Post Game Observations (ASU '14)...

Emcee77

latress on the men-jay
Messages
7,295
Reaction score
555
That's where I'm at. He's much closer to a sophomore in experience than a junior, which is partly why I'm not terribly worried about the TOs. Those are mostly coachable mistakes that can be corrected going forward.

Agreed.

I was so disappointed I haven't even been able to think about the game till now. At this point, I feel like it's pretty much as simple as we dug a huge hole by giving them the ball in the red zone three times, plus we gave them two defensive TDs. Golson just had a horrific game.

But in terms of game experience he is still a relatively young player. The way he settled down and almost brought us back right up till that late-game pick 6 (which of course was Robinson's fault, not Golson's) is definitely something to build on.

As we keep saying, we lose almost zero important players to graduation this year. Lombard (with McGlinchey ready to step in), Riggs (with KVR ready to step in) and Koyack (only true hole to fill). Lots of reasons for optimism.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
That's where I'm at. He's much closer to a sophomore in experience than a junior, which is partly why I'm not terribly worried about the TOs. Those are mostly coachable mistakes that can be corrected going forward.

If they weren't corrected after weeks of solely focusing on football with the preeminent QB coach in the world, then why should we believe that coaching will fix them?
 

Emcee77

latress on the men-jay
Messages
7,295
Reaction score
555
If they weren't corrected after weeks of solely focusing on football with the preeminent QB coach in the world, then why should we believe that coaching will fix them?

Whiskey is talking about Golson's lack of game experience. As Kelly acknowledged at a recent presser, there is no substitute for that when it comes to player development.
 

pkt77242

IPA Man
Messages
10,805
Reaction score
719
That's where I'm at. He's much closer to a sophomore in experience than a junior, which is partly why I'm not terribly worried about the TOs. Those are mostly coachable mistakes that can be corrected going forward.

I kind of disagree. He is at 20 starts for his career now. That is a significant amount of games. To put that into perspective Tommy Rees didn't start his 20th game till his Senior year. While I can see your argument on the INTs, Golson's penchant for fumbling is may not be coachable. If he hasn't fixed it by now I am not sure that he ever will. As long as he is scrambling around and trying to make plays I think that we as fans need to accept that he is going to fumble the ball more than we would like.

I do have hopes that he will learn to make better pre-snap reads but the farther we get into this year the more I lose hope with that, but there is probably still some time for him to improve in that area (at least hopefully).
 

pkt77242

IPA Man
Messages
10,805
Reaction score
719
Whiskey is talking about Golson's lack of game experience. As Kelly acknowledged at a recent presser, there is no substitute for that when it comes to player development.

He has started 20 games. That isn't a lack of game experience, that is almost 2 full seasons of starting, most QBs only start 2-3 full seasons (if they are lucky). I don't understand how that can be the argument for why it is ok to keep turning the ball over.
 

Emcee77

latress on the men-jay
Messages
7,295
Reaction score
555
He has started 20 games. That isn't a lack of game experience, that is almost 2 full seasons of starting, most QBs only start 2-3 full seasons (if they are lucky). I don't understand how that can be the argument for why it is ok to keep turning the ball over.

I think that's fair enough to argue, although I disagree somewhat ... I was just pointing out that kmoose's argument that Golson's time with Whitfield should have prevented his interceptions is not fair. Those were mental errors, not physical ones. Can't iron that out by throwing footballs on the beach. It's gotta be game experience and coaching based on game film.
 

BleedBlueGold

Well-known member
Messages
6,265
Reaction score
2,489
Say what you want about the INTs. Those haven't been exclusively Golson's fault. The fumbles, though, are completely on him and his lack of ball security. All the purple-faced coaching in the world hasn't helped him remember to tuck the ball. It's maddening. I know he wants to make a play, but signs of growth include things like tucking the ball, throwing it away, etc. The kid makes a ton of plays. But unfortunately we have to live and die w/ Golson's insane play-making ability which is joined hand-in-hand with his turnovers.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
I think that's fair enough to argue, although I disagree somewhat ... I was just pointing out that kmoose's argument that Golson's time with Whitfield should have prevented his interceptions is not fair. Those were mental errors, not physical ones. Can't iron that out by throwing footballs on the beach. It's gotta be game experience and coaching based on game film.

I did not mean it as an argument. I was looking for whiskey to hopefully expound on his thoughts. I guess I was just wondering what he saw, that made him think that it is just a matter of coaching, if the coaching of Whitfield didn't prevent it.
 

pkt77242

IPA Man
Messages
10,805
Reaction score
719
I think that's fair enough to argue, although I disagree somewhat ... I was just pointing out that kmoose's argument that Golson's time with Whitfield should have prevented his interceptions is not fair. Those were mental errors, not physical ones. Can't iron that out by throwing footballs on the beach. It's gotta be game experience and coaching based on game film.

