Brian Kelly Revisited (RIP BOZO)

[gkIrish]

One is your starting quarterback, and the other is a team captain. And the third guy supported his coach. You can try to play semantics and say that his words weren't positive, but the entire quote CLEARLY supports his coach:



So now TWO team captains AND the starting QB have come out and supported the coach. It's not stupid to say that any talk of Kelly having lost this team is premature at best, moronic at worst.

I get it. You're just wrong.

Dude...nothing in the extra stuff you quoted from Onwualu changes the meaning of the last sentence in any way. Are you making shit up now?

If some walk on came out and said Brian Kelly is like a second father to me and he is the best coach in America you would take that quote and run to Alaska with it. Two guys come out and respond diplomatically to specific questions about the coach blaming players and you take that to mean Brian Kelly has full control of this team and everything is great.

News flash, we are 2-4 with some horrific losses. We could go 2-10 and you are going to find something positive to say about BK.

I'm done though. Not going to respond again.

 

[IrishLax]

What exactly are you looking for? He called Kizer's play after Duke "not acceptable" off the top of my head.

He called it "subpar"... I've watched every Tuesday presser word for word for the pieces I'm writing for ISD and have yet to see him even strongly "blame" anyone for losses. Again, would love for anyone to show me an example of him "throwing the team under the bus." Possible I missed it in some post game comments one of these weeks. If it doesn't exist, the media and everyone else needs to drop the horseshit narrative.

 

[kmoose]

Dude...nothing in the extra stuff you quoted from Onwualu changes the meaning of the last sentence in any way. Are you making shit up now?

No, I'm not making shit up. That quote was from the article on ESPN.com detailing how the players are supporting Brian Kelly. You're right about one thing...... it doesn't change the meaning of the last sentence, which has always obviously been, "We wouldn't want our coach to have to do that, but I guess that's what it takes, sometimes, to motivate some of the guys who aren't giving their all."

If some walk on came out and said Brian Kelly is like a second father to me and he is the best coach in America you would take that quote and run to Alaska with it.

So now you are comparing Kizer, McGlinchey, and Onwualu to walk-ons. Stay classy.

Two guys come out and respond diplomatically to specific questions about the coach blaming players and you take that to mean Brian Kelly has full control of this team and everything is great.

To say that everything is ok is diplomatic. To say that no other coach in the country could take better care of them than Kelly has is going well beyond "diplomatically". And I've never once asserted that Kelly has full control of the team and that everything is great. I've merely said that it is obvious that he hasn't LOST the team, and it is........... to all of those who AREN'T on a witch hunt. Saying that a guy doesn't suck is not the same as saying that he is GREAT.

News flash, we are 2-4 with some horrific losses. We could go 2-10 and you are going to find something positive to say about BK.

Isn't that what Jesus tried to teach us? To look for some good in everything. I've said that I think this is Kelly's last year at ND, so stop acting like I have my head in the sand and think that everything is perfect.

 

[gkIrish]

He called it "subpar"... I've watched every Tuesday presser word for word for the pieces I'm writing for ISD and have yet to see him even strongly "blame" anyone for losses. Again, would love for anyone to show me an example of him "throwing the team under the bus." Possible I missed it in some post game comments one of these weeks. If it doesn't exist, the media and everyone else needs to drop the horseshit narrative.

That's what I'm asking you. Give me an example of a statement. I consider it throwing the team under the bus when you blame everyone but yourself. So when he says the snapping was bad (in a monsoon.....) rather than saying my gameplan was bad, I see that as throwing others under the bus. That's just an example.

 

[IrishLax]

That's what I'm asking you. Give me an example of a statement. I consider it throwing the team under the bus when you blame everyone but yourself. So when he says the snapping was bad (in a monsoon.....) rather than saying my gameplan was bad, I see that as throwing others under the bus. That's just an example.

But he said his gameplan was bad. He has specifically blamed bad coaching for each of the past two losses above all else.

 

[IrishLion]

I see it both ways.

He's not "throwing them under the bus" in the sense that he's placing all of the blame and the struggles on the players.

But at the same time, when you are offering criticism of specific players to the media, without being prompted by a question, that's kind of a low-ball move IMO.

