2016 Fall Camp Thread

[Blaise]

The only reason I'd be OK with the Texas game is if hes still trying to determine who's best and will start the rest of the year. But his comments sound more like 'both are good so both will play', rather than 'welre still trying to figure out who should be our guy.

I view Texas, Stanford, Usc, MSU and V Tech, as games that we need to be good to win... What if the split doesn't work... Does he let Kizer or Zaire play entire second half?

His words are "Both are too good not to play" well it doesn't sound like we are still evaluating....

 

[koonja]

I view Texas, Stanford, Usc, MSU and V Tech, as games that we need to be good to win... What if the split doesn't work... Does he let Kizer or Zaire play entire second half?

His words are "Both are too good not to play" well it doesn't sound like we are still evaluating....

That's my biggest concern. Call me crazy but that puts a big damper on my season excitement.

 

[ND Fan Vancouver]

Honestly, I couldn't choose a starting QB at ND this year. There's two Championship calibre QB's and Wimbush would start for a bunch of Power fuve teams. I don't like a two QB system but I think it's what you do if you're the HC at ND this year. Let's go out there and win every F'N game this season and win a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP!
GO IRISH! WE ARE ND!

 

[gkIrish]

Positives:

-Neither guy will transfer
-Both guys will keep up the intensity at practice
-Opponents must prepare for both

Negatives:
-Lefty/Righty is going to create route running confusion among WRs.
-Lineman also have to adjust and each player has a different voice and cadence (more false starts?)
-More stuff to worry about within each game. More decisions means more chances to screw up
-Kizer has more upside and his growth will slow down
-Less chemistry with wide receivers.
-Media shitstorm after every game
-BK will be second-guessed every time one throws an interception

You might say some of these negatives apply to the single QB system, too, but I think if you name your starter and say he is the guy you won't have people second guessing every decision.

 

[koonja]

Positives:

-Neither guy will transfer
-Both guys will keep up the intensity at practice
-Opponents must prepare for both

Negatives:
-Lefty/Righty is going to create route running confusion among WRs.
-Lineman also have to adjust and each player has a different voice and cadence (more false starts?)
-More stuff to worry about within each game. More decisions means more chances to screw up
-Kizer has more upside and his growth will slow down
-Less chemistry with wide receivers.
-Media shitstorm after every game
-BK will be second-guessed every time one throws an interception

You might say some of these negatives apply to the single QB system, too, but I think if you name your starter and say he is the guy you won't have people second guessing every decision.

This one could have been listed 10 times. Everything we hear about the WRs is 'inconsistent' and we don't even have one spot locked down with a starter (ESB/Boykin?). Want to really ratchet up inconsistency with the WRs? Change the QBs on them constantly.

 

[IrishLax]

Positives:

-Neither guy will transfer
-Both guys will keep up the intensity at practice
-Opponents must prepare for both

Negatives:
-Lefty/Righty is going to create route running confusion among WRs.
-Lineman also have to adjust and each player has a different voice and cadence (more false starts?)
-More stuff to worry about within each game. More decisions means more chances to screw up
-Kizer has more upside and his growth will slow down
-Less chemistry with wide receivers.
-Media shitstorm after every game
-BK will be second-guessed every time one throws an interception

You might say some of these negatives apply to the single QB system, too, but I think if you name your starter and say he is the guy you won't have people second guessing every decision.

I think your last two points are the most legitimate, because I don't want guys playing afraid of making a mistake, I want them slinging it and trying to make plays.

 

[Domina Nostra]

Maybe martini moves to Sam and Coney plays will.

I think it means, if Morgan gets hurt, Martini slides over to MIKE and Coney takes over at WILL. If Onwualu gets hurt, Martini could slide over depending on how Bilal is developing.

I think your functional 2-deep is this:
Mike:
1) Morgan
2) Martini
3) Barajas

Will
1) Martini
2) Coney
3) Jarron Jones(?)

Sam
1) Onwualu
2) Martini/Bilal

I don't like it. Seems like it's just a way to keep one guy from getting angry.

