2021 Spring Practice

[Dale]

Simply put, Lugg needs work at whatever position he's going to play. I actually think it's kind of wild I even have to post that, lol.

What is more likely, that their are obvious needs and deficiencies in the OL that you see and know how to address that the staff does not or, that the staff does know and our limited practice info doesn’t reflect their very real strategy and process?

I think this blurb can be used to summarize the whole debate and that would be the question I would pose.

 

[ThePiombino]

Yup. I've always wished spring games were actual games/scrimmages. Wish we'd pick Purdue or IU, or rotate, and scrimmage them every spring. Not sure what the NCAA rules say.

Why though? It's not like any respectable program is going to open up the playbook. Also, I can't imagine schools taking on that additional injury risk. Would be fun, just unreasonable IMO.

 

[Dizzyphil]

Yup. I've always wished spring games were actual games/scrimmages. Wish we'd pick Purdue or IU, or rotate, and scrimmage them every spring. Not sure what the NCAA rules say.

Two things it would accomplish - knowing what your offense/defense needs help/support/work,....etc. Also, I believe it could help on injuries - you only have 11 on the field instead of 22... make rules like, 8 minute qtrs, no hitting QBs, no blitzing, etc......

 

[Luckylucci]

I disagree with all of this. It's assuming you know the actual distribution of snaps based on 3 minute snippets over 8ish practices. It assumes the staff doesn't understand the intricacies of getting players snaps at their likely fall position and it assumes you know better where each of these players belongs along the line.

But, this is a message board so.... thanks for your opinion on the OL.

I think it's going to be tough to not compare last year's line to this year's because it will most definitely be at least a step below what we've grown accustomed to. Prior to last year, people complained that Quinn couldn't coach up an OL and he was Kelly's "Buddy". In 2017, I think, people thought Hiestand's best days were behind him. If the OL play plots as a wave over time and we're trying to minimize the amplitude, this will most likely be a "trough year".

I trust the staff to get the best 5-7 best OL out there and in the correct positions.

Well, you can't disagree with all of it because some of it is fact. Kelly has told us only one OT spot is up for grabs. And, that Lugg is at RT but expected to play RG. That's not my opinion or guess work, that's what the HC has told us. So, unless they are deliberately lying to media then we should work with that information. We also know that in all practice footage we have seen neither Baker or Blake has been at RT. So, maybe that is happening during the super secret practice time but I'll assume it's not. Doesn't feel like a huge leap.

My opinion which I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with is whether all this mixing/matching and players playing out of position will impact the results.

On the intricacies of reps, snaps, coaching staff decisions, team preparation, etc. This would assume that all decisions, at all times, made by the staff will always be correct. Since we know that isn't the case nor will it ever be, we discuss them. Were the intricacies of the team properly vetted when they got lambasted by an average Miami team in 2017? Probably not. This isn't a referendum on Kelly so I don't want to make it one but discussing possible road blocks to a successful season seems very appropriate for this thread since it's very possible there will be some.

 

[Luckylucci]

What is more likely, that their are obvious needs and deficiencies in the OL that you see and know how to address that the staff does not or, that the staff does know and our limited practice info doesn’t reflect their very real strategy and process?

I think this blurb can be used to summarize the whole debate and that would be the question I would pose.

Kelly and Quinn are much better football coaches than I. Never once in my IE days have I stated otherwise. However, that doesn't mean that they couldn't make mistakes in preparing the team. I think we all know that's a possible outcome. So, we discuss potential pitfalls and success of the upcoming season. Again, seems like appropriate conversation for the thread.

You disagree and have the utmost confidence that regardless of where these guys take reps and play right now it will be a great year for the OL. I do not. Let's continue to have the discussion as we get more data points.

 

[Irish YJ]

Why though? It's not like any respectable program is going to open up the playbook. Also, I can't imagine schools taking on that additional injury risk. Would be fun, just unreasonable IMO.

We don't need to open up the playbook. It's just more of a pre-season game to work on the basics.

