Quarterback Competition Update (4-11-11)

[Patulski]

Arguing that player safety rules have eliminate or mitigated big hits to the degree that there is a discernible difference between college and the NFL is a completely un-provable hypothesis. I do know that QBs in the NFL get hit with more frequency than those in college though. Don't know how you want to attempt to measure the violence of the hits.

Nonsense. A few plays after Rees was knocked out, two Stanford players hit Rees well after he had released the ball. It was blatant. If those players were in the NFL, they would have been fined The NFL is doing everything it can to diminish the violence in the game, and particularly with regard to unnecessary hits on QB's.

Come on... you put RGIII or Andrew Luck at the head of last year's team and we probably go at least 11-1. Instead, we went 8-5. In those 5 losses, the QB play was a MAJOR factor in all 5. We had top 5 positional talents at WR and TE... an all-around very effective running game with Jonas and Cierre... one of the best pass blocking OLs in the country... an OK DL.... a guy who's going to be the second safety drafted in the NFL... solid LBs.... and iffy CBs. The only position on our team last year that was more of a liability than QB was pun returner.

Luck was also a Senior and 3 year starter. Furthermore, they ran an offense that was a maximum protect offense, and rushed for 50 yards more per game. They were a classic punch them in the mouth/then play-action offense. Add in Luck's superior skills and you've got a major difference in scheme, philosophy and talent. If Rees does win the job, it will be interesting to see his improvement during the next two years. I don't think he's got Luck's talent, but I think he can and will improve.

Like I've said, I totally support Tommy starting if he ends up being the guy as long as Hendrix gets touches in the red zone. It's absolutely necessary to improve our efficiency. But for people not to be frightened of Tommy's little hands or lack of proven vertical passing game or lack of mobility is sheer insanity. It's terrifying to think how much he will hamstring this team if he hasn't made monumental gains in confidence, ability, strength, poise, and understanding. Here's to hoping he has. The only position on this entire team with more question marks coming into this year than QB is CB.

If Hendrix wins the job, or adds value in the Red Zone, I'll be happy. I am not as pessimistic about Rees as many. We'll see what happens.

 

[Old Man Mike]

"Please Lord, in your goodness, do not allow me to open this thread again."

 

[johnnykillz]

"Please Lord, in your goodness, do not allow me to open this thread again."

Amen.

 

[BGIF]

University of Notre Dame Official Athletic Site

I haven't seen this posted anywhere, and I wanted to make sure this is easy to find.

It's an excellent break down of the QBs by Coach Molnar.
He breaks down all their strengths.

He really likes Dayne.
Golson and Hendrix also got a lot of praise.

Rees seemed to get the least love (not intentionally). Molnar just said he's stronger. That's it.
Golson is way ahead of schedule.
Andrew has a great understanding of the game.
Dayne's footwork and decision making have soared.


This competition is making me very excited. Can't wait til the B&G game.

PS) Watch Golson's throw at 2:02.... laser pass right on target, beautiful throw.

Same ol', same ol'

A year later but it still sounds the same. Only difference is Dayne who was revered is gone and Kiel who is revered has arrived.

Golson is still way ahead of schedule.

Andrew still had a great understanding of the game.

Rees gets the least love.


And a year later, I still say, "May the most effective QB win."

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Everyone needs to read Lou Somogyi's recent article on how ND fans HATED Tony Rice until the middle of the 1988 season. After the 1987 season, and even after the first couple games of the 1988 season, everyone clamored for Holtz to put in Kent Graham, a prototypical stud QB who threw "50-yard rainbows" with ease. Holtz stuck with Rice and the rest is history. If you don't subscribe to 247, it's worth signing up for the trial for.

I just don't get why people seem to think that Tommy Rees CANT be a successful QB for us. I don't really expect him to be the starter when fall camp wraps up, but if BK starts him, I'll assume it's because he gives us the best chance to win, as surprising as that will be. Tommy does have a lot of good qualities. The Tony Rice story teaches that you have to trust the coaches sometimes.

Do you believe this? He was the same reporter that went on about how Harrison Smith's game improved because he got a hair cut. I remember the Tony Rice days. Yes, there was controversy, but some was because of the overall offensive system, and some was simply a racial bias.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Why can't I stop reading this sh!t?

It is like arriving at the scene of a bad accident . . .

 

[Bogtrotter07]

He passed for 700 more yards than Robinson.

How did you forget that?

I know: The Derp-NDNation type post has infected this board.

How could he get worse? How could the Derp get worse?