I also think Kizer has massive upside and this will just delay his growth.

Might want to keep Texas guessing ...

 

[Luckylucci]

This one could have been listed 10 times. Everything we hear about the WRs is 'inconsistent' and we don't even have one spot locked down with a starter (ESB/Boykin?). Want to really ratchet up inconsistency with the WRs? Change the QBs on them constantly.

While I agree with the bigger picture concern of playing 2 QB's. Hunter and Sanders are taking virtually all 1st team reps. So they are pretty much locked in at this point. While Boykin has been playing well of late, ESB is still taking the lion share of 1st team reps, as well. So there is more continuity there than you are letting on.

 

[Irishman77]

I was hoping we roll with both. Let them settle it out on the field. They are both very special and a nightmare for opposing defenses; especially in the game planning and the magnitude of sets and personnel they will see against us.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

You can read into Coach Kelly's comments, he wants both QBs locked in and we'll likely see a 60/40 split vs. Texas. We may see it the following week as well if we need that much info to make a decision but our QBs will play themselves into a starting spot.

If they can both play at the level they've exhibited in practice, I'd expect both to continue playing throughout the season. If one starts to separate based on in-game performance, you'll see their reps go up while the other rescinds.

It's a reasonable plan if you can't find any clear distinction between them. The bright lights can affect people differently so let's see how they do in the first two games before we start lambasting Kelly on this decision.

Koon, if it truly is a 60/40 split in either direction, I'm willing to negate the bet (if you also agree). That isn't real separation. Or if you'd rather change the parameters of the bet with this new information, let me know.

 

[Luckylucci]

I think your last two points are the most legitimate, because I don't want guys playing afraid of making a mistake, I want them slinging it and trying to make plays.

I agree.

 

[dwshade]

Positives:

-Neither guy will transfer
-Both guys will keep up the intensity at practice
-Opponents must prepare for both

Negatives:
-Lefty/Righty is going to create route running confusion among WRs.
-Lineman also have to adjust and each player has a different voice and cadence (more false starts?)
-More stuff to worry about within each game. More decisions means more chances to screw up
-Kizer has more upside and his growth will slow down
-Less chemistry with wide receivers.
-Media shitstorm after every game
-BK will be second-guessed every time one throws an interception

You might say some of these negatives apply to the single QB system, too, but I think if you name your starter and say he is the guy you won't have people second guessing every decision.

Neither was a threat to transfer. Malik will graduate this year and likely transfer after season as a 5th year graduate. As for both QB's playing I've always assumed Kizer would be the starter but they'll mix in some Malik in the games. I don't see any issue with that.

 

[greyhammer90]

Only positive I can think of... Worked for Florida in 06?

 

[koonja]

While I agree with the bigger picture concern of playing 2 QB's. Hunter and Sanders are taking virtually all 1st team reps. So they are pretty much locked in at this point. While Boykin has been playing well of late, ESB is still taking the lion share of 1st team reps, as well. So there is more continuity there than you are letting on.

I didn't mean it that way, but see the poor wording now. I mean it as 'there's one spot we don't even have locked down', meaning the ESB/Boykin battle, with Stepherson still lingering around that position.

 

[dwshade]

You can read into Coach Kelly's comments, he wants both QBs locked in and we'll likely see a 60/40 split vs. Texas. We may see it the following week as well if we need that much info to make a decision but our QBs will play themselves into a starting spot.

If they can both play at the level they've exhibited in practice, I'd expect both to continue playing throughout the season. If one starts to separate based on in-game performance, you'll see their reps go up while the other rescinds.

It's a reasonable plan if you can't find any clear distinction between them. The bright lights can affect people differently so let's see how they do in the first two games before we start lambasting Kelly on this decision.

Koon, if it truly is a 60/40 split in either direction, I'm willing to negate the bet (if you also agree). That isn't real separation. Or if you'd rather change the parameters of the bet with this new information, let me know.

I'd be shocked if it were 60/40. More like 75/25.

