Should BVG Be Fired?

[IRISH in MT]

No, I think losing BK would set us back too much for that trade off. Bk has seemed to do a good job with crisis management during his tenure, overall that is. He's able to look at everything from a big picture perspective and figure out what he needs to dedicate more time to. Usually that brings success. I wholeheartedly think the defense can continue to get better with BVG as the DC, it will just be less about him and more about outside input.

I agree Lucky. At ND, BK has learned to swallow his pride and seek outside counsel which has only helped improve him as a coach and improve the program. I think the defense has shown brilliance and domination at times. The consistency just isn't there. BVG needs to swallow pride and keep it simple every game. I know he has to switch up tendencies and game plans week to week but stick to the calls that work instead of trying to use every play he has in his book at least once during the game.

Also, seems BVG likes to coach with dictatorship and authority. He needs to lighten up and be more fun with his players. When players play too tense in fear of getting screamed at for mistakes, they over think things and play slower.

 

[NDohio]

I agree Lucky. At ND, BK has learned to swallow his pride and seek outside counsel which has only helped improve him as a coach and improve the program. I think the defense has shown brilliance and domination at times. The consistency just isn't there. BVG needs to swallow pride and keep it simple every game. I know he has to switch up tendencies and game plans week to week but stick to the calls that work instead of trying to use every play he has in his book at least once during the game.

Also, seems BVG likes to coach with dictatorship and authority. He needs to lighten up and be more fun with his players. When players play too tense in fear of getting screamed at for mistakes, they over think things and play slower.

I know it's not his MO, but I wonder if it would be beneficial for BVG to go up in the booth. I do think there is something to the bold and while he is down on the field there is that extra intimidation factor. Having the coordinator on the field can be effective, but maybe in BVG's case it would be better for him to go up to the coaches box.

 

[Booslum31]

I often wondered how BVG is in the living room or when recruits come and visit. I rarly hear his name when a kid reflects on a visit. Just wonder if he is effective at connecting with kids and if kids aspire to play for him. Anyone have a take?

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

I know it's not his MO, but I wonder if it would be beneficial for BVG to go up in the booth. I do think there is something to the bold and while he is down on the field there is that extra intimidation factor. Having the coordinator on the field can be effective, but maybe in BVG's case it would be better for him to go up to the coaches box.

It bugs me that a DC is on the sideline. I think an OC might have the reason of making communication easier with the QB (who needs to implement his offensive scheme) but things like technique and motivation should be left to the position coaches who work more closely with the players on a day to day basis. The big picture guy should occupy himself with looking at the big picture.

 

[rocket66]

I often wondered how BVG is in the living room or when recruits come and visit. I rarly hear his name when a kid reflects on a visit. Just wonder if he is effective at connecting with kids and if kids aspire to play for him. Anyone have a take?

I feel the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[irishff1014]

It bugs me that a DC is on the sideline. I think an OC might have the reason of making communication easier with the QB (who needs to implement his offensive scheme) but things like technique and motivation should be left to the position coaches who work more closely with the players on a day to day basis. The big picture guy should occupy himself with looking at the big picture.

I personally don't think that's a big issue. If you have the right eyes upstairs this can be effective.

 

[Ndaccountant]

If BVG was to be let go, does BK stick with the theme of unique looking DC's? Diaco had his look, and BVG is obviously Uncle Rico. To continue this trend, I nominate Magnum PI, I mean Tom Selleck, I mean Frank Spaziani, on pure looks alone.

His recruiting pitch would be quite simple really......

Just the same as Bobby D waiting on your doorstep at 3 AM with a boombox.....

 

[dang227]

It bugs me that a DC is on the sideline. I think an OC might have the reason of making communication easier with the QB (who needs to implement his offensive scheme) but things like technique and motivation should be left to the position coaches who work more closely with the players on a day to day basis. The big picture guy should occupy himself with looking at the big picture.