About the seven hundred yards - Floyd, Eifert, Jones, etc. Especially Floyd and Eifert. Also, has anybody checked to see how many rushing yards versus passing yards each offense produced? Especially how much running production from quarterback each team produced?

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Go watch the Stanford and Florida State games. Our pass protection blew goats. The O-line has to get better. Watt consistently gets beat on stunts, Golic can't hold the line of scrimmage and Dever is getting beat on the edge, when he's not giving a free shot on missed assignments



I like the way Hendrix runs. I don't like the way he throws the football directly to linebackers standing 7 yards in front of him. There is good reason to question his peripheral vision.



We had 41 and 57 yards rushing against USC and Stanford. They made us one dimensional. That's whipping us.


You just compared a college sophomore to Peyton Manning?



No argument there. He's got to be stronger inside the pocket.



After getting knocked out of the game against Stanford, Rees completed his next four passes, and was sacked once. Doesn't fit your "inexcusable jitters" narrative. Go watch the game again. Herbstreit is pointing out the obvious: Stanford is dominating our pass protection and putting heavy pressure. Herbstret keeps pointing out the obvious.

There is no reason to criticize the offensive line. Last year: When Cave and Gray went out that was the middle; there were no problems before that, including Michigan, Michigan State, and USC. Rees picked his protection; teams like Stanford learned his tendencies and beat him at his own game. The biggest thing that ND fans will see this year is that we had one-dimensional coaching on the line and at running back. Period. This year we are going to have better talent, which is coached better, with a more balanced attack from a coordination standpoint.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

If you think a combined 98 yards rushing against USC and Stanford is consistent with "a great season in...run blocking", then you have a different standard than I do for ND offensive lines.

Personally, I think the O-line will improve in 2012.

Again, the stat not the context. We didn't run against USC, at all. I was at the game. My friends and I discussed how this may have been the most poorly called game we had seen. Again, we are first and goal going to tie it up, and the other guy, loses the handle, and voila an 87 yard defensive touchdown, giving sucks a fourteen point advantage . . .

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Sorry, I know it was redundant, all over again, but I just had to vent.

 

[ChiRish]

What matters most for the quarterbacks, above all, is the ability to not turn the ball over. Without turnovers, the offense moved rather effectively last year, especially without the drive killing redzone turnovers. So, like many a poster has alluded to, the guy who takes care of the football the best will get the job.

Therein lies the problem. How do you gauge protection of the ball in a practice scenario? Isn't that something that can only be truly judged once you're on the field against an opponent? I have a feeling that that was what happened to Dayne against USF... he had won the job, but once he got on the field in the first half the turnovers came and it flipped BK out.

It's going to be a tough call. I honestly can also see Rees winning out, but if he does, wouldn't mind seeing other guys come in as a change of pace, even if BK said he didn't want to do that too much. I don't concern myself with Tommy's arm strength that much - it's something that isn't as vitally important in BK's offense as taking care of the football.

I do question, however, whether Tommy will excel in this offense without being bailed out by Michael Floyd on every other play. How many times did Floyd, and to a certain extent Eifert, go up in traffic and bail out an underthrown Tommy ball? I just wonder how Rees will do this year where it will take more skill from the QB to make the offense function. This could also definitely be aided, as Bog mentioned, by a much more effectively ran, organized, and balanced offensive scheme.

And at the same time, does BK ignore the natural talent that sits behind Rees? My guess is that the Spring Game is going to be a huge indicator of where he feels the competition stands. It'll be one of the few times the teams go "live" until Fall Practice, and in that respect, the season opener against Navy.

I understand all the naysayers about Rees, and I'm definitely leaning more towards that bunch after watching terrible turnovers and QB play doom the ND season last year. But if Rees really is improved like people (and even Goodman) are hinting at, then give him the job. I honestly don't care who gets it as long as the guy puts points on the board and W's in the W/L column. At the end of the day that's all that matters.

 

[DillonHall]

If Kelly ever wants to win a national championship at ND, then he needs to find a playmaker at QB. If he settles for a manager QB who simply takes care of the ball, then ND will get their **** tossed against the SEC team they play.

 

[woolybug25]

If Kelly ever wants to win a national championship at ND, then he needs to find a playmaker at QB. If he settles for a manager QB who simply takes care of the ball, then ND will get their **** tossed against the SEC team they play.

Is that because the SEC has so many playmakers at QB?

 

[IrishLax]

Rees discusses hand size criticism on IrishEnvy.com

 

[JughedJones]

Man, I got punk'd with this thread up top.