Sorry, for some reason I thought you were responding to Koon. Damn I need to sleep.
 

Old Man Mike

Fast as Lightning!
Messages
8,971
Reaction score
6,459
Nobody wants to contemplate this, but Everett is two different people on the field. When he's in the pocket and can't see everything [other than the pushing defensive tackles which he sees too well], he is "nervous dancing Everett" and does not manifest deliberation or confidence. When things mildly break down, and he can see everything and has quit thinking about the "philosophy" of the play called, he becomes "Everett the rampant defense killer" and looks like an All-American [though an All-American who has escaped the fetters of an offensive plan.]

And therein of course lies the rub. Coach is the consummate offensive planner. He REALLY wants to run an offensive plan. He's willing to cut back on the totality of his plan [see: Tommy Rees] but he refuses to stop calling reasonable mixes of plays because of the possible incompetence of the player execution. Kelly could just punt and emasculate his playbook on the assumption that many of the plays are too risky to run with Everett, but note his comments to the press: "all these errors are fixable." Yes, Coach, in theory they are. But Everett is demonstrating to you that he is not a fast fixer of such things.

Kelly perseveres with his "idealistic" hopes because he just can't believe that Everett can't do these things correctly, and do them correctly every time. Coach refuses to give up on the idea that his offensive systems work like crazy [see our tremendous yardage numbers --- almost regardless of a Tommy or an Everett running it], and they have proven over and over to be capable of being run by a variety of QBs without the carnival-of-errors which we have seen.

We, the fans, it seems, are stuck watching this Mystery Show [of massive offensive production countered by nearly inexplicable turnover boneheads] play its painful way out.

Pass the stomach-acid relief.....
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,545
Reaction score
28,993

Those guys are notoriously terrible at their grading. See: grading for the Stanford game where we gashed them and they couldn't move the ball at all, yet all of their offensive players were basically "green" but Hogan who still got decent marks on a terrible stat line/QBR.

With that being said, I agree with almost all of their grades for this game.
 
K

koonja

Guest
Nobody wants to contemplate this, but Everett is two different people on the field. When he's in the pocket and can't see everything [other than the pushing defensive tackles which he sees too well], he is "nervous dancing Everett" and does not manifest deliberation or confidence. When things mildly break down, and he can see everything and has quit thinking about the "philosophy" of the play called, he becomes "Everett the rampant defense killer" and looks like an All-American [though an All-American who has escaped the fetters of an offensive plan.]

And therein of course lies the rub. Coach is the consummate offensive planner. He REALLY wants to run an offensive plan. He's willing to cut back on the totality of his plan [see: Tommy Rees] but he refuses to stop calling reasonable mixes of plays because of the possible incompetence of the player execution. Kelly could just punt and emasculate his playbook on the assumption that many of the plays are too risky to run with Everett, but note his comments to the press: "all these errors are fixable." Yes, Coach, in theory they are. But Everett is demonstrating to you that he is not a fast fixer of such things.

Kelly perseveres with his "idealistic" hopes because he just can't believe that Everett can't do these things correctly, and do them correctly every time. Coach refuses to give up on the idea that his offensive systems work like crazy [see our tremendous yardage numbers --- almost regardless of a Tommy or an Everett running it], and they have proven over and over to be capable of being run by a variety of QBs without the carnival-of-errors which we have seen.

We, the fans, it seems, are stuck watching this Mystery Show [of massive offensive production countered by nearly inexplicable turnover boneheads] play its painful way out.

Pass the stomach-acid relief.....

Do you honestly put all of the blame on Everett, even though most of the time he has to break the play to scrammble for his life? I don't think you could find it in you to ever blame the OL, or Cam.

This isn't all on Golson. He's asked to do everything (see: rushing yards, pass protection, and WRs skills). No QB can do it all. He's Texas AM from the past 2 years minus having a the top 5 receiver.
 
Last edited:

Luckylucci

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
27,769
Reaction score
10,146
Those guys are notoriously terrible at their grading. See: grading for the Stanford game where we gashed them and they couldn't move the ball at all, yet all of their offensive players were basically "green" but Hogan who still got decent marks on a terrible stat line/QBR.

With that being said, I agree with almost all of their grades for this game.

Agreed, its hard to put too much weight in what they're saying if I don't completely understand their grading system. I will also say that I haven't went back and watched the game a second time yet. However, I do think there are key takeaways. ASU's defense didn't play nearly as well as it seemed while watching the game or the first half. Golson wasn't as bad as it seemed at first. Our defense was worse. Oline is really struggling.