Doubt it would translate into more injuries. QBs can still wear the red jerseys. It would simply allow teams to work on things against a team that doesn't see it every day in practice.

Two things it would accomplish - knowing what your offense/defense needs help/support/work,....etc. Also, I believe it could help on injuries - you only have 11 on the field instead of 22... make rules like, 8 minute qtrs, no hitting QBs, no blitzing, etc......

yup... I'd be fine with blitzing, just no hitting the QBs. turn the passing game into flag football or 2 hand touch.

 

[Dale]

Kelly and Quinn are much better football coaches than I. Never once in my IE days have I stated otherwise. However, that doesn't mean that they couldn't make mistakes in preparing the team. I think we all know that's a possible outcome. So, we discuss potential pitfalls and success of the upcoming season. Again, seems like appropriate conversation for the thread.

You disagree and have the utmost confidence that regardless of where these guys take reps and play right now it will be a great year for the OL. I do not. Let's continue to have the discussion as we get more data points.

I think the debate it is a great conversation and debate, I’d glad to have it. But there is a difference between agreeing/disagreeing with each other or the staff, and implying things, whether it is issues or answers to said issues, as not only obvious to you but obviously missed by the staff, which is the inference I’ve gotten. Like it’s a obvious problem with a obvious answer and the staff is not even taking the test.

 

[Luckylucci]

I think the debate it is a great conversation and debate, I’d glad to have it. But there is a difference between agreeing/disagreeing with each other or the staff, and implying things, whether it is issues or answers to said issues, as not only obvious to you but obviously missed by the staff, which is the inference I’ve gotten. Like it’s a obvious problem with a obvious answer and the staff is not even taking the test.

Well, the obviousness or lack thereof shouldn’t matter. It wouldn't be the first time something obvious was missed by the staff either. If I think something is obvious then I will opine as such. Again, you can disagree all you like. Deliberately playing a guy out of position when he wasn't even good enough to start at his real position the year prior seems like an obvious oversight. We'll see how it plays out. If Lugg is anything less than an AA RG then maybe spending more time there would've helped. It certainly couldn't hurt.

 

[Dale]

Well, the obviousness or lack thereof shouldn’t matter. It wouldn't be the first time something obvious was missed by the staff either. If I think something is obvious then I will opine as such. Again, you can disagree all you like. Deliberately playing a guy out of position when he wasn't even good enough to start at his real position the year prior seems like an obvious oversight. We'll see how it plays out. If Lugg is anything less than an AA RG then maybe spending more time there would've helped. It certainly couldn't hurt.

“You can disagree all you like”

You see this is where I find your thoughts on the debate, interesting. I didn’t say a thing about Lugg. So idk IMO you can’t say this is the place to debate it, I invite debate....but you’re wrong, the staff is wrong, Lugg needs be practicing at RG or they were wrong all along. Message boards I guess.

FWIW, I think there is a chance Lugg is not a starter. So Kelly saying he’ll end up inside in the fall, doesn’t guarantee he’ll start inside. Lugg was “most ready” to fill in when needed this past year, but it’s possible with a off-season of training plus newcomers, he ends up odd man out yet again

EDIT: BK did infer Lugg will start, i re-read the quote, but that is my possible read on what the shuffling could spit out. Or maybe just Fisher optimism coming through lol

 

[Irish YJ]

The more I read and watch about the OL, the more I think not a lot is set in stone at all.

 

[Luckylucci]

“You can disagree all you like”

You see this is where I find your thoughts on the debate, interesting. I didn’t say a thing about Lugg. So idk IMO you can’t say this is the place to debate it, I invite debate....but you’re wrong, the staff is wrong, Lugg needs be practicing at RG or they were wrong all along. Message boards I guess.

