2013 Fall Camp Thread

[NDPhilly]

It just amazes me that after a 12-1 season we have apparently proved absolutely nothing. I mean it seams Michigan has more momentum coming off there 8-5 season than us. Unbelievable.

 

[tadman95]

(Brief Time Out) Just picked this off an Alabama board:

"We're discussing articles from Rolling Stone. Yesterday it was an article from the Wall Street Journal. Earlier in the week it was GQ. Strange times."

Carry on....

 

[Irishcop]

It just amazes me that after a 12-1 season we have apparently proved absolutely nothing. I mean it seams Michigan has more momentum coming off there 8-5 season than us. Unbelievable.

I was thinking the same thing. 12-1 I guess that was all just luck.

 

[stlnd01]

I was thinking the same thing. 12-1 I guess that was all just luck.

Apparently the wise heads think we should have gone 10-3 at best. Because no one else ever catches breaks and wins close football games...

 

[Kak7304]

Apparently the wise heads think we should have gone 10-3 at best. Because no one else ever catches breaks and wins close football games...

For Stanford, the talking heads will say how they only lost to ND by a score and get positive credit for losing to a good team. They'll then turn around and bash us for only winning by a score and credit the win to luck. It's as if the other team is getting credit for the win and I really don't understand it.

 

[ulukinatme]

I was thinking the same thing. 12-1 I guess that was all just luck.

It takes a lot of luck to go 12-0 during the regular season, on top of being a good team and hopefully having a manageable schedule. Some teams can get away with an average or weak schedule and get to 11-1 or 12-0. Most teams can't expect to get through 12 games without a little good fortune though.

I would say we did have quite a bit of luck last season, despite being a very good team defensively and a lackluster team on special teams and offense most times.

Pittsburgh we straight up shoulda lost, that was a lot of luck between the pass inference play, the field goal, the way the game had been going....3 horrible first quarters ended with an unbelieveable 4th quarter and OT. Such an ugly game, and I still can't believe we crawled away from that one.

A lot of people (Media, Stanford fans, and haters) will say we got lucky with the Stanford game. I don't think the Stanford win was lucky, because honestly we fought hard to come back with our backup QB and we decidedly got our score in OT without the need of speculation. Stanford fans will always claim they got the TD to tie it, but in reality the play was whistled dead before he even tried to wiggle around. On top of that his elbow appears to be down before the ball had crossed the plane. In any case, if you can't run the ball 4 times from the goal line and get it in convincingly, you don't deserve to win.

I would say we probably won a few other games with a little bit of luck. Purdue comes to mind, and maybe BYU. The rest of the games I think we did a good job of coming out, playing physical, and dictating how the game was going to be played. We probably were more of a 10-3 or 11-2 team, but we got some lucky breaks in some close games that our team hasn't gotten in the last several seasons.

 

[Bluto]

If Tommy (i.e. the offense) plays even somewhat better than in 2012 and in 2011 this team should win out. The only reason some of those games were close last year and others weren't complete blowouts (USC game) was due to really bad play in the red zone. If Tommy can turn that around this team is going to absolutely destroy most of the teams on its schedule.

 

[Meacon Irish]

I think the "experts" just want to see more consistency, that's all. I mean, if another school that I didn't follow had gone 8-5 two years in a row, then jumped up to 12-1 one year, my first thought would be a possible fluke season.

I don't think that's the case, as I do follow the Irish, and I see the amazing progress Coach Kelly and the staff have made. Last season was only the first of many to come, I believe. But if we win 11, 12, or 13 games again this year, those same "experts" will more than likely change their tune during next season's pre-season talk.

Nevermind the fact that these guys were predicting 8-5 last year for us. Everyone has an opinion, and most opinions are wrong.

At the end of the day, what they say doesn't mean a darn thing. All that matters is our boys are out there kicking a$$.

