Kelly's gameplan was terrible

[BeauBenken]

Trolling and whining are not exactly the same.

Not saying they are. Just saying when Phork thinks you are being too negative, it means something.

 

[pkt77242]

His gameplan was to not bother blocking blitzers. Someone posted his pregame stuff somewhere. Last year kept te's in to block, this year he wasnt going to. Now I know this team had "hot routes" with tommy, so I dunno if that announcer was talking out his ass bout nd not having them but they sure didnt use em with golson. Folston didnt miss blocks, by the time Cam came in asu wasnt mass blitzing. the oline and cam actually started communicating with golson who is incapable of swiveling his head to see obvious presnap blitzes. Thats only adjustment I saw, the offense actually communicating presnap which is only what every team has done since caveman days. I really wish kelly was just a headcoach/program runner and hired a real OC.

About the TE's while it probably hurt pass blocking wise, Koyak was open in the middle most of the game and Golson missed it most of the time. A few throws to Koyak up the middle early on might have forced ASU to back off the pressure and drop more men into coverage.

The hot routes thing boggles my mind (not your point but if it is true or not), though I think that Tommy most often was changing the play, which can in some ways work like hot routes.

I agree that Cam seemed to be calling the blitz pick-up in the second half. Normally it is either an o-lineman (usually center) or the QB who calls the protection for blitzes and it is slightly unnerving that we had to bring a RB in to do it.

 

[GoldenDome]

ASU was flying up the field to stop our short passing game/screens so they faked the screen to Fuller and hit Amir over the top to make it a three point game. Had we caught one break and pulled the game out, we'd be talking about Kelly's creative play calling/adjustment to their defense.

You wanted one.

Playcalling is slight adjustments. I am talking about schematic adjustments that every team has ready for their players in the locker room at half time.

The game plan was fine, it was the players that did not execute. I refuse to believe that gameplan was the reason why Jaylon Smith missed simple tackles, why Shumate whiffed multiple times on easy one on one tackles, or why Golson won't just eat a sack or throw the ball away in certain circumstances. And even if the gameplan sucked, it was thrown out the window in the first quarter anyways because of the score.

My point is that it is pretty much impossible to criticize a gameplan when it was abandoned so early in the game. How does one know what the gameplan was when it never even came to fruition?

 

[Wild Bill]

Playcalling is slight adjustments. I am talking about schematic adjustments that every team has ready for their players in the locker room at half time.

The game plan was fine, it was the players that did not execute. I refuse to believe that gameplan was the reason why Jaylon Smith missed simple tackles, why Shumate whiffed multiple times on easy one on one tackles, or why Golson won't just eat a sack or throw the ball away in certain circumstances. And even if the gameplan sucked, it was thrown out the window in the first quarter anyways because of the score.

My point is that it is pretty much impossible to criticize a gameplan when it was abandoned so early in the game. How does one know what the gameplan was when it never even came to fruition?

We basically agree. I must have misunderstood your original post.

 

[GoldenDome]

His gameplan was to not bother blocking blitzers. Someone posted his pregame stuff somewhere. Last year kept te's in to block, this year he wasnt going to. Now I know this team had "hot routes" with tommy, so I dunno if that announcer was talking out his ass bout nd not having them but they sure didnt use em with golson. Folston didnt miss blocks, by the time Cam came in asu wasnt mass blitzing. the oline and cam actually started communicating with golson who is incapable of swiveling his head to see obvious presnap blitzes. Thats only adjustment I saw, the offense actually communicating presnap which is only what every team has done since caveman days. I really wish kelly was just a headcoach/program runner and hired a real OC.

I agree about BK needing a real OC. Sometimes I marvel at his playcalling but then other times I scratch my head in total disbelief.

There was a particular moment in the game against ASU where we had run the ball right down there throat and there was a break for commercials. So the break ends and play resumes and he has Golson run two straight pass plays, the latter ending in a turnover. I couldn't believe why he would just stop what was clearly effective. I mean we were getting 8-9 ypc at the time.