FWIW, I think there is a chance Lugg is not a starter. So Kelly saying he’ll end up inside in the fall, doesn’t guarantee he’ll start inside. Lugg was “most ready” to fill in when needed this past year, but it’s possible with a off-season of training plus newcomers, he ends up odd man out yet again

You don't need speak for me or put words in my mouth. In none of my posts have I said anyone was wrong. I actually literally used words or phrases like "it seems", "we'll have to see how it plays out", or "potentially" which illustrate the exact opposite of what you are implying. The reality is, it's you who doesn't like my opinion so you are choosing to misrepresent the conversation. No thank you.

 

[Trait Expectations]

We can't change things, we can only watch them unfold.

Luckylucci,

I simply disagree with all of the assumptions you are making. If there were media members able to watch 25% of the practices to verify how reps are being split and if the coaches explained their methodology for identifying the best 5-7 OL and their best positions, then I'd have more faith in extrapolating and you explaining the potential pitfalls in the methodology.

These same staff members are around them during weight room training and drills. They watch how they bend and move and how they handle bull rushing, hand fighting, speed, stunts, twists, etc. They know their relative strengths and weaknesses and they've had 1000s of hours interacting with most of them (freshman EEs excluded).

I enjoy discussing potential lineups but I don't know what we can conclude from these practice snippets.

I surmised Bauer was going to be a starter, along with Liufau but I'm very likely wrong. They seem to always be in on big plays and flying to the ball but the staff may see them constantly over-pursuing or losing gap integrity, etc.

Maybe I disagree less with your assumptions (slightly less) and more with the veracity or assuredness of your thoughts. Or maybe it's just been a really long Thursday after back2back2back2back meetings and I'm over-sensitized.

I really hope our OL can still be a top 25 unit. We've recruited well and if "iron sharpens iron", then our guys should be ready come fall.

 

[Luckylucci]

Hey LL, was it you that posted a link on Freeman's D? If so, can you repost when you have time. TIA.

I posted a article on Elston's comments this last week (DL thread). Sounds like they are hip to lining up both Botelho and Foskey all over the place. I'm with you on the chaos, and I too hope it's controlled lol.

The article had a good portion about Botelho in terms of sending him home, gained maturity, and how Elston is proud of him for turning the corner.

I love the though of Foskey and Botelho as both on opposite edges. Elston's comments about MTA leaning up also exciting.

Unsure if this is the one you are talking about but I thought this was a great read.

Here's What Marcus Freeman Brings To Notre Dame | The Draft Network

And per usual, I liked what Jamie U put together at ISD.

Freeman Should Adapt and Excel | Irish Sports Daily

 

[Luckylucci]

When Lion posted that Draft Network article, he mentioned something that could be significant for this team and that is playing man coverage has been a must for the CB's in Freeman's system. Obviously playing man coverage well, that is. What's of interest is I did read that the feedback II has gotten from the staff is they have been happy with Bracy this Spring. And, feels pretty good about the trio of Bracy, Hart, and Lewis.

Also, it sounds like they are not working Boundary or Field at CB but left or right. It will be interesting to see if that changes, matters, etc. I wouldn't think they'd want Hart to the Field with a speedy WR but maybe they are just doing it now to see how he responds. With that said, if Bracy and Lewis are the top 2 CB's then I could see why they'd do that.

 

[Irish YJ]

OL talk starts about the 18min mark.

A few good nuggets. A few muddy areas that are being debated above.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

This is a perfect year to throw your talented young pups out there. No one expects ND to make the playoff in 2021, the schedule isn't that rough, but 2022 and 2023 get really dicey. If ND leans on older guys this year to go 10-2 and a Cheez it bowl, who really cares?

I'd rather see ND go 8-4 or 9-3 this year playing all the young pups and getting them as much experience as possible for Ohio State and Clemson the next two years along with USC and UNC.

 

[Irish#1]

Concerning the O-line, I’m pretty sure that there was a lot of concern about the line prior to last year and they did alright. There may have been the same concern two years ago as well. Given the limited information we have it appears to me the staff knows what they can do already. The reps Fisher is getting may be to see if he can hold up and be consistent. If he can and he’s going to get to start, the staff more than likely knows where everyone else is going to play.

Remember how snaps back to Book were off sometimes and were slower getting back to him when Patterson went out? It all starts with the snap.

