2013 Fall Camp Thread

[Domer4ever]

Eric Ebron-unc, jenkins-udubb plus is just flat out a beast of a te, cj from iowa and lynch off the top of my head from georgia....Nikklas certainly could be, but when you are the best you don't have a ton of miss blocks...he looked lost a lot of times out there as who his responsibility was....

That's fair, but I think Niklaus can hold his own in the blocking department and was a beast on goal line last year. I think the mistakes from last season get eliminated this year and he essentially becomes an extra offensive lineman out there this season. He is going to be really good for the running game.

 

[Luckylucci]

The chemistry they were developing was what had me so excited. Golson's throw to Daniels against Pitt started what I thought to be a great run for their chemistry.

 

[koonja]

i see your Golson and raise you a Daniels

He was very good. But I think Golson was our best offensive player in that game (totally subjective, so I have no problem with you thinkink Daniels). He didn't have a drop off in production against Bama, which is really impressive.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I agree with that to an extent, but it's also been Kelly's job to develop them and I don't know that he has done a great job of doing so.

Based on what? Crist was a bust, and Rees took over as a true freshman. Even good QBs tend to be pretty bad as freshman and sophomores (read this). The fact that Kelly got Rees and Golson to play competently so early in their careers pretty well proves he can develop QBs; not to mention his long history as a QB guru before coming to ND.

I also don't think that the offense he runs has been real supportive to the QB's he has had to work with either.

You can't simply "commit to the run" without quality depth on the OL. We haven't had that since Holtz; not even last year. We're just now getting to a point where that's possible.

If you have limitations at QB, why not establish and commit to the run instead of trying to throw the ball around the yard and run read option?

Like he did last year?

There is no reason as to why this team can not run the ball down teams throats this year.

See the comment above about OL talent and depth. You sound like NDNation.

 

[NDWorld247]

Eric Ebron-unc, jenkins-udubb plus is just flat out a beast of a te, cj from iowa and lynch off the top of my head from georgia....Nikklas certainly could be, but when you are the best you don't have a ton of miss blocks...he looked lost a lot of times out there as who his responsibility was....

The Stanford game was a tough one for Niklas. Thomas abused him. But other than that game, all I heard was praise for Niklas' blocking ability. Are there other examples of Niklas' poor play?

I appreciate you giving some names, but only Fiedorowicz appears to be a consistently great blocker. I'm not saying Niklas is the best blocking TE in the nation, but to say he's "not even close" is really selling him short. I expect to see a dominating blocker at TE this season.

Seferian-Jenkins could become the complete package as a tight end. He is a fantastic receiver with the potential to be a top blocker. In the ground game, Seferian-Jenkins is generally effective on his blocks. He doesn't sustain his blocks as long as one would like and could use more force and attitude. That being said, Seferian-Jenkins flashes some impressive blocking in pass protection on edge-rushers.He could stand to improve more as a blocker for the NFL, but definitely has the skill set to be a good one.

As a blocker, Ebron flashes. There are times when he rocks defenders and gets them on roller skates. There are other times where he misses or doesn't finish blocks. Ebron needs to improve his ability to sustain his blocks. If the junior could add another 10 pounds of muscle, it could really pay off for him in the ground game.

Ebron could be a nice fit in an NFL zone-blocking system. He could move well with tackle help next to him and use his athletic ability to hit blocks on the second level. Ebron may need more developmental time if he is drafted into a power-man-blocking scheme.

Fiedorowicz did a great job of sealing off the point of attack on runs his way and dominated the few defensive backs he matched up with. Fiedorowicz shows the ability to block bigger defenders as well. Overall, Fiedorowicz is a great blocking tight end and has the potential to be one of the best blocking tight ends when he gets into the NFL.

 

[NDdomer2]

I agree with that to an extent, but it's also been Kelly's job to develop them and I don't know that he has done a great job of doing so. I also don't think that the offense he runs has not been real supportive to the QB's he has had to work with either. If you have limitations at QB, why not establish and commit to the run instead of trying to throw the ball around the yard and run read option? There is no reason as to why this team can not run the ball down teams throats this year. Hope Kelly see's things the same way.

