Is this a "well coached" football team?

[BobD]

Kelly is a very good coach, but for him to become great, he needs to join IE. It's easily apparent, to even the casual observer, that we have all the answers. : )

 

[PADOMERNUT]

And just think had 3 plays went the other way? (Pitt, BC, Wake). You can't play that stupid game, the plays DID go that way. We are 8-3 hanging by a thread to the top25 and are getting ready for the Stanford Jailsexing, that is what we are.

I assume you will be free next Saturday from 8-1130, because according to you, there is no reason that next week's game should even be played...

 

[DomeX2 eNVy]

One of the most important things I've learned in my life: If you want to be successful, you need to continue critiquing yourself, and it's easier to do so after successes rather than failures. This way, you're more logical and objective. As far as program-changing wins, MSU can't be counted as such (I don't think it really changed the program much, considering how inconsistent we've been following the game).

First off, I want to say that I'm not arguing with you, and agree with the first point - but I do want to debate what I bolded. We may be talking different scenarios, but this is a bit of my life philosophy (as an ND grad).

I have been successful in my career for many reasons. (And I'll consider myself successful because despite coming from a lower/middle class background; my ROI exceeds the now famous "Whiskey ND ROI" number even though I got some years to go).
But I consider the main reason for my success the fact that I started out with many failures. Rather than shifting blame, denying it, or focusing on the successes I studied these failures the hardest. This includes not only my personal failures, but the failures of others in the industry. Why? Because it is easier for me to learn from failures than successes.

Why is this? In my business, products have multiple variables that create the end result. Maybe this isn't true in all things, but it is for me and I believe something like a football team. I think we all agree football has multiple variables to make the whole. Looking at products, it is often hard to figure out which of the variables was key to success - because often it isn't one, it is all of them working in concert. Contrasting to that, in a failure it is frequently easy to find the variable that is to blame. One bad element can kill many healthy ones, like a cancer.

So to the point of this thread, I think the coaching staff is doing well for the following reason. They have had 4 bad performances imo: Pitt, USC, Wake, and BC. Look what happened the following weeks: Purdue = blowout; Navy = blowout; Maryland = blowout; Stanford = ???? probably not a blowout, but I expect a good team that learns from this weeks errors. To me that is a sign of a staff that is and will succeed.

The biggest concern to me is the lack of consistency, not of the team because all teams have this, but from the game plans (coaching). For example, why is it high octane against Maryland and then run the clock against BC. I think that makes it hard on the team.


EDIT: You can add the 4th quarter of Michigan to the list of bad performances which was followed by the MSU win.

 

[DillonHall]

So to the point of this thread, I think the coaching staff is doing well for the following reason. They have had 4 bad performances imo: Pitt, USC, Wake, and BC. Look what happened the following weeks: Purdue = blowout; Navy = blowout; Maryland = blowout; Stanford = ???? probably not a blowout, but I expect a good team that learns from this weeks errors. To me that is a sign of a staff that is and will succeed.

Thanks for the post; I don't think I'm personally quite old enough to have had the opportunity to face too many failures, but I've definitely been more motivated after doing poorly on an exam, so I see your point of view.

Regarding the section that I'm replying to, can you say that the team improved/learned from their mistakes if they repeated them later on? In other words, the USC, Wake, and BC games came off the bad outing against Pitt (and probably USF was just as bad a performance as they've had). Just because they bounced back the immediate week that followed doesn't mean they learned from their errors if they repeat them and have other bad outings later on in the year.

 

[DomeX2 eNVy]

Thanks for the post; I don't think I'm personally quite old enough to have had the opportunity to face too many failures, but I've definitely been more motivated after doing poorly on an exam, so I see your point of view.

Regarding the section that I'm replying to, can you say that the team improved/learned from their mistakes if they repeated them later on? In other words, the USC, Wake, and BC games came off the bad outing against Pitt (and probably USF was just as bad a performance as they've had). Just because they bounced back the immediate week that followed doesn't mean they learned from their errors if they repeat them and have other bad outings later on in the year.

Fair question, and you could be right. I see a team that at least learns how to focus and entally improve from adversity, if not schematically or physically improve. Contrast that to how they seem to get overconfident (or as some say 'entitled' in their attitude) after they start rolling teams. I think this may be part of what BK was mentioning about the upper classmen after USC. It seems like they act like they got it all figured out and let up on the practice and preparation.

