'11 CA LB Joe Schmidt (Scholarship Earned)

[Rocket89]

Wondering why OFD does not analyze these plays. I like OFD but they are clearly doing what they can to make Joe look better.

Farley had 7 tackles, on-side kick recovery, and a key interception basically in one half of play.

No, just not taking part in the Schmidt witch hunt. This thread is almost getting as bad as the Rivals board.

BTW, here's our Farley review from the Pitt game:

Outside of a big mental error on Boyd's long sweep run, Matthias Farley had a really strong first half starting in place of Elijah Shumate. He finished with 7 tackles (4 solo) and was quite productive coming down in run support. Of course, we also have to mention his crucial goal line interception which was one of the big first half plays of the game.

Schmidt is not playing as well as last year. He's not making enough plays for the amount of snaps he takes. It's completely justified to complain about this and wonder why other players aren't getting a chance.

But for some people, as epitomized by Te'o4Heisman, Schmidt can't do anything right. He never makes plays. He's always getting knocked back (8 yards for full effect!) and can never get off blocks. Almost in every instance, the reflex is to blame Schmidt for everything on defense.

That's just BS, most especially when it prevents you from laying blame on other players for making really bad mistakes such as Farley on Boyd's sweep play. Isn't it funny how difficult is for Farley to get blame on that play? Literally, some people can't get off Schmidt for just one play.

And the fact that anyone would want to highlight a very routine play of Schmidt covering a tight end on a crossing route, and for a split second not breaking off to tackle the QB, as some horrible play proves my point, I think. He's SO horrible and can't do ANYTHING right and that's the play to point out as to why? Sure, okay.

A poster just above said Max and Joe aren't good. Probably our 10th and 11th worst players on defense in either order, right? Yet until today Redfield's thread was crickets for the past month. Our biggest problem on defense, by a country mile, has been the secondary giving up big plays and for the most part Redfield's not getting anywhere near the criticism of Schmidt. If only Schmidt were a 5-star recruit he'd get less flak cause "he'll figure it out eventually he's too talented not to!"

I'd be much more worried about our secondary against any playoff opponent but why talk about that when Schmidt can't do anything right.

BTW, good on kmoose for trying to bring some balance to this discussion. It's not always easy.

 

[tussin]

But it DOES specifically refute the inference that we can't win a big playoff game because opposing coaches will just target Joe Schmidt.

Considering how no other threads have ever gone off the rails to pile on Joe.......

How so? Joe is the weakest spot in the defense and will continue to get exposed by most playoff teams.

 

[brewdog_14527]

I may be wrong, but I am not sure that Nixon received as much criticism as Joe Schmidt has received in this thread.

 

[tussin]

A poster just above said Max and Joe aren't good. Probably our 10th and 11th worst players on defense in either order, right? Yet until today Redfield's thread was crickets for the past month. Our biggest problem on defense, by a country mile, has been the secondary giving up big plays and for the most part Redfield's not getting anywhere near the criticism of Schmidt. If only Schmidt were a 5-star recruit he'd get less flak cause "he'll figure it out eventually he's too talented not to!"

I'd be much more worried about our secondary against any playoff opponent but why talk about that when Schmidt can't do anything right.

The difference is that Kelly has shown little hesitation to get other people involved at safety. Kelly's extreme loyalty to Schmidt is puzzling to most fans when there appears to be no less than three potential fill-ins behind him.

EDIT: One other point -- yes, the secondary has been awful and deserves scrutiny. But, I think it's worth noting that the secondary has shown that they CAN be effective at times with guys stepping up and making big, athletic plays when they need to. I like JS and think he's a great story, but at this point I am not sure he has the physical abilities to succeed at the position at a high level and no level of coaching will change that. No one can say that about the secondary.

 

[kmoose]

How so? Joe is the weakest spot in the defense and will continue to get exposed by most playoff teams.

You think opposing coaches are going to ignore the secondary, just to exploit Joe Schmidt?

And let's not forget that, as was already pointed out, ND's defense has done a very good job of holding opposing offenses below their scoring averages for the year. So let's not act like any of the Joe Schmidt weakness, OR the secondary weakness, is cause to just chalk up a game against anyone as a loss.

 

[tussin]

You think opposing coaches are going to ignore the secondary, just to exploit Joe Schmidt?

And let's not forget that, as was already pointed out, ND's defense has done a very good job of holding opposing offenses below their scoring averages for the year. So let's not act like any of the Joe Schmidt weakness, OR the secondary weakness, is cause to just chalk up a game against anyone as a loss.

1. I didn't chalk up any game as a loss.
2. I didn't say that opposing teams would focus only on JS. Just that exposing his deficiencies would CERTAINLY be part of any offensive game plan.
3. The fact that a defense is performing well above average in some aspects doesn't mean that there also isn't weak spots that can and should be improved.

