Chuck Martin has no idea what he is doing

[FightingIrishLover7]

Why does everyone keep talking about his poor throws/over throws. He's got a cannon. We have speedy WRs. Its not his fault they cant get to where the ball is.

Tommy can throw the ball.
But he's heaving it.

It's got decent touch, but he's not placing it.

He's essentially throwing as hard as he can, hoping the wrs make a play.

His deep balls right now are reminding me very much of crist.

 

[IrishFan4L]

Tommy can throw the ball.
But he's heaving it.

It's got decent touch, but he's not placing it.

He's essentially throwing as hard as he can, hoping the wrs make a play.

His deep balls right now are reminding me very much of crist.

I don't think, no I'm positive he has nowhere near the arm Crist had. Crist has a cannon tommy does not. Tommy's deep ball has been ugly.

 

[irishff1014]

Link didn't work. My appologies, my stats were prior to yesterdays game. My point and belief still remain. He has more TDs and YDs than I stated and is down 5% in the completion percentage. Which was from one iffy game against our toughest D to this point. Rees isn't main issue, hell he's not in the top 5 probably.

It's hard for any of us to say that with any confidence. We don't know how many times he checked out if runs that might have worked. And then yesterday he had 2 delay of game penalties which are inexcusable IMO

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

I don't think, no I'm positive he has nowhere near the arm Crist had. Crist has a cannon tommy does not. Tommy's deep ball has been ugly.

I didn't mean to say tommy has an arm anywhere near the level of crist.

I'm saying both have issues actually completely a deep throw.

 

[IrishFan4L]

I didn't mean to say tommy has an arm anywhere near the level of crist.

I'm saying both have issues actually completely a deep throw.

Sorry bro, totally agree!!!

 

[Cackalacky]

Regarding play calling I have a suggestion:

After 4 games, it seems to me that the Irish are working off a scripted and condensed playbook for each opponent. I can't prove this but it would explain why we see so many of the same types of plays and the limited types of plays used for each opponent.

I think that offensively the coaches look to see where they think they can get the best advantage and tailor a small "playbook" for each opponent. This would allow Tommy to know the "book" and make checks in and out of them without him having to manage the entire playbook. This would explain why we kept going deep all game against MSU (1 on 1 with DD and an inability to run the ball) and the lack of diversity of calls in the other games as well. I have no explanation for the lack of short routes in the MSU game though on 3rd and short.

It seems to me the playbook got opened up a bit against Michigan because we were down early. Its no coincidence, also, that ND operated at a higher tempo relative to the other games and was the game Tommy threw the poor INT.

What do you guys think about that?

 

[dublinirish]

Nobody gets their hands on the mystical "Full Playbook" Not TR, not EG..nobody!

 

[Irish#1]

Regarding play calling I have a suggestion:

After 4 games, it seems to me that the Irish are working off a scripted and condensed playbook for each opponent. I can't prove this but it would explain why we see so many of the same types of plays and the limited types of plays used for each opponent.

I think that offensively the coaches look to see where they think they can get the best advantage and tailor a small "playbook" for each opponent. This would allow Tommy to know the "book" and make checks in and out of them without him having to manage the entire playbook. This would explain why we kept going deep all game against MSU (1 on 1 with DD and an inability to run the ball) and the lack of diversity of calls in the other games as well. I have no explanation for the lack of short routes in the MSU game though on 3rd and short.

It seems to me the playbook got opened up a bit against Michigan because we were down early. Its no coincidence, also, that ND operated at a higher tempo relative to the other games and was the game Tommy threw the poor INT.

What do you guys think about that?

Not to sound like a smart ***, but every game has a game plan with specific plays for each opponent. Before the game I posted that the MSU game was going to come down to our ability to run the ball or hit the long pass. MSU was going to play 8 & 9 near the line and force us to go one on one over the top. There was a legit PI, but we got lucky on a few of those calls. MSU's DB's played great. I noticed that when we started using the jet sweep motion, our running game improved. It forced MSU to move with the motion instead of keeping the LOS stacked.

Wooley is right. MSU's corners kept pushing our WR's to the sideline. This didn't give TR much room to drop the ball in. Our WR's needed to start inside a little more or fake inside to get more spacing between them and the sideline. TR would have looked better if they had.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Regarding play calling I have a suggestion:

After 4 games, it seems to me that the Irish are working off a scripted and condensed playbook for each opponent. I can't prove this but it would explain why we see so many of the same types of plays and the limited types of plays used for each opponent.

