Sep 7 | Michigan

[Whiskeyjack]

It's so funny to see how quickly the UM fans are throwing Denard Robinson under the bus.

And the hyperbole makes it even better: "Gardner is 1,000,000 times better at scrambling".

Uh-huh.

Absolutely. Very common type of rationalization by their fans, but c'mon, Tom. Reach for a little self-awareness here.

Denard's ability to take it to the house on any given down made him a schematic nightmare for opposing DCs, which in turn opened up a lot of easy passing opportunities for him. Gardner's a better passer, but he's not even in the same galaxy as a runner, so he'll be much easier to scheme against. Having a better balance of passing and running skills definitely gives him a higher ceiling than Robinson (as a QB), but he ain't there yet.

I'm really glad we're facing Gardner tomorrow instead of Robinson. A Gardner-led offense with average to subpar skill talent around him is a lot less dangerous than the same offense with Robinson under center.

 

[IrishLax]

Oh, you mean the season where Brady tore his ACL and the Pats didn't make the playoffs?

With the exception of the record setting season, Cassell had comparable or better passing stats to Brady in his season with New England. In fact, Cassell had a better year than Brady had in any of his Super Bowl winning seasons.

If you actually think Brady "made" Bellichik and not the other way around, you are truly one of the dumbest people I've ever come across on the internet. And that's really saying something. There is not a single objective person with any knowledge of football that believes that. But I guess it's the Michigan company line?

Pats were 16-0 in the regular season the year before, and Cassell was throwing to a Randy Moss still in his prime and a Wes Welker that was just entering his prime. He threw for 21 TD's vs. 11 INT's throwing to those guys. Brady threw for 50 TD's and 8 picks the year before.

Fact: before Brady, Belicheck was a failure in Cleveland and 5-13 in New England.
Fact: Belicheck has never made the playoffs in New England without Tom Brady at QB.

Fact: The Patriots went 11-5 with Cassell, and that is good enough to make the playoffs basically every single year. Tom Brady has had many worse seasons at the helm. Including the year he returned where they went 10-6 with the same weapons as Cassell had in 2008.
Fact: Cassell had a comparable year in 2008 than Brady did in 2009 with the same weapons. And Matt Cassell SUCKS at football. So you can't have your cake and eat it too.
Fact: Brady has never made the playoffs without Bellichik (see what I did there?)

 

[Whiskeyjack]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Mr Corso has picked against <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23NotreDame&src=hash">#NotreDame</a> more than any school (13 times) He's 8-5. Picked ND only 5 times (4-1), loss was a biggie (BCS)</p>— Chris Fowler (@cbfowler) <a href="https://twitter.com/cbfowler/statuses/376001626617565184">September 6, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Kak7304]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>This happened. MT <a href="https://twitter.com/BillBeckTruth">@BillBeckTruth</a>: <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Michigan&src=hash">#Michigan</a> HC Brady Hoke just told <a href="https://twitter.com/dpshow">@dpshow</a> that he believes Johnny Manziel would play behind Devin Gardner.</p>— Rachel Terlep (@eTruth_Irish) <a href="https://twitter.com/eTruth_Irish/statuses/375996245891747840">September 6, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Just like Teddy Bridgewater would be backing up Tommy Rees at ND.

 

[IrishLax]

Not to mention his blatant ability to ignore the fact that Tom Brady was awful at Michigan. The entire time he was there the fans were calling for Henson to start. Brady was picked in the 6th round for a reason.

Kid you not, he had comparable stats/winning percentage to Tommy Rees as a sophmore when we many dubbed him "awful" and he lost his job to Golson. I touched on that in detail here: A Maturation: Tommy Rees | Irish Turning Point

It's also crazy to see Wetzel go in depth on the Bellichik/Kelly relationship. I mused on that quite a bit in the Tommy Rees article and how you could scheme to his strengths. Weird to see that's actually 100% what the coaches were doing and Bill even went so far as to watch film/instruct our guys.

 

[Cackalacky]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Mr Corso has picked against <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23NotreDame&src=hash">#NotreDame</a> more than any school (13 times) He's 8-5. Picked ND only 5 times (4-1), loss was a biggie (BCS)</p>— Chris Fowler (@cbfowler) <a href="https://twitter.com/cbfowler/statuses/376001626617565184">September 6, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

So ND is 9-9 with Corso picking a game involving ND. Nice. He's a flat .500.

