Potential Transfers INTO ND

[Irish#1]

Koon gets so excited about anyone who shows interest in ND.

 

[woolybug25]

Ishaq has 1 sack in 3 years. I might be in the minority here but I often question his desire. There are a lot of plays where it looks like he is going through the motions. I think of the 2012 season and the difference in effort and attitude between him and a guy like Prince Shembo that year.

He's been playing out of position as an OLB. He hasn't been asked to rush the passer, so the lack of sacks isn't surprising. He probably looked lost because he was. Diaco's scheme was very demanding of his position and he clearly wasn't very comfortable.

We still have never got to see what he could do as a pure pass rusher.

 

[EvilleIrish]

He's been playing out of position as an OLB. He hasn't been asked to rush the passer, so the lack of sacks isn't surprising. He probably looked lost because he was. Diaco's scheme was very demanding of his position and he clearly wasn't very comfortable.

We still have never got to see what he could do as a pure pass rusher.

Didn't he play with his hand on the ground quite a bit in 3rd downs though?

 

[ulukinatme]

Ishaq has 1 sack in 3 years. I might be in the minority here but I often question his desire. There are a lot of plays where it looks like he is going through the motions. I think of the 2012 season and the difference in effort and attitude between him and a guy like Prince Shembo that year.

Ishaaq also played LB, a position he didn't have in high school if I recall. He's built more like a DE, not a LB. He was better when his hand was in the dirt in a 3-4, certainly not in coverage. Obviously he was set to start in 2014 before the Frozen Five incident, I think he finally found his calling as a 4-3 DE again. We won't know unless he gets the opportunity this year, so we'll see what happens, but I think he'll end up being pretty good if everything works out academically for him to come back...maybe not 5 star good, since that ship kind of sailed, but I think he'll be an asset and not a liability.

Didn't he play with his hand on the ground quite a bit in 3rd downs though?

Some, but Shembo was also getting a majority of the snaps while Ishaaq was struggling at LB.

 

[tko]

Didn't he play with his hand on the ground quite a bit in 3rd downs though?

Actually played with his thumb in his azz. His career highlight was the forced fumble of the Navy QB in Ireland.

 

[Big23Head]

Sampson talked to Sebastian and his old coach. He has been in contact with Cody Riggs and his coach thinks he would fit in very well at ND. Appears to be a SS though.

 

[Irishman77]

Notre Dame Fighting Irish Football, Basketball, and Recruiting Front Page

 

[Luckylucci]

From the Rivals Cal reporter, he would be surprised if Scarlett and Avery land at ND.

Avery Sebastian has had a injury plagued career and played behind a walk on this past season at Cal. "I'd be really surprised if he ended up at a high profile place."

Brennan Scarlett, also an injury plagued career and he thinks Stanford or nowhere so he can play with his brother. He'd be surprised if he left the state.

FWIW, I don't think this guy knows shit

 

[sharksamardzija8345]

Actually played with his thumb in his azz. His career highlight was the forced fumble of the Navy QB in Ireland.

hahahahahaha!

 

[Big23Head]

Tj over at II said as of today the most likely candidates are Sebastian and Young.

 

[IrishLion]

On Ishaq, I thought he actually played with his hand on the ground and as a pass rusher a lot in 2013, and did a pretty good job of generating consistent push. The problem was he didn't have much help in terms of guys using that disruption to get home, and the other guys didn't create enough disruption to allow HIM to get home.

 

[Me2SouthBend]

Tj over at II said as of today the most likely candidates are Sebastian and Young.

Young so Williams and Adams can both redshirt? Not sure I agree w bringing in another RB.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Tj over at II said as of today the most likely candidates are Sebastian and Young.

Unless the staff has major concerns about Bryant's ability to shoulder a substantial load in 2015, I don't understand why we'd turn down a homegrown 5Y in exchange for Young. At 5'10'' and 195 lbs, he wouldn't fill a niche as a true "power" back for us.

