Nov 7 | Clemson

[ulukinatme]

Right, but when you don't have that elite head coach/program you do need the QB. ND will never have a program like Clemson/Bama/OSU under Kelly, or possibly any coach. So, we can't ride a game manager to a natty. An elite QB can win with a very good, but not elite, supporting cast. Like ND has.

I mean, that's kind of the reality of the ND program. It's impropable that we win another championship given the way we handcuff ourselves with admissions. It's been at least a decade since we had what I would call an elite QB that lived up to expectations. So many 4 and 5 star QBs are recruited to programs each year, but only a few are really elite. Can't keep relying on your program getting the next Burrow with those odds, gotta plan for a good QB that takes care of the ball...and if your guy turns out better then it's icing on the cake.

 

[DONALDIII]

Book could play out of his mind, but with a poor WR group he's not going to keep Clemson's D honest without some legit playmakers that will stretch the field.

This isn't a shot at you, just using your post to ask my question. Why is there so much talk of our WR group being poor? The announcers can say we're not getting open all they want but you can see from replay people are open. One of the ND podcasts even said you could find WR's open when in person. Book doesn't read the field or make his throws on time. I would bet we're much happier with our WR's with a Sam Howell than Book. I bet Kizer could make these guys look good.

I understand it's a new group but that doesn't mean a bad group. They have a bad QB.

 

[benneboy]

This isn't a shot at you, just using your post to ask my question. Why is there so much talk of our WR group being poor? The announcers can say we're not getting open all they want but you can see from replay people are open. One of the ND podcasts even said you could find WR's open when in person. Book doesn't read the field or make his throws on time. I would bet we're much happier with our WR's with a Sam Howell than Book. I bet Kizer could make these guys look good.

I understand it's a new group but that doesn't mean a bad group. They have a bad QB.

They were blanketed all day Saturday and when they were covered there were still moments that Book took a shot and we had like 5 drops on well thrown balls. Also Howell took an L last week against a team we just beat with a significantly better WR core. You're seeing what you want to see.

 

[ulukinatme]

This isn't a shot at you, just using your post to ask my question. Why is there so much talk of our WR group being poor? The announcers can say we're not getting open all they want but you can see from replay people are open. One of the ND podcasts even said you could find WR's open when in person. Book doesn't read the field or make his throws on time. I would bet we're much happier with our WR's with a Sam Howell than Book. I bet Kizer could make these guys look good.

I understand it's a new group but that doesn't mean a bad group. They have a bad QB.

Kizer is a great example. What happened in 2016 when all our leading pass catchers left? Kizer struggled to move the ball at times without Will Fuller to help stretch the field, in addition to reliable guys that were gone like Chris Brown and Corey Robinson. Now, we had other problems in 2016(Namely defense), but an inexperienced WR group contributed to our problems.

Book's favorite target last year was Claypool by a mile. Before that is was Boykin. He's had no problem hitting WRs in the past. OL has been stout and experienced. The fact our leading pass catchers are 2 TEs and Kyren tells you all you need to know. The root of the problem isn't the experienced QB, it's the WR personnel.

 

[T-Boone]

Book to McKinley last week said it all. Dropped 5; 2 of which he should have caught and 2 which were garbage throws. So its a team effort.

 

[ThePiombino]

The problem is we have a QB who operates with zero margin of error due to his physical (and possibly mental) limitations. He's not great. He's not terrible. He's likely closer to average than either of those extremes. And that's not his fault, it's the coaching staff's - ND deserves better talent at the position, plain and simple.

What compounds this issue is that we currently are asking an average WR to be a #1 - JM. Again, not great and not terrible, just average. Claypool and Boykin were both bonafide #1s. Austin, presumably, is a #1; yet he has been unable to keep himself on the field for one reason or another. Lenzy is a stud, but he's not a #1. He's the perfect compliment to a #1. He has also had a hard time staying on the field and even when he is on the field he's complimenting average talent.

There's more than one thing off here. Hopefully KA, BL, and whomever they want to stick in the slot can get out there and establish some chemistry because it's legit the only way this team has a chance against Clemson. Book will never be a giant killer, but at least with the right WR corps maybe he can do his part and MANAGE a victory. Get the ball to the playmakers (that includes willingness to go down field) and let THEM kill some giants.