With that said I think when I re-watch the game Golson missed a lot of opportunities with open WR's and moved poorly in the pocket.
 

BobbyMac

Staff & Stuff
Staff member
Messages
33,950
Reaction score
9,294
Both Murtaugh and Hansen emphasized my biggest concern going forward: our OL struggles. They're absolutely baffling since we've arguably recruited the position better than anyone else in the nation over the last several years. All of the other issues that plagued us against ASU will likely work themselves out heading into 2015, but if there's an underlying weakness in our OL development or scheme, that would place a low ceiling on what ND can expect to achieve in the foreseeable future.

My buddy was a DII All American at guard and his exact words on Saturday were... ND will be unstoppable when guys like Montelus and Mustipher are at guard instead of converted 6-6 LT's. I've said it before on here, the Irish are taller across the front line than the Arizona Cardinals and their QB is (was) 6-5. Short drops, a short QB and an very tall O line that can't keep the D line's hands down are a bad combo.
 

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,584
Reaction score
20,035
I kind of disagree. He is at 20 starts for his career now. That is a significant amount of games. To put that into perspective Tommy Rees didn't start his 20th game till his Senior year. While I can see your argument on the INTs, Golson's penchant for fumbling is may not be coachable. If he hasn't fixed it by now I am not sure that he ever will. As long as he is scrambling around and trying to make plays I think that we as fans need to accept that he is going to fumble the ball more than we would like.

I do have hopes that he will learn to make better pre-snap reads but the farther we get into this year the more I lose hope with that, but there is probably still some time for him to improve in that area (at least hopefully).

He has started 20 games. That isn't a lack of game experience, that is almost 2 full seasons of starting, most QBs only start 2-3 full seasons (if they are lucky). I don't understand how that can be the argument for why it is ok to keep turning the ball over.

Twenty games, but in 2012 he wasn't asked to do much more than hand the ball to the RB's. Remember how shocked we were when he let that bomb fly against Oklahoma? anyone have any stats on the number of passes he threw versus the number of runs?
 

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,584
Reaction score
20,035
Do you honestly put all of the blame on Everett, even though most of the time he has to break the play to scrammble for his life? I don't think you could find it in you to ever blame the OL, or Cam.

This isn't all on Golson. He's asked to do everything (see: rushing yards, pass protection, and WRs skills). No QB can do it all. He's Texas AM from the past 2 years minus having a the top 5 receiver.

Agreed, its hard to put too much weight in what they're saying if I don't completely understand their grading system. I will also say that I haven't went back and watched the game a second time yet. However, I do think there are key takeaways. ASU's defense didn't play nearly as well as it seemed while watching the game or the first half. Golson wasn't as bad as it seemed at first. Our defense was worse. Oline is really struggling.

With that said I think when I re-watch the game Golson missed a lot of opportunities with open WR's and moved poorly in the pocket.

I may be wrong, but it seems to me Golson's first movement in the pocket is always backwards. He can buy valuable time simply stepping up in the pocket.
 
K

koonja

Guest
I may be wrong, but it seems to me Golson's first movement in the pocket is always backwards. He can buy valuable time simply stepping up in the pocket.

That's the first thing you usually want your QB to do, but when he does stick with it and step up, the pocket collapses faster than any I've seen. I can't remember what game it was, but you could tell Golson was making an effort to stick in it and step up, and he wasn't getting rewarded for it. He'd step up and a half of a second later, be on the ground or falling forward to the LOS.

Edit: WTH. Why am I incapable of quoting people?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
Do you honestly put all of the blame on Everett, even though most of the time he has to break the play to scrammble for his life? I don't think you could find it in you to ever blame the OL, or Cam.

This isn't all on Golson. He's asked to do everything (see: rushing yards, pass protection, and WRs skills). No QB can do it all. He's Texas AM from the past 2 years minus having a the top 5 receiver.

A lot of the reason that Golson has been running for his life is because he has failed to identify who the unblocked guy will be. When the defenders outnumber the blockers, it is on the QB, and the QB only, to account for which guy is going to be unblocked, and do what is necessary to nullify him. One of the things that I heard, in Kelly's post game presser, is that the interception on the first drive of the second half should have been a running play. Golson has the ability to run or pass on almost every play, just like Rees used to, and he utterly failed to check into the right play on that down.

I have no idea what the bolded is supposed to mean? Are you trying to say that Golson would be putting up Johnny Douchebag numbers, if he had a Top 5 receiver?
 
