Is Kelly a REALLY good coach?

[kmoose]

I am still miffed why we don't put in McGlinchy and Luatua at TE in goalline packages and just ram the ball in?! Sick of shotgun formation on 10 yard line. Looking at risk, an INT can be thrown, EG can fumble, the WR can drop the pass, the pass can be deflected. Running the ball on goalline you worry that the RB fumbles or gets stuffed. Much less risk.

If you are going to put Golson under center, then the RB is not the only that you should be worried about fumbling the ball.

 

[IrishinSyria]

If you are going to put Golson under center, then the RB is not the only that you should be worried about fumbling the ball.

That's on the coaching staff if we still can't execute a snap from under center. Week 2 or 3 when it happened, it kind of made sense because our starting center broke his hand and we'd just shifted our entire line. Once that was identified as an issue though, it's something that should have been drilled until it was perfect. There's absolutely no excuse for this team not being able to run a play from under center at this point in the year.

 

[Irish Insanity]

#FreeMax

 

[dshans]

... There's absolutely no excuse for this team not being able to run a play from under center at this point in the year.

Something of a cry in the wilderness, it would seem.

Reasonable and of import nonetheless.

 

[Crazy Balki]

I guess my only frustration with Kelly is the fact that he has a 1,000 page playbook but won't dumb it down to a simpler version. He keeps saying "well EG is technically a sophmore in his 2nd year of starting at the QB position." Well, make it easier for him. It worked in 2012 when you didn't ask him to be the hero on offense.

Isn't Auburn on a 2 year offensive tear using a playbook with 3 simple options each play? Fake or give to the RB, throw to an open receiver, or the QB takes off running. Seems like EG could handle this instead of trying to be Manning or Luck at the line and changing/audibling to another play every snap.

We have a young defense so giving simple assignments would make things simpler on that side of the ball as well. Why on earth did we have Niles Morgan trying to cover a slot reciever on 3rd and long?! Take away his coverage responsibilities and let him blitz and tackle.

Bottom line, when you have as much youth playing as we do, the coach's need to make the material easier to understand.

I agree. I don't know why it takes so damn long for Kelly to implement his offense when teams like Oregon and Auburn can do it in a matter of 1 year. 5 years later, the offense STILL has problems. A lot of that has to do with the QB, but come on already, when is the QB situation going to resolve itself then. When is the playcalling going to be consistently good. It seems Kelly goes from having a pretty good game to having a horrendous one the next.

 

[Crazy Balki]

The problem with that is Golson did not have to score 30+ points in 2012 so Kelly was able to dumb it down for him and make him a game manager instead of a leader. Our scoring defense was in the top 5 and avg around 12 points/game during the regular season. This year Golson has to be able to score close to 40 points to win every game and cannot afford to make any mistakes because we have to almost score on every drive. We have the players but Golson isn't able to play a complete game without any mistakes. I give the kid credit. He battles back after making mistake after mistake and has come close in the 4 losses of winning in the end. If he can cut out his own mistakes then he can win the shootouts we have been in lately. But dumbing things down like 2012 wouldn't be the answer this year. With a defense that is young and having trouble stopping even the most putrid offenses, Kelly has to have a QB who can lead and an offense that can put up a lot of points. He basically needs a Baylor offense this year and he doesn't have it.

And that's the problem. Why don't we have an offense like Baylor's or Oregon's or Texas A&M's (when they're on). Briles didn't need a playmaker QB to make his offense dynamic. He went from a dual-threat all-everything QB in RGIII to a 3-star pro-style QB in Bryce Petty and the offense is just as dynamic as before, in fact, it may be even more so now.

Why can't Kelly do that? Why couldn't he develop Hendrix or fix Crist? Why is Golson after 4 years and coaching with Whitfield, still having trouble learning the playbook? I can't imagine it's just bad luck, because Briles has been able to develop QB's, Helfrich has been able to take over seamlessly from Chip Kelly in developing Mariotta, who was a 3-star, just like Golson. Yet, Mariotta's a Heisman frontrunner and Golson is a turnover machine. It's not just QB either (though that's the main gripe). Why is the offensive line having so much trouble? I understand that losing Martin and Watt hurt, but with the talent and experience still there, it shouldn't be this big of a hurdle to climb to just get an average line. Why can't our receivers run the correct routes or get separation? (though the last one might just be because they're not that fast). It just boggles me that we haven't made that much progress in year 5. I don't think the offense is bad, they're actually quite good, but they still have so many issues that shouldn't be a factor.