This really isn't rocket science. Do you think JS is playing well? Given his play on Saturdays, why haven't the coaches experimented with alternatives at the position? Before you respond, please save the "coaches always know more than we do" narrative because that has been proven wrong time and time again in sports.

 

[Wild Bill]

You think opposing coaches are going to ignore the secondary, just to exploit Joe Schmidt?

And let's not forget that, as was already pointed out, ND's defense has done a very good job of holding opposing offenses below their scoring averages for the year. So let's not act like any of the Joe Schmidt weakness, OR the secondary weakness, is cause to just chalk up a game against anyone as a loss.

No, they'll target both. We really have no other option in the secondary, we're just too thin. That's not true at mike. We have Grace, a former starter, and Martini, a kid who makes plays and plays smart whenever his number is called.

Nobody is chalking it up as a loss. It's just a concern given the amount of time they'll have to prepare.

 

[Irish#1]

I may be wrong, but I am not sure that Nixon received as much criticism as Joe Schmidt has received in this thread.

You've been rep'd my friend.

 

[Cackalacky]

Schmidt is not playing as well as last year. He's not making enough plays for the amount of snaps he takes. It's completely justified to complain about this and wonder why other players aren't getting a chance.

Truth.

But for some people, as epitomized by Te'o4Heisman, Schmidt can't do anything right. He never makes plays. He's always getting knocked back (8 yards for full effect!) and can never get off blocks. Almost in every instance, the reflex is to blame Schmidt for everything on defense.

I am not gonna say he can't do anything right and I don't think he does everything wrong, but the most legitimate criticism displayed every game this year is Joe is asked to do things he can't do by BVG athletically. Guarding a RB in the slot, covering a TE across the middle, and if the play stays in front of him, he whiffs on tackles or can't get there any way. There are more than enough plays throughout the season to justify this criticism. But since this is Pitt week I chose that one in particular because it was SOOOOOOOOOOO BAD.

Another criticism is that after the snap, he is one of the least productive start on defense. Mathias Farley for all his mistakes he makes is very productive. Kelly said he loves Farley because for every mistake he makes he always manages to make a huge play. For a 5th year starting MLB, Joe is incredibly unproductive. There is no amount of balance that can spin that another direction. Most people's frustration arises from the fact that this coaching staff is either unwilling or unable to get Morgan ready.

That's just BS, most especially when it prevents you from laying blame on other players for making really bad mistakes such as Farley on Boyd's sweep play. Isn't it funny how difficult is for Farley to get blame on that play? Literally, some people can't get off Schmidt for just one play.

Maybe you were here during 2012/2013 (IDK) when Farley was the guy everyone hated. Everyone knows Farley's limitations but he still manages to make great plays elsewhere. Also he is a utility man and not in every play as Joe is. Joe never comes off the field. So his exploits are magnified, especially when next to Jaylon. There is plenty of blame to be had all around the D. I readily admit it. But passing the buck to Farley makes no difference on how bad Joe's MLBing is.

And the fact that anyone would want to highlight a very routine play of Schmidt covering a tight end on a crossing route, and for a split second not breaking off to tackle the QB, as some horrible play proves my point, I think. He's SO horrible and can't do ANYTHING right and that's the play to point out as to why? Sure, okay.

I highlighted it for many reasons, but the fact that it is a ROUTINE play that a 5th year starting MLB should be able to do. There are definitely mental lapses at three points on that play. Its not the only one but the only one I took the time to parse from that video. There are others, I just don't have time to do it.

A poster just above said Max and Joe aren't good. Probably our 10th and 11th worst players on defense in either order, right? Yet until today Redfield's thread was crickets for the past month. Our biggest problem on defense, by a country mile, has been the secondary giving up big plays and for the most part Redfield's not getting anywhere near the criticism of Schmidt. If only Schmidt were a 5-star recruit he'd get less flak cause "he'll figure it out eventually he's too talented not to!"

There are no shortage of people here discombobulated by Redfield. Most of us wrote him off last year or least by the spring. Not sure your point. But who is Redfield's back up? Why are we not able to get young guys in to spell. Much of that again lands at the coach's feet who are unwilling or unable to get the the young guys on the field. Joe is bad. I don't find Redfield's thread's lack of activity any relevance to Joe's thread.

I'd be much more worried about our secondary against any playoff opponent but why talk about that when Schmidt can't do anything right.

Our defense as a whole has been relatively very good outside of a handful of plays every game where there is a break down in assignment and large chunk plays are made. We are excellent in 3rd downs, very good in redzone, very good in efficiency...No one is saying different i think, but we could still be that much better. We could be that much better with a more athletic MLB that can get to players in space AND make the tackle.... not just follow his man all the way to the sideline and stand there with him while the ball is still live.