I meant We're...

 

[irishfan]

So ND is 9-9 with Corso picking a game involving ND. Nice. He's a flat .500.

Fowler worded it poorly. Is he saying that or is he saying Corso is 12-6 and we're 9-9?

 

[wizards8507]

So ND is 9-9 with Corso picking a game involving ND. Nice. He's a flat .500.

No. ND is a flat .500. Corso is 12-6, or .667.

 

[wizards8507]

Fowler worded it poorly. Is he saying that or is he saying Corso is 12-6 and we're 9-9?

This.

 

[IrishLax]

Question... why are we categorizing Andrew Luck as a dual threat QB? He played in a pro set offense and was a pocket passer. Am I missing something (per usual)?

Yeah, Andrew Luck plays pro-style for sure, but he's still an athletic QB. He ran the same 40 as Newton and Theo Riddick. In the article, I spent some time discussing the difference between guys who scramble to pass and those that scramble to run. Each put pressure on a defense in a different way.

In Luck's best season, he had over 8 YPC and 450+ rushing yards with sacks included. That's better than Golson who last year had a bit under 300 rushing yards and a much worse YPC. I also would bet Luck runs a better 40 than Golson. The truth is Luck is every bit as athletic as a Russell Wilson or Cam Newton, but just doesn't tuck and run as often because he is a superior passer and would rather extend the play and look to throw.

 

[Cackalacky]

This.

yes. My fault. I meant ND is .500.

I need to just go ahead and start my drinking now.

 

[ryno 24]

Lax I get your rationale but Luck is not a dual threat qb. Just because one is athletic does not make them a dual threat qb. Golson is because that is part of his game. The Jets tried to run read option with Geno but he is not a dual threat and many people try to say Bridgewater is as well, but he is a pure pocket passer that is just athletic.

 

[woolybug25]

Yeah, Andrew Luck plays pro-style for sure, but he's still an athletic QB. He ran the same 40 as Newton and Theo Riddick. In the article, I spent some time discussing the difference between guys who scramble to pass and those that scramble to run. Each put pressure on a defense in a different way.

In Luck's best season, he had over 8 YPC and 450+ rushing yards with sacks included. That's better than Golson who last year had a bit under 300 rushing yards and a much worse YPC. I also would bet Luck runs a better 40 than Golson. The truth is Luck is every bit as athletic as a Russell Wilson or Cam Newton, but just doesn't tuck and run as often because he is a superior passer and would rather extend the play and look to throw.

I'll have to read the article to get it, me thinks. I still don't see why he is lumped in with Dual Threat, even if his stats suggest that he was good at scrambling. If we are looking at Kelly's record against "dual threat" QB's, shouldn't we be just looking at QB's playing in a DT system? Otherwise, the study would be "Kelly's record vs athletic QB's".

I'll read it when I have some time, i'm sure it will make sense then.

 

[IrishLax]

I'll have to read the article to get it, me thinks. I still don't see why he is lumped in with Dual Threat, even if his stats suggest that he was good at scrambling. If we are looking at Kelly's record against "dual threat" QB's, shouldn't we be just looking at QB's playing in a DT system? Otherwise, the study would be "Kelly's record vs athletic QB's".

I'll read it when I have some time, i'm sure it will make sense then.

We're not. We're looking at his record against mobile or athletic QBs. That was the premise of the article and how all the stats were derived. The title of the article is "Defending Mobile Quarterbacks" and the stat is presented as:

...Notre Dame has not been nearly as effective in containing athletic QBs. Against teams with a QB who can make plays with his feet, Notre Dame is a dreadful 5-8.

There is no argument that can be made for Luck not being athletic/mobile when he's athletic as hell by objective testing measures AND uses that on the field. As fantasy football players know, he even puts up solid rushing numbers in the NFL.

 

[ryno 24]

okay i thought your article was dual threat systems not athletic qbs. Makes more sense now

 

[irishroo]

I hate Michigan like Fielding Yost hated Catholics. Irish win big 45-13 and then proceed to burn the Big House to the ground, meaning I can die happy on Sunday.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Lax I get your rationale but Luck is not a dual threat qb. Just because one is athletic does not make them a dual threat qb. Golson is because that is part of his game. The Jets tried to run read option with Geno but he is not a dual threat and many people try to say Bridgewater is as well, but he is a pure pocket passer that is just athletic.