 

[Crazy Balki]

If you watch, you'll see that BK has called a few read option plays and Golson struggles to make the read quickly. Given his rate of fumbles per carry, I'm not sure I want him running the ball.

Another reason why Golson shouldn't be the starting QB. It's not just a matter of experience, but Zaire has the athleticism and ability to get better mentally as the year goes on. Golson seems to be stuck making the same mistakes over and over again. This is simply unacceptable. Kelly has stated several times how much more further along Zaire has gotten compared to Golson when he arrived, then doesn't that tell you who is improving more and who has the ability to get better at a faster rate?

 

[T Town Tommy]

The last two years Notre Dame has been riddled with injury as the season progressed. I read where Whiskey posted that something like 51 scholarship players are available for the USC game. That's unreal. You can't run a practice that's effective with that few players.

This I know about football. You spend hours and hours practicing your craft in order to prepare for games. Without that repetition, no team will get better. I really think that ND has suffered due to this. Maybe, just maybe, Golson needs to go against stiff competition every day in practice. If he isn't challenged, he probably isn't improving.

Not saying injuries should be used as an excuse but it is evident that they have impacted the Irish's ability to improve across every phase of the game.

 

[Crazy Balki]

The last two years Notre Dame has been riddled with injury as the season progressed. I read where Whiskey posted that something like 51 scholarship players are available for the USC game. That's unreal. You can't run a practice that's effective with that few players.

This I know about football. You spend hours and hours practicing your craft in order to prepare for games. Without that repetition, no team will get better. I really think that ND has suffered due to this. Maybe, just maybe, Golson needs to go against stiff competition every day in practice. If he isn't challenged, he probably isn't improving.

Not saying injuries should be used as an excuse but it is evident that they have impacted the Irish's ability to improve across every phase of the game.

Preach. I understand that injuries are a part of the game, but GOOD LORD, why is ND constantly dealing with an unrealistic amount of them? This year especially. In fact, all of my teams seem to be having this issue. The Bears, the Bulls, the Hawks. It's utter insanity.

 

[koonja]

The last two years Notre Dame has been riddled with injury as the season progressed. I read where Whiskey posted that something like 51 scholarship players are available for the USC game. That's unreal. You can't run a practice that's effective with that few players.

This I know about football. You spend hours and hours practicing your craft in order to prepare for games. Without that repetition, no team will get better. I really think that ND has suffered due to this. Maybe, just maybe, Golson needs to go against stiff competition every day in practice. If he isn't challenged, he probably isn't improving.

Not saying injuries should be used as an excuse but it is evident that they have impacted the Irish's ability to improve across every phase of the game.

Please Tommy. Everything you said has merit, but the last thing this board needs is the seed of yet another excuse.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Please Tommy. Everything you said has merit, but the last thing this board needs is the seed of yet another excuse.

I agree with you. That's why I stated in my post that it isn't an excuse but more of a contributing factor. How much of a factor is certainly debateable.

 

[Cackalacky]

We need a fullback.

 

[Luckylucci]

FWIW, Kelly basically admitted to sitting Folston to get his attention. Assuming the same thing was done with Redfield and Shumate.

 

[Crazy Balki]

Please Tommy. Everything you said has merit, but the last thing this board needs is the seed of yet another excuse.

I'm tired of people saying "injuries are an excuse". They're not. If you don't have the bodies, you're probably not gonna win. I know that the whole "next man in" mumbo jumbo is implanted into our brains, but after awhile, that next man in can't do the job at an adequate level. We've more than past that point. To say we're on our last leg in terms of personnel would be putting things lightly. We're standing on a pinkie toe.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I'm tired of people saying "injuries are an excuse". They're not. If you don't have the bodies, you're probably not gonna win. I know that the whole "next man in" mumbo jumbo is implanted into our brains, but after awhile, that next man in can't do the job at an adequate level. We've more than past that point. To say we're on our last leg in terms of personnel would be putting things lightly. We're standing on a pinkie toe.

Especially when you have 5 suspensions and rarely carry a full roster because you don't oversign.

 

[IRISH in MT]

We need a fullback.

AMEN!!! Or at least a huge HB. I think Luatua could suffice at FB in goalline. Lou Holtz and his full house backfield inside the 10 was my favorite time as an ND fan. Rodney Culver, Brooks brothers, Bettis, Marc Edwards, Ray Zellars...oh the good ol days.