I think that offensively the coaches look to see where they think they can get the best advantage and tailor a small "playbook" for each opponent. This would allow Tommy to know the "book" and make checks in and out of them without him having to manage the entire playbook. This would explain why we kept going deep all game against MSU (1 on 1 with DD and an inability to run the ball) and the lack of diversity of calls in the other games as well. I have no explanation for the lack of short routes in the MSU game though on 3rd and short.

It seems to me the playbook got opened up a bit against Michigan because we were down early. Its no coincidence, also, that ND operated at a higher tempo relative to the other games and was the game Tommy threw the poor INT.

What do you guys think about that?

Not directed at you ( I tend to agree with you), but I think people are too blinded by their emotion and preconceived ideas of what Tommy is.

I think in 2012, BK played a conservative offense and it worked. In 2011 with Tommy, he had a good defense but lost games due to the inability to protect the football. That was with a young Tommy, but he had Floyd, Eifert, Jonas Gray, Wood and Theo. The OL was also, IMO, better in 2011. He had Cave, Martin, Robinson, Watt and Dever. It wasn't until Cave got injured and Golic replaced him that the OL really struggled.

I don't think anybody would argue against that Tommy is better in 2013 than 2011, but I don't think anyone will argue that he has the supporting cast that he had in 2011 either. I love DD and what he can become and TJ is a good talent, but neither of them stack up to Floyd and Eifert is irreplaceable.

So the question is, would you open the playbook with a OL that has three new starters (Lombard is starting in a new position and it shows), a supporting cast that has potential, but isn't fully developed with a QB that has shown in the past a propensity to turn the football over when he is pressing? I wouldn't, especially when if I went 12-0 the year before doing the exact same thing.

Now, put yourself in the shoes of the opposing DC. Who scares you on this team? As much as I root for him, Tommy doesn't scare me. Neither does Cam, GA3, Amir, TJ, Troy or the OL. The only person that would really scare me is DD. The game plan is simple and I am sure you will see this moving forward. Roll the coverage over the top of DD and plan man elsewhere while playing the run when the personnel is right.

The only way ND can beat this is to have Brown, TJ, Robinson or Fuller emerge as someone that can play as a true double threat WR. By that, I mean a guy that can run a great slant/out/in while still being a threat deep. TJ is really good 0-15 yards, but hasn't consistently gone deep. Now, I could make the argument that Robinson lining up opposite DD could force a safety away from the box due to his size on the perimeter.

In sum, I think the game plan and personnel are dictating the offense. I would like to see some more creativity, especially as it relates personnel packages and calls at the line. I am waiting for the pump and go on the WR screen, on the out pattern when there is a blitz and a simple RB screen that looks competent. Losing EG really hurt the offense in 2013 since the threat of his run would have loosened up the defenses.

 

[ThePiombino]

Nobody gets their hands on the mystical "Full Playbook" Not TR, not EG..nobody!

I heard Coach Red Beaulieu stole his playbook back when they both coached at the University of Louisiana. Could be wrong, though.

 

[tko]

Not directed at you ( I tend to agree with you), but I think people are too blinded by their emotion and preconceived ideas of what Tommy is.

I think in 2012, BK played a conservative offense and it worked. In 2011 with Tommy, he had a good defense but lost games due to the inability to protect the football. That was with a young Tommy, but he had Floyd, Eifert, Jonas Gray, Wood and Theo. The OL was also, IMO, better in 2011. He had Cave, Martin, Robinson, Watt and Dever. It wasn't until Cave got injured and Golic replaced him that the OL really struggled.

I don't think anybody would argue against that Tommy is better in 2013 than 2011, but I don't think anyone will argue that he has the supporting cast that he had in 2011 either. I love DD and what he can become and TJ is a good talent, but neither of them stack up to Floyd and Eifert is irreplaceable.

So the question is, would you open the playbook with a OL that has three new starters (Lombard is starting in a new position and it shows), a supporting cast that has potential, but isn't fully developed with a QB that has shown in the past a propensity to turn the football over when he is pressing? I wouldn't, especially when if I went 12-0 the year before doing the exact same thing.