 

[Irish#1]

1. I didn't chalk up any game as a loss.
2. I didn't say that opposing teams would focus only on JS. Just that exposing his deficiencies would CERTAINLY be part of any offensive game plan.
3. The fact that a defense is performing well above average in some aspects doesn't mean that there also isn't weak spots that can and should be improved.

This really isn't rocket science. Do you think JS is playing well? Given his play on Saturdays, why haven't the coaches experimented with alternatives at the position? Before you respond, please save the "coaches always know more than we do" narrative because that has been proven wrong time and time again in sports.

And that's why we're on here and not coaching.

 

[Rocket89]

The difference is that Kelly has shown little hesitation to get other people involved at safety. Kelly's extreme loyalty to Schmidt is puzzling to most fans when there appears to be no less than three potential fill-ins behind him.

EDIT: One other point -- yes, the secondary has been awful and deserves scrutiny. But, I think it's worth noting that the secondary has shown that they CAN be effective at times with guys stepping up and making big, athletic plays when they need to. I like JS and think he's a great story, but at this point I am not sure he has the physical abilities to succeed at the position at a high level and no level of coaching will change that. No one can say that about the secondary.

That's certainly reasonable. Schmidt's lack of impact plays makes it very easy to point out a couple bad snaps each week and blanket the rest of his performance as the same.

To the first point, the difference has been that people were still angry when Redfield has been benched and more often than not the coaching staff has been blamed for Redfield's failures (he should be developed more, the scheme must be too complicated, etc. etc.) more than just admitting Max just might not be that good. It's not a 100% comparable situation (we basically don't have much behind Redfield) but Schmidt will never get that benefit of the doubt in some quarters.

 

[gkIrish]

No, just not taking part in the Schmidt witch hunt. This thread is almost getting as bad as the Rivals board.

BTW, here's our Farley review from the Pitt game:



Schmidt is not playing as well as last year. He's not making enough plays for the amount of snaps he takes. It's completely justified to complain about this and wonder why other players aren't getting a chance.

But for some people, as epitomized by Te'o4Heisman, Schmidt can't do anything right. He never makes plays. He's always getting knocked back (8 yards for full effect!) and can never get off blocks. Almost in every instance, the reflex is to blame Schmidt for everything on defense.

That's just BS, most especially when it prevents you from laying blame on other players for making really bad mistakes such as Farley on Boyd's sweep play. Isn't it funny how difficult is for Farley to get blame on that play? Literally, some people can't get off Schmidt for just one play.

And the fact that anyone would want to highlight a very routine play of Schmidt covering a tight end on a crossing route, and for a split second not breaking off to tackle the QB, as some horrible play proves my point, I think. He's SO horrible and can't do ANYTHING right and that's the play to point out as to why? Sure, okay.

A poster just above said Max and Joe aren't good. Probably our 10th and 11th worst players on defense in either order, right? Yet until today Redfield's thread was crickets for the past month. Our biggest problem on defense, by a country mile, has been the secondary giving up big plays and for the most part Redfield's not getting anywhere near the criticism of Schmidt. If only Schmidt were a 5-star recruit he'd get less flak cause "he'll figure it out eventually he's too talented not to!"

I'd be much more worried about our secondary against any playoff opponent but why talk about that when Schmidt can't do anything right.

BTW, good on kmoose for trying to bring some balance to this discussion. It's not always easy.

As Tussin said, the key difference is that Joe Schmidt plays basically 100% of the snaps. Farley and Redfield do not. KVR gets plenty of criticism from many of us, too.

The issue is that OFD has dug a trench around the position that Joe Schmidt isn't that bad and doesn't write up analyses of any of Schmidt's bad plays (that I've seen).

Coupled with the "Chaos in the Notre Dame Secondary" article conveniently released within 15 minutes of the Joe Schmidt Iso Cam article, it's obvious that there is some ulterior motive going on. You're trying to show everyone how bad the secondary is and also show that Joe Schmidt isn't that bad. I have no idea why OFD has chosen to do this (I can guess but I really don't know). I find it unprofessional to protect a player that does not merit protection while subsequently throwing the ND secondary under the bus. I guess only walk-ons are worth your support.

Here are quotes from the Secondary article:

Inexplicably, Farley completely ignores the obvious sweep read in front of him and decides to focus on the running back (blue star) on the other side of the formation (green arrow). This really wasn't necessary as Notre Dame had 4 players (numbered 1-4) that would have been in good position if the running back got the ball.

Boyd is off to the races (blue box). Farley is woefully out of position (green circle).

This is a bizarre play from a 5th year player. It was a simple read. Even if it wasn't, in this alignment Farley's job is not to try and make plays on the other side of the formation. He needs to take care of his side of the field first. If you are wondering why the Notre Dame defense has a tendency to give up big plays, here's a great example. This should have been a short gain. Instead a mental error leads to a 37 yard gain.

