and looking far to into things.

 

[PJWhitfield]

Flip the focus for some balance: Does anybody really believe that USC would've won without that freakish fumble which brought a 14 point turnaround in an instant? And if Crist had hung onto the ball, what would we be saying about BK now? We played much of the game like crap but so did USC. We just outcrapped them. Hopefully we can go back to competence against Navy. And maybe Stanford can show the USC trash talkers a thing or two. I'd like that.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Flip the focus for some balance: Does anybody really believe that USC would've won without that freakish fumble which brought a 14 point turnaround in an instant? And if Crist had hung onto the ball, what would we be saying about BK now? We played much of the game like crap but so did USC. We just outcrapped them. Hopefully we can go back to competence against Navy. And maybe Stanford can show the USC trash talkers a thing or two. I'd like that.

It's really hard, for me, to say with confidence that USC wins that game if Notre Dame ties it up 17-17.

USC dominated the opening quarter, going up 17-0 and looking like the game was going to be one of the 38-0 routs of yesteryear. That did not happen. Notre Dame "manned up."

Notre Dame goes on a 10-0 run to end the first half. USC gets the ball after half, and misses the field goal, Notre Dame gets the ball and drives the field and scores to tie it 17-17. All momentum is Irish at this point. Interesting game from there.

USC played the fourth quarter with a huge emotional swing in their favor. Teams that have to run the clock out feed off of that energy. Without victory in their sight, it gets interesting. Of course you could argue that their first possession of the second half went pretty well, and they ran the clock out in the fourth quarter. But, in my opinion, a Notre Dame defense with momentum and energy stops them and Notre Dame wins....and Brian Kelly is lauded as being the masterful coach who got the comeback. Instead we have loonies (and I'm being kind) suggesting some failure of a coaching job on the staff's part. In reality it's in the middle, Notre Dame didn't come to play, the coaches got the players to focus and mounted a comeback, and the QB play gave it right back to USC.

 

[adsnorri]

Anyone can play the if game. Fact of the matter is usc came in our house in the biggest game of our year while the crowd was going crazy and simply beat us up. They did not need momentum to best us, just a better gameplan...which is why it didnt matter how lots the crowd was or anything else. They knew what they were going to do and did it.

By the same token, we could not stop them at all. With the crowd going crazy, biggest game of some of these players careers... It didnt matter. If we gameplan better to get the ball out of rees' hands quicker, dayne would not be in there. Loonies playing the if game and the “were going to be great this year" games are blinded to these facts. Green kool aid and shades have you seeing a close game lost by mistakes while in fact we got dominated in the running game and did not have a gameplan to get the ball in our best receivers hands while they did. Twist it how you choose but the team was not ready to play. This is a whole nother subject but I think we should not have a bye week before this game anymore. I think the team over thinks this game and has paralysis by analysis. Coaches as well.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Well, you're wrong. I don't know any other way to slice it.

I said initially that USC basically dominated on the ground, now you're taking my argument from me?! hahaha Just the fact that you suggested blitzing the edges while the opponent runs up the A and B gaps means you know as much about the chess game out there as my alarm clock sitting next to me does.

A team can play better than the other without a coach being at fault. Please, for your mental health, stop trying to assign the blame on anything more than USC's sheer will and determination in the trenches. If that's a strategic X's and O's move, sure. I think it was motivation and USC had a ton more of it than the Irish on Saturday. If Notre Dame plays with that level of anger, they won't lose a game the rest of the season.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Here's part of my weird take on the game: there are certain teams that you don't do anything outside of the game itself to awaken from their happy surfside demeanor. USC is notorious for two characteristics: being absolutely loaded with animalistic talent, and going to sleep about twice a season [at least] under their shade trees.

When scheduling a team like that, let them surf their brains out and snooze in the shade. We instead created a media circus atmosphere. That was great for national television exposure, but an error in terms of prodding animals.

My reading of our guys over the past several years is that they are talented and supersmart and great people, but they are not animals. They just do not respond to the glitz the way an animal team does. Special uniforms? Special helmets? Special night game? National TV audience? Sure all that creates excitement....but WHO gets MORE excited?

My brother played Alabama at Alabama. Their stands were rocking a nerve-pulsing "RROLLLLLL TIIIIIIDE!" right and left along the whole field. What impact did that have on him? He was so fired up that he smashed the first several Alabama defensive players in the mouth with his best shot.

Excitement is a Knife which cuts both ways. One better be sure that your team is going to get more out of it than the other guys. USC is the one team on our schedule that I would never do anything pre-game than plain vanilla. DURING the game is different---obvious cheering for ones own guys does not psychologically trip off the animal in the opposition. Booing the opponent or hurling some mockery at the "wrong" time might, but loud cheering is all good in-game.