BK is asked about specific players a lot after games, and so when he talks about what those guys didn't do well enough or need to do better, that's cool; it was a prompt from the media, and he's usually pretty fair with his criticisms, and he's usually pretty good at subtly letting you know "I think highly of this player, which is why I'm displeased."

But when his second "main point" comment after a terrible loss, before he's asked a question, is to put the blame on a particular player, even if he doesn't use that player's name, is not a great sign.

We all know there were several bad snaps that hurt the offense. Everyone saw it. But everyone also saw a terribly ineffective gameplan from BK's staff, and an alarming lack and delay of adjustments. So even though he prefaced his first comments with his admiration for how tough they played, his first specific play-related comment was to indirectly criticize a player, rather than discuss the offense's failures as a whole.

So he's not out there lambasting guys like it often seems, but he's also got a problem with taking ownership of his own problems. He will criticize a player without prompting, but he won't criticize himself unless a reporter asks. And that is kind of bush league.

 

[kmoose]

That's what I'm asking you. Give me an example of a statement. I consider it throwing the team under the bus when you blame everyone but yourself. So when he says the snapping was bad (in a monsoon.....) rather than saying my gameplan was bad, I see that as throwing others under the bus. That's just an example.

Do you watch any of the press conferences? Do you watch ANY of the FIDM pieces? Did you watch the post game locker room speech I posted in this very thread? Kelly has taken A LOT of responsibility. He has blamed himself A LOT. So, by your own words, he hasn't thrown anyone under the bus.

 

[IrishLion]

But he said his gameplan was bad. He has specifically blamed bad coaching for each of the past two losses above all else.

It's in my post above, but my biggest issue is that he doesn't really shoulder any blame or criticism of himself unless he's asked directly by reporters, or until you can see that he's had enough time to give other answers about the team's shortcomings.

On the other hand, he will criticize players without prompting at times.

 

[kmoose]

It's in my post above, but my biggest issue is that he doesn't really shoulder any blame or criticism of himself unless he's asked directly by reporters, or until you can see that he's had enough time to give other answers about the team's shortcomings.

On the other hand, he will criticize players without prompting at times.

Name me one time when he criticized a player that it wasn't warranted?

 

[gkIrish]

But he said his gameplan was bad. He has specifically blamed bad coaching for each of the past two losses above all else.

What Lion says below. It's not so much that he won't take any accountability at all, it's that he never feels like it's his own fault as evidenced by the way he comes out and summarizes what went wrong.

I see it both ways.

He's not "throwing them under the bus" in the sense that he's placing all of the blame and the struggles on the players.

But at the same time, when you are offering criticism of specific players to the media, without being prompted by a question, that's kind of a low-ball move IMO.

BK is asked about specific players a lot after games, and so when he talks about what those guys didn't do well enough or need to do better, that's cool; it was a prompt from the media, and he's usually pretty fair with his criticisms, and he's usually pretty good at subtly letting you know "I think highly of this player, which is why I'm displeased."

But when his second "main point" comment after a terrible loss, before he's asked a question, is to put the blame on a particular player, even if he doesn't use that player's name, is not a great sign.

We all know there were several bad snaps that hurt the offense. Everyone saw it. But everyone also saw a terribly ineffective gameplan from BK's staff, and an alarming lack and delay of adjustments. So even though he prefaced his first comments with his admiration for how tough they played, his first specific play-related comment was to indirectly criticize a player, rather than discuss the offense's failures as a whole.

So he's not out there lambasting guys like it often seems, but he's also got a problem with taking ownership of his own problems. He will criticize a player without prompting, but he won't criticize himself unless a reporter asks. And that is kind of bush league.

 

[gkIrish]

Name me one time when he criticized a player that it wasn't warranted?

The example we have been using....Mustipher.

Mustipher has done a good/great job all year and it's his fault it's impossible to snap the ball properly in that weather?? There was literally zero reason for BK to mention that in the presser. Everyone could see that the snaps were bad and everyone knows why. It had nothing to do with the player failing. Yet BK calls him out.

 

[skehiaian]

We should go get the coach at the University of Washington, I have followed him for a long time, he would be a great replacement for Kelly!

 

[Luckylucci]

He called it "subpar"... I've watched every Tuesday presser word for word for the pieces I'm writing for ISD and have yet to see him even strongly "blame" anyone for losses. Again, would love for anyone to show me an example of him "throwing the team under the bus." Possible I missed it in some post game comments one of these weeks. If it doesn't exist, the media and everyone else needs to drop the horseshit narrative.