K

koonja

Guest
A lot of the reason that Golson has been running for his life is because he has failed to identify who the unblocked guy will be. When the defenders outnumber the blockers, it is on the QB, and the QB only, to account for which guy is going to be unblocked, and do what is necessary to nullify him. One of the things that I heard, in Kelly's post game presser, is that the interception on the first drive of the second half should have been a running play. Golson has the ability to run or pass on almost every play, just like Rees used to, and he utterly failed to check into the right play on that down.

I have no idea what the bolded is supposed to mean? Are you trying to say that Golson would be putting up Johnny Douchebag numbers, if he had a Top 5 receiver?

I'm saying he's asked to be our entire offense since we cannot create and keep a pocket for him to throw in, or provide a ground game, much like Texas AM during JFF's time (although they may have had a better OL - I do not know).

And he doesn't have the top 5 WR to bail him out like JFF did.
 

Luckylucci

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
27,769
Reaction score
10,146
A lot of the reason that Golson has been running for his life is because he has failed to identify who the unblocked guy will be. When the defenders outnumber the blockers, it is on the QB, and the QB only, to account for which guy is going to be unblocked, and do what is necessary to nullify him. One of the things that I heard, in Kelly's post game presser, is that the interception on the first drive of the second half should have been a running play. Golson has the ability to run or pass on almost every play, just like Rees used to, and he utterly failed to check into the right play on that down.

I have no idea what the bolded is supposed to mean? Are you trying to say that Golson would be putting up Johnny Douchebag numbers, if he had a Top 5 receiver?

I agree, this is definitely part of the problem that wont show up in the box score.
 

Emcee77

latress on the men-jay
Messages
7,295
Reaction score
555
A lot of the reason that Golson has been running for his life is because he has failed to identify who the unblocked guy will be. When the defenders outnumber the blockers, it is on the QB, and the QB only, to account for which guy is going to be unblocked, and do what is necessary to nullify him. One of the things that I heard, in Kelly's post game presser, is that the interception on the first drive of the second half should have been a running play. Golson has the ability to run or pass on almost every play, just like Rees used to, and he utterly failed to check into the right play on that down.

Yes, exactly. Last year against ASU, Kelly kept the TE in to block so the pass rushers wouldn't outnumber the blockers. This year, because he has a QB who can actually move a little bit, he sent the TE and depended on Golson to identify the unblocked guy and either elude him with his feet or throw quickly to an uncovered receiver. Golson simply did not do that reliably enough. I think the OL is getting a lot of unfair blame that should be put on Golson.
 

Luckylucci

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
27,769
Reaction score
10,146
Below is a stat from ESPN. We knew they were going to blitz and blitz a lot.

Arizona State sent five or more pass rushers on 73% of Everett Golson's dropbacks Saturday, its second-highest percentage in a game this season. On such plays, Golson completed less than half of his passes and had all of his career-high five turnovers.

The Sun Devils entered the game sending five or more pass rushers on 55% of opponents' dropbacks, the second-highest percentage for a Power 5 team and double the Power 5 average of 27%. [+]
 

blackirish

New member
Messages
163
Reaction score
2
Ok the playoff deal is out, now win out and get a great bowl game, maybe a shot at an sec team that everyone around the country thinks is so much better than Notre Dame. I had these guys at 8-4 this year, they now have a chance to make a statement for next year. Honestly, yesterday I was gutted but now what these guys have down this year and what should happen next year - lets tee it up and win out. You cant expect to win a game with that much turnover and defensive personnel beat up. ASU should give a game ball to Navy.
Which SEC team would you like for us to play. Bama ?
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Yes, exactly. Last year against ASU, Kelly kept the TE in to block so the pass rushers wouldn't outnumber the blockers. This year, because he has a QB who can actually move a little bit, he sent the TE and depended on Golson to identify the unblocked guy and either elude him with his feet or throw quickly to an uncovered receiver. Golson simply did not do that reliably enough. I think the OL is getting a lot of unfair blame that should be put on Golson.

That may be true, and part of me hopes it is. Of our 5 OL, Elmer and Martin were the only two profootballfocus graded in the red.

Mysterious OL struggles could portend serious long-term issues, but mental mistakes by Golson both: (1) fit Kelly's narrative of why we lost; and (2) are easier to fix/ scheme around.
 

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,584
Reaction score
20,035
Below is a stat from ESPN. We knew they were going to blitz and blitz a lot.

Arizona State sent five or more pass rushers on 73% of Everett Golson's dropbacks Saturday, its second-highest percentage in a game this season. On such plays, Golson completed less than half of his passes and had all of his career-high five turnovers.