I have done it both ways. It is amazing in the booth because you see everything. Sometimes on the field you can't see what happens especially back side. The problem in the booth is communicating with the players and making sure your point gets across. The must position that needs to be in the box is the secondary coach. Some coordinators prefer the box, some prefer the field. Even though the box is great, I missed the emotion of the game that comes with being on the sideline.

 

[Irish Insanity]

BVG in the booth as opposed to on the sidelines isn't gonna change how difficult his D is to learn. It isn't gonna change him sitting a freshman AA for a someone half your D lineman can out run. It isn't gonna change a D lineman dropping in to coverage 30% of the time.

 

[Irish YJ]

I feel the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ya mean fist pumps don't go over well in the living room?

 

[kmoose]

BVG in the booth as opposed to on the sidelines isn't gonna change how difficult his D is to learn. It isn't gonna change him sitting a freshman AA for a someone half your D lineman can out run. It isn't gonna change a D lineman dropping in to coverage 30% of the time.

Some of you guys act like VanGorder is the only DC doing this in college football. I saw it a lot, this year, from quite a few different teams.

And no one has said that the Defense is too difficult for these kids to learn, or that that was causing issues on the field this year. People have said that his defense is sophisticated, and there have been issues on the field; but people have just kind of welded those two separate statements together to form some kind of everlasting truth...

 

[Irish YJ]

Some of you guys act like VanGorder is the only DC doing this in college football. I saw it a lot, this year, from quite a few different teams.

And no one has said that the Defense is too difficult for these kids to learn, or that that was causing issues on the field this year. People have said that his defense is sophisticated, and there have been issues on the field; but people have just kind of welded those two separate statements together to form some kind of everlasting truth...

Not going to spend the time searching, but one player did say something to the effect that learning the D was rocket science. Outside of that, most infer that Joe starting over a more physically talented bench means others are struggling to learn the D. I'm no pro, and don't have your FB acumen, but (for me) watching our LBs and DBs (outside of Jaylon) seemed contrived and slow. Just didn't "feel" like kids were playing fast and instinctive.

 

[dang227]

Not going to spend the time searching, but one player did say something to the effect that learning the D was rocket science. Outside of that, most infer that Joe starting over a more physically talented bench means others are struggling to learn the D. I'm no pro, and don't have your FB acumen, but (for me) watching our LBs and DBs (outside of Jaylon) seemed contrived and slow. Just didn't "feel" like kids were playing fast and instinctive.

Redfield said it was easier to learn Chinese than BVG's defense.

 

[kmoose]

Redfield said it was easier to learn Chinese than BVG's defense.

I was pretty sure that that was said tongue in cheek. But even if it wasn't. The whole idea of the defense being too difficult to grasp has always been speculation. But because people don't want to believe that these kids might not be as talented as they think they are, it makes for a good scapegoat. I'm always skeptical of the star ratings......... most of those sites can actually scout how many kids a year? A couple hundred, MAYBE? I would certainly rather have a roster full of 5* guys than a roster full of 2* guys; but we know that the rating services miss on a BUNCH of kids every year.

 

[Irish YJ]

I was pretty sure that that was said tongue in cheek. But even if it wasn't. The whole idea of the defense being too difficult to grasp has always been speculation. But because people don't want to believe that these kids might not be as talented as they think they are, it makes for a good scapegoat. I'm always skeptical of the star ratings......... most of those sites can actually scout how many kids a year? A couple hundred, MAYBE? I would certainly rather have a roster full of 5* guys than a roster full of 2* guys; but we know that the rating services miss on a BUNCH of kids every year.

I'm also skeptical to an extent, but it is directionally correct. I think the problem I have, is that teams with far fewer stars seem to do better with less complex schemes. Maybe they have better teachers? A few people have mentioned Wisconsin. I know nothing about their scheme, so would appreciate your thoughts here.

 

[gkIrish]

Some of you guys act like VanGorder is the only DC doing this in college football. I saw it a lot, this year, from quite a few different teams.