Then to contrast later in the game there was a beuatiful play call for an inside shovel pass/screen, probably BK's best play call of the night and it was dropped by the receiver.

Just that kind of night for the Irish.

 

[anarin]

I agree about BK needing a real OC. Sometimes I marvel at his playcalling but then other times I scratch my head in total disbelief.

There was a particular moment in the game against ASU where we had run the ball right down there throat and there was a break for commercials. So the break ends and play resumes and he has Golson run two straight pass plays, the latter ending in a turnover. I couldn't believe why he would just stop what was clearly effective. I mean we were getting 8-9 ypc at the time.

Then to contrast later in the game there was a beuatiful play call for an inside shovel pass/screen, probably BK's best play call of the night and it was dropped by the receiver.

Just that kind of night for the Irish.

So it's BK's playcalling that gets called into question when his team turns the ball over 5 times . Yeeeaahhhh makes total sense.

I liked you better 28 posts ago.

 

[Rocket89]

I agree about BK needing a real OC. Sometimes I marvel at his playcalling but then other times I scratch my head in total disbelief.

There was a particular moment in the game against ASU where we had run the ball right down there throat and there was a break for commercials. So the break ends and play resumes and he has Golson run two straight pass plays, the latter ending in a turnover. I couldn't believe why he would just stop what was clearly effective. I mean we were getting 8-9 ypc at the time.

Then to contrast later in the game there was a beuatiful play call for an inside shovel pass/screen, probably BK's best play call of the night and it was dropped by the receiver.

Just that kind of night for the Irish.

This is a gross misrepresentation of what actually happened.

I'm sure you're thinking of the offensive series that bled into the 2nd quarter because it's the only one that could possibly fit the narrative you presented.

Folston started off the series with runs of 1 yard and -2 yards. Golson then picked up the first down with a 13 yard pass to Robinson.

Folston then ran for 8 and then 4 yards before the quarter ended. Then Golson scrambled for 8 yards and threw a pick six.

For the RTDB crowd all it takes is 1 good run to equal "we're running the ball down their throat!" and this is the reality you wanted to see. At no point in the game did we stop running the ball when it was clearly effective.

Yeah, Folston had that run of 8 yards but his other runs went for 2, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 2 and the above 4, 1, and -2 yards. Not only is that clearly not effective it's the exact opposite!

This kind of narrative bugs the crap out of me because it makes no sense when you switch the running and passing around. No one in the history of football has watched a quarterback struggle putting together a bunch of incompletions and a few short completions only to hit one 25-yard pass and exclaim, "Why didn't we throw more we were really abusing their secondary!"

 

[Grahambo]

I agree about BK needing a real OC. Sometimes I marvel at his playcalling but then other times I scratch my head in total disbelief.

There was a particular moment in the game against ASU where we had run the ball right down there throat and there was a break for commercials. So the break ends and play resumes and he has Golson run two straight pass plays, the latter ending in a turnover. I couldn't believe why he would just stop what was clearly effective. I mean we were getting 8-9 ypc at the time.

Then to contrast later in the game there was a beuatiful play call for an inside shovel pass/screen, probably BK's best play call of the night and it was dropped by the receiver.

Just that kind of night for the Irish.

He is a real OC. How is this lost on people? He's generally regarded as one of the top offensive minds in college football by many people. Doesn't really get much better.

 

[TheOneWhoKnocks]

I have no trust in a guy who coaches his offense, not to take an easy 5yd offside penalty. ITS ABSURD! hes the only coach ive ever heard have the philosophy, why would I take 5 free yards when my awesome super genius playcall will obviously get me more yards. My favorite part is when golson does a hard count and it works on dline, but no one moves or snaps ball. It makes me want to hulk smash kittens.

 

[pkt77242]

He is a real OC. How is this lost on people? He's generally regarded as one of the top offensive minds in college football by many people. Doesn't really get much better.