 

[IRISH in MT]

Very much so. I still don't understand why in year 5, Kelly is still having trouble utilizing the fullest extent of his playbook? Why hasn't the success at UC translated here with a vastly higher amount of athletes?

BVG I can forgive, because it's year 1 for him and he's being forced to play with almost all freshmen and sophomores.

I am with you 100%. Personally, I think it has a little to do with BK's accountability. At UC it seemed if a RB fumbled or a QB threw interceptions they got yanked and the players knew it. They played with more focus so they got to stay in the game. A 3 star focused player is just as good as a spoiled 5 star player.

BVG will succeed again like he did in the first 6 games. Just too young and inexperienced right now with all the injuries and suspensions. With all the playing time the Frosh got this year, our 3 deep will be sick with experience next year.

 

[Irish Insanity]

AMEN!!! Or at least a huge HB. I think Luatua could suffice at FB in goalline. Lou Holtz and his full house backfield inside the 10 was my favorite time as an ND fan. Rodney Culver, Brooks brothers, Bettis, Marc Edwards, Ray Zellars...oh the good ol days.

I thought we experimented with Luatua before the season and then he got hurt. I assumed that's why we never saw him.

 

[GoIrish41]

I thought we experimented with Luatua before the season and then he got hurt. I assumed that's why we never saw him.

He played in 2 or 3 games at the beginning of the season, I think.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Ya, then I thought he got hurt in practice and hasn't been seen since.

It was a concussion I believe.

 

[tko]

Wonder how Kelly and BVG are working together behind the scenes during this trying time? I noticed them having a "discussion" during the first half of the Louisville game. It has to be impossible given the rash of injuries and mayhem that has taken place on both sides of the ball.

 

[Rocket89]

Why can't Kelly do that? Why couldn't he develop Hendrix or fix Crist? Why is Golson after 4 years and coaching with Whitfield, still having trouble learning the playbook? I can't imagine it's just bad luck, because Briles has been able to develop QB's, Helfrich has been able to take over seamlessly from Chip Kelly in developing Mariotta, who was a 3-star, just like Golson. Yet, Mariotta's a Heisman frontrunner and Golson is a turnover machine. It's not just QB either (though that's the main gripe). Why is the offensive line having so much trouble? I understand that losing Martin and Watt hurt, but with the talent and experience still there, it shouldn't be this big of a hurdle to climb to just get an average line. Why can't our receivers run the correct routes or get separation? (though the last one might just be because they're not that fast). It just boggles me that we haven't made that much progress in year 5. I don't think the offense is bad, they're actually quite good, but they still have so many issues that shouldn't be a factor.

Whew, that's a lot of hyperbole.

Let's just set aside the argument that because of turnovers Kelly hasn't developed Golson. 8th in passing yards, 7th in touchdown passes, 20th in rating, and a soon-to-be school record for most total touchdowns in a single season. We'll save that argument for another day. You want to call that not developing, okay sure.

A lot of people ask why Kelly can't get the offense to be like it was at Cincinnati. Well, that question doesn't fully understand Kelly's history all that well.

First of all, his final season in Cincinnati (2009) was outrageously productive on offense. If Kelly ever gets an offense at Notre Dame to perform like that we'll be setting many school records. I just want to point out that the bar is set extremely high when you look at that one year. But if you look at Kelly's other campaigns stretching back to his Central Michigan days you'll find he's really not an offensive genius in the mold of Briles, Chip Kelly, etc. In fact, the narrative that Kelly was an offensive genius was born almost exclusively out of that 2009 season and it was never all that accurate of a description of him anyway.

For example, Kelly has only had 3 seasons since 2004 where his offense averaged north of 30 points per game: 2007, 2009, and 2014.

So let's take a look at those seasons to make some comparisons:

S&P Offense
2007- 28
2009- 5
2014- 16

S&P Standard Down
2007- 36
2009- 3
2014- 12

S&P Passing
2007- 23
2009- 8
2014- 13

S&P Rushing
2007- 74
2009- 9
2014- 25

Points Per Game
2007- 36.3
2009- 38.6
2014- 34.7

Yards Per Play
2007- 6.18
2009- 6.98
2014- 6.19

Yards Per Game
2007- 441.0
2009- 447.4
2014- 453.2

So an honest evaluation would say this current offense is probably Kelly's second best he's ever coached, at least since he moved up from Grand Valley State. I honestly wouldn't hold your breath expecting Kelly to start putting together one, two, or three seasons comparable to his 2009 production. We can probably get close to it in some of the advanced stats--and we pretty much are right now anyway--but averaging almost 7 yards per play at Notre Dame with the schedule we play just isn't realistic. Only Oregon and Wisconsin have a higher YPP among Power 5 teams right now than that 2009 Cincinnati team.

