How many more chances does Golson get?

[pkt77242]

AFAIK, none of our members has played QB at an FBS school before, so we really don't know how valuable that extra time in the film room is without the live snaps to prove it. If your theory is correct, Hendrix should have been a QB phD before he finally saw the field for us, but he wasn't.



Same answer as above. Is a semester off school and private QB tutoring an advantage, or was his time with Whitfield just an offset to the large disadvantage of losing an entire season as the starting QB?

You don't have to play QB at an FBS level to know that extra time in the film room is important. Look at the NFL, where coaches will tell you it is one of the most important things for a young QB. Also it isn't just film study it is all of the extra reps in practice, learning the ins and outs of the playbook. You are really going to argue that those things don't make a difference or that since we didn't play QB at the FBS level then we can't know for sure?

 

[ulukinatme]

Some of these arguments make my head hurt...the logic and assumptions are all over the place.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

In short, some kind of sophomore-and-a-half.

That's fair.

I agree that on game experience he isn't ahead of Clausen or Quinn but on time in the program, with the same offense (no changes in the offense is important) he should be farther ahead of them.

You are really going to argue that those things don't make a difference or that since we didn't play QB at the FBS level then we can't know for sure?

My argument is that we don't know how to compare the value of these different variables relative to one another; not that time in the film room is worthless. Golson was an EE and got a semester off to train with George Whitfield. But he only had one season of on-field experience, during which he was on a short leash and was frequently pulled for Rees.

So it's fair to say that he should be ahead of where Quinn and Clausen were as sophomores. But it seems like on-field experience is by far the most important variable, so I don't think it's fair to compare Golson to a 3Y starter. As wizards mentioned above, he's basically a super-sophomore.

 

[TheTurningPoint]

Not trying to sound like a smart ass but the Notre Dame offense in 2014, is not the Notre Dame offense of 2011 (Rees/Crist) 2012 (Golson) or 2013 (Rees).

That is the great thing about Kelly, is that adapts to her personnel of that year. Much less, Chuck Martin is not here so forcing QBs to throw to the 1-on-1 match up and really restricting what the offense could do.

So just based off that statement, I dont see what you are trying to argue. Im sure Golson has watched 2012 film multiple times through but that just doesnt have an impact on this years offense bc its so different. You can pick up different coverages and routes, but that isnt his problem. Golsons problem is fumbling. Kelly and co arent worried about the INTs, thats just the process of a 2nd year starter and 4-5 arent even his fault, but simply fluke plays.

 

[IrishLax]

Not trying to sound like a smart ass but the Notre Dame offense in 2014, is not the Notre Dame offense of 2011 (Rees/Crist) 2012 (Golson) or 2013 (Rees).

That is the great thing about Kelly, is that adapts to her personnel of that year. Much less, Chuck Martin is not here so forcing QBs to throw to the 1-on-1 match up and really restricting what the offense could do.

So just based off that statement, I dont see what you are trying to argue. Im sure Golson has watched 2012 film multiple times through but that just doesnt have an impact on this years offense bc its so different. You can pick up different coverages and routes, but that isnt his problem. Golsons problem is fumbling. Kelly and co arent worried about the INTs, thats just the process of a 2nd year starter and 4-5 arent even his fault, but simply fluke plays.

You're such an apologist for the coaching staff... I don't know how you can possibly defend Golson playing over Montgomery VanGorder right now. Stache Jr. would be a Heisman lock if they let him unleash the dragon.

 

[pkt77242]

That's fair.





My argument is that we don't know how to compare the value of these different variables relative to one another; not that time in the film room is worthless. Golson was an EE and got a semester off to train with George Whitfield. But he only had one season of on-field experience, during which he was on a short leash and was frequently pulled for Rees.

So it's fair to say that he should be ahead of where Quinn and Clausen were as sophomores. But it seems like on-field experience is by far the most important variable, so I don't think it's fair to compare Golson to a 3Y starter. As wizards mentioned above, he's basically a super-sophomore.

I agree that Golson shouldn't be compared to a 3 year starter, he should be compared to a true senior who is in his second year of starting.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I agree that Golson shouldn't be compared to a 3 year starter, he should be compared to a true senior who is in his second year of starting.

I don't think his academic year is relevant, unless you assume that Golson is learning the exact same offense that was in place when he got to campus in January of 2012. As TP mentioned above, that's not the case.