Now, put yourself in the shoes of the opposing DC. Who scares you on this team? As much as I root for him, Tommy doesn't scare me. Neither does Cam, GA3, Amir, TJ, Troy or the OL. The only person that would really scare me is DD. The game plan is simple and I am sure you will see this moving forward. Roll the coverage over the top of DD and plan man elsewhere while playing the run when the personnel is right.

The only way ND can beat this is to have Brown, TJ, Robinson or Fuller emerge as someone that can play as a true double threat WR. By that, I mean a guy that can run a great slant/out/in while still being a threat deep. TJ is really good 0-15 yards, but hasn't consistently gone deep. Now, I could make the argument that Robinson lining up opposite DD could force a safety away from the box due to his size on the perimeter.

In sum, I think the game plan and personnel are dictating the offense. I would like to see some more creativity, especially as it relates personnel packages and calls at the line. I am waiting for the pump and go on the WR screen, on the out pattern when there is a blitz and a simple RB screen that looks competent. Losing EG really hurt the offense in 2013 since the threat of his run would have loosened up the defenses.

Don't forget some crossing routes.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Don't forget some crossing routes.

They had been utilizing the crossing routes against UM and Purdue.

I think they stopped against MSU since I think ND was worried about turnovers. I am probably wrong on this, but I think the picks against UM were both on crossing routes. I think ND was thinking MSU would bring pressure (they did at times, but played coverage more often than not) and missing a pass over the middle was a way to swing the game to MSU's favor.

I think the crossing routes will return this week.

 

[DillonHall]

Regarding play calling I have a suggestion:

After 4 games, it seems to me that the Irish are working off a scripted and condensed playbook for each opponent. I can't prove this but it would explain why we see so many of the same types of plays and the limited types of plays used for each opponent.

I think that offensively the coaches look to see where they think they can get the best advantage and tailor a small "playbook" for each opponent. This would allow Tommy to know the "book" and make checks in and out of them without him having to manage the entire playbook. This would explain why we kept going deep all game against MSU (1 on 1 with DD and an inability to run the ball) and the lack of diversity of calls in the other games as well. I have no explanation for the lack of short routes in the MSU game though on 3rd and short.

It seems to me the playbook got opened up a bit against Michigan because we were down early. Its no coincidence, also, that ND operated at a higher tempo relative to the other games and was the game Tommy threw the poor INT.

What do you guys think about that?

That interception occurred at the end of the half when we were running a hurry up offense. There's a significant difference between a hurry-up offense and an uptempo offense that's an integral part of the offense's identity.

 

[Ndaccountant]

That interception occurred at the end of the half when we were running a hurry up offense. There's a significant difference between a hurry-up offense and an uptempo offense that's an integral part of the offense's identity.

While I would agree with you there, I also think Tommy's strength is getting the team into the correct play after dissecting the defensive personnel. With the hurry up, we hasn't sown the ability to be as effective pre-snap.

Also, what is the point of going hurry up? To me, it is about taking advantage of matchups and exploiting them to your advantage or trying to get a defense confused. What match-up against MSU would ND have exploited? I can't think of one, so the only other thing would have been trying to confuse MSU. I think Max Bullough would have them in the right position. To me, against MSU, tempo would have been high risk.

 

[DillonHall]

While I would agree with you there, I also think Tommy's strength is getting the team into the correct play after dissecting the defensive personnel. With the hurry up, we hasn't sown the ability to be as effective pre-snap.

Also, what is the point of going hurry up? To me, it is about taking advantage of matchups and exploiting them to your advantage or trying to get a defense confused. What match-up against MSU would ND have exploited? I can't think of one, so the only other thing would have been trying to confuse MSU. I think Max Bullough would have them in the right position. To me, against MSU, tempo would have been high risk.

When you go uptempo on offense, you're able to dictate not just the tempo, but also the personnel of both teams. This typically gives the advantage to the offense IMO. It was first created in order to be an equalizer against defenses with superior talent.

The way we currently operate lets the defense dictate what play we run. This makes our offense much more predictable. I'm sure that there are much more plays in our playbook compared to the number of available checks.

I'm not familiar enough with MSU's defense enough to pretend to know what specific matchups to exploit. However, if Bullough is in charge of positioning his teammates, then this would be an even larger advantage for an uptempo offense (harder to line up others when there's much less time to do so).