Instead of making contact, KVR pulls up and actually avoids the hit (blue arrow).

This should have been a big play for the Irish, instead it was a big play for Pitt. KVR was in perfect position, and he ended up doing absolutely nothing. I know what people are going to say, KVR was trying to avoid a targeting penalty or he didn't want to hit his teammate so he pulled up. I don't buy those explanations. Great players make big plays in key situations. This was a missed opportunity.

You realize all those quotes apply to almost every Joe Schmidt play? But because the narrative that "Joe Schmidt isn't that bad" needs to be progressed, we don't see any articles with similar quotes about Joe Schmidt. It's pathetic, poor journalism.

/rant.

 

[IrishLion]

Alright, I put on the replay and isolated on Joe every play.

Here is what I saw:

JOE ISO

FIRST DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10): Joe sticks his nose into the hole and takes on a blocker. Doesn’t make the tackle, but does a good job of attacking the running lane. Just a good 5-yard power by Pitt. EVEN.

Play 2 (2nd and 5): Joe fills the first lane that develops to the right on another run play, takes on a block very quickly in the hole, forces runner to pick different lane. Jaylon fails to fill the next void that opens, Pitt picks up a first down. +1.

Play 3 (1st and 10): Pitt fakes a run to the right and tosses left. Joe is initially fooled and hesitates, but makes up the ground to the edge and gets involved with the tackle. A nice recovery by several defenders holds it to five yards after some space seemed to exist initially. +1.

Play 4 (2nd and 5): Joe dips underneath a block on another run to the left outside. Non-factor, as the edge defenders made a nice play to string it out for a small loss. EVEN.

Play 5 (3rd and 7): Joe shows blitz, then bails out into what looks to be a flat zone or a buzz zone underneath of safety help. Takes the slot receiver away as the receiver moves through his zone by staying in the throwing lane. Pass complete on the outside for a first down with KVR in coverage. +1.

Play 6 (1st and 10): Joe takes on a block in the hole on a power run, doesn’t give up much ground, involved in gang tackle after a 5-yard gain. EVEN.

Play 7 (2nd and 5): Joe again takes on a block in the hole, this time he gets swallowed up and pushed back as a gang tackle occurs after a 4-yard gain. -1.

Play 8 (3rd and 1): Pitt calls an excellent PA fake, their QB roles out into all of the green grass. Joe was fooled like the rest of the defense and collapsed on the fake. Just a good play-call by Pitt to the weak side. EVEN.

Play 9 (1st and goal): Pitt now at the ND 7. Stretch play to the left, Joe takes on a blocker and gives up some ground, defeats the block and would be in position if needed, but the ballcarrier is dropped short of Joe for a 3-yard gain. EVEN.

Play 10 (2nd and goal from the 4): Pitt throws a fade at the snap, nothing to see. EVEN.

Play 11 (3rd and goal from the 4): Joe does a reallllly nice job of locating the crossing receiver and trailing right on his hip. Pitt QB has to scramble, but the receiver was eliminated from the play even if the pocket was good. Good work Joe. +1.


SECOND DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10 at the Pitt 19): Joe gets caught in traffic on a basic slam play up the middle, can’t get to the outside when the RB moves that way. Trails the play, but not a bad play. EVEN.

Play 2 (2nd and 5): PA fake that Joe bites on, but clears out pretty quickly into his pass responsibility. ND forces a throw-away. EVEN.

Play 3 (3rd and 5): Joe is in great coverage on JP Holtz, right on his hip. The throw and catch need to be perfect; they are NOT perfect. Excellent job by Joe. +1.


THIRD DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10 at the Pitt 30): PA fake with what looks to be only one receiver running, incomplete deep. EVEN.

Play 2 (2nd and 10): A fake toss with a handoff back to the left. Joe recognizes the fake and takes a deep angle to try and get across the field, but isn’t needed. Holding called on the play. EVEN.

Play 3 (2nd and 20): A handoff up the middle. Joe takes on the block and doesn’t give up ground, kind of helps with the tackle. I’ll allow it. +1.

Play 4 (3rd and 17): Joe sit underneath in pass coverage, picks up the RB out of the backfield. The RB shakes Joe and would have had a catch and some yardage, but the QB misses the throw. Tough open-field coverage matchup, but you can’t fall for the hip fake. -1.


FOURTH DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10 at the Pitt 28): Toss to the outside. Joe fights through traffic and takes a deep angle. Not his responsibility to make a play on this one. 9-yard gain. EVEN.

Play 2 (1st and 10): Joe takes on a block, locates and catches the RB as the OL tries to get to the second level, minimizing the gain. A first down, but Joe played it well. +1.