 

[JughedJones]

I think the "experts" just want to see more consistency, that's all. I mean, if another school that I didn't follow had gone 8-5 two years in a row, then jumped up to 12-1 one year, my first thought would be a possible fluke season.

I don't think that's the case, as I do follow the Irish, and I see the amazing progress Coach Kelly and the staff have made. Last season was only the first of many to come, I believe. But if we win 11, 12, or 13 games again this year, those same "experts" will more than likely change their tune during next season's pre-season talk.

Nevermind the fact that these guys were predicting 8-5 last year for us. Everyone has an opinion, and most opinions are wrong.

At the end of the day, what they say doesn't mean a darn thing. All that matters is our boys are out there kicking a$$.

Don't feel bad. Tommy has a lot to prove.

ND has a lot to prove.

Coach said it better than any of us could hope to. "If we give the same effort as last year, we're an 8 and 5 team."

I think he has the kids believing that rhetoric (as they should,) and we'll be an 11-2 team this year.

I love this squad.

 

[rocket66]

2013 Fall Camp Thread

I refuse to say last year's Pitt game was "lucky". No one ever talks about Cierre freaking Wood fumbling on the goal line in that OT before the missed field goal. The flukey stuff went both ways in that game.

I definitely agree with the previous posts at how weird it is that close losses seem to be looked at more favorably than close (lucky) wins. It boggles my mind. It seems the preseason rankings and predictions are more of a decade achievement award more than simply evaluating THIS season/team and returning starters. It's frustrating.

Edit: The most interesting bit in all of this pre season chatter is disregarding what a BK coached team will accomplish. He's a top 5 coach and finally has a team built with his attitude and style. I'm really looking forward to seeing it on the field.

 

[NDohio]

The one thing that really gets me is before last season started all the experts were saying that UND was a year away from being a really good team. Experts consistently said 2013 was the year to look out for the Irish. Well, it's 2013 and the doubters are coming on strong. Yes, I realize losing our starting QB is a big deal. Fortunately we have an experienced replacement. I just don't see how you can look at this team across the board and realize that the potential for them to be better than last year is there.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I just love how suddenly ND plays a tough schedule again. Where are all the people who constantly say ND's schedule is weak? Last I checked, the teams on the schedule are the same sans the Shamrock Series game. When ND wins games this year, they'll say the schedule clearly wasn't that strong. It's ridiculous and we shouldn't get riled up about it.

And I completely agree with the above post: How does ND, who's coming off a 12-1 season and a top recruiting class, have less momentum than a team like Michigan? Drives me nuts. The media just LOVES to HATE ND. Keeps the masses entertained, the ratings up, and the comment section on their bogus blogs in full force. Ugh.

 

[Irish#1]

I was thinking the same thing. 12-1 I guess that was all just luck.

The one thing that really gets me is before last season started all the experts were saying that UND was a year away from being a really good team. Experts consistently said 2013 was the year to look out for the Irish. Well, it's 2013 and the doubters are coming on strong. Yes, I realize losing our starting QB is a big deal. Fortunately we have an experienced replacement. I just don't see how you can look at this team across the board and realize that the potential for them to be better than last year is there.

There's an old saying, "I'd rather be lucky than good."

It doesn't matter to me what anyone else thinks, just win. If we put two strong seasons together back to back, then they've lost the rest of their ammunition.

Is it Saturday yet?

 

[ulukinatme]

I refuse to say last year's Pitt game was "lucky". No one ever talks about Cierre freaking Wood fumbling on the goal line in that OT before the missed field goal. The flukey stuff went both ways in that game.

Fumble aside, if the refs would have noticed we had two players on the field with the same number, they probably make the field goal on the next kick and we lose. The pass interference call was a gift too. Fumbles happen, but blown calls by refs are things that are completely out of your hands. On the other hand, if we lost that game we probably would have played in the Rose Bowl or something as Oregon or someone else takes our place in the championship. I would have felt much better about a matchup with Wisconsin.