Now I disagree with this statement at the same time. As much as our QB play has been inconsistent with flashes of good, I think Kelly did pretty good impromptu development with Rees that allowed us to stay competitive. Then what he did with Golson in 2 years. He was playing good at the end of the year.

I think we will some improvement with Rees. Is it going to make him the greatest QB in ND history? Absoslutely not. Can he help us win a lot of games this year? You better believe it.

As far as tailoring the offense, I think he has tailored to our recruiting success (big wr's and te's), instead of our qb's. And, I agree that our run game should be potent. I like that we are going to be able to keep guys fresh and feed the hot hand.

 

[Domer4ever]

Based on what? Crist was a bust, and Rees took over as a true freshman. Even good QBs tend to be pretty bad as freshman and sophomores (read this). The fact that Kelly got Rees and Golson to play competently so early in their careers pretty well proves he can develop QBs; not to mention his long history as a QB guru before coming to ND.

That's the point, he came in as a QB "guru" that was going to develop the position and I just don't think the development aspect has been there to this point. It's been up and down for all the guys. I think Golson would have given us a better barometer on the development aspect this year so it's a shame that he's out.


You can't simply "commit to the run" without quality depth on the OL. We haven't had that since Holtz; not even last year. We're just now getting to a point where that's possible.

Disagree. The horses have been there, the commitment has not. A prime example was running over Navy in the opener to not even trying against Purdue the following week.

Like he did last year?

See above, the commitment was not there and the offense lacked an identity as a whole. That can't happen this season if this team is going to win with Rees under center.

See the comment above about OL talent and depth. You sound like NDNation.

The depth issue doesn't hold water. Why do you need "depth" on the line to run the football? Continuity is much more important along the line and that has been there and will be again this season with three key starters returning. No reason this team can't run on anyone.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

The depth issue doesn't hold water. Why do you need "depth" on the line to run the football?

Which teams have found recent success by committing to the run? Wisconsin, Stanford, 'Bama, etc. (Oregon's a different beast). All of those teams have deep and talented OL. ND hasn't had the depth or talent necessary to do so in many years. Last year was the first under Kelly where our OL could be considered "good", and we still got blown out by 'Bama in large part because there was virtually no depth behind them, which in Kelly's own words, severely limited our ability to practice effectively in the run up to the NCG.

Continuity is much more important along the line and that has been there and will be again this season with three key starters returning. No reason this team can't run on anyone.

Your previous comment was retrospective. You stated that: (1) Kelly hasn't developed our QB talent well; (2) Kelly's system hasn't supported our QBs well; and (3) when one has "limitations at QB" (Rees?), relying on the run makes sense.

I don't agree with (1) or (2), and I'd suggest that Kelly agrees with (3). 2011 was our best season for rushing production in many years. 2012 was even better, and we have every reason to believe Kelly and Martin will continue to rely on the run in 2013. So what's your complaint, exactly?

 

[Cackalacky]

All in all I think our offense is limited to runs and short passes with Rees at the helm. I read earlier and I forget where but it is still apparent Rees has trouble with the deep ball. If he still struggles this year with the deep ball I foresee a tough year for us. Defenses will not be able to be extended and our speed on the outside will be negated. We will have to rely on short passes and elusion in the pass game and jumbo sets in the run game. Defenses will basically only have to defend 30 yards or so (which is basically red zone type offense) if Tommy can't at least have the threat of stretching the field.

 

[irishog77]

All in all I think our offense is limited to runs and short passes with Rees at the helm. I read earlier and I forget where but it is still apparent Rees has trouble with the deep ball. If he still struggles this year with the deep ball I foresee a tough year for us. Defenses will not be able to be extended and our speed on the outside will be negated. We will have to rely on short passes and elusion in the pass game and jumbo sets in the run game. Defenses will basically only have to defend 30 yards or so (which is basically red zone type offense) if Tommy can't at least have the threat of stretching the field.

If BK can isolate a guy like Chris or Corey deep down the middle of the field (like Weis used to do), then Ress' lack of ability to throw a deep ball can be negated somewhat.