Posted this in a thread that Mike F started at Rivals. Basically called him out for his article where he bashed Kelly for "throwing his players under the bus". Except what everyone, including some ND fans fail to realize is that he actually apologized to the team in the locker room, right after the game. In what was a fairly humble speech, IMO. Not defending BK here, but the narrative has been taken too far.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

We should go get the coach at the University of Washington, I have followed him for a long time, he would be a great replacement for Kelly!

Feel like I read awhile back he is very attached to the Pacific Northwest area, and turned down USC a few years ago. Washington was really the only job he wanted to leave Boise State for. IMO, he is very laid back, and didn't want a "glamour" job.

 

[IrishLax]

Posted this in a thread that Mike F started at Rivals. Basically called him out for his article where he bashed Kelly for "throwing his players under the bus". Except what everyone, including some ND fans fail to realize is that he actually apologized to the team in the locker room, right after the game. In what was a fairly humble speech, IMO. Not defending BK here, but the narrative has been taken too far.

Pretty much where I'm at, I spent a good 20 minutes searching for the money quote where he "threw the team under the bus" and came up empty. So then I asked here, and it seems likes it's all some circular conversation.

Believe me, I currently want Kelly out after this abomination of a season, but I'm perplexed at some of the narratives. "Threw team under the bus"... didn't actually do that. "Can't win big games"... has nothing to do with any of the four losses we have this season. "Hisetand sucks and we can never run the ball"... last year we had the third most efficient running attack in the entire country and shredded people.

I just don't get it.

 

[Rocket89]

Do you watch any of the press conferences? Do you watch ANY of the FIDM pieces? Did you watch the post game locker room speech I posted in this very thread? Kelly has taken A LOT of responsibility. He has blamed himself A LOT. So, by your own words, he hasn't thrown anyone under the bus.

Heh.

Can we all agree that "throwing the team under the bus" is one of the laziest, shallowest, and outright dumb phrases in sports? Holy crap, what an annoying phrase that's tossed around like candy.

But you're right, it's pretty clear who REALLY pays attention to what Kelly says and actually watches the pressers and/or reads the transcripts versus those who, despite spending a significant amount of time posting, are mainly here to skim over comments, parse phrases, and further an agenda.

Also, it's weird how virtually no one is bringing up the context in which Kelly spoke following the game. The II podcast did a good job bringing this up in that Kelly was saying "the snapping was atrocious" i.e. meaning in general it was poor for both sides. He never called out Mustipher AND talked about the whole snapping process between Mustipher, Nelson, and Kizer breaking down on the last snap.

The best part for me is that people want the team to go out and dominate every week and yet treat these players like they're 7-year olds who shouldn't take criticism, or even worse, can't take criticism.

I'm glad the players are reacting the way they are. It's pretty funny.

 

[gkIrish]

Notre Dame Fighting Irish coach Brian Kelly promises to evaluate 'every position' after 1-3 start

SOUTH BEND, Ind. -- In the minutes after a 38-35 home loss Saturday to Duke, Notre Dame coach Brian Kelly said that all 22 starting jobs on the Fighting Irish are up for grabs, sending a stern message to his 1-3 team.

"Every position, all 22 of them, will be evaluated," Kelly said at his postgame news conference. "Each and every position. There is no position that is untouchable on this football team. And that's the quarterback, all the way down to -- maybe the long snapper's OK. We're not going to touch him. But everybody else is vulnerable."

Kelly described quarterback DeShone Kizer's play as "below standard" and "not acceptable" after the redshirt sophomore threw for 381 yards and rushed for 60 but turned over the ball twice. The Irish, for the first time, featured backup quarterback Malik Zaire as a receiver on two plays, but Kelly said those packages will be scrapped after the plays netted minus-8 yards.

Asked if it's a possibility that sophomore quarterback Brandon Wimbush -- who had been expected to redshirt -- will play this season, Kelly said: "That's a possibility. That's a definite possibility."

Asked later about who has to be on the field for the Fighting Irish, Kelly said, "Guys that have fire and grit and -- we had one guy in the entire football team that had emotion and fire. That is (running back) Dexter Williams. He's the only one. He's the only one that I saw. One guy.