We have the horses at every position group on offense to score on Clemson. We just need all cylinders firing on time.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

 

[StPaul_Irish]

The problem is we have a QB who operates with zero margin of error due to his physical (and possibly mental) limitations. He's not great. He's not terrible. He's likely closer to average than either of those extremes. And that's not his fault, it's the coaching staff's - ND deserves better talent at the position, plain and simple.

What compounds this issue is that we currently are asking an average WR to be a #1 - JM. Again, not great and not terrible, just average. Claypool and Boykin were both bonafide #1s. Austin, presumably, is a #1; yet he has been unable to keep himself on the field for one reason or another. Lenzy is a stud, but he's not a #1. He's the perfect compliment to a #1. He has also had a hard time staying on the field and even when he is on the field he's complimenting average talent.

There's more than one thing off here. Hopefully KA, BL, and whomever they want to stick in the slot can get out there and establish some chemistry because it's legit the only way this team has a chance against Clemson. Book will never be a giant killer, but at least with the right WR corps maybe he can do his part and MANAGE a victory. Get the ball to the playmakers (that includes willingness to go down field) and let THEM kill some giants.

We have the horses at every position group on offense to score on Clemson. We just need all cylinders firing on time.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Your argument is a little flawed. Calling Boykin and Claypool bonafied #1's is looking at the world with hindsight. Neither one was a TRUE #1 until their final year at ND. Of course you could come back and say that is BK or Del's fault or whatever, however no one really knows.

I have been reading some seriously narrow minded takes on the Twitter... IE.. Let JJ or Watts go out there and run 2-3 routes, they don't need the whole play book... Or look at this guys HS highlights, get him on the field.....

 

[NDohio]

Your argument is a little flawed. Calling Boykin and Claypool bonafied #1's is looking at the world with hindsight. Neither one was a TRUE #1 until their final year at ND. Of course you could come back and say that is BK or Del's fault or whatever, however no one really knows.

I have been reading some seriously narrow minded takes on the Twitter... IE.. Let JJ or Watts go out there and run 2-3 routes, they don't need the whole play book... Or look at this guys HS highlights, get him on the field.....

So, you are saying they were both bonafide #1 receivers while book was throwing to them...

 

[RDU Irish]

Kizer is a great example. What happened in 2016 when all our leading pass catchers left? Kizer struggled to move the ball at times without Will Fuller to help stretch the field, in addition to reliable guys that were gone like Chris Brown and Corey Robinson. Now, we had other problems in 2016(Namely defense), but an inexperienced WR group contributed to our problems.

Book's favorite target last year was Claypool by a mile. Before that is was Boykin. He's had no problem hitting WRs in the past. OL has been stout and experienced. The fact our leading pass catchers are 2 TEs and Kyren tells you all you need to know. The root of the problem isn't the experienced QB, it's the WR personnel.

Kiser rode Fuller's coattails to an NFL job - just look at where they are now. Fuller a difference making WR for the Texans, Kiser flamed out fast. I thought at the time Kiser needed to stay and develop - now I think he had hit his ceiling and risked being exposed and not drafted at all if he stuck around.

Boykin and Claypool are starting NFL WRs, if your QB HAS to have that to be effective then the problem is not your WR corps. MB and CC have ridiculous catch radiuses, athleticism and sticky hands - they can make any college QB look good. Our running game is so good it should also make about any college QB look good. Book is our guy and I root for him but he places significant limitations on our offense.

 

[Sherm Sticky]

Kiser rode Fuller's coattails to an NFL job - just look at where they are now. Fuller a difference making WR for the Texans, Kiser flamed out fast. I thought at the time Kiser needed to stay and develop - now I think he had hit his ceiling and risked being exposed and not drafted at all if he stuck around.

Boykin and Claypool are starting NFL WRs, if your QB HAS to have that to be effective then the problem is not your WR corps. MB and CC have ridiculous catch radiuses, athleticism and sticky hands - they can make any college QB look good. Our running game is so good it should also make about any college QB look good. Book is our guy and I root for him but he places significant limitations on our offense.