That's my hope anyway. Otherwise, some of the defenses may be able to be headaches all day long against ND.

 

[Cackalacky]

If BK can isolate a guy like Chris or Corey deep down the middle of the field (like Weis used to do), then Ress' lack of ability to throw a deep ball can be negated somewhat.

That's my hope anyway. Otherwise, some of the defenses may be able to be headaches all day long against ND.

Yes. This is my biggest fear with TR at QB.

 

[Irishbounty28]

I understand why everyone is concerned with Tommy's ability to throw the ball downfield, and this concern is warranted. I do know however that there has been a few quarterbacks recently that have limited arm strength that have had some success in the FBS.

Kellen Moore is a guy that comes to mind that had limited arm strength and similar size to Tommy. Additionally, his mobility was limited, but they were able to have major success in their offensive production.

Like I said, the concern about Tommy is warranted as he has shown in the past that he is not able to push the ball downfield. With that, I believe that we can have a successful season with Tommy pulling the trigger.

 

[Domer4ever]

Which teams have found recent success by committing to the run? Wisconsin, Stanford, 'Bama, etc. (Oregon's a different beast). All of those teams have deep and talented OL. ND hasn't had the depth or talent necessary to do so in many years. Last year was the first under Kelly where our OL could be considered "good", and we still got blown out by 'Bama in large part because there was virtually no depth behind them, which in Kelly's own words, severely limited our ability to practice effectively in the run up to the NCG.

We got blown out by Bama because we were outcoached, the defense didn't show up, and the offense was playing from behind all night which they were ill equipped to handle. Offensive line depth had little to no effect on the final outcome.


Your previous comment was retrospective. You stated that: (1) Kelly hasn't developed our QB talent well; (2) Kelly's system hasn't supported our QBs well; and (3) when one has "limitations at QB" (Rees?), relying on the run makes sense.

I don't agree with (1) or (2), and I'd suggest that Kelly agrees with (3). 2011 was our best season for rushing production in many years. 2012 was even better, and we have every reason to believe Kelly and Martin will continue to rely on the run in 2013. So what's your complaint, exactly?

I don't have a complaint, it's more so an observation that the offense has lacked an identity under Kelly because of mediocre QB play and his inability to commit to one style of offense. I contend that if this continues this season it's going to be a long one with a "game manager" in Rees under center. I am making the obvious suggestion that this team needs to run the football effectively (and a lot) for this offense to have success. The horses are there, it's on Kelly to commit to it instead of throwing in the towel ala against Purdue last season before the game even started.

 

[IrishLion]

I don't have a complaint, it's more so an observation that the offense has lacked an identity under Kelly because of mediocre QB play and his inability to commit to one style of offense. I contend that if this continues this season it's going to be a long one with a "game manager" in Rees under center. I am making the obvious suggestion that this team needs to run the football effectively (and a lot) for this offense to have success. The horses are there, it's on Kelly to commit to it instead of throwing in the towel ala against Purdue last season before the game even started.

I don't think that this is about "his" inability to commit to a style of offense... in 2010, after Rees took over for Crist, the running game became the focus. It was again the focus all of 2011 with Rees at the helm. Last year, with Golson's talent, the pass was featured more prominently late in the season.

If anything, this shows BK's willingness to adjust to his QB. You are very obviously missing the fact that with Rees at QB, the run IS the feature of the offense. Again, it's not that he refuses to pick a style, as he obviously does with Rees at QB. Also, I would say BK ultimately wants a perfect balance. Be able to smash it down throats at will, or be able to air it out at will.

We'll get the answer to his "sticking with a certain style" this season though.

 

[Cackalacky]

Under Kelly we have averaged right at 7 yards per completion no matter who is at the helm.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

We got blown out by Bama because we were outcoached, the defense didn't show up, and the offense was playing from behind all night which they were ill equipped to handle. Offensive line depth had little to no effect on the final outcome.

Then you disagree with Kelly's most frequently stated reason for why we got blown out. You don't think of that could be attributable to an inability to practice properly? Did you see what happened to USC last year when they couldn't tackle in practice due to lack of depth?