 

[pkt77242]

Not trying to sound like a smart ass but the Notre Dame offense in 2014, is not the Notre Dame offense of 2011 (Rees/Crist) 2012 (Golson) or 2013 (Rees).

That is the great thing about Kelly, is that adapts to her personnel of that year. Much less, Chuck Martin is not here so forcing QBs to throw to the 1-on-1 match up and really restricting what the offense could do.

So just based off that statement, I dont see what you are trying to argue. Im sure Golson has watched 2012 film multiple times through but that just doesnt have an impact on this years offense bc its so different. You can pick up different coverages and routes, but that isnt his problem. Golsons problem is fumbling. Kelly and co arent worried about the INTs, thats just the process of a 2nd year starter and 4-5 arent even his fault, but simply fluke plays.

I do disagree with this part. The middle of the field has been open frequently this year and Goslon seems to avoid it. I will admit I don't know if it is because he doesn't read the outside progressions fast enough to get to the middle or if he is just too short to see the middle of the field.

Also, he is greatly struggling with reading the blitzes and figuring out who the free runners are going to be. That is evident from watching the games.

Finally this offense isn't the exact same as those offenses but the base is the same (lots of the same pass plays). Sure there are parts of the playbook that get opened up for Golson this year but you are talking something like 20% not the whole playbook.

 

[wizards8507]

Stache Jr. would be a Heisman lock if they let him unleash the dragon.

Heh. Heh heh heh heh heh heh.

Picture iiiiiiiiiiit.

 

[pkt77242]

I don't think his academic year is relevant, unless you assume that Golson is learning the exact same offense that was in place when he got to campus in January of 2012. As TP mentioned above, that's not the case.

Not the exact same but it is mostly the same (for a round number lets say 80%). Yes there are some plays that are different this year for Golson but many are the same as previous years (including Kelly's love for the deep comeback route on the outside, ugh). Lets not pretend that this is a brand new offense, it is just an expanded offense in comparison to recent years.

 

[wizards8507]

Not the exact same but it is mostly the same (for a round number lets say 80%). Yes there are some plays that are different this year for Golson but many are the same as previous years (including Kelly's love for the deep comeback route on the outside, ugh). Lets not pretend that this is a brand new offense.

There's also value in things like vocabulary, route trees, cadence, hand signals, etc. Even if they're calling different plays than they did in 2008, the language is all the same.

 

[kmoose]

I agree that Golson shouldn't be compared to a 3 year starter, he should be compared to a true senior who is in his second year of starting.

A true Senior at ND, or a true senior at a "normal" school? Because I think we have to acknowledge that guys at ND have academic rigors such that they don't have the same opportunity to make giant leaps, off of the field, like guys at other schools do.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Not the exact same but it is mostly the same (for a round number lets say 80%). Yes there are some plays that are different this year for Golson but many are the same as previous years (including Kelly's love for the deep comeback route on the outside, ugh). Lets not pretend that this is a brand new offense, it is just an expanded offense in comparison to recent years.

I agree with you, but again, we're left with the problem of comparing the value of an academic understanding of the offense v. actual on-field experience in running it. There's a lot of stuff--like identifying coverages, sensing pressure, etc.--for which study is no substitute for experience.

 

[pkt77242]

A true Senior at ND, or a true senior at a "normal" school? Because I think we have to acknowledge that guys at ND have academic rigors such that they don't have the same opportunity to make giant leaps, off of the field, like guys at other schools do.

Does that really matter (and since we were comparing him to Clausen and Quinn who were both true sophomores at ND it really doesn't matter)?

We can make excuses like that and while there is some truth to that, then lets all be happy with 8-5 seasons with once every 5-8 years a 10-2 or 11-1 season.

 

[kmoose]

Does that really matter (and since we were comparing him to Clausen and Quinn who were both true sophomores at ND it really doesn't matter)?

We can make excuses like that and while there is some truth to that, then lets all be happy with 8-5 seasons with once every 5-8 years a 10-2 or 11-1 season.

So why are we comparing him to Clausen and Quinn, and not Pat Dillingham or Matt LoVecchio? If I look at a second year NFL QB, and only compare him to Marino, Elway, and Montana..... is that really a fair comparison? Clausen and Quinn rewrote the ND record books........... they were pretty damned good. So why does Golson have to measure up to the best? Why can't he be in the next tier down?