 

[NDdomer2]

All this OL talk and OMM hasnt entered the thread like Kramer yet...amazing

 

[Fbolt]

Interested in what Coan has to say about the team as compared to Wisky, how he feels about the receiver group, and then the D play.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

This is a perfect year to throw your talented young pups out there. No one expects ND to make the playoff in 2021, the schedule isn't that rough, but 2022 and 2023 get really dicey. If ND leans on older guys this year to go 10-2 and a Cheez it bowl, who really cares?

I'd rather see ND go 8-4 or 9-3 this year playing all the young pups and getting them as much experience as possible for Ohio State and Clemson the next two years along with USC and UNC.

This is not educated.
12-1 or 11-2 while mixing in young guys (who deserve it).

 

[RDU Irish]

Interested in what Coan has to say about the team as compared to Wisky, how he feels about the receiver group, and then the D play.

Would be interesting over casually over beers - I'm sure he would say all the right things to reporters not to upset any apple carts.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

Would be interesting over casually over beers - I'm sure he would say all the right things to reporters not to upset any apple carts.

This.
From what we've seen so far / heard from the beat, he seems like a very PC kind of guy. And by all accounts enjoyed his time at Wisco. He wouldn't say anything publicly.

 

[Trait Expectations]

This is a perfect year to throw your talented young pups out there. No one expects ND to make the playoff in 2021, the schedule isn't that rough, but 2022 and 2023 get really dicey. If ND leans on older guys this year to go 10-2 and a Cheez it bowl, who really cares?

I'd rather see ND go 8-4 or 9-3 this year playing all the young pups and getting them as much experience as possible for Ohio State and Clemson the next two years along with USC and UNC.

This is a terrible idea and not the way good coaches think. The staff and players should be trying to win every single game in front of them and field the players that help them accomplish that task. Losing now so you can win in the future is a sure fire way to lose the culture you've worked so hard to build.

I don't care if the best we can do is 10-2 and a Cheez-it bowl. I hope we show up ready to play and we try to beat up the opponent in every game.

Imagine Kelly saying, "Well, I don't really expect this team to do much this year so we're going to get a lot players in to see what they can do". It's just as absurd to think that way.

Sorry, I greatly despise this thinking in any avenue in life.

 

[Luckylucci]

This is a terrible idea and not the way good coaches think. The staff and players should be trying to win every single game in front of them and field the players that help them accomplish that task. Losing now so you can win in the future is a sure fire way to lose the culture you've worked so hard to build.

I don't care if the best we can do is 10-2 and a Cheez-it bowl. I hope we show up ready to play and we try to beat up the opponent in every game.

Imagine Kelly saying, "Well, I don't really expect this team to do much this year so we're going to get a lot players in to see what they can do". It's just as absurd to think that way.

Sorry, I greatly despise this thinking in any avenue in life.

I think you are both correct in some respects because there is a lot of nuances to this conversation. Of course to play to win every game. And, yes, playing the players that deserve the PT is the best way to keep culture. But how you get to that has some nuances. Because, you have to play to get better.

If you have a 5th year Senior and a true Sophomore competing for a spot and the difference in performance is negligible and you go with the young guy. That's very reasonable. Now, ideally, both play a fair amount of snaps and you make the transition over time. But, it wouldn't be unheard of or crush culture. Now, playing a young guy for the sake of being young, that could impact culture and sometimes it's intended too. But, you usually only see that with regime changes and obviously that's not us.

I mentioned the other day that I think Hinish might feel some of this, this year. I'm hopeful his snap count actually goes down so we can get the next group of NT's, mainly Cross, more involved. I like Hinish a great deal but if his play and Cross's is close, hopefully the snap count gap closes immensely. With all the OL talk yesterday, one of the things Dale said that got my attention (I'd be open to the possibility) was the thought that maybe Lugg will not be a starter. Now, ultimately I think he will be but if there is a RG that is close to Lugg's performance and has 2-3 years left, I'm siding with the youth.