I don't have a complaint, it's more so an observation that the offense has lacked an identity under Kelly because of mediocre QB play and his inability to commit to one style of offense.

I think Kelly has been tailoring the offense to the (very flawed) personnel he inherited over 3 years ago. Initially, that involved a lot more passing than pounding the rock. More recently, he's transitioned to a more balanced run-first offense. I doubt we'd be more effective running the ball 70%+ against some of the front-sevens we face year in and out.

The horses are there, it's on Kelly to commit to it instead of throwing in the towel ala against Purdue last season before the game even started.

We rushed 36 times (vs. 37 pass attempts) for a total of 52 yards against Purdue. Yup, 1.4 yards per rush. Clearly, a lack of dedication to the run was our problem there. Or maybe it was Kelly's lack of an offensive identity that allowed Kawan Short to run roughshod over Cave and Golic all game long?

 

[CoachB]

Dang, I hate it when facts interrupt a good tangent

 

[ScooterIrish]

We rushed 36 times (vs. 37 pass attempts) for a total of 52 yards against Purdue. Yup, 1.4 yards per rush. Clearly, a lack of dedication to the run was our problem there. Or maybe it was Kelly's lack of an offensive identity that allowed Kawan Short to run roughshod over Cave and Golic all game long?

Ugh 16 "carries" by Golson for -10 yards. Kelly went into that game not going to run (see his comments before the game) but he did have reason. Cave and Golic got killed.

 

[NDhoosier]

random question. I just saw an interview with Nick Martin and he said something about the Pistol offense. Did I miss something, is Kelly going to the Pistol offense?

 

[WestCoast]

Then you disagree with Kelly's most frequently stated reason for why we got blown out. You don't think of that could be attributable to an inability to practice properly? Did you see what happened to USC last year when they couldn't tackle in practice due to lack of depth?

Or ND '07. Umph. I can still taste the throw-up in my mouth from that season.

 

[STLDomer]

random question. I just saw an interview with Nick Martin and he said something about the Pistol offense. Did I miss something, is Kelly going to the Pistol offense?

They've showed some but I wouldn't quite say we are switching to it yet. Daniels mentioned it too.

 

[Domer4ever]

Then you disagree with Kelly's most frequently stated reason for why we got blown out. You don't think of that could be attributable to an inability to practice properly? Did you see what happened to USC last year when they couldn't tackle in practice due to lack of depth?

Yeah I do disagree as that sounds much more like a cop out in trying to take focus off of being out coached and seemingly unprepared to play in the championship game. It's not like they were learning a new offense or starting newbies along the line that had not played all season. Laying that spanking on the shoulders of a lack of "offensive line depth" is weak sauce at its finest.

I think Kelly has been tailoring the offense to the (very flawed) personnel he inherited over 3 years ago. Initially, that involved a lot more passing than pounding the rock. More recently, he's transitioned to a more balanced run-first offense. I doubt we'd be more effective running the ball 70%+ against some of the front-sevens we face year in and out.

See I don't see the balance. While the offense has improved in some areas, Kelly seems to adjust him game plan and offense to the problems an opposing defense presents for that particular week instead of forming an offensive identity and let that defense worry about what our offense does best.



We rushed 36 times (vs. 37 pass attempts) for a total of 52 yards against Purdue. Yup, 1.4 yards per rush. Clearly, a lack of dedication to the run was our problem there. Or maybe it was Kelly's lack of an offensive identity that allowed Kawan Short to run roughshod over Cave and Golic all game long?

See the post above. A lot of those rushes were Golson runs. Kelly stated he thought they would have problems running the ball against their d line, so he went to the pass a week after pounding the ball against Navy in a run dominate performance. He quit on the run before the game even began. This is a prime example of his non committal to try and form an offensive identity and what in my opinion we can not see this season for this offense to be a success with Rees.

 

[Booslum31]

Golic got crushed in many games last year.

 

[Emcee77]

I don't understand why anyone would argue that great depth isn't critical to the success of a championship level program.