"So, if you want to play for me moving forward, you better -- I don't care what your résumé says, I don't care if you were a five-star [recruit], if you had 100 tackles or 80 receptions or 30 touchdown passes -- you better have some damn fire and energy in you. We lack it. We lack it. Severely."

Those personnel changes, however, will leave the coaching staff unaffected. Third-year coordinator Brian VanGorder has faced plenty of heat from the fan base, with the segments of Saturday's Notre Dame Stadium crowd chanting to fire him after the Irish gave up 35-plus points for the fifth time in their past six games dating to last season.

"Actually, that's probably the one area that I feel better about today," Kelly said. "We did what I wanted today in terms of coaching. And coaching had nothing to do with the outcome today. I was pleased from that perspective."

Kizer said Duke wanted the game more than Notre Dame did, and that he has to execute the offense better.

"We're always held to a higher standard," Kizer said. " ... we understand that in order for to us win football games, we're going to have to come out with a fire and a sense of urgency, the thing that [Kelly has] been preaching all week

"Coaching had nothing to do with the outcome today."

 

[gkIrish]

Let's not forget when he shit on Weis players...

Notre Dame football: Brian Kelly apologizes after uproar - tribunedigital-chicagotribune

 

[kmoose]

The example we have been using....Mustipher.

Mustipher has done a good/great job all year and it's his fault it's impossible to snap the ball properly in that weather?? There was literally zero reason for BK to mention that in the presser. Everyone could see that the snaps were bad and everyone knows why. It had nothing to do with the player failing. Yet BK calls him out.

What specifically did he say about Sam? I have not seen one quote where he said Sam was to blame for the poor snapping.

 

[IrishLax]

Notre Dame Fighting Irish coach Brian Kelly promises to evaluate 'every position' after 1-3 start



"Coaching had nothing to do with the outcome today."

You're really grabbing the one line where he was just blindly deflecting about the guy he then immediately fired? Contrast to his Tuesday presser comments same week.

And sorry but when you get beat by DUKE an honest and realistic assessment of how the team played is not "throwing them under the bus"... he was directly critical of one player (Kizer), commended one other player (Williams), and said the team needs to play with fire and energy (accurate) in the quotes you bolded. Again, go look at how he expands on these topics in the Tuesday presser.

Throwing them under the bus would be: "we lost because Nick Coleman couldn't tackle, our safeties can't cover, the team has a bad attitude. Our defense gave up 5 touchdowns to a team that can't score on anybody because they didn't make plays when in position." That's not what he said. In fact, he goes to lengths to defend guys like Studstill later for taking a bad angle because of his "fatigue" and saying that's on the coaches for not playing more players.

 

[stlnd01]

Two things:
1: After all these years, not sure why people continue to take what BK says in a press conference completely at face value. He has different messages for different audiences, for various strategic reasons. So when he says "coaching was not the issue" - to me anyway - he's not in denial, he's trying to hold off the "Fire BVG" crowd until he figures out what he wants to do.

2: He is completely a process-oriented coach. I have to believe his process includes teaching his players to execute. And he knows he's going back to work with those players on execution on Monday. So when he blames "lack of execution" he's not throwing beneath the bus players who he'll fire that night like an NFL coach might. He's acknowledging a failure that's at least as much on the coaching staff as it is on the 19-year-old he's talking about.

That's how I interpret some of this, anyway. Don't take it all so literally.

 

[IrishLax]

Let's not forget when he shit on Weis players...

Notre Dame football: Brian Kelly apologizes after uproar - tribunedigital-chicagotribune

This moment basically fixed the entire mentality of the program and lead to the 2012 season soooooo............

 

[IrishLax]

Two things:
1: After all these years, not sure why people continue to take what BK says in a press conference completely at face value. He has different messages for different audiences, for various strategic reasons. So when he says "coaching was not the issue" - to me anyway - he's not in denial, he's trying to hold off the "Fire BVG" crowd until he figures out what he wants to do.

2: He is completely a process-oriented coach. I have to believe his process includes teaching his players to execute. And he knows he's going back to work with those players on execution on Monday. So when he blames "lack of execution" he's not throwing beneath the bus players who he'll fire that night like an NFL coach might. He's acknowledging a failure that's at least as much on the coaching staff as it is on the 19-year-old he's talking about.

That's how I interpret some of this, anyway. Don't take it all so literally.