I don’t agree that Kiser rode Fullers coat tails. In 2015 Kiser was dropping dimes to other receivers and Josh Adams out of the backfield. Not to mention Kiser was making plays with his legs. Kiser tried to do way to much in 2016 on a crap team. And then was thrown into a crap situation starting in Cleveland on a crap team when he wasn’t ready to start in the NFL. Kiser lost all his confidence and is viewed as a loser now. If he stick around for 2017 his career trajectory could be 100% different.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fightingirish26]

Kizer is a great example. What happened in 2016 when all our leading pass catchers left? Kizer struggled to move the ball at times without Will Fuller to help stretch the field, in addition to reliable guys that were gone like Chris Brown and Corey Robinson. Now, we had other problems in 2016(Namely defense), but an inexperienced WR group contributed to our problems.

Book's favorite target last year was Claypool by a mile. Before that is was Boykin. He's had no problem hitting WRs in the past. OL has been stout and experienced. The fact our leading pass catchers are 2 TEs and Kyren tells you all you need to know. The root of the problem isn't the experienced QB, it's the WR personnel.

Weren't we complaining until like halfway through the season last year that Book wasn't throwing it up to Claypool enough?

 

[317Irish]

Kiser rode Fuller's coattails to an NFL job - just look at where they are now. Fuller a difference making WR for the Texans, Kiser flamed out fast. I thought at the time Kiser needed to stay and develop - now I think he had hit his ceiling and risked being exposed and not drafted at all if he stuck around.

Boykin and Claypool are starting NFL WRs, if your QB HAS to have that to be effective then the problem is not your WR corps. MB and CC have ridiculous catch radiuses, athleticism and sticky hands - they can make any college QB look good. Our running game is so good it should also make about any college QB look good. Book is our guy and I root for him but he places significant limitations on our offense.

I completely understand why people would have that argument about Kizer and you can easily point to his lack of NFL success as Exhibit A to your point. I believe Kizer was a solid QB in terms of talent with or without Fuller. I think he could have been great on many ND teams outside of that shitshow we had in 2016, and could have had much more success in the NFL if weren’t for some other factors (I know you can probably say that about many players). Just my .02, but I saw a lot of qualities in his game that I don’t think everyone gives him credit for. Kind of a moot point tho lol. Ok I’m done.

 

[317Irish]

I don’t agree that Kiser rode Fullers coat tails. In 2015 Kiser was dropping dimes to other receivers and Josh Adams out of the backfield. Not to mention Kiser was making plays with his legs. Kiser tried to do way to much in 2016 on a crap team. And then was thrown into a crap situation starting in Cleveland on a crap team when he wasn’t ready to start in the NFL. Kiser lost all his confidence and is viewed as a loser now. If he stick around for 2017 his career trajectory could be 100% different.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You beat me to it and I couldn’t agree more.

 

[IrishLax]

Kiser always had accuracy problems, and that's why he failed in the NFL. When you have an incredible OL and people need to load up to stop the run... and you have a receiver like Fuller that can take the top off a defense... there are LOTS of ways to attack a team. In 2015, they repeatedly hit explosive plays by design. CJ Prosise was getting 6.5 yards per carry, Fuller was getting 20 yards per catch.

Misses don't matter that much in college when you're going for chunk plays. In the NFL, they ask you to throw with anticipation and accuracy and he didn't have to do that to be successful at ND. His "regression" in 2016 was a product of missing the running game + OL as much as it was missing Fuller. That was just a bad team top-to-bottom. I'm not sure if there are any QBs that would've truly succeeded in that situation. Ironically, then he went to Cleveland and was thrown to the wolves again. The main reason he is out of the league though is that there is a lot of film that shows he's inaccurate and turnover prone, and three teams that evaluated him and saw him daily in practice basically felt there was no upside there. If Oakland or Green Bay thought he could play, he would've stayed on those rosters as a backup.

 

[ThePiombino]

Your argument is a little flawed. Calling Boykin and Claypool bonafied #1's is looking at the world with hindsight. Neither one was a TRUE #1 until their final year at ND. Of course you could come back and say that is BK or Del's fault or whatever, however no one really knows.



I have been reading some seriously narrow minded takes on the Twitter... IE.. Let JJ or Watts go out there and run 2-3 routes, they don't need the whole play book... Or look at this guys HS highlights, get him on the field.....

It's not flawed at all. Book had bonafide #1s in his 1st two seasons as QB1.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

 

[StPaul_Irish]

So, you are saying they were both bonafide #1 receivers while book was throwing to them...

I think I was pretty clear in my response. They were not considered a true #1 until late in their careers.