I'll have to read the article to get it, me thinks. I still don't see why he is lumped in with Dual Threat, even if his stats suggest that he was good at scrambling. If we are looking at Kelly's record against "dual threat" QB's, shouldn't we be just looking at QB's playing in a DT system? Otherwise, the study would be "Kelly's record vs athletic QB's".

I'll read it when I have some time, i'm sure it will make sense then.

The distinction is more "mobile v. immobile". Luck was mobile enough to scramble for 1st downs, which he did with regularity in all three games he played (and won) against us. That's the point of Lax's article; our W/L ratio against such QBs is alarmingly poor.

My counter-argument would be that most of those losses came against amazing athletes. Guys like Andrew Luck and Denard Robinson don't come around but once a decade or so, and we had the misfortune of having to play them repeatedly through painful transition seasons.

 

[PANDFAN]

The distinction is more "mobile v. immobile". Luck was mobile enough to scramble for 1st downs, which he did with regularity in all three games he played (and won) against us. That's the point of Lax's article; our W/L ratio against such QBs is alarmingly poor.

My counter-argument would be that most of those losses came against amazing athletes. Guys like Andrew Luck and Denard Robinson don't come around but once a decade or so, and we had the misfortune of having to play them repeatedly through painful transition seasons.

 

[wizards8507]

...Notre Dame has not been nearly as effective in containing athletic QBs. Against teams with a QB who can make plays with his feet, Notre Dame is a dreadful 5-8.

Is that much of a surprise though? All you're really saying is that "Notre Dame is better when playing against quarterbacks who suck at one aspect of the position."

I think you're making a false dichotomy. Being an "athlete" and a "passer" are not mutually exclusive. The conclusion that this whole conversation leads us to is that ND is worse against "athletes" than against "passers," when in reality many of the "athletes" are darn good "passers" as well. You can't just look at athletic versus non-athletic. The breakdown would really only be meaningful if it were more along the lines of:

1. Athletic, can't pass
2. Unathletic, can pass
3. Athletic and can pass
4. Unathlatic, can't pass

I think your numbers make ND look particularly bad against "athletic QBs" because #3 skews the sample.

 

[IrishLax]

Athletic is used 10 times in the article. Mobile is used 19 times.

Dual-threat is only used 5. 4 of those times specifically referring accurately to dual-threat QBs. Only 1 of those times erroneously used as a catch-all for mobile/athletic because I simply missed it. Although to be fair, many analysts use "dual threat" as a catch all for any QB that can hurt you with his feet. I don't agree with this, but it's done frequently:
ProFootballWeekly.com - Dual-threat Rodgers, precise Rivers head QB class

Hope that clarifies. Or you can just read the thing and get the general gist of it all.

 

[woolybug25]

The distinction is more "mobile v. immobile". Luck was mobile enough to scramble for 1st downs, which he did with regularity in all three games he played (and won) against us. That's the point of Lax's article; our W/L ratio against such QBs is alarmingly poor.

My counter-argument would be that most of those losses came against amazing athletes. Guys like Andrew Luck and Denard Robinson don't come around but once a decade or so, and we had the misfortune of having to play them repeatedly through painful transition seasons.

That's kinda objective isn't it? Is there a link to the article? I mean, Temple's QB was athletic, would he be considered?

Seems like a lot of guys that would be characterized as "athletic" could get ruled out because we stopped them, ie - made them look "unathletic".

So it's not about Dual Threat?

*EDIT - Lax posted as I was posting. Reading the article now.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

1. Athletic, can't pass
2. Unathletic, can pass
3. Athletic and can pass
4. Unathlatic, can't pass

I think your numbers make ND look particularly bad against "athletic QBs" because #3 skews the sample.

Put another way, #3 QBs have been very rare (though they're becoming more common), and they give everyone fits (see Manziel v. 'Bama). So the 5-8 record probably isn't indicative of a congenital weakness in Diaco's scheme, and it probably doesn't merit special concern unless one of our annual rivals develops a player like Andrew Luck again. And even then, it's a bit of a truism. Those sorts of players beat everyone.