Play 3: (1st and 10): PA fake, and Pitt has two offensive lineman way too far down field. Ball is caught but eventually overturned to incomplete.

Play 4: (2nd and 10): Joe diagnoses a WR screen, goes unblocked, and has the WR lined up for an easy tackle. Joe whiffs, and he wasn’t even going for a kill-shot. This one is bad. -2.

Play 5: (3rd and 1): Joe attacks the hole in short-yardage, brings some noise and helps stop the RB short. +1.

Play 6 (4th and short): Joe helps fill again, does a nice job of fighting through a block and hitting the RB in the backfield for a solo tackle. Though the RB did a nice job of spinning and falling forward for a first down (by inches), good play by Joe. Couldn’t do it much better. +1.

Play 7 (1st and 10): PA to the TE on a corner, not Joe’s side. EVEN.

Play 8 (1st and 10): Joe runs with the RB out of the backfield on a go-route. Joe is a few steps behind, but he has safety help over the top, so the QB would have to make a perfect throw over the top as Joe trails. Matthias gets the pick. Joe was beat, but the tight field allowed Farley to make the play while Joe was technically preventing a short throw. EVEN.


FIFTH DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10 from the Pitt 36): Joe clears out against a pass, sitting underneath the corner/safety who were both in coverage on receivers. Wasn’t tested as Onwualu gets a sack. EVEN.

Play 2 (2nd and 17): JP Holtz drops a pass as Joe cleared out to help immediately. EVEN.

Play 3: (3rd and 17): Joe tries to blitz along with Jaylon and James as BVG brings the house. Joe is nullified by a guard immediately, doesn’t even make a move to avoid or get off of the block. Pass complete, but short of the first down. -1.


SIXTH DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10 from the Pitt 16): Joe has RB responsibility in pass coverage. The RB wheels to the flats, Joe follows. The QB takes off, and Joe peels back to attempt a diving tackle. He misses, but actually did an okay job of just getting back involved when the DL lost lane integrity. EVEN.

Play 2 (1st and 10): Joe is once again settled in the middle in pass coverage, but Pitt attacks deep while the RB stays in. EVEN.

Play 3 (2nd and 10): Joe shows blitz, retreats to the seam. Throw goes to opposite side. EVEN.

Play 4 (3rd and 10): Joe blitzes as BVG brings the house once again. He comes free as the unaccounted man, but Peterman outruns him to the edge. Your MLB NEEDS to make this play. HOWEVER, Peterman was surprisingly athletic, and Jaylon is the only LB on this team that would have actually made the play because of Peterman’s recognition/athleticism to the edge. If Peterman doesn’t immediately feel the pressure, Joe probably gets home. EVEN.




What did I learn from ONE HALF (keep that in mind lol) of isolating on Joe?

1. Pitt was not picking on Joe. That's why there are so many plays marked as "EVEN," and not "+1" or "-1"
Pitt was picking on the secondary, as others have said. The secondary was actually helped out by some poor throws, drops, and some pressure from ND's front 7.

2. Joe makes as many "okay" plays as he makes "not great" plays, so there was I think a pretty even distribution of +1's and -1's.

3. Joe doesn't make many boom plays, because he lacks athleticism. He has more potential for big bust plays, which we saw one of in the first half (I know there is another in the second half, but I didn't break that down).

4. Joe was +4 in the first half according to my crude grading/judgement scale. Of course, I don't know his actual responsibilities, so I might be way off. However, it seems pretty clear at the snap that Joe is in command of the mental aspect of the game, because his responsibilities at least seem very clear to me, someone without any actual coaching/scouting experience. I tried to be impartial, but I fear I may have erred on the side of positivity. Some of those EVENs might be -1's in someone else's eyes.

In conclusion, Joe is not enough of a liability to warrant as much griping as we do, I don't think. I will try, personally, to refrain from pointing out every play he doesn't make.

HOWEVER, I think it's also clear that your MLB at this level of football needs to be able to turn some "EVEN" plays into "+1" plays, and some "-1" plays into some "EVEN" plays using his athleticism. Joe just lacks the tools to make this happen.

Another point is that if Joe is truly in charge of communication, it's not making much of a difference in terms of the front 7, because those guys all do a good job of flowing and playing their assignments. The problems are in the secondary, and if Joe's communication skills aren't helping that anyway, why not at least give some reps to younger guys in the middle here and there?

TL;DR
Joe isn't as bad as the complaining seems to illustrate, but his level of play also shouldn't really be acceptable for a starting MLB at ND. He is actually pretty good in coverage, but lacks the ability to make things happen on his own.

 

[Rocket89]

As Tussin said, the key difference is that Joe Schmidt plays basically 100% of the snaps. Farley and Redfield do not. KVR gets plenty of criticism from many of us, too.