There's definite room for growth, but at the same time, I don't think people realize how productive the offense is right now. Next year Golson should clean up his turnovers, we may find a little more stability and consistency on the offensive line, and maybe we'll improve to 36 or 37 points per game. Even then, those figures are approaching the highest scoring Notre Dame teams in 60 or 70 years.

I hope this helps when people complain about the offense and how we haven't made progress. We've made progress.

 

[Crazy Balki]

Whew, that's a lot of hyperbole.

Let's just set aside the argument that because of turnovers Kelly hasn't developed Golson. 8th in passing yards, 7th in touchdown passes, 20th in rating, and a soon-to-be school record for most total touchdowns in a single season. We'll save that argument for another day. You want to call that not developing, okay sure.

A lot of people ask why Kelly can't get the offense to be like it was at Cincinnati. Well, that question doesn't fully understand Kelly's history all that well.

First of all, his final season in Cincinnati (2009) was outrageously productive on offense. If Kelly ever gets an offense at Notre Dame to perform like that we'll be setting many school records. I just want to point out that the bar is set extremely high when you look at that one year. But if you look at Kelly's other campaigns stretching back to his Central Michigan days you'll find he's really not an offensive genius in the mold of Briles, Chip Kelly, etc. In fact, the narrative that Kelly was an offensive genius was born almost exclusively out of that 2009 season and it was never all that accurate of a description of him anyway.

For example, Kelly has only had 3 seasons since 2004 where his offense averaged north of 30 points per game: 2007, 2009, and 2014.

So let's take a look at those seasons to make some comparisons:

S&P Offense
2007- 28
2009- 5
2014- 16

S&P Standard Down
2007- 36
2009- 3
2014- 12

S&P Passing
2007- 23
2009- 8
2014- 13

S&P Rushing
2007- 74
2009- 9
2014- 25

Points Per Game
2007- 36.3
2009- 38.6
2014- 34.7

Yards Per Play
2007- 6.18
2009- 6.98
2014- 6.19

Yards Per Game
2007- 441.0
2009- 447.4
2014- 453.2

So an honest evaluation would say this current offense is probably Kelly's second best he's ever coached, at least since he moved up from Grand Valley State. I honestly wouldn't hold your breath expecting Kelly to start putting together one, two, or three seasons comparable to his 2009 production. We can probably get close to it in some of the advanced stats--and we pretty much are right now anyway--but averaging almost 7 yards per play at Notre Dame with the schedule we play just isn't realistic. Only Oregon and Wisconsin have a higher YPP among Power 5 teams right now than that 2009 Cincinnati team.

There's definite room for growth, but at the same time, I don't think people realize how productive the offense is right now. Next year Golson should clean up his turnovers, we may find a little more stability and consistency on the offensive line, and maybe we'll improve to 36 or 37 points per game. Even then, those figures are approaching the highest scoring Notre Dame teams in 60 or 70 years.

I hope this helps when people complain about the offense and how we haven't made progress. We've made progress.

I think turnover argument is good, because that may very well explain why Kelly hasn't been able to develop him. That being said, how much of that is on Golson and how much on Kelly? Sure turnovers happen, and it's simply a matter of learning from your mistakes. But that's the issue, Golson hasn't learned from his mistakes. He's still turning the ball over in outrageously frustrating fashion to boot. It's even more frustrating, considering what Golson possesses. When Rees committed a turnover, it was generally out of an inability to make a throw he sees. He had his occasional WTF turnover, but overall, Tommy's problems were his lack of tools. Golson's turnovers seems to all be WTF turnovers. After a while, you have to eventually point to the coaches as to why this keeps happening. It also begs the question as to why is Golson so slow at reading defenses? 3 years and one under George Whitfield's tutelage and you'd think we'd be able to run this thing at a fast pace, or at the very least, not have to wait until the playclock is at :01. I always associated Kelly's offense as a fast-paced offense, maybe not Auburn or Oregon level, but it seems like we're as slow as an offense can get a lot of the times.