 

[Irish#1]

He ran as fast of a 40 as our own Theo Riddick and Cam Newton and in his best season (2010) he averaged 8.2 YPC including sacks. What made him so dangerous is that like Aaron Rodgers he scrambles to throw instead of run. He gets you to commit and then hits the open guy rather than put his head down and pick up 3-8 yards. His elusiveness is quite underrated by most.

Lot of people don't realize that Luck is as fast as RGIII. People at the combine were surprised when their 40 times were almost identical. As a senior, his team was better balanced and he didn't have to run as often.

 

[ulukinatme]

So fun fact other than against Pitt (which went into double overtime) Kelly has not won a game in which he has given up more than 20 points. Kind of a scary proposition, but also that is how good his defenses have been

You mean in 2012, right?

59-33 Air Force 2011
45-21 Maryland 2011
44-20 Western Michigan 2010

 

[ryno 24]

No, Luck is as fast as Cam (still very impressive) RGIII runs a 4.4 or below. There is a significant difference.

 

[woolybug25]

Athletic is used 10 times in the article. Mobile is used 19 times.

Dual-threat is only used 5. 4 of those times specifically referring accurately to dual-threat QBs. Only 1 of those times erroneously used as a catch-all for mobile/athletic because I simply missed it. Although to be fair, many analysts use "dual threat" as a catch all for any QB that can hurt you with his feet. I don't agree with this, but it's done frequently:
ProFootballWeekly.com - Dual-threat Rodgers, precise Rivers head QB class

Hope that clarifies. Or you can just read the thing and get the general gist of it all.

Great job, Lax. I really enjoyed that article.

That being said, I still have some questions in the reasoning of your 5-8 record statement. Trying to wrap my head around how subjective this number actually is. The article doesn't specifically list the games. If it's not too much trouble, can you tell me what teams made up the 5-8 record?

Thanks

 

[IrishLax]

Is that much of a surprise though? All you're really saying is that "Notre Dame is better when playing against quarterbacks who suck at one aspect of the position."

Sure? But Peyton Manning sucks at an aspect of the position?

I think you're making a false dichotomy. Being an "athlete" and a "passer" are not mutually exclusive. The conclusion that this whole conversation leads us to is that ND is worse against "athletes" than against "passers," when in reality many of the "athletes" are darn good "passers" as well. You can't just look at athletic versus non-athletic. The breakdown would really only be meaningful if it were more along the lines of:

1. Athletic, can't pass
2. Unathletic, can pass
3. Athletic and can pass
4. Unathlatic, can't pass

I think your numbers make ND look particularly bad against "athletic QBs" because #3 skews the sample.

Yeah..... that's actually not at all what I'm doing. In fact it is literally the opposite. I'm done discussing this with people who obviously didn't read it, because most of these question are resolved by... you know... reading what was actually written.

A very large portion of the article is dedicated to detailing the different types of mobile quarterbacks and how each presents different challenges. Even so, I had to cut a full page that went into excruciating detail on the different types of schemes for using a dual-threat quarterback versus those QBs who play in a pro-style or spread offense where there are no/few designed runs... and how within that subset, some quarterbacks use their athleticism to extend plays and pass the ball, and others lean towards tucking and running.

Heck, Gardner plays in a pro-style offense and has minimal designed runs... but is a huge threat to scramble. How would you classify him? At the end of the day it all becomes splitting hairs and debatable nomenclature.

 

[GoldenIsThyFame]

Finebaum is such an asshat. Why is this guy on TV? They do this big lead in to ND vs Michigan and his analysis is, " Yeah I'll watch. I mean there is nothing else on tomorrow night." They do a Miami vs Florida intro as well and he says "after this year they won't play again."

Great insight Paul.

 

[ryno 24]

You mean in 2012, right?

59-33 Air Force 2011
45-21 Maryland 2011
44-20 Western Michigan 2010

I forgot about Air Force and Maryland but I meant his entire ND career. I said when we gave up more than 20. It is not a good sign when we give up more than 20 though.

 

[Kak7304]

This whole debate reminds me of the time a Weis defense shut out a Colin Kaepernick led offense. I'm still trying to figure that one out.