And no one has said that the Defense is too difficult for these kids to learn, or that that was causing issues on the field this year. People have said that his defense is sophisticated, and there have been issues on the field; but people have just kind of welded those two separate statements together to form some kind of everlasting truth...

Which teams? Were any of them a top 25 defense?

 

[DillonHall]

Some of you guys act like VanGorder is the only DC doing this in college football. I saw it a lot, this year, from quite a few different teams.

This tactic is much more common in the NFL because so many professional defensive linemen are freakishly athletic. We simply didn't have the personnel

 

[kmoose]

Which teams? Were any of them a top 25 defense?

Alabama was one that I remember, in particular. Because I remember thinking, specifically.......... "Everyone at IE is bitching about VanGorder using zone blitzes, but here is arguably one of the top defenses of the past 5-ish years doing it."

 

[Irish Insanity]

My problem isn't the fact we do it, it's the fact that it's glaringly obvious it isn't very successful for us. I've watched every game this year. I'm sure there were more, but I can remember only 1 time it was successful. And several it wasn't.

 

[irishff1014]

Alabama was one that I remember, in particular. Because I remember thinking, specifically.......... "Everyone at IE is bitching about VanGorder using zone blitzes, but here is arguably one of the top defenses of the past 5-ish years doing it."

I can't believe people are putting Bama's defense and ND's in the same sentence.

 

[Irish YJ]

I can't believe people are putting Bama's defense and ND's in the same sentence.

Bama's DL is crazy athletic and if they are a 10, we are a 4ish.... They run their DTs (2 of them) as full backs in short yardage situations. Absolutely no comparison with our talent level along the defensive front.

 

[gkIrish]

I can't believe people are putting Bama's defense and ND's in the same sentence.

Bama's DL is crazy athletic and if they are a 10, we are a 4ish.... They run their DTs (2 of them) as full backs in short yardage situations. Absolutely no comparison with our talent level along the defensive front.

Beat me to it.

 

[kmoose]

I'm also skeptical to an extent, but it is directionally correct. I think the problem I have, is that teams with far fewer stars seem to do better with less complex schemes. Maybe they have better teachers? A few people have mentioned Wisconsin. I know nothing about their scheme, so would appreciate your thoughts here.

Didn't get to see a full Wisconsin game this year, so I couldn't really comment with any real insight. But a cursory look at the statistics shows that Wisconsin's Defense was significantly better than ND's. They gave up 13.7 points per game, while we gave up 24.1; they forced 21 turnovers to our 14; they had 28 sacks to our 25; they gave up 95.4 yards rushing per game to our 175.6; and they gave up 173.2 yards passing per game to our 197.1. What I can't speak on is how their recruiting on defense compares to ours. Lets face it: ND has been focused on recruiting the offensive side of the ball for the last few years. That's not to say they haven't gotten some big name defenders, but the focus has been on offense. So do you think they were really digging as deep, trying to find the diamonds in the rough, so to speak, on defense? They've done a good job of identifying them on offense. CJ Prosise, Everett Golson, Cam McDaniel, Nick Martin, and Josh Adams were all 3* guys on offense, who have made significant contributions to the team. I anticipate that Kelly now has his offense to the point where the staff can turn their focus in recruiting to the defense. I think we will see significant improvement. I can't guarantee it, but it is my best guess.

 

[irishff1014]

Didn't get to see a full Wisconsin game this year, so I couldn't really comment with any real insight. But a cursory look at the statistics shows that Wisconsin's Defense was significantly better than ND's. They gave up 13.7 points per game, while we gave up 24.1; they forced 21 turnovers to our 14; they had 28 sacks to our 25; they gave up 95.4 yards rushing per game to our 175.6; and they gave up 173.2 yards passing per game to our 197.1. What I can't speak on is how their recruiting on defense compares to ours. Lets face it: ND has been focused on recruiting the offensive side of the ball for the last few years. That's not to say they haven't gotten some big name defenders, but the focus has been on offense. So do you think they were really digging as deep, trying to find the diamonds in the rough, so to speak, on defense? They've done a good job of identifying them on offense. CJ Prosise, Everett Golson, Cam McDaniel, Nick Martin, and Josh Adams were all 3* guys on offense, who have made significant contributions to the team. I anticipate that Kelly now has his offense to the point where the staff can turn their focus in recruiting to the defense. I think we will see significant improvement. I can't guarantee it, but it is my best guess.

