ND's Talking Heads ... The good, bad & ugly

[ulukinatme]

We wouldn't be having the Moorehead/Rees discussion if the O-line was just average. So the O-line struggles and we need to replace the OC because he doesn't have this magic bag of tricks? I seriously doubt any Moorehead or any other OC would do much better this year if they were the OC instead of Tommy.

Well said. While there have always been Rees detractors, most people were fine with Tommy as OC last year when we were undefeated. The OL takes a big step back and now it's "Tommy sucks."

 

[ulukinatme]

The point was that you can't have it both ways. The Clemson win last year was lots of fun and was still a great win. Nobody is denying that. But you can't say Moorhead's time in PSU doesn't count because he had talent and then disregard a relative talent deficiency in another argument.

I'm not saying it didn't count, I'm just saying it's easy to look like an offensive genius when you've got considerable NFL talent at all the skill positions like Moorhead had. Where was Joe's experience and acumen against Stanford? Why did they need late heroics to go up late on Fresno State? Don't get me wrong, I think he's a decent coordinator, but I just don't see him being that much better than Tommy. Rees has done well despite getting arguably hamstrung last year and this year at WR and now a pretty awful OL. Moorhead would have not done better given the circumstances.

 

[NDRock]

We wouldn't be having the Moorehead/Rees discussion if the O-line was just average. So the O-line struggles and we need to replace the OC because he doesn't have this magic bag of tricks? I seriously doubt any Moorehead or any other OC would do much better this year if they were the OC instead of Tommy.

I agree that it's tough for any OC to get an offense rolling when the OL is poor. Do you think it's possible that another QB coach (now OC) could have had us in better shape at the position after 5 years? I would feel much better with Tommy if we didn't parlay our recent success into an injured Clark, a shorter Book, a Wisconsin retread, and TB12.

The most glaring deficiency of the program to being a playoff winning team is an elite QB. We seem no closer to having one.

 

[Ndaccountant]

I'm not saying it didn't count, I'm just saying it's easy to look like an offensive genius when you've got considerable NFL talent at all the skill positions like Moorhead had. Where was Joe's experience and acumen against Stanford? Why did they need late heroics to go up late on Fresno State? Don't get me wrong, I think he's a decent coordinator, but I just don't see him being that much better than Tommy. Rees has done well despite getting arguably hamstrung last year and this year at WR and now a pretty awful OL. Moorhead would have not done better given the circumstances.

Moorhead had emergency surgery before the Stanford game and didn't coach in it. Part of the reason why they lost frankly.

Thanks for boiling it down....you think Tommy is equal to Moorhead.

 

[ulukinatme]

Moorhead had emergency surgery before the Stanford game and didn't coach in it. Part of the reason why they lost frankly.

Thanks for boiling it down....you think Tommy is equal to Moorhead.

I'm going to take Tommy 9 times out of 10 because he's the right fit for Notre Dame, but whatever floats your boat.

 

[irishff1014]

Well said. While there have always been Rees detractors, most people were fine with Tommy as OC last year when we were undefeated. The OL takes a big step back and now it's "Tommy sucks."

If you go back to last year you'll see there was plent of complaints about the play calling. This is nothing new with Rees.

 

[ThePiombino]

Well said. While there have always been Rees detractors, most people were fine with Tommy as OC last year when we were undefeated. The OL takes a big step back and now it's "Tommy sucks."

I don't think the question is whether or not he sucks. The question is whether or not he was the best possible hire. Do you honestly think that he was? You don't think that Notre Dame could have pulled in a better offensive coordinator (given the recent run of success it was currently on) than a 20-something year old with a 0 years experience?

 

[irishff1014]

I'm going to take Tommy 9 times out of 10 because he's the right fit for Notre Dame, but whatever floats your boat.

9 out o 10 times against Moorehead or in general?

 

[ulukinatme]

I don't think the question is whether or not he sucks. The question is whether or not he was the best possible hire. Do you honestly think that he was? You don't think that Notre Dame could have pulled in a better offensive coordinator (given the recent run of success it was currently on) than a 20-something year old with a 0 years experience?

As OC he has three losses, all from Top 10 teams. If he didn't get the job at ND he would probably be a hot commodity somewhere else. If Moorhead was on the table and he was the better candidate and a better fit why didn't ND pick him up then?

 

[Calabrese's People]

The way he was hired still resonates with people. Its was a chance to change anything or everything in the offensive philosophy and (from what has been reported), Coach Kelly never took the option to look at it. He didnt meet with Moorhead. Didnt meet with Major Applewhite. Didnt meet with anyone from the NFL. Im not saying hire those guys, but at least get their imput in what they would do with the staff and scheme. It would have made it look like Tommy won the interview process. Instead it looked like the hire of least effort.
Coach Kelly decided on Tommy right off the bat, then had him interview for Oregon at the end to build buzz. He never left the golf course.
Just my opinion. Also we dont do shit to help Tommy. The offensive analyst role is treated like a work-experience position for junior coaches. Maybe look to bring in someone more senior who can challenge Tommy and provide ideas and imput (cough....Todd Haley....Cough)... I like Tommy. Kelly is doing him no favours right now.