 

[kmoose]

I refuse to say last year's Pitt game was "lucky". No one ever talks about Cierre freaking Wood fumbling on the goal line in that OT before the missed field goal. The flukey stuff went both ways in that game.

And the Stanford goal line stand was epic. Even if you believe that they scored on the last play (I don't), it was still an incredible feat, keeping them from an obvious touchdown.

 

[NDWorld247]

And the Stanford goal line stand was epic. Even if you believe that they scored on the last play (I don't), it was still an incredible feat, keeping them from an obvious touchdown.

It ticks me off when people say our win vs. Stanford was "lucky" and that we would have lost if the ref didn't blow the whistle. It's as if people conveniently forget that would have only tied the game (if Stanford kicks the XP) and sent it to another OT.

The only game I give any credence to us being "lucky" is the Pitt game.

 

[clashmore_jon]

there are a couple things that have been pissing me off about media coverage lately. One is them constantly harping, like the SI article above, on how all the breaks went our way last year. What about Cierre's fumble at the goal line in OT vs Pitt (or BYU but i think Pitt)? What about any number of individual plays that didnt go our way? The stanford goal line stand was not luck, we overpowered them.

the second is people saying that TR got boo'd when he came out ahgainst purdue. I was at that game. I saw a lot of people saying "who?? WHO??" and there was a smattering of boos but i'm very confident those were directed at coach for pulling the starter so soon, a player that all the fans had been dying to see develop.

oh well. i guess this sort of media rage comes with the territory of being a fan, particularly an ND fan.

 

[Irishman77]

I agree...if you start playing the what if game you end up in La la land...like hey what if Alabama don't get the two completely bogus calls at the beginning of the NC game. That completely deflated our first half.

 

[wizards8507]

Yes, I realize losing our starting QB is a big deal.

I'm not picking on you because I know I'm in the very small minority on this one, but can someone please explain the "losing Golson is a big deal" sentiment to me? Last year, Everett Golson's range of play was anywhere between "dreadful" and "pretty good." He was wildly inconsistent but people seem to be in love with him just because he's an "athlete." The closest analogy I can draw to Golson is Tim Tebow. Not Florida Tim Tebow, but the NFL Tim Tebow. He has a definite set of skills but he hasn't shown me ANYTHING that indicates he can actually play the position. People seem to assume that he would have somehow blossomed into RGIII in the offseason but I think that's just a tad unrealistic.

 

[rocket66]

2013 Fall Camp Thread

I'm not picking on you because I know I'm in the very small minority on this one, but can someone please explain the "losing Golson is a big deal" sentiment to me? Last year, Everett Golson's range of play was anywhere between "dreadful" and "pretty good." He was wildly inconsistent but people seem to be in love with him just because he's an "athlete." The closest analogy I can draw to Golson is Tim Tebow. Not Florida Tim Tebow, but the NFL Tim Tebow. He has a definite set of skills but he hasn't shown me ANYTHING that indicates he can actually play the position. People seem to assume that he would have somehow blossomed into RGIII in the offseason but I think that's just a tad unrealistic.

Right. Kelly was on with Jack Arute and Gino Toretta on Tuesday and touched on the qb situation as compared to last year. He pointed out how several times Golson didn't check out of run plays when the box was over manned, and vice versa for pass plays. Golson also struggled to take advantage of match ups in the passing game, which Rees excels at. It's unlike BK to really pump up a certain player, but he seemed uber-confident in Rees' ability to move the football and get the offense in the right situations every time. He also pointed out that Rees is surprisingly more athletic this fall camp, able to slide his feet, hit windows, and great in the red zone. I know BK was also quoted in the presser as saying they'll score more than in 2012 (which isn't saying a lot), but it's obvious he is very happy with where this team is going into this season.

 

[Kak7304]

Win games and shut the critics up. It's as simple as that.