I agree with everything that you posted. Having said that I sometimes think that it is very difficult to be the OC (by that I mean calling the plays) and the HC (or for that matter the HC and DC) at the same time. I don't believe that it is impossible to do both but that it is very difficult.

 

[GoldenDome]

He is a real OC. How is this lost on people? He's generally regarded as one of the top offensive minds in college football by many people. Doesn't really get much better.

Surely your can formulate your own opinion. What do YOU think makes him an elite offensive mind?

I would love to hear this.

Some say Obama is more effective than Ronald Reagan as POTUS.

 

[GoldenDome]

This is a gross misrepresentation of what actually happened.

I'm sure you're thinking of the offensive series that bled into the 2nd quarter because it's the only one that could possibly fit the narrative you presented.

Folston started off the series with runs of 1 yard and -2 yards. Golson then picked up the first down with a 13 yard pass to Robinson.

Folston then ran for 8 and then 4 yards before the quarter ended. Then Golson scrambled for 8 yards and threw a pick six.

For the RTDB crowd all it takes is 1 good run to equal "we're running the ball down their throat!" and this is the reality you wanted to see. At no point in the game did we stop running the ball when it was clearly effective.

Yeah, Folston had that run of 8 yards but his other runs went for 2, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 2 and the above 4, 1, and -2 yards. Not only is that clearly not effective it's the exact opposite!

This kind of narrative bugs the crap out of me because it makes no sense when you switch the running and passing around. No one in the history of football has watched a quarterback struggle putting together a bunch of incompletions and a few short completions only to hit one 25-yard pass and exclaim, "Why didn't we throw more we were really abusing their secondary!"

The passing game was clearly more ineffective. All the turnovers, which many argue turned the outcome of the game, were all on passing plays. The problems were more than just Golson playing poorly. Granted Golson did not have his best game and continues to lack ball security, the oline could not handle the slanting dline creating blitzing lanes, Folston either could not pick up the blitz or did not execute the block correctly, and the oline simply cannot sustain blocks in pass protect. How many times did Golson either get sacked or get hit in the game? Many times Golson could not step into his throw because Oline were getting pushed into him. At one point, Golson just threw the ball with all arm strength. I saw other times Golson bailing on throws because he would have gotten crushed.

 

[BGIF]

The passing game was clearly more ineffective. ...

Uh ...

38 Rushes

41 Net Yards Rushing

1.1 Yards/Attempt

 

[NDhoosier]

But the old school people like to run it and whenever we lose, it is simply because we did not play smash mouth football. That is the only logical explanation.

 

[Domer_Nurse09]

I don't know if anyone else heard it but Kelly was absolutely destroyed by sedano and schlereth on espn radio last night. they were saying kelly is the kind of coach that as long as they are winning he is the expert and it was all him but when we lose its someone elses fault. even to the point of mocking kelly saying "don't look at me I have done all I can do its golsons fault". then bomani jones loud mouth called in making it sound like kelly is going to lose the team and no one will want to play for him. they even threw in kellys comments post fsu about not coaching illegal plays. pointing to that comment as "its someone elses fault not his".

 

[Guest]

Ok. We ran the ball 25 times for 52 yards, if you take Golson's stats out. Why would anyone CONTINUE to get 2.1 yards per play, instead of 10+, on average?

Because it sets up other things. Take the Dallas Cowboys for example. They are playing really well this year because of (Zach Martin) the ability to run the football. A lot of D Murray's runs are into walls (run or pass blitzes) for little to no gain. HOWEVER, this sets up play action calls that have been extremely successful for Dallas who has a ton of big plays. In addition, right after a big pass play, Dallas will run the ball and gouge the defense who is on their heels. Murray has gotten most of his big runs after big pass plays, which inflates his yard per carry. It is a run to setup the pass which works quite well whether in college or the pros.