 

[wizards8507]

There's a lot of stuff--like identifying coverages, sensing pressure, etc.--for which study is no substitute for experience.

And other things, like ball security and football IQ, are inherent, largely independent of both study AND experience. What's the tipping point? I know you wouldn't suggest "always play the guy with more experience" because, as we've discussed before, that would have had Tommy Rees starting every game in 2012. At some point, neither the study nor the experience are resulting in incremental production. Malik is probably worse than Golson TODAY, but at what point do we decide that Golson isn't getting much better and maybe it's time to start investing in the future?

Blue is Golson. Red is Malik if we play him now. Yellow is Malik if we play him when Golson is gone. We'd probably take a hit TODAY by making the switch, but it puts us on the track to rapid improvement and leaves us in much better shape for the next few years.*

*(No, we don't have any clue what the slope of the red line would be. That's why I advocate giving him some real snaps to get a feel for how quickly he's adjust.)

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Blue is Golson. Red is Malik if we play him now. Yellow is Malik if we play him when Golson is gone. We'd probably take a hit TODAY by making the switch, but it puts us on the track to rapid improvement and leaves us in much better shape for the next few years.*

We also don't know that Golson has plateaued, since he's only a 2Y starter. But you still bring up a good point, which is one disadvantage of our scheduling model-- we have no cupcake games, so we rarely know what we've got on the bench at certain positions.

There's never a good time to "play for next season" at ND; it's always win now or out come the pitchforks and torches. And right now, that's going to require scoring a ton of points, which only Golson can do for us (at least against UL and USC).

 

[pkt77242]

So why are we comparing him to Clausen and Quinn, and not Pat Dillingham or Matt LoVecchio? If I look at a second year NFL QB, and only compare him to Marino, Elway, and Montana..... is that really a fair comparison? Clausen and Quinn rewrote the ND record books........... they were pretty damned good. So why does Golson have to measure up to the best? Why can't he be in the next tier down?

That is who TP compared them too, not me. You are barking up the wrong tree. Al

 

[pkt77242]

I agree with you, but again, we're left with the problem of comparing the value of an academic understanding of the offense v. actual on-field experience in running it. There's a lot of stuff--like identifying coverages, sensing pressure, etc.--for which study is no substitute for experience.

I agree that experience is generally better then studying, but also studying is better then no experience.

I think that you and I are on similar pages.

 

[kmoose]

That is who TP compared them too, not me. You are barking up the wrong tree. Al

Kelly would never have started Dillingham or LoVecchio. He would start Matt Hegarty at QB before either of those two guys.

 

[pkt77242]

We also don't know that Golson has plateaued, since he's only a 2Y starter. But you still bring up a good point, which is one disadvantage of our scheduling model-- we have no cupcake games, so we rarely know what we've got on the bench at certain positions.

There's never a good time to "play for next season" at ND; it's always win now or out come the pitchforks and torches. And right now, that's going to require scoring a ton of points, which only Golson can do for us (at least against UL and USC).

I agree with everything but the bold (and that I only disagree with partially). I agree that we don't know if he has plateaued but I have an issue with the "since he's only a 2Y starter". Many QBs in college football only get 2 years to start so it isn't that short of a period of time to form an opinion on the player. Could he get better, of course but 2 years as a starter is also a significant amount of time to judge a player as well.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I agree with everything but the bold (and that I only disagree with partially). I agree that we don't know if he has plateaued but I have an issue with the "since he's only a 2Y starter". Many QBs in college football only get 2 years to start so it isn't that short of a period of time to form an opinion on the player. Could he get better, of course but 2 years as a starter is also a significant amount of time to judge a player as well.

COUNTER-POINT: If Golson just figures out the Zone Read and ball security, his ceiling is absurdly high. So that may be why Kelly is riding out these frustrating games with him.

Given a similar amount of experience, I'd bet Zaire would be a much better runner/ option QB, and would probably be better at protecting the ball. But Kelly's offense is based on Four Verts, and I very much doubt Zaire will ever be able to sling it like Golson can.

 

[pkt77242]

COUNTER-POINT: If Golson just figures out the Zone Read and ball security, his ceiling is absurdly high. So that may be why Kelly is riding out these frustrating games with him.