1. Guys need to play to reach there potential.
2. It's not only about upside these days, it's about keeping the young guys happy and in the program. You can't lose the Senior/5th year guy and the guy behind him in the same offseason.

So, I think you are both right, to a point. You never just throw the young guys in over the old just for the sake of doing it. But, would we really be doing that at many spots when the staff has recruited this well? I would like to see a youth movement at various positions but only if the performance is close. And some of this for me is the difference between playing Bauer or White. Hinish vs Cross. Blake and Baker at OT vs Patterson. Those are just a few that come to mind.

 

[Trait Expectations]

I think you are both correct in some respects because there is a lot of nuances to this conversation. Of course to play to win every game. And, yes, playing the players that deserve the PT is the best way to keep culture. But how you get to that has some nuances. Because, you have to play to get better.

If you have a 5th year Senior and a true Sophomore competing for a spot and the difference in performance is negligible and you go with the young guy. That's very reasonable. Now, ideally, both play a fair amount of snaps and you make the transition over time. But, it wouldn't be unheard of or crush culture. Now, playing a young guy for the sake of being young, that could impact culture and sometimes it's intended too. But, you usually only see that with regime changes and obviously that's not us.

I mentioned the other day that I think Hinish might feel some of this, this year. I'm hopeful his snap count actually goes down so we can get the next group of NT's, mainly Cross, more involved. I like Hinish a great deal but if his play and Cross's is close, hopefully the snap count gap closes immensely. With all the OL talk yesterday, one of the things Dale said that got my attention (I'd be open to the possibility) was the thought that maybe Lugg will not be a starter. Now, ultimately I think he will be but if there is a RG that is close to Lugg's performance and has 2-3 years left, I'm siding with the youth.

1. Guys need to play to reach there potential.
2. It's not only about upside these days, it's about keeping the young guys happy and in the program. You can't lose the Senior/5th year guy and the guy behind him in the same offseason.

So, I think you are both right, to a point. You never just throw the young guys in over the old just for the sake of doing it. But, would we really be doing that at many spots when the staff has recruited this well? I would like to see a youth movement at various positions but only if the performance is close. And some of this for me is the difference between playing Bauer or White. Hinish vs Cross. Blake and Baker at OT vs Patterson. Those are just a few that come to mind.

If this is how PL22 would've stated it, I'd be far more inclined to agree. If you are not sacrificing winning to get players reps, by all means. That's a prudent decision. If you want to see if they can grow, and lock down the position, by all means. But you don't say, "the hell with it, let's put our young QB and OL so they can start prepping for 22 & 23".

As you stated it, I'm in complete agreement. I also agree about the specific positions/players you mentioned. I want to see if these guys can approach a higher ceiling if it's an even race.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

This is not educated.
12-1 or 11-2 while mixing in young guys (who deserve it).

Not educated? Education has no relevance here. It's just a difference in opinion.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

This is a terrible idea and not the way good coaches think. The staff and players should be trying to win every single game in front of them and field the players that help them accomplish that task. Losing now so you can win in the future is a sure fire way to lose the culture you've worked so hard to build.

I don't care if the best we can do is 10-2 and a Cheez-it bowl. I hope we show up ready to play and we try to beat up the opponent in every game.

Imagine Kelly saying, "Well, I don't really expect this team to do much this year so we're going to get a lot players in to see what they can do". It's just as absurd to think that way.

Sorry, I greatly despise this thinking in any avenue in life.

Take a deep breath. I'm in Philly but not calling for ND tanking the 2021 season like the 76ers. Of course we want to approach every game with the goal of winning the damn thing. What I'm saying is the potential is MUCH stronger for ND to win big in 2022 and 2023 than it is in 2021 and the competition gets tougher in those years.

Look at a few of the matchups Luckylucci mentioned. My underlying point was ND going 9-3 this year and the young guys not getting enough experience sets them up for disaster in 2022 when Clemson and Ohio State show up and guys like Coan, Hinish, Gibbons, and others are long gone.