Kelly wants to pass to setup the run. The problem is, against a blitzing defense, you HAVE to establish the run early. On the first series against ASU, Kelly did this. They marched down the field. Then, he started playing spread trips and the blitzes started getting to Golson, who at this point in his career, is turnover prone.

I think the turnovers will tone down as Golson 'ages', because remember this is only his second full year of starting so he is a young Senior. Kelly has to recognize this and adjust his game plan. Once Golson gets rattled, he should have settled into a more conservative game plan to settle the team down, stop the turnovers, control the clock, and setup big run and pass plays that took advantage of an aggressive defense.

Chris Spielman was all over this on the broadcast during the game, and so was one of the announcers in a previous game this year (I am sorry, cannot remember the announcer). Kelly is great, but he makes mistakes at times.

 

[GoldenDome]

Uh ...

38 Rushes

41 Net Yards Rushing

1.1 Yards/Attempt

Could have sworn the turnovers and major miscues were because of passing, which was a huge determining factor in the game.

Also remember, college football subtracts sack yardage from rushing, not passing like the NFL so stats are not really that useful here considering Golson was sacked a multitude of times on passing downs. Still never understood why they haven't changed that but that is another story altogether.

But think what you want. Look at the numbers instead of what went wrong. How many turnovers did rushing plays net? Look that stat up for me and let me know, I'm curious.

 

[kmoose]

Because it sets up other things. Take the Dallas Cowboys for example. They are playing really well this year because of (Zach Martin) the ability to run the football. A lot of D Murray's runs are into walls (run or pass blitzes) for little to no gain. HOWEVER, this sets up play action calls that have been extremely successful for Dallas who has a ton of big plays. In addition, right after a big pass play, Dallas will run the ball and gouge the defense who is on their heels. Murray has gotten most of his big runs after big pass plays, which inflates his yard per carry. It is a run to setup the pass which works quite well whether in college or the pros.

Kelly wants to pass to setup the run. The problem is, against a blitzing defense, you HAVE to establish the run early. On the first series against ASU, Kelly did this. They marched down the field. Then, he started playing spread trips and the blitzes started getting to Golson, who at this point in his career, is turnover prone.

I think the turnovers will tone down as Golson 'ages', because remember this is only his second full year of starting so he is a young Senior. Kelly has to recognize this and adjust his game plan. Once Golson gets rattled, he should have settled into a more conservative game plan to settle the team down, stop the turnovers, control the clock, and setup big run and pass plays that took advantage of an aggressive defense.

Chris Spielman was all over this on the broadcast during the game, and so was one of the announcers in a previous game this year (I am sorry, cannot remember the announcer). Kelly is great, but he makes mistakes at times.

DeMarco Murray's worst game(s) this year, he has averaged 4.2 yards per carry. That's a full 2+ yards better, per carry, than ND was averaging. ASU was averaging 35+ points per game. That's a pretty good offense. You can't go 3 and out, just to set something up. You have to move the ball. And ND did that, through the air. Golson threw for almost 450 yards. I would have liked to see a better adjustment after the initial spate of turnovers, as well. But you can't switch to something that isn't working, just to make a change.

 

[Rocket89]

Could have sworn the turnovers and major miscues were because of passing, which was a huge determining factor in the game.

Also remember, college football subtracts sack yardage from rushing, not passing like the NFL so stats are not really that useful here considering Golson was sacked a multitude of times on passing downs. Still never understood why they haven't changed that but that is another story altogether.

But think what you want. Look at the numbers instead of what went wrong. How many turnovers did rushing plays net? Look that stat up for me and let me know, I'm curious.

You're not arguing straight.

You said above that Kelly got away from the run game when it was gashing ASU. You said he went away from something that was effective. You want sacks removed?

THE RUNNING BACKS RUSHED FOR 54 YARDS ON 20 CARRIES FOR 2.7 YPC.