One thing I'm sick of on this board (generally speaking) is people saying that they always play down to the opponents level. Sometimes yes, but definitely not as frequently as in the previous years.


* We'll disagree on USF, I feel the team played well and dominated except for turnovers. And don't worry, you'll get old some day too

 

[Patulski]

This entitlement also extends to the fans. NDNation was full of posts this week about how lousy BC was, how they shouldn't even be mentioned as anything but an afterthought in regards to mighty ND etc. etc. But BC hates Notre Dame, and the ND game is their biggest game of the year. They get kids that are on the ND recruiting bubble, who aren't a big of a step down from what we have. So, combine that with a sky high emotional attitude and you've got a tough game. I'd wager Kelly and the players respected BC more than the fans did. That's why they're satisfied with the win, while much of the fanbase isn't.

Contrast that to how they seem to get overconfident (or as some say 'entitled' in their attitude) after they start rolling teams. I think this may be part of what BK was mentioning about the upper classmen after USC. It seems like they act like they got it all figured out and let up on the practice and preparation.

 

[phork]

I assume you will be free next Saturday from 8-1130, because according to you, there is no reason that next week's game should even be played...

Nah. I'll be here. Setting up and using the LiveChat feature. I am predicting high drunkability factor. Come join us, it'll be a blast.

Just had to do a quick edit..

This year, USF was a mess, but again, you don't start the year with them schedule makers. You start w/ Kent St so you can work through your mistakes.

Yah I guess LSU missed that memo.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

I enjoy going to games usually so I don't have to read this ****. By the time I get back, it's usually off the front page.

Thanks for ruining my day. What the **** do some of you want? Most arrogant fan base in sports. Bunch of fat *** couch jockeys that think they could coach D1 football.

"We're allowed to question the coaches." Yes, but you do so on a play by play basis instead of looking at the entire game or season progression. It's like I'm dealing with 5 year olds in an argument.

Please, continue to grace us with your in-depth perspective on the spread offense, and why it's destined for failure. You do know that even NFL teams run variations of this ****, right? Tricky? Evolve.

This argument is two-sided, and it certainly appears both sides are bringing valid points to the thread. The only arrogance here is the people who are convinced they are right, and fail to look at differing opinions objectively.

 

[loomis41973]

No excuse for the state of our special teams, but i do think we are improving as a whole.

 

[Domer4ever]

This argument is two-sided, and it certainly appears both sides are bringing valid points to the thread. The only arrogance here is the people who are convinced they are right, and fail to look at differing opinions objectively.

Yeah I love how if you question the coaching staff you are deemed "delusional" or "not a real fan" and to be labeled as such by a few of the perceived high and mighty on this board is a complete crock of ****. I am not saying anyone is right one way or the other in regards to the coaching, but there have certainly been enough mental mistakes and uninspired football under Kelly to certainly bring up the topic in discussion without being raked over the coals.

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

Yeah I love how if you question the coaching staff you are deemed "delusional" or "not a real fan" and to be labeled as such by a few of the perceived high and mighty on this board is a complete crock of ****.

There's a lot of really good posters on this board. And, there are a greater number of really bad posters, unfortunately. Very little in between. Not sure what it is about this program (The ND football program) that attracts D bags.

 

[Old Man Mike]

This post is directed at no specific person. If you feel that it IS directed at you, then that is an opportunity for meditation.

I have no idea who is a good or bad person or a good or bad fan. All we have on the board are posts. My view of a good or bad post is perhaps idiosyncratic to myself, but I think that a significant number of others share it. It is, at least in part:

A). a good post addresses the point of the discussion with some evidence that the poster made some effort prior to just firing something off. That is, a good post actually "brings something to the table" and thereby contains some evidence that the point being made is not the product of drunkenness, stupidity, ignorance, whimsey, manic-depression, childishness, or a myriad of other such "emotional" blurts which all of us have had the displeasure of reading thousands of times; posters of all persuasions along the positivity/negativity scale may produce such board pollution;

B). a good post lacks, as much as is possible, "attitude". Attitude is a dead giveaway that the poster's ego is involved. Frankly, no one cares who you or I am, nor whether "we" are brilliant [in our own minds], or "first" in some piece of trivia, or "win" an argument to salve our immature self-images. I view the Board as a Team effort and a privileged opportunity to freely and impersonally share substantive information about something that most of us care about [perhaps too much];

C). a good post manifests perspective. This perspective is many-sided. At the absolute minimum, it demands that the poster demonstrate that they have actually read the relevant previous postings in the thread [ideally in other threads as well], and understand what the thread starter was actually trying to talk about.