Molnar talking about Dayne made me laugh. Well done if it was a joke.

 

[irishpat183]

"...and iffy CBs"

Uhhhh...no. We had terrible CB's.

 

[IrishLax]

"...and iffy CBs"

Uhhhh...no. We had terrible CB's.

No, we didn't. Robert Blanton played pretty darn well all year. Gary Gray, for all of his faults, was not "terrible." He wasn't even close to terrible. He was VERY consistent against the run. Everyone wants to take the Michigan game and say he "sucks" while ignoring that he played pretty darn solid in all of the other games in the year.

 

[Emcee77]

No, we didn't. Robert Blanton played pretty darn well all year. Gary Gray, for all of his faults, was not "terrible." He wasn't even close to terrible. He was VERY consistent against the run. Everyone wants to take the Michigan game and say he "sucks" while ignoring that he played pretty darn solid in all of the other games in the year.

Agree 100%.

 

[IrishLax]

This is every snap of Robert Blanton against MSU, all-Big Ten WR BJ Cunningham, and project #4/#5 QB off the board Kirk Cousins.

<object width="640" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/evK-42V0P-E?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/evK-42V0P-E?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="640" height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

Terrible, huh?

 

[Ndaccountant]

To me, it all comes down to this.

When the going gets tough, what do you fall back on? What is the one thing you do so well that it can get the team out of a jam.

At this point, we don't know what the fall back is for any of the QB's, which is troubling. However, to be fair, we have not seen enough from Golson, Hendrix or Gunner to know what that is. But Tommy, we have seen over 1 year of football from him. After 1+ seasons leading the team, what is his fall back?

If you are like me, you have a really hard time finding one? Arm strength? Nope. Moving the pocket or scrambling? Nope. Deadly accuracy? Nope. Really, all he has is Eifert and Floyd, and Floyd is now gone.

What makes this even worse is the BK tends to fall back on the pass when it gets tough. For better or for worse, that is the way it is. Even with improved decision making (less TO's), ND still will be hard pressed to beat an athletic, well coached D with Tommy back there.

BTW, compaing a "game manager" like the last few Bama QB's to Tommy is comparing apples to oranges. At Bama, combo of great defense and strong running game has propelled them. Under any Saban team, the QB is not the focus like it is with BK.

 

[TDHeysus]

Gary Gray, for all of his faults, was not "terrible." He wasn't even close to terrible. He was VERY consistent against the run.

I like Gary Gray as a player, and I can remember he played really good with supporting the run as well (he was studly against the run, as a CB). But that Michigan game, really 2 of the last 4 plays of that game, are what sticks in my head. Maybe because that Michigan loss last year hurt (leading with :30 sec left). Its probably unfair, but that is what jumps in my head when I think about Gary Gray (I know one game doesnt make a college career)

I have a similar situation with Duval Kamara, slipping on that slant route FTW against USC in JC's last year.

Its the image I have of those 2 players.

Jonas Gray, some may remember his fumble against USF, but I remember how that guy responded, and how he killed it all year long, only to get betrayed by an injury on Senior Day.

To me, it all comes down to this.

When the going gets tough, what do you fall back on?

....But Tommy, we have seen over 1 year of football from him. After 1+ seasons leading the team, what is his fall back?

Tommy's innate strength is poise, nothing seems to rattle that dude. Obviously a QB needs more than poise, but that is Tommy's strength, some QBs will never develop the poise that Tommy demostrates. I imagine its one of the factors in him not getting buried by other QBs this spring.

I say poise, BK says moxy

 

[koonja]

Blanton reminded me of a defensive version of Golden Tate. Just makes plays.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Blanton reminded me of a defensive version of Golden Tate. Just makes plays.

I'm too lazy to go back to link it, but didn't Mayock say of Blanton after the pro day that he would make a good saftey in the NFL? After hearing that, and re-watching the highlights, I tend to agree. He can cover, but I think Saftey would suit him well.

 

[Emcee77]

The key attribute for any spread QB is the ability to make quick, good decisions and get the ball out of his hand quickly. Tommy's decision-making could use some improvement, of course, but he has a quick release which allows him to get rid of the ball in a hurry without losing accuracy, and when teams rushed or played base I thought he was quite good, except for some dumb turnovers. He ran into trouble when teams realized they could drop back in coverage on him and let him make mistakes. I don't know how the idea took hold that the ONLY way to counter that tactic is to run for positive yards. Tommy just has to learn to move around a bit and buy time without taking a sack or being forced into throwing an INT. That's the sort of thing that QBs learn to do with experience. Jimmy Clausen and countless others learned to make smarter decisions and to move more cagily behind the line of scrimmage over the course of their careers, and I don't see how Tommy is so different.