I was responding to the narrative that BL, KA and others need to get all the reps based on their talents. This is not flawed, but to call out guys as being true #1s their whole career is flawed.

 

[NDRock]

I think I was pretty clear in my response. They were not considered a true #1 until late in their careers.

I was responding to the narrative that BL, KA and others need to get all the reps based on their talents. This is not flawed, but to call out guys as being true #1s their whole career is flawed.

They were both considered #1 in their final seasons. Hence, Book had a true #1 in both 2018 (Boykin) and 2019 (Claypool).

 

[ulukinatme]

Let's not forget Finke here. He was no where near a #1, but he was a reliable receiver when healthy and Book hit him often. Again, Book has plenty of tape where he's proven that he can hit our WRs, just not this season. All our big targets graduated or were drafted, leaving us with a lot of inexperienced guys and untapped potential. It's up to that WR group to step up and improve. If we want any chance of beating Clemson, no matter how small, we'll need other targets that can get open when they inevitably focus on our TEs.

 

[StPaul_Irish]

They were both considered #1 in their final seasons. Hence, Book had a true #1 in both 2018 (Boykin) and 2019 (Claypool).

Yeah, i havent said other wise

 

[T-Boone]

I have been reading some seriously narrow minded takes on the Twitter... IE.. Let JJ or Watts go out there and run 2-3 routes, they don't need the whole play book... Or look at this guys HS highlights, get him on the field.....

How do you know those guys only know 2 or 3 routes?
Even if that is all they know why not play them?

I suspect JJ isn't playing because BK loves veterans and is suspicious of freshmen and also more specifically some old school blocking obsession. I would rather have JJ out there dropping passes than a veteran.

 

[greyhammer90]

How do you know those guys only know 2 or 3 routes?
Even if that is all they know why not play them?

I suspect JJ isn't playing because BK loves veterans and is suspicious of freshmen and also more specifically some old school blocking obsession. I would rather have JJ out there dropping passes than a veteran.

Weird, because Mayer and Tyree are out there...

Maybe, just maybe, it has more to do with Johnson than BK.

 

[PANDFAN]

Weird, because Mayer and Tyree are out there...

Maybe, just maybe, it has more to do with Johnson than BK.

 

[Irish#1]

How do you know those guys only know 2 or 3 routes?
Even if that is all they know why not play them?

I suspect JJ isn't playing because BK loves veterans and is suspicious of freshmen and also more specifically some old school blocking obsession. I would rather have JJ out there dropping passes than a veteran.

Blocking is typically something the young players need to learn/develop. WR blocking is important on running plays as much as their ability to catch passes on passing plays. The problem with playing the young players only on passing downs, is you're tipping your hand.

 

[fightingirish26]

Weird, because Mayer and Tyree are out there...

Maybe, just maybe, it has more to do with Johnson than BK.

SERIOUSLY

 

[Irish YJ]

Weird, because Mayer and Tyree are out there...

Maybe, just maybe, it has more to do with Johnson than BK.

Maybe. But I also can't remember a freshman WR ever getting significant PT under BK in all the years. Can you?

Not saying every team does it, but several do. OSU and UGA are starting true freshmen WRs. IIRC, Bama and Clemson have true frosh in their 2 deep.

 

[NDdomer2]

Stepherson got some solid reps as a frosh

 

[zelezo vlk]

Corey Robinson and Fuller got some pretty decent playing time in 2013. Robinson made a few big catches in the MSU game I thought, and Fuller really started to show around the Air Force game.

 

[greyhammer90]

Maybe. But I also can't remember a freshman WR ever getting significant PT under BK in all the years. Can you?

Not saying every team does it, but several do. OSU and UGA are starting true freshmen WRs. IIRC, Bama and Clemson have true frosh in their 2 deep.

Corey Robinson, TJ Jones, Fuller, Stepherson.

 

[Irish YJ]

Stepherson got some solid reps as a frosh

Good call. I forgot about 2016. Didn't we have like almost zero uperclassmen WRs that year besides Hunter who was gimpy? I think he jumped Corey.

 

[Irish YJ]

Corey Robinson, TJ Jones, Fuller, Stepherson.

Robinson and Fuller got very little IIRC.

I remember now TJ beating out Kamara in BKs first year. I think Stepherson had the biggest role though, or at least most yards out of the two. Still kind of the 3/4 spot for both.