Beyond the simple courtesy of the above, good posts show perspective in considering that situations/issues being talked about are always complex. That SHOULD require some attempt to understand the complexities. Upon honestly trying to see the complexity, one might easily begin to see the "other person's" reasons for saying what they do. IF one is incapable of figuring out anything complex, one should at least then show some humility in the emotional intensity of one's opinions. We are BADLY lacking in humility on this board.

A third dimension of perspective is the "historical". This is not just "history" in the depth that BGIF operates. This history might go back just to last spring, or the beginning of the season. It unfailingly moderates cocksureness in one's knee-jerk posting.

There is much more to creating a good post [such as not mocking recruits, especially on their own threads], but this will do.

Concerning this thread topic, I will risk putting myself on the hot seat and referring you to my post early in the thread. Doubtless I will have failed to accurately "write the talk", but at least I can tell you that I gave it a try.

 

[NDFANnSouthWest]

This post is directed at no specific person. If you feel that it IS directed at you, then that is an opportunity for meditation.

I have no idea who is a good or bad person or a good or bad fan. All we have on the board are posts. My view of a good or bad post is perhaps idiosyncratic to myself, but I think that a significant number of others share it. It is, at least in part:

A). a good post addresses the point of the discussion with some evidence that the poster made some effort prior to just firing something off. That is, a good post actually "brings something to the table" and thereby contains some evidence that the point being made is not the product of drunkenness, stupidity, ignorance, whimsey, manic-depression, childishness, or a myriad of other such "emotional" blurts which all of us have had the displeasure of reading thousands of times; posters of all persuasions along the positivity/negativity scale may produce such board pollution;

B). a good post lacks, as much as is possible, "attitude". Attitude is a dead giveaway that the poster's ego is involved. Frankly, no one cares who you or I am, nor whether "we" are brilliant [in our own minds], or "first" in some piece of trivia, or "win" an argument to salve our immature self-images. I view the Board as a Team effort and a privileged opportunity to freely and impersonally share substantive information about something that most of us care about [perhaps too much];

C). a good post manifests perspective. This perspective is many-sided. At the absolute minimum, it demands that the poster demonstrate that they have actually read the relevant previous postings in the thread [ideally in other threads as well], and understand what the thread starter was actually trying to talk about.

Beyond the simple courtesy of the above, good posts show perspective in considering that situations/issues being talked about are always complex. That SHOULD require some attempt to understand the complexities. Upon honestly trying to see the complexity, one might easily begin to see the "other person's" reasons for saying what they do. IF one is incapable of figuring out anything complex, one should at least then show some humility in the emotional intensity of one's opinions. We are BADLY lacking in humility on this board.

A third dimension of perspective is the "historical". This is not just "history" in the depth that BGIF operates. This history might go back just to last spring, or the beginning of the season. It unfailingly moderates cocksureness in one's knee-jerk posting.

There is much more to creating a good post [such as not mocking recruits, especially on their own threads], but this will do.

Concerning this thread topic, I will risk putting myself on the hot seat and referring you to my post early in the thread. Doubtless I will have failed to accurately "write the talk", but at least I can tell you that I gave it a try.

Another data point that OMM is a man of integrity and honor.

 

[NDinL.A.]

Man I wish we had won yesterday.

 

[kmoose]

Those who don't expect a lot from themselves AND from others are usually the ones that aren't that successful in life.

Those who continually have unrealistic expectations of others are usually the ones that die alone, in the streets, because no one can stand to be around them.

 

[Rudy89]

Man I wish we had won yesterday.

But we di.....oohhhhhhh I see what you did there

 

[kmoose]

I pointed out that the teams that we have beaten aren't that good. In general, people on this board need to stop putting words in my mouth...And as for it being my 'BCS problem,' it's also Kelly's because that was his stated goal at the start of the year and even up until the USC game.

1. If you don't consider Michigan State to be a good team, then you'll never be happy with anything this team does.

2. I quoted you so that I wouldn't be accused of putting words in your mouth.

3. Just because Brian Kelly set a goal, you think that entitles you to an expectation? Again...............a you problem!