Given a similar amount of experience, I'd bet Zaire would be a much better runner/ option QB, and would probably be better at protecting the ball. But Kelly's offense is based on Four Verts, and I very much doubt Zaire will ever be able to sling it like Golson can.

I agree with all of this, and as I have stated many times I still think Golson should be starting for ND but my patience is wearing thin due to all of the turnovers. The real question is can he cut down on those turnovers. I don't have the answer for that (I wish I did as I could make a killing in Vegas). My disagreement has been with people who claim that you can never bench Golson, while I view it as we haven't reached the benching point yet but we seem to be getting dangerously close to it.

 

[ickythump1225]

I agree with everything but the bold (and that I only disagree with partially). I agree that we don't know if he has plateaued but I have an issue with the "since he's only a 2Y starter". Many QBs in college football only get 2 years to start so it isn't that short of a period of time to form an opinion on the player. Could he get better, of course but 2 years as a starter is also a significant amount of time to judge a player as well.

If Golson hung onto the ball better he would be insanely good. I can live with the interceptions because a lot of them are flukey and we pass a lot so interceptions will happen.

 

[anarin]

The backup qb is always the most popular guy in town.

Malik will have his day, it just wont be this year, unless golson goes down with an injury or has a monumental meltown ( like 3 for 15, 4 picks and a fumble in the first half)

 

[pkt77242]

If Golson hung onto the ball better he would be insanely good. I can live with the interceptions because a lot of them are flukey and we pass a lot so interceptions will happen.

I agree.

If he just had the 12 interceptions and lets say 2 fumbles on the season, then I don't think people are questioning Golson but 12 interceptions and 9 fumbles is a lot of turnovers.

 

[Irish#1]

If Golson hung onto the ball better he would be insanely good. I can live with the interceptions because a lot of them are flukey and we pass a lot so interceptions will happen.

I agree.

If he just had the 12 interceptions and lets say 2 fumbles on the season, then I don't think people are questioning Golson but 12 interceptions and 9 fumbles is a lot of turnovers.

That's the problem "IF". Where in fact he has thrown too many INT's and fumbled too much. Should he be benched? I don't know because I'm not in the film room with him and Kelly when they watch tape. I don't know if the wrong play was called, the wrong play was audibled into, EG mis-read the D, etc., etc., etc.

What I will say, is that I am not seeing the improvement over the season I expected. For instance, against Stanford we saw him tuck the ball as a defender was about to tackle him, yet the next game his ball security is back to where it has been. Does he not get it or is he just ignoring the coaching?

 

[Irish Insanity]

The ceiling for Golson gets higher almost every game, the problem is the floor doesn't. He can make all the throws, he has great arm strength, and can escape pressure. But can he ever escape the stupid mistakes. A QB can make mistakes and be successful, like Favre. The problem for me is he isn't Favre like with his mistakes. Favre made mistakes because he took chances that were high risk/reward. Golson just makes 'what the fuck were you thinking' mistakes.

 

[IRISH in MT]

The ceiling for Golson gets higher almost every game, the problem is the floor doesn't. He can make all the throws, he has great arm strength, and can escape pressure. But can he ever escape the stupid mistakes. A QB can make mistakes and be successful, like Favre. The problem for me is he isn't Favre like with his mistakes. Favre made mistakes because he took chances that were high risk/reward. Golson just makes 'what the fuck were you thinking' mistakes.

Dude, perfectly said. I held my breath everytime Farve threw the ball. He tried to force things in tighter spots than Robin Hood could hit with an arrow. However, he was trying to make a play. With EG he takes the blame in the media and swear he is working to fix it only to play worse the following game! His fumbles are mind boggling...at this point, how the hell doesn't he have an automatic switch in his head that makes both arms cover the ball when he takes off?!?!

 

[wizards8507]

Dude, perfectly said. I held my breath everytime Farve threw the ball. He tried to force things in tighter spots than Robin Hood could hit with an arrow. However, he was trying to make a play. With EG he takes the blame in the media and swear he is working to fix it only to play worse the following game! His fumbles are mind boggling...at this point, how the hell doesn't he have an automatic switch in his head that makes both arms cover the ball when he takes off?!?!

I think part of the problem is that he's heard over and over again "you need to be a passer first, not a runner." He's taken that advice to heart a little too much in my opinion, continuing to look for a passing opportunity when it just isn't there and the running lane is. This keeps the ball loosely palmed in his throwing hand rather than tucked for a run.