So if the question is what are Tommy's strengths, he clearly has poise (as Heysus said above; I couldn't have put it better myself), quick release, and accuracy (at least on short and mid-range throws). He also is a great student of the game; he has a coach's son's mentality and by all accounts is great in the film room. For me, these attributes, especially the first and last, point to a guy who is going to improve with experience. I'm not saying I know it will happen, but I cannot understand how other people can be so sure it won't. Predictions as to what will happen if Tommy starts next year are simply premature. He could be quite good ... or he could be ****ty.

 

[jmoodie]

From a quick read of all the common criticisms and support of Tommy Rees, I think I can boil it down to the following:

Those who hope for a new face to show up at QB:

Tommy as has average arm strength, prone to mistakes, slow, prone to bad decisions, has very little physical upside or natural talent that would indicate potential for future growth

Those who think Tommy is pretty solid:

His overall numbers cumulative are good for historical ND measures, in the games he was worst his offensive line was bad, given time he is pretty good, he shakes off his mistakes well, he 'could' develop into something great since he's only a sophomore



To me this gets down to a few simple common themes:

1. He makes a lot of mistakes. And often at critical times.
2. And he would be a passable QB given the following: good wr's, excellent protection, and a good running game.

Regarding number two - literally 3/4 of all Division 1 QB's would be okay QB's then. The main defense of Rees always seems to include some version of the second point. The ability to make plays when protection breaks down is a key facet of the QB on ANY team. The occasional mistake due to the OL is understandable. But to have entire games given a pass b/c the OL was off is way too generous.

The reality is that Rees is a great QB to have on your roster. He's an accomplished back up QB who can win you games, but likely does not have the physical tools to compete with elite teams.

The question of our starting QB is a question of the team we want to be vs. the team we are. If Rees continues to be the starter, it's a sign that the team we are is basically an 8-5 team. It might find a way to get to 10 wins, but that team will get prison raped by a BCS level SEC team.

I don't know if any QB on our roster is the answer we need to be an elite team, but I do know that Rees is far more than likely not that guy. To start another QB is a sign, to me, of what we want to be. I firmly believe that is why Dayne started last year. Basically, we don't know that Dayne, Golson, Hendrix, Kiel are or were the answer we're looking for. But they are those who possess the physical tools that lead one to believe that can be the answer.

I think the world of Tommy, and I cheer for him to succeed, but I also think that he is what he is.

 

[Ndaccountant]

I like Gary Gray as a player, and I can remember he played really good with supporting the run as well (he was studly against the run, as a CB). But that Michigan game, really 2 of the last 4 plays of that game, are what sticks in my head. Maybe because that Michigan loss last year hurt (leading with :30 sec left). Its probably unfair, but that is what jumps in my head when I think about Gary Gray (I know one game doesnt make a college career)

I have a similar situation with Duval Kamara, slipping on that slant route FTW against USC in JC's last year.

Its the image I have of those 2 players.

Jonas Gray, some may remember his fumble against USF, but I remember how that guy responded, and how he killed it all year long, only to get betrayed by an injury on Senior Day.



Tommy's innate strength is poise, nothing seems to rattle that dude. Obviously a QB needs more than poise, but that is Tommy's strength, some QBs will never develop the poise that Tommy demostrates. I imagine its one of the factors in him not getting buried by other QBs this spring.

I say poise, BK says moxy

I think poise is needed, but is that really a fall back? They way I view it, to be a good qb, you need poise. But, just because you have poise, doesn't mean you are a good qb.

 

[Ndaccountant]

From a quick read of all the common criticisms and support of Tommy Rees, I think I can boil it down to the following:

Those who hope for a new face to show up at QB:

Tommy as has average arm strength, prone to mistakes, slow, prone to bad decisions, has very little physical upside or natural talent that would indicate potential for future growth

Those who think Tommy is pretty solid:

His overall numbers cumulative are good for historical ND measures, in the games he was worst his offensive line was bad, given time he is pretty good, he shakes off his mistakes well, he 'could' develop into something great since he's only a sophomore



To me this gets down to a few simple common themes:

1. He makes a lot of mistakes. And often at critical times.
2. And he would be a passable QB given the following: good wr's, excellent protection, and a good running game.