 

[Irish To The Core]

There are some fans of every team who are eternally dissatisfied. If their team wins, they should have won by more. If their team loses they should have won. If their team wins by a large margin, they wonder why the 3rd stringers didn't get more reps. If the team improves they wonder why they didn't improve more.

These fans tend to exaggerate their team's outlook prior to the season so that the odds of being disappointed are maximized. They tend to remember the team's failures and quickly forget the successes. And, apparently, they have invented a mantra that goes something like: "program changing win...program changing win...".

Oh yes, and they seem to enjoy adopting the defeatist attitude as in "Once Stanford grinds our testicles into sausage and serves us second helpings...".

Yes every team has these kind of fans.

 

[Domer4ever]

1. If you don't consider Michigan State to be a good team, then you'll never be happy with anything this team does.

2. I quoted you so that I wouldn't be accused of putting words in your mouth.

3. Just because Brian Kelly set a goal, you think that entitles you to an expectation? Again...............a you problem!

Oh please, we all have expectations of this team, so why is the fact that this team bumbled and stumbled there way through losses against South Florida, Michigan and USC a "him" problem. If they dont crap themselves in those games they are in the BCS conversation and would have met the expectations of many including the head coach himself.

Go back to the original topic and you have to wonder why they crapped themselves in those games and why are they still making so many mental mistakes at this point in the season? I think you have to look at coaching and cant lay everything at the feet of the players themselves.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

There are two ends of the spectrum here, and both are extremely dangerous:

You have the "BK knows more than you, how dare you question his genius? You are an idiot for wondering why that play was called." types. These guys would have made good German soldiers in the 1940's.

Then, you have the chicken little camp that rants "Oh my God we lost the sky is falling fire BK right now."

Both types annoy the crap out of me, but I digress. What makes this site great is the plethora of opinions and insight. I try to find a happy medium, and stop to smell the roses when applicable. We won yesterday, and it felt good even though it was ugly. Just my opinion gents.

 

[Rhode Irish]

Oh please, we all have expectations of this team, so why is the fact that this team bumbled and stumbled there way through losses against South Florida, Michigan and USC a "him" problem. If they dont crap themselves in those games they are in the BCS conversation and would have met the expectations of many including the head coach himself.

Go back to the original topic and you have to wonder why they crapped themselves in those games and why are they still making so many mental mistakes at this point in the season? I think you have to look at coaching and cant lay everything at the feet of the players themselves.

Why? Because they aren't perfect. They aren't the best team in college football this year, and even the best team in college football is far from perfect. When you're a pretty good - but not great - team, that often manifests itself in inconsistent play. Overall, I think this team is good and getting better. It will continue to add and develop talent that fits into the offensive and defensive systems that this staff wants to run.

The idea that Kelly was going to take the remnants of a 6-6 football team, add some talented 18 year olds, and go undefeated and blow everybody out on the way seems foolish to me. There is a process at work right now. If you don't like watching the sausage being made, perhaps you should take a year or two away.

 

[pkt77242]

Why? Because they aren't perfect. They aren't the best team in college football this year, and even the best team in college football is far from perfect. When you're a pretty good - but not great - team, that often manifests itself in inconsistent play. Overall, I think this team is good and getting better. It will continue to add and develop talent that fits into the offensive and defensive systems that this staff wants to run.

The idea that Kelly was going to take the remnants of a 6-6 football team, add some talented 18 year olds, and go undefeated and blow everybody out on the way seems foolish to me. There is a process at work right now. If you don't like watching the sausage being made, perhaps you should take a year or two away.

^This

I would rep you but I need to spread the love around.

 

[kmoose]

Oh please, we all have expectations of this team, so why is the fact that this team bumbled and stumbled there way through losses against South Florida, Michigan and USC a "him" problem. If they dont crap themselves in those games they are in the BCS conversation and would have met the expectations of many including the head coach himself.

Go back to the original topic and you have to wonder why they crapped themselves in those games and why are they still making so many mental mistakes at this point in the season? I think you have to look at coaching and cant lay everything at the feet of the players themselves.

That's reasonable, and I have no problem with it. You are posing a question, and providing a logical path for how you came to that idea.

But if you create unrealistic expectations for your team, based on goals stated by the coach..........that's a you problem. There's a sh!tpile of difference between a goal and an expectation!