 

[Old Man Mike]

really good substance-filled post by Rocket.... my short view of this is: Kelly's offense is a terrific system which emphasizes alignments which stress the defenses vs the passes, and thereby set them up for vulnerability vs the runs --- translation: a pass-first offense highly-dependent upon a heady unshakeable quarterback, who knows when to check off to the run [and who will run it himself occasionally.]

This system gains yards like crazy and creates stats for the QB. It also creates stats for the RB if the QB is doing his whole job.

BUT whereas the system will generate a lot of offense almost on its own [with good receivers], it will fail if the QB fails it too frequently. Kelly thinks his offense should score about 80% of the time, and I believe him. The fact that it doesn't comes from bad execution giving the opportunities away. This is not on the Coach but on the players. {I was a teacher and a damm good one. Many of my students STILL didn't learn what they could have learned --- for a variety of reasons all of us are cognizant of. THAT buck didn't stop at my desk if it was their "frailities" not mine. Such things cannot reasonably be laid at Kelly's door either.}


p.s. anyone who still believes that a good coach can teach any stud athlete how to really play quarterback needs to read the latest articles about RGIII --- chillingly familiar to Golson.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Murtaugh dropping bombs up in here.

There's definite room for growth, but at the same time, I don't think people realize how productive the offense is right now. Next year Golson should clean up his turnovers, we may find a little more stability and consistency on the offensive line, and maybe we'll improve to 36 or 37 points per game. Even then, those figures are approaching the highest scoring Notre Dame teams in 60 or 70 years..

 

[Rocket89]

I think turnover argument is good, because that may very well explain why Kelly hasn't been able to develop him. That being said, how much of that is on Golson and how much on Kelly? Sure turnovers happen, and it's simply a matter of learning from your mistakes. But that's the issue, Golson hasn't learned from his mistakes. He's still turning the ball over in outrageously frustrating fashion to boot. It's even more frustrating, considering what Golson possesses. When Rees committed a turnover, it was generally out of an inability to make a throw he sees. He had his occasional WTF turnover, but overall, Tommy's problems were his lack of tools. Golson's turnovers seems to all be WTF turnovers. After a while, you have to eventually point to the coaches as to why this keeps happening. It also begs the question as to why is Golson so slow at reading defenses? 3 years and one under George Whitfield's tutelage and you'd think we'd be able to run this thing at a fast pace, or at the very least, not have to wait until the playclock is at :01. I always associated Kelly's offense as a fast-paced offense, maybe not Auburn or Oregon level, but it seems like we're as slow as an offense can get a lot of the times.

Kelly has developed Golson. I don't know how anybody can see 2012 Golson and the quarterback he is right now and think he hasn't taken tremendous strides in several areas.

Turnovers are going to happen. Yes, the ability to protect the football is very important. But judging a quarterback's development solely on turnovers is wrong.

Golson also isn't slow reading defenses. And he's been able to move the offense at it's fastest pace since Kelly got here.

 

[philipm31]

Whew, that's a lot of hyperbole.

Let's just set aside the argument that because of turnovers Kelly hasn't developed Golson. 8th in passing yards, 7th in touchdown passes, 20th in rating, and a soon-to-be school record for most total touchdowns in a single season. We'll save that argument for another day. You want to call that not developing, okay sure.

A lot of people ask why Kelly can't get the offense to be like it was at Cincinnati. Well, that question doesn't fully understand Kelly's history all that well.

First of all, his final season in Cincinnati (2009) was outrageously productive on offense. If Kelly ever gets an offense at Notre Dame to perform like that we'll be setting many school records. I just want to point out that the bar is set extremely high when you look at that one year. But if you look at Kelly's other campaigns stretching back to his Central Michigan days you'll find he's really not an offensive genius in the mold of Briles, Chip Kelly, etc. In fact, the narrative that Kelly was an offensive genius was born almost exclusively out of that 2009 season and it was never all that accurate of a description of him anyway.

For example, Kelly has only had 3 seasons since 2004 where his offense averaged north of 30 points per game: 2007, 2009, and 2014.