 

[koonja]

You can read into Coach Kelly's comments, he wants both QBs locked in and we'll likely see a 60/40 split vs. Texas. We may see it the following week as well if we need that much info to make a decision but our QBs will play themselves into a starting spot.

If they can both play at the level they've exhibited in practice, I'd expect both to continue playing throughout the season. If one starts to separate based on in-game performance, you'll see their reps go up while the other rescinds.

It's a reasonable plan if you can't find any clear distinction between them. The bright lights can affect people differently so let's see how they do in the first two games before we start lambasting Kelly on this decision.

Koon, if it truly is a 60/40 split in either direction, I'm willing to negate the bet (if you also agree). That isn't real separation. Or if you'd rather change the parameters of the bet with this new information, let me know.

Yes - if it's close and you can tell both are playing legitimate time, bet is off if you agree. Who knows how truthful BK is being - maybe he's just throwing people off and keeping both interested - but if it's pretty obvious he's playing both for a reason, no bet.

 

[gkIrish]

Neither was a threat to transfer. Malik will graduate this year and likely transfer after season as a 5th year graduate. As for both QB's playing I've always assumed Kizer would be the starter but they'll mix in some Malik in the games. I don't see any issue with that.

I meant Kizer transferring this year or Malik transferring next year as a 5th year. You ideally want both guys on the team this season and next before Wimbush takes over.

 

[dwshade]

I meant Kizer transferring this year or Malik transferring next year as a 5th year. You ideally want both guys on the team this season and next before Wimbush takes over.

There was never a chance Kizer was leaving. And Malik will be gone after this season barring injury to Kizer.

 

[IrishBroker]

There was never a chance Kizer was leaving. And Malik will be gone after this season barring injury to Kizer.

I can totally see one of them leaving if the other locks down the position.

But that's a part of the game. I've never been a fan of the two QB system. It doesn't work. Stick with your guy and let him get into a groove with the offense and gel.

I think BK needs to just make the decision and go with it. If one guy leaves? Oh well. Wimbush will be waiting and I think he's going to be better than either one of the current guys.

 

[dwshade]

I can totally see one of them leaving if the other locks down the position.

But that's a part of the game. I've never been a fan of the two QB system. It doesn't work. Stick with your guy and let him get into a groove with the offense and gel.

I think BK needs to just make the decision and go with it. If one guy leaves? Oh well. Wimbush will be waiting and I think he's going to be better than either one of the current guys.

Again no one was leaving. Malik has nowhere to go until after he graduates this year. And Kizer is all in with ND. It does him no good to sit out a year as a transfer when he's going to be the starter 100% next year.

 

[Irish Insanity]

I don't like it. Seems like it's just a way to keep one guy from getting angry.

I also think Kizer has massive upside and this will just delay his growth.

No thanks... I do not want a 2 qb system

I strongly approve the above quoted posts.

Also, I believe GK mentioned it, I just see the righty/left ball delivery as not a good thing for a young inexperienced WR group.

 

[gkIrish]

Again no one was leaving. Malik has nowhere to go until after he graduates this year. And Kizer is all in with ND. It does him no good to sit out a year as a transfer when he's going to be the starter 100% next year.

You keep saying it as if it's fact. It never makes sense for any QB to transfer and sit out a year, but they do it anyway. He could transfer right now and still start 2 years for someone else.

 

[IrishBroker]

Again no one was leaving. Malik has nowhere to go until after he graduates this year. And Kizer is all in with ND. It does him no good to sit out a year as a transfer when he's going to be the starter 100% next year.

How many times have we heard that in the past?

And who says they'd go somewhere to sit out?


I'm playing devils advocate here, but, again, I could see a kid transferring from a school when he's got someone playing in front of him, and a stud waiting behind him.

 

[IrishLax]

Only positive I can think of... Worked for Florida in 06?

This is the main reason I don't get the consternation... unless it's a true tiemshare with everyone playing tight and being second guessed on every throw.