You're not living in reality if you think that is effective. Just because Golson turned the ball over doesn't mean you can retroactively convince everyone that it's Kelly's fault for going away from the 'effective' run game. Additionally...

WE WERE VERY BALANCED ON OFFENSE FOR MOST OF THE 1ST HALF AND FELL BEHIND 31-3.

Only once we stopped running so much (cause hello it wasn't working) were we able to score 4 touchdowns and get back into the game.

If you were the head coach and went to a run-heavy offense after the first few turnovers Notre Dame would have lost this game 48-10. We stayed balanced and fell behind 31-3, no coach with a brain keeps running the ball much in that situation. Notre Dame just would have died a much more painful and embarrassing death by running the ball more when it was going for less than 3 yards a pop. I wonder how many people would be criticizing Kelly if he did that?

Look, it sucks that Golson turned it over a bunch but the run game was not helping. I repeat, the run game was not helping.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

But think what you want. Look at the numbers instead of what went wrong. How many turnovers did rushing plays net? Look that stat up for me and let me know, I'm curious.

That would have set us up for a 41-14 loss. But probably with fewer TOs, so... yay?

Golson was slinging it because ASU was stacking the box. Trying to force the run against such a defensive scheme, especially with a few weak links on the OL, wasn't going to accomplish anything. Had Golson protected the ball better, we either would have beaten ASU easily, or it would have forced ASU to back off with the pressure, which in turn would have opened up space for our RBs. But Golson didn't protect the ball, so we lost.

If the opposing defense is good enough to take away the run and pressure your QB by stacking the box, you're simply not going to win unless the QB protects the ball and makes plays through the air.

 

[EddytoNow]

The bottom line is Kelly's offensive game plan worked when Golson wasn't turning the ball over. To me it looked like the game plan was effective and the execution of that game plan was not. Pretty simple. Don't turn the ball over 5 times and we win the game. Golson was responsible for all the turnovers except the one that was bobbled by Robinson near the end of the game. The offensive line was responsible for Golson constantly being under pressure.

I, for one, do not feel that Kelly was throwing Golson under the bus after the game. Golson played poorly for much of the game. For Kelly to say otherwise would be ignoring facts that everyone witnessed for themselves on national TV. If anything, Kelly is too loyal to his starting quarterbacks, refusing to trust the back-up for much of anything.

The offensive line and the quarterback need look no further than the mirror. If they need Kelly to point out how poorly they played, then we are in more trouble than anyone could have thought.

 

[wizards8507]

The offensive line was responsible for Golson constantly being under pressure.

I think this is where people might disagree with you. We could have stuck the Dallas Cowboys' offensive line out there and even then, six or seven pass rushers will ALWAYS beat five blockers. Our guys didn't just get "beat." We seemed genuinely surprised that Arizona State, the blitziest team in the country, blitzed us all game.

 

[BGIF]

I think this is where people might disagree with you. We could have stuck the Dallas Cowboys' offensive line out there and even then, six or seven pass rushers will ALWAYS beat five blockers. Our guys didn't just get "beat." We seemed genuinely surprised that Arizona State, the blitziest team in the country, blitzed us all game.

The Cowboys?

We win with last year's OLine or the one from '12.


They practice for the blitz but they didn't execute like they practiced. And add Koyack and Folston to the guys you think didn't get beat. We had 6 or 7 blockers available. They failed as a unit

 

[wizards8507]

The Cowboys?

We win with last year's OLine or the one from '12.

They practice for the blitz but they didn't execute like they practiced. And add Koyack and Folston to the guys you think didn't get beat. We had 6 or 7 blockers available. They failed as a unit

I'm not just making things up. The announcers said over and over again that we didn't have enough blockers to handle the pass rush and that "Kelly was counting on Golson to account for the free rusher himself." Golson was obviously not capable of that, and that's on the game plan.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I'm not just making things up. The announcers said over and over again that we didn't have enough blockers to handle the pass rush and that "Kelly was counting on Golson to account for the free rusher himself." Golson was obviously not capable of that, and that's on the game plan.