Regarding number two - literally 3/4 of all Division 1 QB's would be okay QB's then. The main defense of Rees always seems to include some version of the second point. The ability to make plays when protection breaks down is a key facet of the QB on ANY team. The occasional mistake due to the OL is understandable. But to have entire games given a pass b/c the OL was off is way too generous.

The reality is that Rees is a great QB to have on your roster. He's an accomplished back up QB who can win you games, but likely does not have the physical tools to compete with elite teams.

The question of our starting QB is a question of the team we want to be vs. the team we are. If Rees continues to be the starter, it's a sign that the team we are is basically an 8-5 team. It might find a way to get to 10 wins, but that team will get prison raped by a BCS level SEC team.

I don't know if any QB on our roster is the answer we need to be an elite team, but I do know that Rees is far more than likely not that guy. To start another QB is a sign, to me, of what we want to be. I firmly believe that is why Dayne started last year. Basically, we don't know that Dayne, Golson, Hendrix, Kiel are or were the answer we're looking for. But they are those who possess the physical tools that lead one to believe that can be the answer.

I think the world of Tommy, and I cheer for him to succeed, but I also think that he is what he is.

great points and I wanted to just expand a little on the bolded text.

For people that make the argument about the OL, they need to factor in that the games the OL wasn't top notch, was against good defenses. One could make the argument that when the OL played it well, it was against average or bad defenses. So, to point to the games that the OL was bad and place it on the OL but when the offense was good, say it was because of Tommy, is very inconsistant.

 

[SoIll]

random note..does TR remind any of you of graham harrell? I understand graham was deadly in Leach's spread offense.. but athleticism wise and throwing mechanics, He just reminds me of graham.. Random thought... sorry I am extremely bored...

by the way...Team Hendrix

 

[irishpat183]

No, we didn't. Robert Blanton played pretty darn well all year. Gary Gray, for all of his faults, was not "terrible." He wasn't even close to terrible. He was VERY consistent against the run. Everyone wants to take the Michigan game and say he "sucks" while ignoring that he played pretty darn solid in all of the other games in the year.

Sorry, we can agree to disagree. Gray(A measely 2 picks and only about 4 passes defended and misplayed tons of balls) was awful last season. It wasn't just the mich game. He was nice in run support...but that's just an excuse people use when their guys can't cover "He's a good tackler"....I want my CB's more like Deion.

And Blanton was Ok.....He's jsut a hard nosed football player. But he also left more to be desired in coverage (2 picks and 6 passes defended).

I know stats don't tell the whole story...but come on. You need more than that outta your starting cover guys.

I should've expanded and said our entire secondary wasn't all that impressive. I think it's our biggest weakness. We were 38th in pass d last year and only had 8 picks.....

So we really didn't have "playmakers" as many of you would like to think. Solid guys...but don't kid yourselves we didn't have "playmakers". HA.

And that's what we're missing. That's why I get so heated when guys like Darby and Shep don't commit...because we need THOSE kinds of athletes.

 

[IrishLax]

Sorry, we can agree to disagree. Gray(A measely 2 picks and only about 4 passes defended and misplayed tons of balls) was awful last season. It wasn't just the mich game. He was nice in run support...but that's just an excuse people use when their guys can't cover "He's a good tackler"....I want my CB's more like Deion.

And Blanton was Ok.....He's jsut a hard nosed football player. But he also left more to be desired in coverage (2 picks and 6 passes defended).

I know stats don't tell the whole story...but come on. You need more than that outta your starting cover guys.

I should've expanded and said our entire secondary wasn't all that impressive. I think it's our biggest weakness. We were 38th in pass d last year and only had 8 picks.....

So we really didn't have "playmakers" as many of you would like to think. Solid guys...but don't kid yourselves we didn't have "playmakers". HA.

And that's what we're missing. That's why I get so heated when guys like Darby and Shep don't commit...because we need THOSE kinds of athletes.

See, if you had said that I would've totally agreed. That's why I called them "iffy." I also could've used the word "suspect." But terrible? Terrible is a gross overstatement.

Blanton played at a very high level all year. So did Smith. Slaughter had moments of brilliance. Zeke Motta and Gary Gray left a lot to be desired. Both have fatal flaws (foot speed for Zeke, ability to play the ball in the air for Gray). They were both quite inconsistent and "terrible" at times. But truly terrible is Oklahoma's DBs against Oklahoma State or Washington against Baylor or Clemson against West Virginia.

More often than he failed, Gary Gray succeeded last year. It was the timing and manner of his failures that gives him a bad wrap. I still bet he gets invited to NFL camps and might even make a roster with some luck.