 

[Ndaccountant]

When you go uptempo on offense, you're able to dictate not just the tempo, but also the personnel of both teams. This typically gives the advantage to the offense IMO. It was first created in order to be an equalizer against defenses with superior talent.

The way we currently operate lets the defense dictate what play we run. This makes our offense much more predictable. I'm sure that there are much more plays in our playbook compared to the number of available checks.

I'm not familiar enough with MSU's defense enough to pretend to know what specific matchups to exploit. However, if Bullough is in charge of positioning his teammates, then this would be an even larger advantage for an uptempo offense (harder to line up others when there's much less time to do so).

Bullough is in charge of defensive calls, much like Teo was last year and he is very good.

I still ask generically if the defense lines up in Nickel, do you have faith that ND can run the ball effectively? Do you think if the D is in a base 4-3, that anyone other than DD provides a consistent matchup problem? I personally do not and think tempo would actually work against ND this year, especially if it puts the D on the field for longer stretches.

 

[tommyIRISH23]

Anyone think Zaire will get any situational reps this week? Kelly said he'll be part of the gameplan this week or something along those lines?

 

[DillonHall]

Bullough is in charge of defensive calls, much like Teo was last year and he is very good.

I still ask generically if the defense lines up in Nickel, do you have faith that ND can run the ball effectively? Do you think if the D is in a base 4-3, that anyone other than DD provides a consistent matchup problem? I personally do not and think tempo would actually work against ND this year, especially if it puts the D on the field for longer stretches.

I think Tommy over-analyzes every play, and the constant checks will start to become predictable (if they aren't already). Clear example against MSU was the delay of game he caused after trying to change the play twice.

What ever happened to calling a play and effectively executing it no matter what the opposition tries to do? Why are we letting the defense dictate what we do on offense?

This has nothing to do with the tempo debate, but I think we have more offensive skill talent now more than ever before under Kelly. This is highly debatable though due to the lack of experience.

 

[GoldenIsThyFame]

I think Tommy over-analyzes every play, and the constant checks will start to become predictable (if they aren't already). Clear example against MSU was the delay of game he caused after trying to change the play twice.

What ever happened to calling a play and effectively executing it no matter what the opposition tries to do? Why are we letting the defense dictate what we do on offense?

This has nothing to do with the tempo debate, but I think we have more offensive skill talent now more than ever before under Kelly. This is highly debatable though due to the lack of experience.

I have thought this for the last two games. Paralysis by analysis.

 

[T Town Tommy]

I think Tommy over-analyzes every play, and the constant checks will start to become predictable (if they aren't already). Clear example against MSU was the delay of game he caused after trying to change the play twice.

What ever happened to calling a play and effectively executing it no matter what the opposition tries to do? Why are we letting the defense dictate what we do on offense?

This has nothing to do with the tempo debate, but I think we have more offensive skill talent now more than ever before under Kelly. This is highly debatable though due to the lack of experience.

While there is a risk of over-analyzing plays, I think TR has been more than effective at changing plays at the LOS based on what the defense is doing. We all to often over-analyze the game of football. It is about matchups... plain and simple. Learn to utilize those matchups in your favor and you will be successful more times than not, given you execute the play that is called.

 

[DillonHall]

While there is a risk of over-analyzing plays, I think TR has been more than effective at changing plays at the LOS based on what the defense is doing. We all to often over-analyze the game of football. It is about matchups... plain and simple. Learn to utilize those matchups in your favor and you will be successful more times than not, given you execute the play that is called.

I know Tommy's been good at that during the game. But why can't we identify favorable matchups during the week and formulate an advantageous game plan so that we can "grip it and rip it" during the game?

 

[TheSunIsRising]

When you go uptempo on offense, you're able to dictate not just the tempo, but also the personnel of both teams. This typically gives the advantage to the offense IMO. It was first created in order to be an equalizer against defenses with superior talent.

The way we currently operate lets the defense dictate what play we run. This makes our offense much more predictable. I'm sure that there are much more plays in our playbook compared to the number of available checks.

I'm not familiar enough with MSU's defense enough to pretend to know what specific matchups to exploit. However, if Bullough is in charge of positioning his teammates, then this would be an even larger advantage for an uptempo offense (harder to line up others when there's much less time to do so).