Yup. Don't know how this is complicated.

 

[gkIrish]

What specifically did he say about Sam? I have not seen one quote where he said Sam was to blame for the poor snapping.

For the 10000th time:

Just extremely disappointed in the offensive execution and obviously, the lack of our ability to manage—the snapping of the football was atrocious as well

Last time I checked Sam is the one who snaps the football. Brian is disappointed...in the snapping of the football...which was atrocious.

What was he disappointed in if not for Sam, kmoose?

 

[IrishinSyria]

We should go get the coach at the University of Washington, I have followed him for a long time, he would be a great replacement for Kelly!

Who would leave Seattle and the team he has there to go to South Bend?

 

[IrishLax]

For the 10000th time:



Last time I checked Sam is the one who snaps the football. Brian is disappointed...in the snapping of the football...which was atrocious.

What was he disappointed in if not for Sam, kmoose?

But he did not say "Sam Mustipher really didn't get it done snapping the football"... and in further quotes/context, he expanded on that and talked about how the "atrocious conditions" made it extremely difficult to snap the football, and how they practiced going under center before the game and had problems with that as well.

Saying "I'm disappointed with the offense and the snapping" in a game where Notre Dame scored 3 points and had huge issues snapping the football is not ground breaking or throwing anyone under the bus. It's a simple answer to a simple question.

 

[gkIrish]

You're really grabbing the one line where he was just blindly deflecting about the guy he then immediately fired? Contrast to his Tuesday presser comments same week.

And sorry but when you get beat by DUKE an honest and realistic assessment of how the team played is not "throwing them under the bus"... he was directly critical of one player (Kizer), commended one other player (Williams), and said the team needs to play with fire and energy (accurate) in the quotes you bolded. Again, go look at how he expands on these topics in the Tuesday presser.

Throwing them under the bus would be: "we lost because Nick Coleman couldn't tackle, our safeties can't cover, the team has a bad attitude. Our defense gave up 5 touchdowns to a team that can't score on anybody because they didn't make plays when in position." That's not what he said. In fact, he goes to lengths to defend guys like Studstill later for taking a bad angle because of his "fatigue" and saying that's on the coaches for not playing more players.

You wanted a "money quote" and I just gave you one. It doesn't matter if you or I think he actually threw players under the bus. The perception is that he did. Dozens of articles were written about what he said about Mustipher and what he said after the Duke game. Thousands of tweets about it. Finebaum brought it up on his show. That's the kind of negative attention this program doesn't need right now.

 

[IrishinSyria]

I'm definitely on the Kelly points the finger at his team way too much bus, but I think he's too smart to ever do it overtly.

But I don't know, I come from a hockey background and the expectation there is to use me for blame and we or them for praise. Never point fingers, never take credit. I've never understood what Kelly gets out of talking about the snapping to the media, for example.

 

[gkIrish]

But he did not say "Sam Mustipher really didn't get it done snapping the football"... and in further quotes/context, he expanded on that and talked about how the "atrocious conditions" made it extremely difficult to snap the football, and how they practiced going under center before the game and had problems with that as well.

Saying "I'm disappointed with the offense and the snapping" in a game where Notre Dame scored 3 points and had huge issues snapping the football is not ground breaking or throwing anyone under the bus. It's a simple answer to a simple question.

Come on man that's absurd. There's a reason every media outlet jumped on the snapper quote. He didn't have to say his name.

It is ridiculous to be disappointed in a snapper in any context whatsoever in that monsoon. A good coach would have said "we obviously had issues snapping the ball today due to the weather." That's it, no need to express disappointment.

 

[Luckylucci]

Pretty much where I'm at, I spent a good 20 minutes searching for the money quote where he "threw the team under the bus" and came up empty. So then I asked here, and it seems likes it's all some circular conversation.

Believe me, I currently want Kelly out after this abomination of a season, but I'm perplexed at some of the narratives. "Threw team under the bus"... didn't actually do that. "Can't win big games"... has nothing to do with any of the four losses we have this season. "Hisetand sucks and we can never run the ball"... last year we had the third most efficient running attack in the entire country and shredded people.

I just don't get it.

I'm right there with ya. I initially took it upon myself to post on some of these topics, as beaten up fans have come up with some fairly outlandish reasons for being upset. Or reasons why this team isn't good. When some of it is just misunderstood.