So let's take a look at those seasons to make some comparisons:

S&P Offense
2007- 28
2009- 5
2014- 16

S&P Standard Down
2007- 36
2009- 3
2014- 12

S&P Passing
2007- 23
2009- 8
2014- 13

S&P Rushing
2007- 74
2009- 9
2014- 25

Points Per Game
2007- 36.3
2009- 38.6
2014- 34.7

Yards Per Play
2007- 6.18
2009- 6.98
2014- 6.19

Yards Per Game
2007- 441.0
2009- 447.4
2014- 453.2

So an honest evaluation would say this current offense is probably Kelly's second best he's ever coached, at least since he moved up from Grand Valley State. I honestly wouldn't hold your breath expecting Kelly to start putting together one, two, or three seasons comparable to his 2009 production. We can probably get close to it in some of the advanced stats--and we pretty much are right now anyway--but averaging almost 7 yards per play at Notre Dame with the schedule we play just isn't realistic. Only Oregon and Wisconsin have a higher YPP among Power 5 teams right now than that 2009 Cincinnati team.

There's definite room for growth, but at the same time, I don't think people realize how productive the offense is right now. Next year Golson should clean up his turnovers, we may find a little more stability and consistency on the offensive line, and maybe we'll improve to 36 or 37 points per game. Even then, those figures are approaching the highest scoring Notre Dame teams in 60 or 70 years.

I hope this helps when people complain about the offense and how we haven't made progress. We've made progress.

Has the TEAM made progress? No, not really.

Anyone who thinks we were going to be WORSE on offense this year was already off their rocker.

But defensively, not even close.

ST, not even close.

When you only progress on 1/3 of your options, then no you have not made progress as a TEAM.

That is why people are concerned. Seriously, there was no way we were getting worse on offense simply because we had more talent there overall, than we have had at any time under Kelly.

But if you think we have progress as a TEAM, I do not think that is all that accurate, because we are just as bad on defense as we were under Weis and our ST has been a steaming pile of dung this year.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Has the TEAM made progress? No, not really.

Anyone who thinks we were going to be WORSE on offense this year was already off their rocker.

But defensively, not even close.

ST, not even close.

When you only progress on 1/3 of your options, then no you have not made progress as a TEAM.

That is why people are concerned. Seriously, there was no way we were getting worse on offense simply because we had more talent there overall, than we have had at any time under Kelly.

But if you think we have progress as a TEAM, I do not think that is all that accurate, because we are just as bad on defense as we were under Weis and our ST has been a steaming pile of dung this year.

Um, what? Murtaugh already demonstrated that this year's offense is the most productive (by far) that Kelly has fielded at ND. 2005 was the only team in recent memory to average more PPG (36.7), and you'd have to go back pretty far to find a team another team that beat it.

Our STs current rank 35th in D1. After finishing 82nd in 2013 and 90th in 2012, that's clearly progress. Though it may not feel that way since our record-setting senior placekicker has missed a few crucial FGs recently.

And the defense is easily explained. Accounting for the new defensive scheme and all the talent we lost to the draft/ graduation, suspension and injury pre-season, everyone knew our defense would be taking a step back this year; the only question was how big? Despite all that, BvG's coaching and Schmidt's leadership made it look like we might even improve this year, but an absurd run of defensive injuries dashed those hopes.

 

[philipm31]

And yes, injuries and bad luck have to do with SOME of that, but every year teams that are very good battle through injuries and bad luck, but that is not a valid excuse, and that is all it is.

Overall, the coaching each phase where ND has struggled seems to either be worse, or at least stagnant.

And if we are having off the field motivation issues with so many players as seems to be the case, then maybe that needs to be factored into why the team as a whole has not progressed throughout this year, and the Kelly Era, so far.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

And yes, injuries and bad luck have to do with SOME of that, but every year teams that are very good battle through injuries and bad luck, but that is not a valid excuse, and that is all it is.

Those "very good" teams you reference don't labor under the sort of recruiting and roster management restrictions that Kelly deals with at ND. Kelly bears some blame for the roster holes at ILB and DT since he was Diaco's boss, but we've only got 51 healthy players on scholarship available against USC. And 15/22 players on the defensive two-deep are underclassmen. You can't wave that off as run-of-the-mill bad luck with injuries.

Overall, the coaching each phase where ND has struggled seems to either be worse, or at least stagnant.

The objective data says otherwise. Our offense is the 2nd most productive it's been in decades, and our STs overall are better than they have been in many years. Whether or not it "seems" that way from your vantage point in the cheap seats is irrelevant.

And if we are having off the field motivation issues with so many players as seems to be the case, then maybe that needs to be factored into why the team as a whole has not progressed throughout this year, and the Kelly Era, so far.

More hand-waving. When the roster is decimated by injury, our margin for error (which is already really small) basically disappears. It also has the unfortunate effect of simultaneously making individual players far more important to the team's success and less motivated to work in practice, since there's no one pushing them for playing time.