 

[T-Boone]

Well said. While there have always been Rees detractors, most people were fine with Tommy as OC last year when we were undefeated. The OL takes a big step back and now it's "Tommy sucks."

There was already thoughts that Rees was too inexperienced and therefore unlikely (low odds) that he was going to be better than a proven, best OC available type.
I think a fair bit of talk then started after the offense was bad in the two loses at the end. We wanted improvement when it matters and those performances made many think the improvement was not there under Rees.

 

[ulukinatme]

There was already thoughts that Rees was too inexperienced and therefore unlikely (low odds) that he was going to be better than a proven, best OC available type.
I think a fair bit of talk then started after the offense was bad in the two loses at the end. We wanted improvement when it matters and those performances made many think the improvement was not there under Rees.

The big problem in those last two games is one that's often plagued us. We didn't have the playmakers to stretch the field, and both teams basically loaded up the box to stop the run. Our receivers don't get open, at least not consistently. We have no DeVonta Smith, not even close.

 

[Irish#1]

I don't think the question is whether or not he sucks. The question is whether or not he was the best possible hire. Do you honestly think that he was? You don't think that Notre Dame could have pulled in a better offensive coordinator (given the recent run of success it was currently on) than a 20-something year old with a 0 years experience?

Was he the best possible hire? None of us really know for sure. I don't think Tommy was lazy hire and BK could have landed a bunch of other guys. After coaching him and then watching him coach, he demonstrated the traits BK feels are necessary for that position. Tommy got the job because BK believes in him. People complain because the same coaches get recycled, then they complain because a young coach was hired.

Brad Stevens and Frank Vogel were hired while they were still wet behind the ears and with hardly any experience. They've done pretty well. I think Tommy could step it up in recruiting, but he's fine as the OC IMO.

 

[ThePiombino]

Was he the best possible hire? None of us really know for sure. I don't think Tommy was lazy hire and BK could have landed a bunch of other guys. After coaching him and then watching him coach, he demonstrated the traits BK feels are necessary for that position. Tommy got the job because BK believes in him. People complain because the same coaches get recycled, then they complain because a young coach was hired.

Brad Stevens and Frank Vogel were hired while they were still wet behind the ears and with hardly any experience. They've done pretty well. I think Tommy could step it up in recruiting, but he's fine as the OC IMO.

Is "fine" enough though? Seems a lot of rookie mistakes are being made. With the win margins being razor thin this year, you don't think ND would have benefitted from a seasoned OC rather than an OC-in-training?

 

[Irish#1]

Is "fine" enough though? Seems a lot of rookie mistakes are being made. With the win margins being razor thin this year, you don't think ND would have benefitted from a seasoned OC rather than an OC-in-training?

No, because any OC would fair poorly with the line play being what it is. We tend to want to dissect things way too much when the problem is simple and staring us right in the face. Yet the discussion has been BK is too stubborn to change, Tommy doesn't know how to call plays, Tommy can't develop QB's, Quinn needs to be let go yesterday, Alexander can't develop WR's.

These are problems every team not named Alabama has all the time. If the line play was just average, we probably beat Cincy even though we had three TO's. Fix the line and you fix a lot of problems.

 

[ThePiombino]

No, because any OC would fair poorly with the line play being what it is. We tend to want to dissect things way too much when the problem is simple and staring us right in the face. Yet the discussion has been BK is too stubborn to change, Tommy doesn't know how to call plays, Tommy can't develop QB's, Quinn needs to be let go yesterday, Alexander can't develop WR's.

These are problems every team not named Alabama has all the time. If the line play was just average, we probably beat Cincy even though we had three TO's. Fix the line and you fix a lot of problems.

Agreed any OC would struggle, but I would argue a seasoned OC who's "been there" would be better equipped to handle the current situation. Maybe ID sooner that a statue of a QB isn't the answer? Maybe ID sooner that by not spreading out the D it's even further handicapping the run game? Maybe ID sooner that putting Buchner in the 2nd half of the Cinci game while Pyne was moving the ball was stubborn and tone deaf? Rookie mistakes...

 

[NDdomer2]

Agreed any OC would struggle, but I would argue a seasoned OC who's "been there" would be better equipped to handle the current situation. Maybe ID sooner that a statue of a QB isn't the answer? Maybe ID sooner that by not spreading out the D it's even further handicapping the run game? Maybe ID sooner that putting Buchner in the 2nd half of the Cinci game while Pyne was moving the ball was stubborn and tone deaf? Rookie mistakes...

the unknown here is Pyne in practice. Maybe he wasn't showing some of this play making or was turning it over frequently. Hard saying. The Coan talk was always about consistency, so should we take that as Pyne wasn't consistent?

 

[ThePiombino]

the unknown here is Pyne in practice. Maybe he wasn't showing some of this play making or was turning it over frequently. Hard saying. The Coan talk was always about consistency, so should we take that as Pyne wasn't consistent?

Seems very likely and I can only assume that's exactly the case if Pyne doesn't get the start on Saturday. That said, the little sample size we have of Pyne when it counts seems to suggest he would be better suited for the current situation. No?