 

[Kak7304]

I'm not picking on you because I know I'm in the very small minority on this one, but can someone please explain the "losing Golson is a big deal" sentiment to me? Last year, Everett Golson's range of play was anywhere between "dreadful" and "pretty good." He was wildly inconsistent but people seem to be in love with him just because he's an "athlete." The closest analogy I can draw to Golson is Tim Tebow. Not Florida Tim Tebow, but the NFL Tim Tebow. He has a definite set of skills but he hasn't shown me ANYTHING that indicates he can actually play the position. People seem to assume that he would have somehow blossomed into RGIII in the offseason but I think that's just a tad unrealistic.

With the exception of 4th quarter against Pitt, Golson was only asked to not lose games. Our D carried us last year so I don't know why everyone expects a big drop off after losing Golson.

 

[clashmore_jon]

With the exception of 4th quarter against Pitt, Golson was only asked to not lose games. Our D carried us last year so I don't know why everyone expects a big drop off after losing Golson.

and when we look back at the footprints of our season, and see only one set of footprints during the difficult times; we will ask unto the Reesus why he abandoned us. and the Reesus will say "my child, those were the times when i carried you into the end zone."

 

[Emcee77]

The scary thing about losing Golson is losing his big-play, something-out-of-nothing ability. Even leaving aside his running ability, take a look, for example, at the long bomb TD to Goodman in the Michigan State game, from outside the pocket and across the field ... that's a play that Tommy just can't make. Yeah, our D carried us last year, but we scored a lot of touchdowns that might have been 3 or zero points with Tommy at QB.

Don't get me wrong, I personally think Tommy will surprise a lot of people this year ... but I understand the nervousness some people are feeling.

 

[NDBoiler]

and when we look back at the footprints of our season, and see only one set of footprints during the difficult times; we will ask unto the Reesus why he abandoned us. and the Reesus will say "my child, those were the times when i carried you into the end zone."

W.W.R.D.

 

[clashmore_jon]

The scary thing about losing Golson is losing his big-play, something-out-of-nothing ability. Even leaving aside his running ability, take a look, for example, at the long bomb TD to Goodman in the Michigan State game, from outside the pocket and across the field ... that's a play that Tommy just can't make. Yeah, our D carried us last year, but we scored a lot of touchdowns that might have been 3 or zero points with Tommy at QB.

Don't get me wrong, I personally think Tommy will surprise a lot of people this year ... but I understand the nervousness some people are feeling.

Yeah but in theory we wont be in nearly as many 'something out of nothing' plays this year because TR will check out of them pre-snap. apples and oranges really.

I'm sort of glad that this year we won't be seeing Golson scrambling around holding the ball like a baseball as 17 defenders come at him. Big play potential there too (for the opponent).

 

[Kak7304]

W.W.R.D.

Can we get bracelets made?

 

[Kak7304]

Yeah but in theory we wont be in nearly as many 'something out of nothing' plays this year because TR will check out of them pre-snap. apples and oranges really.

I'm sort of glad that this year we won't be seeing Golson scrambling around holding the ball like a baseball as 17 defenders come at him. Big play potential there too (for the opponent).

Absolutely right. Golson had a tendency to hold the ball out when scrambling instead of tucking. Scared the crap out of me every single time.

 

[NDBoiler]

Can we get bracelets made?

So let it be written, so let it be done.

(I know, Pharaoh, not Reesus)

 

[ryno 24]

Absolutely right. Golson had a tendency to hold the ball out when scrambling instead of tucking. Scared the crap out of me every single time.

Let's not blow things out of proportion. I think Reesus can and will have a good year. There is a reason Golson won the job last year over a former starter and would have had the job this year. Coaches were glowing about him and he was making a bunch of improvements this year. Also, he was supposedly becoming a leader and could have been named a captain. The offense is also more open with Golson in the offense. Golson also had less turnovers than Rees in the season that he started.

Though Reesus probably has improved, I would still prefer Golson.