1) Injuries happen ... the difference between a good team and a bad team is often the ability to plug the holes and keep rolling.
2) When the 2's and 3's are nearly as good as the 1's, it pushes the 1's and makes everybody better. Competition breeds success.

I'd thought that stuff was axiomatic. How can there be any question that our lack of depth on the OL hindered the progress of our running game?

I think Kelly has been tailoring the offense to the (very flawed) personnel he inherited over 3 years ago. Initially, that involved a lot more passing than pounding the rock. More recently, he's transitioned to a more balanced run-first offense. I doubt we'd be more effective running the ball 70%+ against some of the front-sevens we face year in and out.

I'd go even further than this and say that Kelly's philosophy, generally, is to tailor the offense to the personnel. He has basically said that in press conferences ... "the offense will change to fit the personnel" etc. He simply does not subscribe to the theory that a coach should have an offense with an "identity" that he should force the players to fit. He believes in putting his best athletes in position to make plays, that's it. The things that a lot of people think of as forming an "identity" are just irrelevant details to him. His job is get his players to execute, and the things they are best at executing may vary from year to year (or even game to game or series to series, depending on the opponent). No need to force 2013 Notre Dame to do the things that 2012 Notre Dame was good at if 2013 ND is better at something else.

 

[irishog77]

I don't understand why anyone would argue that great depth isn't key for a championship level program.

1) Injuries happen ... the difference between a good team and a bad team is often the ability to plug the holes and keep rolling.
2) When the 2's and 3's are nearly as good as the 1's, it pushes the 1's and makes everybody better. Competition breeds success.

I'd thought that stuff was axiomatic.

I don't think Domer4ever is arguing that (if that is, in fact, who you are referencing).

The argument has evolved now to depth (specifically on OL) being a major problem practicing before the Natty, to paraphrase Brian Kelly.

I'm actually in agreement with Domer4ever here. While I think what BK said was an actual problem leading up to and during the game, I don't think it was an overriding factor for the beatdown. Why wasn't this debilitating lack of depth a huge factor then in the 12 games before that?

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Yeah I do disagree as that sounds much more like a cop out in trying to take focus off of being out coached and seemingly unprepared to play in the championship game. It's not like they were learning a new offense or starting newbies along the line that had not played all season. Laying that spanking on the shoulders of a lack of "offensive line depth" is weak sauce at its finest.

Then go ahead and blame Kelly. Pretty sure he accepts full responsibility for the 'Bama loss anyway.

See I don't see the balance. While the offense has improved in some areas, Kelly seems to adjust him game plan and offense to the problems an opposing defense presents for that particular week instead of forming an offensive identity and let that defense worry about what our offense does best.

So what would you have done differently over the last 3 years in order to form an offensive identity? I presume you would have committed to the run, regardless of our OL depth and talent. I'm certain our record would have been significantly worse as a result, and Kelly probably wouldn't be around anymore.

Kelly favors a balanced run-first spread. Within that framework, he adjusts his weekly game plan to exploit weaknesses in our opponents. That's just good strategy.

I suspect that complaints about "offensive identity" are just a repackaged version of the NDNation "Harrumph! Fullbacks!"

See the post above. A lot of those rushes were Golson runs. Kelly stated he thought they would have problems running the ball against their d line, so he went to the pass a week after pounding the ball against Navy in a run dominate performance. He quit on the run before the game even began. This is a prime example of his non committal to try and form an offensive identity and what in my opinion we can not see this season for this offense to be a success with Rees.

Then back out Golson's 16 sacks/ scrambles for -10 yards. 20 rushing attempts for 62 is still a pedestrian 3.1 yards/ attempt. Committing to the run doesn't work when your C and ROG are on rollerskates for the entire game. We simply haven't had the OL talent or depth to play that kind of football until recently.

 

[Irishokie]

I take it media wasn't allowed at today's practice or there wasn't practice at all today?

 

[95NDAlumNM]

I take it media wasn't allowed at today's practice or there wasn't practice at all today?

I think I heard that instead of having access today (as was originally planned) they would have more (i.e. longer) access tomorrow. So we should see/hear a lot of stuff come tomorrow evening.