 

[NDdomer2]

Seems very likely and I can only assume that's exactly the case if Pyne doesn't get the start on Saturday. That said, the little sample size we have of Pyne when it counts seems to suggest he would be better suited for the current situation. No?

Yes, I think with what we've seen in games, it would be difficult to not see the upside to the offense with him.

I just hope it's not second quarter and we're all going "ahhh....so that's why Coan won the starter job".

 

[Irish#1]

Agreed any OC would struggle, but I would argue a seasoned OC who's "been there" would be better equipped to handle the current situation. Maybe ID sooner that a statue of a QB isn't the answer? Maybe ID sooner that by not spreading out the D it's even further handicapping the run game? Maybe ID sooner that putting Buchner in the 2nd half of the Cinci game while Pyne was moving the ball was stubborn and tone deaf? Rookie mistakes...

It's BK's call on who plays, not Tommy's. For all we know Tommy may have wanted to make a change earlier, but BK wanted to wait. Tommy's opening drive was great until the pressure came and Coan threw that WTF pass. I'm not advocating Coan over Pyne, but this is still a line problem IMO.

 

[Irish#1]

Yes, I think with what we've seen in games, it would be difficult to not see the upside to the offense with him.

I just hope it's not second quarter and we're all going "ahhh....so that's why Coan won the starter job".

That's the unknown. Pyne threw a couple Saturday where he wasn't on the same page as the receivers. How many of those do we see if he plays the entire game? How many of those turn into INT's? If Pyne is starting, he should have been getting the majority of the reps this week. If he was, I think something would have leaked out by now.

 

[Free Manera]

The weird thing with picking Coan is that Kelly said "we need to pick one QB and roll with it." But like that's what they tried to do initially. They picked Coan and he couldn't move the ball so they played Pyne. So by naming a starter again now, he's basically just picking the status quo.

If it's 17-0 VT at the half, and Coan has 2 INTs, is he really not going to try Pyne again? I doubt it. That's how you lose a locker room.

 

[dad4aa]

Agreed any OC would struggle, but I would argue a seasoned OC who's "been there" would be better equipped to handle the current situation. Maybe ID sooner that a statue of a QB isn't the answer? Maybe ID sooner that by not spreading out the D it's even further handicapping the run game? Maybe ID sooner that putting Buchner in the 2nd half of the Cinci game while Pyne was moving the ball was stubborn and tone deaf? Rookie mistakes...

How's that working out for Clemson this year....with a 5* QB to boot?

 

[ThePiombino]

How's that working out for Clemson this year....with a 5* QB to boot?

How did the two OCs compare in the two h2h matchups last season?

 

[Dale]

How did the two OCs compare in the two h2h matchups last season?

ummm I think most outside opinions would say Rees. Elliott is under critique for having a uninventive scheme that Lawrence/Watson carried. I don’t think the ACC rematch proved that opinion of multiple coaches wrong

 

[ThePiombino]

ummm I think most outside opinions would say Rees. Elliott is under critique for having a uninventive scheme that Lawrence/Watson carried. I don’t think the ACC rematch proved that opinion of multiple coaches wrong

Really? Both teams scored 40 offensive points (if you include OT; otherwise Elliot put up more than Rees) in the 1st game. ACCCG had Rees manage all of 10 points to to Elliot's 34. Tell me again how Rees faired better.

 

[Free Manera]

Elliot is also an absolutely absurd recruiter: https://247sports.com/Coach/Tony-Elliott-1265/AllTimeRecruits/

Before anyone says the "shopping down a different aisle" trash, most of his top signees had ND offers. He just crushes ND head to head for recruits.

To name a few: Mackensie Alexander, Will Shipley, Mitch Hyatt, Tre Lamar, and Ray-Ray McCLoud.

 

[Dale]

Really? Both teams scored 40 offensive points (if you include OT; otherwise Elliot put up more than Rees) in the 1st game. ACCCG had Rees manage all of 10 points to to Elliot's 34. Tell me again how Rees faired better.

I didn’t know Elliott suited up and was scoring the TDs. If we’re going to simplify it to points per game then yeah I guess you’re right. If we’re actually evaluating the compiling of a game plan and play calling again that’s different and Rees did a great job

 

[Dale]

Elliot is also an absolutely absurd recruiter: https://247sports.com/Coach/Tony-Ell...lTimeRecruits/

Before anyone says the "shopping down a different aisle" trash, most of his top signees had ND offers. He just crushes ND head to head for recruits.

To name a few: Mackensie Alexander, Will Shipley, Mitch Hyatt, Tre Lamar, and Ray-Ray McCLoud.

I don’t think anyone would ever throw different aisle talk at Clemson. That’s part of Dabo’s whole schtick is he recruits RKGs

 

[Irish#1]

Really? Both teams scored 40 offensive points (if you include OT; otherwise Elliot put up more than Rees) in the 1st game. ACCCG had Rees manage all of 10 points to to Elliot's 34. Tell me again how Rees faired better.

Tommy was 1-1 against Clemson last year.