Tim Tebow as a frosh on that Florida team had 6.4 carries/game, 33.5 RYPG, 8 TDs with 2.4 passing attempts per game with a healthy 10.8 yards/attempt and 4 TDs. So Tebow got about 9 snaps a game and accounted for about 60 yards of offense and a TD. Most importantly, his efficiency numbers were off the charts... he lead every player with at least 50 rushing attempts in YPC, he threw a TD pass every 8 attempts, and his YPA was strong considering he was primarily used in short yardage situations. And if you look at Tebow's stats only over the second half of the season where he played more, they get even more eye popping.

The point is that Tebow wasn't used in place of Chris Leak. He was used in specific situations for specific plays that catered to his strengths. Let's say hypothetically ND uses Zaire like that... I think it's going to be incredibly effective... I just wonder what the fans do when Zaire's per play numbers are mind blowing.

 

[arrowryan]

I'm glad Kelly agrees with me that you can't keep talented guys like Kizer and Zaire on the bench. Hearing that both will play is music to my ears.

 

[koonja]

I'm glad Kelly agrees with me that you can't keep talented guys like Kizer and Zaire on the bench. Hearing that both will play is music to my ears.

I don't get that mindset 'they're 2 of my 5 best players so they have to play'.

Only 1 is going to be on the field anyway, so it's not like you're maximizing your 'play makers'. And subbing out prevents one of them from developing to his full potential.

 

[ulukinatme]

-Kizer has more upside and his growth will slow down

You've said this a few times, what are the reasons though? Both were highly recruited, Zaire the #4 Dual threat, Kizer the #12 Pro. Both are playing well in practice. I would say Zaire has more intangibles, Kizer has more game day experience. I see no reason why we can't win with either or both. If we could split time and space and see both scenarios where each QB takes all the reps going forward, I don't see how Kizer would be head and shoulders ahead of Zaire. He might have an edge on the passing, but Zaire gets the job done too and has his own strengths.

 

[arrowryan]

I don't get that mindset 'they're 2 of my 5 best players so they have to play'.

Only 1 is going to be on the field anyway, so it's not like you're maximizing your 'play makers'. And subbing out prevents one of them from developing to his full potential.

Well I would hold off on the "only one is going to be on the field anyway" as BK stated he has thought of the idea of having them both on the field at the same time.

And for the bolded statement, couldn't the same be said for running backs? I know they need breathers but Folston, Josh, and Dex can't max out their potential because they'll be subbing all the time.

Coaches want to get the most out of the talent that they have on the team and he can't do that if it is on the bench. I agree with LAX in that it probably won't be 50/50 (more like 65/35) and Zaire could play a similar role as Tebow did. Give him a run heavy playbook and beat the defense occasionally with his arm.

 

[arrowryan]

You've said this a few times, what are the reasons though? Both were highly recruited, Zaire the #4 Dual threat, Kizer the #12 Pro. Both are playing well in practice. I would say Zaire has more intangibles, Kizer has more game day experience. I see no reason why we can't win with either or both. If we could split time and space and see both scenarios where each QB takes all the reps going forward, I don't see how Kizer would be head and shoulders ahead of Zaire. He might have an edge on the passing, but Zaire gets the job done too and has his own strengths.

I don't think GK is saying that we can't win with Zaire. I agree with that Kizer has more upside as he already has a NFL caliber body and is probably a little more accurate on his throws. Zaire, in my opinion, is more shifty running to go along with his better than average arm and that is why he will be playing

 

[gkIrish]

You've said this a few times, what are the reasons though? Both were highly recruited, Zaire the #4 Dual threat, Kizer the #12 Pro. Both are playing well in practice. I would say Zaire has more intangibles, Kizer has more game day experience. I see no reason why we can't win with either or both. If we could split time and space and see both scenarios where each QB takes all the reps going forward, I don't see how Kizer would be head and shoulders ahead of Zaire. He might have an edge on the passing, but Zaire gets the job done too and has his own strengths.

Both have shown to be exceptionally talented, but Kizer is (1) a full year younger, and (2) has the better arm. It's basically that simple.

I also dispute this whole idea of Zaire having better intangibles. I don't think there is any substance to that. I think that all originated from sympathy he generated on Showtime.