 

[kmoose]

You have the "BK knows more than you, how dare you question his genius? You are an idiot for wondering why that play was called." types. These guys would have made good German soldiers in the 1940's.

Vee haff vays uff making you tock!!!

 

[Patulski]

The idea that Kelly was going to take the remnants of a 6-6 football team, add some talented 18 year olds, and go undefeated and blow everybody out on the way seems foolish to me. There is a process at work right now. If you don't like watching the sausage being made, perhaps you should take a year or two away.

What's more disturbing is how many alumni seem to want Kelly to fail to support their own smug assessment of him.

 

[irshtrain]

I will say this about this subject. I dont think Brian Kelly or ANYONE who has not been an asst coach at Notre Dame understands how Notre Dame gets the opponents best shot every week week in and week out. It is the one thing that must shock every coach who takes the job. Yes you can say something like its a super bowl every week or everyone gets up for Notre Dame but if you havent experienced it you dont get it until it hits you in the mouth. Fake field goals in overtime/teams like BC playing better than expected/Wake on the road/Mich pulling it out of their @$$ in the 4th quarter/ you dont get it until you have to deal with it every week. It is always the first thought I have when a new coach must take the seat. Now is knows. Now he plays to win anyway he can. Now he understands the pressure. Now he can nod his head when Ara or Lou speaks of it. Now he can speak on what its like to be the head coach at Notre Dame. Now he understands. It ages you and it will eventually beat you down, but it is still the best football job in the world. Brian Kelly is doing just fine-he will even get better at this mountain of a job. Just give him the players.

 

[DillonHall]

1. If you don't consider Michigan State to be a good team, then you'll never be happy with anything this team does.

2. I quoted you so that I wouldn't be accused of putting words in your mouth.

3. Just because Brian Kelly set a goal, you think that entitles you to an expectation? Again...............a you problem!

Dude, what's your problem? Why don't you quote me on a more recent post? I'm not a stubborn bitch like other people and I already made some concessions on this debate. Don't be an *** for no reason.

 

[HereComeTheIrish]

Dude, what's your problem? Why don't you quote me on a more recent post? I'm not a stubborn bitch like other people and I already made some concessions on this debate. Don't be an *** for no reason.

Still picking fights.... NICE.

 

[DillonHall]

Still picking fights.... NICE.

You, BGIF, and kmoose have been trying to pick fights with me for the past week and a half. I understand that we're going to have different viewpoints, but you three have tried to make it personal with me. I also realize that I've made dumb comments that were at times over the edge, and I apologize. However, I don't think your behavior has been mature or respectful either.

 

[Patulski]

I will say this about this subject. I dont think Brian Kelly or ANYONE who has not been an asst coach at Notre Dame understands how Notre Dame gets the opponents best shot every week week in and week out. It is the one thing that must shock every coach who takes the job. Yes you can say something like its a super bowl every week or everyone gets up for Notre Dame but if you havent experienced it you dont get it until it hits you in the mouth. Fake field goals in overtime/teams like BC playing better than expected/Wake on the road/Mich pulling it out of their @$$ in the 4th quarter/ you dont get it until you have to deal with it every week. It is always the first thought I have when a new coach must take the seat. Now is knows. Now he plays to win anyway he can. Now he understands the pressure. Now he can nod his head when Ara or Lou speaks of it. Now he can speak on what its like to be the head coach at Notre Dame. Now he understands. It ages you and it will eventually beat you down, but it is still the best football job in the world. Brian Kelly is doing just fine-he will even get better at this mountain of a job. Just give him the players.

I think Kelly is beginning to get it. If he was still at Cincy, there's no way he would have punted on 4th and 1 in BC territory. But he's learning that all he has to do is manage a win, and that even when he does win, nobody will be satisfied. He won, nobody was satisfied. Business as usual. Now he has to win them all, at which point nobody will be satisfied until the final play of the final game, when he'll get a six month grace period till the second guessing starts again. The only consolation he'll have if he wins a NC is that some day he'll be sanctified and compared to the then current coach, who will pale in comparison in every way until he wins a NC at ND. At ND, it's NC or bust. That's just the way it is. The good thing is that Kelly is a fighting SOB, which is more than I can say for Davie, Willingham or Weis. He'd kick every one of their asses, and his team is beginning to reflect that. Will it be good enough to win a NC? We'll see. If he duplicates the recruiting class he got in 2011, it's a good sign.