I find it odd that when Cam came in, the blitz suddenly became less of an issue and ND scored points.

It wasn't an issue of not having enough blockers. It was that the blockers on the field to start the game, failed to do their assignments. But yea, it was the game plan...

 

[BGIF]

I'm not just making things up. The announcers said over and over again that we didn't have enough blockers to handle the pass rush and that "Kelly was counting on Golson to account for the free rusher himself." Golson was obviously not capable of that, and that's on the game plan.

Yeah, I heard that too. With an empty backfield and no TE that is the plan by simple math.

But I also saw OLs, a TE, and an RB whiffing. And two OLs taking the same man when there were extra rushers coming. I didn't need the color guy to point that out.

If Golson was a couple inches taller and had a different complexion I would have thought that was deja vu of Clausen as a freshman.

Golson held on to the ball too long sometimes trying to make a play but it starts up front. Our pass protection did not function well as a unit.

 

[Hammer Of The Gods]

Yeah, I heard that too. With an empty backfield and no TE that is the plan by simple math.

But I also saw OLs, a TE, and an RB whiffing. And two OLs taking the same man when there were extra rushers coming. I didn't need the color guy to point that out.

If Golson was a couple inches taller and had a different complexion I would have thought that was deja vu of Clausen as a freshman.

Golson held on to the ball too long sometimes trying to make a play but it starts up front. Our pass protection did not function well as a unit.

Our pass protection was all kinds of confused. We looked absolutely silly at times. I didn't HATE the game plan at all, just like anything else. We execute we will be fine, we don't, we are in for a disaster. My only consistent complaint, and I have had it all year. why can't we have two running backs in the backfield? why can't we use a tight end as a lead blocker? those two things blow my mind.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

My only consistent complaint, and I have had it all year. why can't we have two running backs in the backfield?

For the same reason you don't see Clemson, Baylor and aTm doing it. Multi-RB sets don't make much sense in a pass-first spread.

why can't we use a tight end as a lead blocker?

We do. Koyack has lined up as an H-back occasionally.

 

[wizards8507]

Our pass protection was all kinds of confused. We looked absolutely silly at times. I didn't HATE the game plan at all, just like anything else. We execute we will be fine, we don't, we are in for a disaster.

That's kind of my point. Confusion indicates poor preparation and planning. If we were just physically missing guys or getting beat with speed, I'd agree that it was primarily poor execution. However, when we look like we don't even know what we're supposed to do, that comes back to what we did Monday through Friday.

why can't we have two running backs in the backfield?

Or three? With split backs and jet motion from a third, the defense wouldn't know what the heck we're going to do. The jet guy could be a Fuller/Prosise/Hunter WR, or it could be the third guy of Cam, GB, and Folston.

For the same reason you don't see Clemson, Baylor and aTm doing it. Multi-RB sets don't make much sense in a pass-first spread.

Maybe the argument is we shouldn't necessarily be a pass-first spread. I'd love to see even a sniff of read option every once in awhile. We've run the look a few times, but I don't know if it's ever a true option in the sense of EG making a read and choosing what to do. They always look like half-ass play action where the give/keep call is predetermined in the huddle or at the line.

 

[Wild Bill]

I think this is where people might disagree with you. We could have stuck the Dallas Cowboys' offensive line out there and even then, six or seven pass rushers will ALWAYS beat five blockers. Our guys didn't just get "beat." We seemed genuinely surprised that Arizona State, the blitziest team in the country, blitzed us all game.

That's not necessarily true. The expectation is not that line will beat six or seven with five. The expectation is that the line will block and beat the five most dangerous defenders. Scan front to back from defensive line to linebacker to secondary and side to side from play side to weak side. The sixth or seventh man will be beaten by play design, receivers reading blitz and adjusting routes and a QB that can stand and deliver to the spots vacated by the blitzers.