He was #2 in carries and yards for Stanford last year, but that's not saying much. Wright was the bell-cow, and after him there were four RBs (including Young) all clustered around 300 yards of production.

It's probably more helpful to look at his production through %s; Young only got 14% of the Cardinal's carries, and only produced about 16% of their rushing yards.

System-fit is a potential issue as well. McCafferty was their only RB who was utilized much in the passing game. Young still had 6 receptions for 31 yards, but Kelly puts a much bigger emphasis on hitting RBs on short passes coming out of the backfield; that's not something he's been asked to do much in Palo Alto. Stanford utilizes pro-style personnel, while we utilize spread sets. Stanford utilizes gap-blocking, while we primarily utilize zone-blocking, etc.

Am I missing something? We've got 4 RBs on the roster now, which is pretty much ideal depth for Kelly's system. Why bring in a marginally-productive RB from Stanford that doesn't fit our system?

 

[Grahambo]

Unless the staff has major concerns about Bryant's ability to shoulder a substantial load in 2015, I don't understand why we'd turn down a homegrown 5Y in exchange for Young. At 5'10'' and 195 lbs, he wouldn't fill a niche as a true "power" back for us.

He was #2 in carries and yards for Stanford last year, but that's not saying much. Wright was the bell-cow, and after him there were four RBs (including Young) all clustered around 300 yards of production.

It's probably more helpful to look at his production through %s; Young only got 14% of the Cardinal's carries, and only produced about 16% of their rushing yards.

System-fit is a potential issue as well. McCafferty was their only RB who was utilized much in the passing game. Young still had 6 receptions for 31 yards, but Kelly puts a much bigger emphasis on hitting RBs on short passes coming out of the backfield; that's not something he's been asked to do much in Palo Alto. Stanford utilizes pro-style personnel, while we utilize spread sets. Stanford utilizes gap-blocking, while we primarily utilize zone-blocking, etc.

Am I missing something? We've got 4 RBs on the roster now, which is pretty much ideal depth for Kelly's system. Why bring in a marginally-productive RB from Stanford that doesn't fit our system?

My guess would be depth. Maybe they would prefer a 5y as a 3rd RB to try and preserve the eligibility of DW and Adams.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

My guess would be depth. Maybe they would prefer a 5y as a 3rd RB to try and preserve the eligibility of DW and Adams.

Maybe Kelly plans to go run-heavy next year, so he needs more depth than usual. But unless he's going to change things up, bringing on a 5th RB makes no sense.

Last year, our #3 RB (Bryant) only got 54 carries. That number could actually decrease in 2015 if Kelly integrates more option plays and jet sweeps into the mix. So again, unless there's a serious lack of confidence in one of our four RBs, what's the point of bringing on a 5th?

 

[Grahambo]

Maybe Kelly plans to go run-heavy next year, so he needs more depth than usual. But unless he's going to change things up, bringing on a 5th RB makes no sense.

Last year, our #3 RB (Bryant) only got 54 carries. That number could actually decrease in 2015 if Kelly integrates more option plays and jet sweeps into the mix. So again, unless there's a serious lack of confidence in one of our four RBs, what's the point of bringing on a 5th?

You're not going to get an argument out of me. I'm just spitballing as last year was an eye opener in terms of depth. Maybe he does not want to rush the RBs and with Adams coming off a knee injury, we really only have 3 healthy backs. Just 100% spitballing though.

 

[ThePiombino]

I don't get the 5th RB talk. Get us a safety. Or DL.

 

[FearTheBeard]

Greg Bryant moving to safety...

 

[ACamp1900]

Maybe Kelly plans to go run-heavy next year, so he needs more depth than usual. But unless he's going to change things up, bringing on a 5th RB makes no sense.