 

[RDU Irish]

I think BK has done a better job of spreading reps around which is probably a function of higher quality depth too. Then we have the phenomenon of never destroying our opponent and only getting final possession V formation type reps for the back ups. Crushing some lesser opponents opens the door for spreading those reps around too. Not just full 2nd/3rd string but working in with the 1s and resting some of your top guys.

Fully expect to see 7-8 players consistently worked in at DL - some monsters there and a can be a high energy position that can benefit from being "fresh". I would place that at top of my list of "rotation as a plus" unit with OL being at the bottom of that list.

Then the issue of game breaking talent - need to get some WRs reps so they ARE ready if we are making the playoffs.

 

[IrishLion]

I think BK has done a better job of spreading reps around which is probably a function of higher quality depth too. Then we have the phenomenon of never destroying our opponent and only getting final possession V formation type reps for the back ups. Crushing some lesser opponents opens the door for spreading those reps around too. Not just full 2nd/3rd string but working in with the 1s and resting some of your top guys.

Fully expect to see 7-8 players consistently worked in at DL - some monsters there and a can be a high energy position that can benefit from being "fresh". I would place that at top of my list of "rotation as a plus" unit with OL being at the bottom of that list.

Then the issue of game breaking talent - need to get some WRs reps so they ARE ready if we are making the playoffs.

My kingdom for a Clemson-esque 35-7 2nd-quarter score against anybody... get the young guys mixed in with the starters on the OL at that point, then sub liberally the rest of the way.

 

[Armyirish47]

In general my main criticism of Kelly over the years (I think everyone knows I've been on the Kelly bandwagon for the whole ride) is his general demeanor which seems to lack a sense of urgency at times. We've seen it in big game prep over the years, his progress with QB's, etc. It's this idea that all is well because he's the coach and he knows his players will respond. And, largely he's been really good at it but it's also backfired incredibly bad before.

For example, Matt Freeman at ISD speculated that Baker and Blake could be competing for the RT spot as Patterson may come back and play the LT spot. So why are neither taking reps at RT? Because we have to play our RG and RT for the Spring? Doesn't really make sense. If they are the top two healthy OT's they should be getting as many reps as they can handle and/or working on pushing those reps higher by playing at the same time, not splitting reps while a vet plays out of position.

Even if the plan is for Patterson to play RT and there is this battle at LT, Lugg playing RT might be one of the more cavalier decisions. Lugg wasn't a good enough RG to beat out Kraemer who is a fringe NFL guard or any of our other OL over the last 4 years. Now, that was hard to do, I get that. But, that should be the point. Fielding an top 5 OL unit every year. And Lugg wasn't good enough to be part of that unit last year, I don't see how he would be now without added work. OL is about reps. Simply put, Lugg needs work at whatever position he's going to play. I actually think it's kind of wild I even have to post that, lol.

I also really dislike the idea of Patterson being locked in to one of the OT spots. He hasn't played OT in multiple years and in a year where OL turnover is going to be heavy, we're moving him to a premium position without playing it. How many Fall practices will he have? 18-20. So we're going to go into '21 with a first time starter at one OT spot in Baker or Blake and our other OT will have 18 practices, or so, at that position in the last 3 years? Or you have Blake and Baker as our LT and RT and one of them will have 18 practices to play RT for probably the first time in, probably, their lives.

What would make sense is if it was a 3 person battle for OT between the 3 mentioned above. But again, in that event, Blake and Baker should be practicing at RT and Lugg should be at RG. If Blake is that good and he's your LT then is it better to have Baker at RT and Patterson at LG or Patterson at RT and Gibbons at LG? It just doesn't have a lot of rhyme or reason. It's more like hey, we got all these talented guys and they'll be ready to go wherever we put them.

This is good post. I wonder too if part of the strategy in the Spring has to do with numbers and prepping for the blue gold game. I may be wildly misremembering but I thought we were at like 11 healthy scholarship lineman, so mixing and matching would be good cross training and create a functional set of two lines for a capstone Spring game?