The issue is that OFD has dug a trench around the position that Joe Schmidt isn't that bad and doesn't write up analyses of any of Schmidt's bad plays (that I've seen).

Coupled with the "Chaos in the Notre Dame Secondary" article conveniently released within 15 minutes of the Joe Schmidt Iso Cam article, it's obvious that there is some ulterior motive going on. You're trying to show everyone how bad the secondary is and also show that Joe Schmidt isn't that bad. I have no idea why OFD has chosen to do this (I can guess but I really don't know). I find it unprofessional to protect a player that does not merit protection while subsequently throwing the ND secondary under the bus. I guess only walk-ons are worth your support.

You realize all those quotes apply to almost every Joe Schmidt play? But because the narrative that "Joe Schmidt isn't that bad" needs to be progressed, we don't see any articles with similar quotes about Joe Schmidt. It's pathetic, poor journalism.

/rant.

You are the ACross of Irish Envy.

Since you feel that way about OFD we must be doing a good job. Thanks for the indirect promotion of the site.

Keep up the great work.

 

[tko]

McCaffrey wheel route towards Joe, prayers needed.

 

[kmoose]

McCaffrey wheel route towards Joe, prayers needed.

Who runs a wheel route at the Mike? Wheel routes are outside routes, not inside.

 

[tko]

Who runs a wheel route at the Mike? Wheel routes are outside routes, not inside.

Thanks chief, meant outside with Joe forced to cover. Don't go down this path moose.

 

[tko]

Stanford will look to expose Joe every which way.

 

[IrishLion]

Who runs a wheel route at the Mike? Wheel routes are outside routes, not inside.

Everyone that runs a wheel at ND will be running it at Joe. Joe covered the RB in the flats every time against Pitt.

This might be a scheme issue, which is why Peterman had that successful scramble in the first half.

 

[tko]

Everyone that runs a wheel at ND will be running it at Joe. Joe covered the RB in the flats every time against Pitt.

This might be a scheme issue, which is why Peterman had that successful scramble in the first half.

My observation exactly. Thanks Lion.

 

[IrishLion]

It was probably too long for anyone to actually read it, but I merged my breakdown and "Joe ISO" into one post for anyone that might have been reading it, so sorry for the formatting change.

 

[gkIrish]

You are the ACross of Irish Envy.

Since you feel that way about OFD we must be doing a good job. Thanks for the indirect promotion of the site.

Keep up the great work.

I've got about 100 followers on Twitter. I can send them all a link to your bullsh...I mean website if that will help too!

 

[IrishJayhawk]

It was probably too long for anyone to actually read it, but I merged my breakdown and "Joe ISO" into one post for anyone that might have been reading it, so sorry for the formatting change.

It's a great post. Everyone should read it.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

Can we rename this thread to Joe Schmidt (Scholarship earned?)?

 

[Cackalacky]

Everyone that runs a wheel at ND will be running it at Joe. Joe covered the RB in the flats every time against Pitt.

This might be a scheme issue, which is why Peterman had that successful scramble in the first half.

Yes. This. Joe also was matched up with Clemson's RB a lot. I have seen it many times in each game.

 

[tko]

Yes. This. Joe also was matched up with Clemson's RB a lot. I have seen it many times in each game.

First play USC ran from scrimmage, Joe's responsibility? I need to go back and check that out. Call it a wheel, a flare, whatever. Clearly teams have noticed Joe with RB assignment and they are exploiting.

 

[Booslum31]

Stanford will look to expose Joe every which way.

Good MLB get off blocks quickly...Great MLBs blow up blocks. My concern with Joe really hasn't been pass coverage (though you guys got me thinking). My concern has been how easily he's been tied up and his ability to pick an angle and make the play once he's free of his blocker.

 

[koonja]

It's such an accepted myth that Joe was good last year. He was not. He was playing directly behind Jarron Jones and Sheldon Day and so the middle wasn't charmin soft last year. This year it's Cage/Tillery, who will be good but are not Jarron Jones (our best DL last year).

Joe had .5 TFL's last year. You don't accomplish that as a Mike linebacker through 8 games without being severely below average. He's never been good.

 

[Te'o4Heisman]

Alright, I put on the replay and isolated on Joe every play.

Here is what I saw:

JOE ISO

FIRST DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10): Joe sticks his nose into the hole and takes on a blocker. Doesn’t make the tackle, but does a good job of attacking the running lane. Just a good 5-yard power by Pitt. EVEN.

Play 2 (2nd and 5): Joe fills the first lane that develops to the right on another run play, takes on a block very quickly in the hole, forces runner to pick different lane. Jaylon fails to fill the next void that opens, Pitt picks up a first down. +1.