Last year, our #3 RB (Bryant) only got 54 carries. That number could actually decrease in 2015 if Kelly integrates more option plays and jet sweeps into the mix. So again, unless there's a serious lack of confidence in one of our four RBs, what's the point of bringing on a 5th?

Did you just say MORE jet sweeps.....

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Did you just say MORE jet sweeps.....

New red-zone special. Guaranteed to get you 6 on the goal line.

 

[ulukinatme]

I don't get the 5th RB talk. Get us a safety. Or DL.

I don't know about DL. We certainly didn't do a great job with pass rush last year, but we have a lot of bodies there already. We've got our fair share of young DL players, we're looking at 17 guys total on the line with only 4 being upperclassmen, that's not a lot of experience. That doesn't count Ishaq either.

 

[condoms SUCk]

1). Take a safety, regardless if they are a SS or FS. The more health body's the better I say, especially if they have a health amount of playing time.

2). I agree with koonja, I'm not holding my breath on Ishaq coming back. You can't tell me BK seems to be in the loop w/ KVR's progress, yet seems in the dark regarding Ishaq. Not to mention BK said Ishaq would has a more difficult path to get back to ND. Wouldn't you think if you have two players that you want to return, and student A has a more difficult path, that you wouldn't be in constant communication with that player? From statement BK made I get the sense that KVR is on top of what he needs to do and keeps the staff in the loop. Whereas Ishaq knows what he needs to do but is not being as proactive or the communication is not as clear, which is not good. but hey, I could be wrong!

3). Ummm who really thinks Ishaq, if he does return, is going to be that great anyway? He hasen't played a down in college football for over a year and he really wasn't that dominating to beguine with. So even if he comes back, wouldn't it take him a while to get back to the level of player he was before the F5, not to mention, the time to exceed that level?

4). Someone please take all of Koons vbucks.

 

[ThePiombino]

I don't know about DL. We certainly didn't do a great job with pass rush last year, but we have a lot of bodies there already. We've got our fair share of young DL players, we're looking at 17 guys total on the line with only 4 being upperclassmen, that's not a lot of experience. That doesn't count Ishaq either.

We need a pass-rushing DE. I don't care how many bodies we have; without a pass rush, our secondary will get exploited. Having Russell back helps, but in order to not hang our corners up to dry, our line needs to get pressure - which they currently seem unable to do.

 

[GoldenDome]

Um, 4 RB (2 of which are true freshmen) is not deep. True freshmen RB's usually have a hard time blocking and picking up blocking. One injury away from being pass happy BK. I say take the RB so long as he can pass pro and read blitzes.

 

[ThePiombino]

Um, 4 RB (2 of which are true freshmen) is not deep. True freshmen RB's usually have a hard time blocking and picking up blocking. One injury away from being pass happy BK. I say take the RB so long as he can pass pro and read blitzes.

It is when you have Procise and Carlisle who both can play the position in a pinch, plus Brent who played RB his senior year. 4 true RBs is MORE than enough when you factor that and it puts RB need behind pass rushing DE and safety IMO

 

[Cackalacky]

It is when you have Procise and Carlisle who both can play the position in a pinch, plus Brent who played RB his senior year. 4 true RBs is MORE than enough when you factor that and it puts RB need behind pass rushing DE and safety IMO

I agree. I wish we had a 2014 Rb just for little more development but we are not hurting that bad with the 4, plus Carlisle if necessary.

 

[koonja]

Urban Liar has to cut ~ 5 guys and we're close to OSU. Since we're spinning hypotheticals, any that would make sense from OSU?

 

[NDdomer2]

if they get "cut" can they transfer for immediate playing time?

I highly doubt ND will have interest in OSU scraps

 

[koonja]

if they get "cut" can they transfer for immediate playing time?

I highly doubt ND will have interest in OSU scraps

True, but I'd take my chances with the champ's scraps over Cal's at face value.

 

[phork]

Just an FYI, looks like Lyons is heading out of Stanford and into Michigan.