Technically it isn't being uptempo that prevents the defense from substituting, it is going no huddle and being over the ball ready-to-play. The offense can drive the play clock down to (close to) zero, and as long as they haven't substituted themselves and they get immediately over the ball, the defense are not allowed to substitute.

 

[woolybug25]

I think Tommy over-analyzes every play, and the constant checks will start to become predictable (if they aren't already). Clear example against MSU was the delay of game he caused after trying to change the play twice.

What ever happened to calling a play and effectively executing it no matter what the opposition tries to do? Why are we letting the defense dictate what we do on offense?

This has nothing to do with the tempo debate, but I think we have more offensive skill talent now more than ever before under Kelly. This is highly debatable though due to the lack of experience.

The problem on that play was Bullough. He, like Rees, is a coaches son and does a great job of checking out of formations to fit what the offense was doing. On that particular play, they went back and forth several times. Burroughs won that one, but Rees won almost every other play.

If Rees wasn't checking out of every play against MSU, Burroughs would have changed the alignment on him every single play. Burroughs is one of the best in the game with managing the formation of his defense.

 

[DillonHall]

Technically it isn't being uptempo that prevents the defense from substituting, it is going no huddle and being over the ball ready-to-play. The offense can drive the play clock down to (close to) zero, and as long as they haven't substituted themselves and they get immediately over the ball, the defense are not allowed to substitute.

Right. The offense dictates personnel because it gets to decide whether or not to substitute.

 

[T Town Tommy]

I know Tommy's been good at that during the game. But why can't we identify favorable matchups during the week and formulate an advantageous game plan so that we can "grip it and rip it" during the game?

The short answer is probably because the opponent is trying to do the same thing the week leading up to the game. The preverbial "chess match" come game day is what makes it most interesting. Like watching two heavyweights go at it.

I liken it to watching P. Manning at Indy. I could not stand to watch him check off at the line over and over. But I was also amazed that he was right way more than he was ever wrong. Now, I am not saying TR is in that level by no means, but the fact that he is still allowed to check off probably means he is getting more reads right than wrong. The issues to me is more on the execution side. If the Irish can get that shored up, the offense will be in great shape.

 

[DillonHall]

The problem on that play was Bullough. He, like Rees, is a coaches son and does a great job of checking out of formations to fit what the offense was doing. On that particular play, they went back and forth several times. Burroughs won that one, but Rees won almost every other play.

If Rees wasn't checking out of every play against MSU, Burroughs would have changed the alignment on him every single play. Burroughs is one of the best in the game with managing the formation of his defense.

LOL we gained 220 yards (before penalties). I'd hardly say that Tommy won for most of the game.

 

[DillonHall]

The short answer is probably because the opponent is trying to do the same thing the week leading up to the game. The preverbial "chess match" come game day is what makes it most interesting. Like watching two heavyweights go at it.

I liken it to watching P. Manning at Indy. I could not stand to watch him check off at the line over and over. But I was also amazed that he was right way more than he was ever wrong. Now, I am not saying TR is in that level by no means, but the fact that he is still allowed to check off probably means he is getting more reads right than wrong. The issues to me is more on the execution side. If the Irish can get that shored up, the offense will be in great shape.

I understand that Tommy's good at it; I'm just wondering if it's a useful skill in college football.

 

[T Town Tommy]

I understand that Tommy's good at it; I'm just wondering if it's a useful skill in college football.

With the development of more complex defensive schemes in today's CFB setting, I think it is a "must" skill.

 

[PANDFAN]

With the development of more complex defensive schemes in today's CFB setting, I think it is a "must" skill.

or if you're not that good at it, "Golson"...then you use your legs

 

[CarrollVermin]

My frustration has come with the lack of creativity and ingenuity. Rees is Rees. He completely limits our offense by not being a running threat and not having the arm strength to beat you consistently down the field. I would have thought that four weeks into the season we would have seen different formations or plays that help keep the D honest. We have not, and Kelly seems to be OK with the idea of winning and losing with Tommy.

At the end of the day, our Red Zone efficiency is going to nip us in the butt. We have to be more consistent and creative.

Also, the "Fire Martin" sentiment was very, very strong this weekend in Section 135.