Play 3 (1st and 10): Pitt fakes a run to the right and tosses left. Joe is initially fooled and hesitates, but makes up the ground to the edge and gets involved with the tackle. A nice recovery by several defenders holds it to five yards after some space seemed to exist initially. +1.

Play 4 (2nd and 5): Joe dips underneath a block on another run to the left outside. Non-factor, as the edge defenders made a nice play to string it out for a small loss. EVEN.

Play 5 (3rd and 7): Joe shows blitz, then bails out into what looks to be a flat zone or a buzz zone underneath of safety help. Takes the slot receiver away as the receiver moves through his zone by staying in the throwing lane. Pass complete on the outside for a first down with KVR in coverage. +1.

Play 6 (1st and 10): Joe takes on a block in the hole on a power run, doesn’t give up much ground, involved in gang tackle after a 5-yard gain. EVEN.

Play 7 (2nd and 5): Joe again takes on a block in the hole, this time he gets swallowed up and pushed back as a gang tackle occurs after a 4-yard gain. -1.

Play 8 (3rd and 1): Pitt calls an excellent PA fake, their QB roles out into all of the green grass. Joe was fooled like the rest of the defense and collapsed on the fake. Just a good play-call by Pitt to the weak side. EVEN.

Play 9 (1st and goal): Pitt now at the ND 7. Stretch play to the left, Joe takes on a blocker and gives up some ground, defeats the block and would be in position if needed, but the ballcarrier is dropped short of Joe for a 3-yard gain. EVEN.

Play 10 (2nd and goal from the 4): Pitt throws a fade at the snap, nothing to see. EVEN.

Play 11 (3rd and goal from the 4): Joe does a reallllly nice job of locating the crossing receiver and trailing right on his hip. Pitt QB has to scramble, but the receiver was eliminated from the play even if the pocket was good. Good work Joe. +1.


SECOND DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10 at the Pitt 19): Joe gets caught in traffic on a basic slam play up the middle, can’t get to the outside when the RB moves that way. Trails the play, but not a bad play. EVEN.

Play 2 (2nd and 5): PA fake that Joe bites on, but clears out pretty quickly into his pass responsibility. ND forces a throw-away. EVEN.

Play 3 (3rd and 5): Joe is in great coverage on JP Holtz, right on his hip. The throw and catch need to be perfect; they are NOT perfect. Excellent job by Joe. +1.


THIRD DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10 at the Pitt 30): PA fake with what looks to be only one receiver running, incomplete deep. EVEN.

Play 2 (2nd and 10): A fake toss with a handoff back to the left. Joe recognizes the fake and takes a deep angle to try and get across the field, but isn’t needed. Holding called on the play. EVEN.

Play 3 (2nd and 20): A handoff up the middle. Joe takes on the block and doesn’t give up ground, kind of helps with the tackle. I’ll allow it. +1.

Play 4 (3rd and 17): Joe sit underneath in pass coverage, picks up the RB out of the backfield. The RB shakes Joe and would have had a catch and some yardage, but the QB misses the throw. Tough open-field coverage matchup, but you can’t fall for the hip fake. -1.


FOURTH DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10 at the Pitt 28): Toss to the outside. Joe fights through traffic and takes a deep angle. Not his responsibility to make a play on this one. 9-yard gain. EVEN.

Play 2 (1st and 10): Joe takes on a block, locates and catches the RB as the OL tries to get to the second level, minimizing the gain. A first down, but Joe played it well. +1.

Play 3: (1st and 10): PA fake, and Pitt has two offensive lineman way too far down field. Ball is caught but eventually overturned to incomplete.

Play 4: (2nd and 10): Joe diagnoses a WR screen, goes unblocked, and has the WR lined up for an easy tackle. Joe whiffs, and he wasn’t even going for a kill-shot. This one is bad. -2.

Play 5: (3rd and 1): Joe attacks the hole in short-yardage, brings some noise and helps stop the RB short. +1.

Play 6 (4th and short): Joe helps fill again, does a nice job of fighting through a block and hitting the RB in the backfield for a solo tackle. Though the RB did a nice job of spinning and falling forward for a first down (by inches), good play by Joe. Couldn’t do it much better. +1.

Play 7 (1st and 10): PA to the TE on a corner, not Joe’s side. EVEN.

Play 8 (1st and 10): Joe runs with the RB out of the backfield on a go-route. Joe is a few steps behind, but he has safety help over the top, so the QB would have to make a perfect throw over the top as Joe trails. Matthias gets the pick. Joe was beat, but the tight field allowed Farley to make the play while Joe was technically preventing a short throw. EVEN.


FIFTH DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10 from the Pitt 36): Joe clears out against a pass, sitting underneath the corner/safety who were both in coverage on receivers. Wasn’t tested as Onwualu gets a sack. EVEN.