The Sun Devils entered the game sending five or more pass rushers on 55% of opponents' dropbacks, the second-highest percentage for a Power 5 team and double the Power 5 average of 27%. [+]

This is what is unsettling. Golson Was accounting for the blitz on the first drive. Short drops, quick passes to the area vacated by the blitzer. After that it seemed he started reading the D wrong or just missed the signs they were sending.
 

Wild Bill

Well-known member
Messages
5,518
Reaction score
3,263
A lot of the reason that Golson has been running for his life is because he has failed to identify who the unblocked guy will be. When the defenders outnumber the blockers, it is on the QB, and the QB only, to account for which guy is going to be unblocked, and do what is necessary to nullify him. One of the things that I heard, in Kelly's post game presser, is that the interception on the first drive of the second half should have been a running play. Golson has the ability to run or pass on almost every play, just like Rees used to, and he utterly failed to check into the right play on that down.

Yes, exactly. Last year against ASU, Kelly kept the TE in to block so the pass rushers wouldn't outnumber the blockers. This year, because he has a QB who can actually move a little bit, he sent the TE and depended on Golson to identify the unblocked guy and either elude him with his feet or throw quickly to an uncovered receiver. Golson simply did not do that reliably enough. I think the OL is getting a lot of unfair blame that should be put on Golson.



I don't disagree with you. It's hard to tell from a fan's perspective what he should have called. He is partially to blame for the picks but the line is absolutely not pulling their weight right now. They are not finishing blocks, they are not playing aggressive and they are not giving all out effort.

That pick in the second half was partially on Lombard. It looked like a sprint out to the right. Lombard's man beat him off the snap and got up the field too quick. He needs to be more aggressive, he needs to give more effort out of his stance and he needs to get his helmet across that man's body. Golson could not sprint due to the penetration, he didn't have time b/c the backside rush (which would have been negated if he was able to sprint out) was closing in on him so he rushed a throw. That one was on Golson (for not making the right call and not throwing it away) but once the ball was snapped, he didn't get much effort/help from Lombard.

The first pick, the one that was tipped by Lombard's man, was another example of lack of effort, lack of aggression and not finishing blocks. Hegarty let a backside five technique cross his face, Elmer gets beat off the ball by a 400lb man, doesn't shuffle his feet and then he tries to lay on the defender. Lombard tries to throw a cut block, fails miserably and quits on the play.

You can't win every one on one battle but you can give effort every down. There is no reason Elmer should ever get beat off the snap by that defender. That's a lack of effort or concentration. What's worse is that even though he got beat off the snap, he still has a relatively easy block to make if he simply moves his feet to the right and gets into the defender's body. He didn't move his feet at all. And if he thought it was impossible to shuffle over to his body, he could have dropped down and cut his backside knee out and eliminated him from the play. He just laid on him and guided him into EG's window to throw the ball.

Hegarty, instead of striking a defender, simply caught him and guided him into the play side gap. It wasn't an issue on this play but it is an issue with pass protection overall. They are getting into their pass drops and catching defenders when they enter their strike zone. They need to be more aggressive and violent with their hands. If you have a chance to strike you have to unload on your defender. Throttling a pass rusher with your hands is the ultimate equalizer. If you can consistently get get it done, you will win most of your one on one battles. If you can keep a good base and have a good punch you will win all of them (see Martin, Zack).

Lombard's defender smelled the quick pass and makes a nice play to take away a passing lane. I understand why Lombard's cut was ineffective but I don't understand why he quit on the play. He needs to stay on all fours and bear crawl the side of his body into that defenders hip as hard as humanly possible. If he doesn't quit on that block that defender would have been using his hands to protect his body and not deflecting the pass. If I'm Lombard, I walk right over to the bench and let them know it's on me, not EG.

The second tipped pick, the one that Stanley's man tipped, was confusing. The line action makes me think it was a play action pass but EG did not even attempt to hand the ball off. Big mistake on his part if that was a play action pass b/c a fake would have forced that end to crash down the line to tackle the ball carrier and he would have opened up his own passing lane. Stanley is not aggressive enough on the play, though. Initially he gets into the defender's body and does a nice job but he doesn't finish the block. He needs to smell blood there. He was in good position, the defender's eyes were in the backfield and he could have laid him out and eliminated him from the play. Be aggressive, finish your block and that pick never happens (never happens if EG play fakes either).

I'm not implying the line is lazy. I'm sure they all work hard but they do not have the right mindset to be a successful offensive line. That's on coaching, seniors and your best talent. Harry, Martin and Stanley need to demand more of themselves and the unit or this will not change.
 
Last edited:
Top