 

[Domer4ever]

Then go ahead and blame Kelly. Pretty sure he accepts full responsibility for the 'Bama loss anyway.

As well he should. It was a dreadful performance by the coaching staff and team as a whole.

So what would you have done differently over the last 3 years in order to form an offensive identity? I presume you would have committed to the run, regardless of our OL depth and talent. I'm certain our record would have been significantly worse as a result, and Kelly probably wouldn't be around anymore.

The actual starters, sans Golic, over the last couple years have been good players and some good young guys (Martin, Lombard, Stanley, Hanratty) have been developing behind them. Kelly is calling Zac Martin the best OT in college football and Watt is going to be an early round draft pick. This team has talent along the line so to excuse the commitment to running the football on a lack of talent or depth is just wrong. I'm not saying running the ball is the only way to create an identity, but really what has this offense done consistently well under Kelly outside of throwing to the TE's? We are going into year 4 without really knowing what this offense can hang their hat on. Again I contend that the horses are their this year to play power football and Kelly should take advantage of it.

Kelly favors a balanced run-first spread. Within that framework, he adjusts his weekly game plan to exploit weaknesses in our opponents. That's just good strategy.

I agree, but don't abandon what you just did well the week prior! He can not allow a defense to dictate his offensive strategy and how he wants to play football.

I suspect that complaints about "offensive identity" are just a repackaged version of the NDNation "Harrumph! Fullbacks!"

Wrong! See above.

Then back out Golson's 16 sacks/ scrambles for -10 yards. 20 rushing attempts for 62 is still a pedestrian 3.1 yards/ attempt. Committing to the run doesn't work when your C and ROG are on rollerskates for the entire game. We simply haven't had the OL talent or depth to play that kind of football until recently.

It looked like a completely different offense from the week prior with virtually no attempt to do what they did so well the week prior. Every run was into the teeth of that Purdue defense instead of trying to exploit the edges. I really had no idea what Kelly was trying to do offensively in that game and Mayock seemed to concur as well. 10 rushes a half that game was way too little, essentially putting the outcome on Golson in his second career start.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Kelly hasn't yet had a really solid OLine to work with nor a really solid QB. And I can't see how either of those things have been his fault given the personnel history as we [excruciatingly] know it.

That first line had guys that we liked personally, but do we remember that Robinson and Stewart were both so unready conditioning-wise that they had to plead to be allowed to rest hands on ground and side despite Warriner wanting them in a different stance balance-wise??

We were pretty mediocre all across the line back then, with Braxton [thank God healthy at the time,] still learning. Do we not remember Kelly saying : When Braxton blocks you you stayed blocked; now we have to get him to block the right people?

When ZMart and Watt flowered at LT/LG, we STILL weren't really solid everywhere else --- would have been at center had Braxton not gotten chronically injured. Lombard stepped in and slowly evolved his way to "good", but was just OK to begin with. Still Center and RG were below optimal.

Now, ZMart, Watt and Lombard are ready; and little brother NMart seems a precocious surprise. But we STILL don't know if we're solid All-Five. It's a tale to be told.

How anybody can gripe about Coach's offense with a straight face, when the guy has been lumbered with a massive OLine development problem [how FAST does anyone think you can turn a Five-Fingered Fist into a harmonious power unit anyway?] AND a SMALL group of QB candidates --- none ready made --- into a consistent offense either running or passing eludes me.

In my opinion, Coach has worked a Damm miracle getting this offense to function as well as it has. The Monsters are in the pipeline to fix both the OLine and the RBs. When they mature, THEN we'll see the consistent running attack. When Kelly gets a chance to develop a QB who doesn't lack nerves, or footspeed, or academic judgement for more than two years, he'll get the passing attack right as well --- it's been about 75% right anyway.

We win games because of Kelly's brilliance in turning Chicken Sh!t into Chicken Soup, plus his and Diaco's and Alford's abilities to recruit studs. Griping on the Coach is suicidal for ND success --- they are what we have going FOR us. Thank God for them... and please all of you stay with us.