Play 2 (2nd and 17): JP Holtz drops a pass as Joe cleared out to help immediately. EVEN.

Play 3: (3rd and 17): Joe tries to blitz along with Jaylon and James as BVG brings the house. Joe is nullified by a guard immediately, doesn’t even make a move to avoid or get off of the block. Pass complete, but short of the first down. -1.


SIXTH DRIVE

Play 1 (1st and 10 from the Pitt 16): Joe has RB responsibility in pass coverage. The RB wheels to the flats, Joe follows. The QB takes off, and Joe peels back to attempt a diving tackle. He misses, but actually did an okay job of just getting back involved when the DL lost lane integrity. EVEN.

Play 2 (1st and 10): Joe is once again settled in the middle in pass coverage, but Pitt attacks deep while the RB stays in. EVEN.

Play 3 (2nd and 10): Joe shows blitz, retreats to the seam. Throw goes to opposite side. EVEN.

Play 4 (3rd and 10): Joe blitzes as BVG brings the house once again. He comes free as the unaccounted man, but Peterman outruns him to the edge. Your MLB NEEDS to make this play. HOWEVER, Peterman was surprisingly athletic, and Jaylon is the only LB on this team that would have actually made the play because of Peterman’s recognition/athleticism to the edge. If Peterman doesn’t immediately feel the pressure, Joe probably gets home. EVEN.




What did I learn from ONE HALF (keep that in mind lol) of isolating on Joe?

1. Pitt was not picking on Joe. That's why there are so many plays marked as "EVEN," and not "+1" or "-1"
Pitt was picking on the secondary, as others have said. The secondary was actually helped out by some poor throws, drops, and some pressure from ND's front 7.

2. Joe makes as many "okay" plays as he makes "not great" plays, so there was I think a pretty even distribution of +1's and -1's.

3. Joe doesn't make many boom plays, because he lacks athleticism. He has more potential for big bust plays, which we saw one of in the first half (I know there is another in the second half, but I didn't break that down).

4. Joe was +4 in the first half according to my crude grading/judgement scale. Of course, I don't know his actual responsibilities, so I might be way off. However, it seems pretty clear at the snap that Joe is in command of the mental aspect of the game, because his responsibilities at least seem very clear to me, someone without any actual coaching/scouting experience. I tried to be impartial, but I fear I may have erred on the side of positivity. Some of those EVENs might be -1's in someone else's eyes.

In conclusion, Joe is not enough of a liability to warrant as much griping as we do, I don't think. I will try, personally, to refrain from pointing out every play he doesn't make.

HOWEVER, I think it's also clear that your MLB at this level of football needs to be able to turn some "EVEN" plays into "+1" plays, and some "-1" plays into some "EVEN" plays using his athleticism. Joe just lacks the tools to make this happen.

Another point is that if Joe is truly in charge of communication, it's not making much of a difference in terms of the front 7, because those guys all do a good job of flowing and playing their assignments. The problems are in the secondary, and if Joe's communication skills aren't helping that anyway, why not at least give some reps to younger guys in the middle here and there?

TL;DR
Joe isn't as bad as the complaining seems to illustrate, but his level of play also shouldn't really be acceptable for a starting MLB at ND. He is actually pretty good in coverage, but lacks the ability to make things happen on his own.

Thanks for taking the time, but definitely not what I see looking at those same plays...and the grading seems pretty biased with intent to make him look not nearly as bad as he is...

Play 8 (3rd and 1): Pitt calls an excellent PA fake, their QB roles out into all of the green grass. Joe was fooled like the rest of the defense and collapsed on the fake. Just a good play-call by Pitt to the weak side. EVEN.

Seriously? They ran a play action boot to his side of the field and he was completely out of position, but because other people were too he gets an EVEN grade????It only takes him to stay home and that play doesnt go for 30 yards if he is fast enough to stay with a QB in the open field. Same could be said about 2 or 3 other players on the same play, but he is our MIKE.

The fist play of the game as well, just running blindly into the pile up at the line of scrimmage and getting bounced back on a 5 yd gain gets him an even grade? Thats like saying if his responsibility is to blitz, and he blitzes but gets completely stonewalled like he does on most blitzes that it's an even play...he's supposed to make or disrupt plays even if he cant make the play... simply charging into your blocker just because thats the blocker you were supposed to take on does not mean you executed your responsibility.

 

[tussin]

]
Another point is that if Joe is truly in charge of communication, it's not making much of a difference in terms of the front 7, because those guys all do a good job of flowing and playing their assignments. The problems are in the secondary, and if Joe's communication skills aren't helping that anyway, why not at least give some reps to younger guys in the middle here and there?

This is a big one for me. Isn't that one of Joe's strengths according to the coaches? If the secondary has been this bad from an assignment POV, why not take a chance with another MIKE?