If this was the staffs outlook then they failed just on insight alone. Because that's no different then the Weis era. Kelly knew coming to ND the defense had to be a primary and here we sit with an average defense. It is a lot easier to make a 3 star Wr effective then a 3 star DB imo.

 

[kmoose]

If this was the staffs outlook then they failed just on insight alone. Because that's no different then the Weis era. Kelly knew coming to ND the defense had to be a primary and here we sit with an average defense. It is a lot easier to make a 3 star Wr effective then a 3 star DB imo.

Kelly is an offensive guy. If you expected him to focus on anything else before that, then you should have known better.

 

[dang227]

My problem is not that he runs zone blitzes. Every team has them in their package. It just seems like he constantly overuses them and either guesses wrong or runs them at the wrong time. Also, why we have so much pre-snap movement is beyond me. Our guys are more concerned with getting to a spot at the snap than reading what's going on. Also, our blitzes were often ineffectual with who was running them.

 

[GATTACA!]

Didn't get to see a full Wisconsin game this year, so I couldn't really comment with any real insight. But a cursory look at the statistics shows that Wisconsin's Defense was significantly better than ND's. They gave up 13.7 points per game, while we gave up 24.1; they forced 21 turnovers to our 14; they had 28 sacks to our 25; they gave up 95.4 yards rushing per game to our 175.6; and they gave up 173.2 yards passing per game to our 197.1. What I can't speak on is how their recruiting on defense compares to ours. Lets face it: ND has been focused on recruiting the offensive side of the ball for the last few years. That's not to say they haven't gotten some big name defenders, but the focus has been on offense. So do you think they were really digging as deep, trying to find the diamonds in the rough, so to speak, on defense? They've done a good job of identifying them on offense. CJ Prosise, Everett Golson, Cam McDaniel, Nick Martin, and Josh Adams were all 3* guys on offense, who have made significant contributions to the team. I anticipate that Kelly now has his offense to the point where the staff can turn their focus in recruiting to the defense. I think we will see significant improvement. I can't guarantee it, but it is my best guess.

Dude are you related to BVG or something? The lengths you are going to to defend the piss poor job he has done is astounding.

According to 247 the last four recruiting classes for BC have been ranked 62, 52, 87, and 71. NDs last 4 classes have been ranked 13, 11, 5, and 18. I don't care what the "focus" was of those classes, whatever that means, with that large of a margin those players are more talented by almost any measure. BVG simply isn't getting enough out of the talent he is being given. Can you imagine what the BC defense would have looked like if their last four classes were ranked an average of 11th.

Also it's not like it's one issue. Maybe you're right the system isn't too complex, BVG just hasn't had enough time. Maybe all of our players, that qualified for and are in good academic standing at one of the most prestigious colleges in the country are all too dumb. Maybe all of these 5 star players really aren't any good, they are worse than the 3 star players at schools performing better than ND. Even if this is all true, there are still issues all over. Our tackling is atrocious. Our DB's still can't locate and play the ball while it's in the air. Our front 4 gets zero push or pressure, unless we are blitzing. We have talent sitting on our bench behind inferior athletes for seemingly no reason since you are convinced it isn't a problem with the complexity of the system.

We're giving BVG a beautiful black angus filet mignon, and every saturday he turns it into a gross greasy meatloaf.

 

[NDRock]

Didn't get to see a full Wisconsin game this year, so I couldn't really comment with any real insight. But a cursory look at the statistics shows that Wisconsin's Defense was significantly better than ND's. They gave up 13.7 points per game, while we gave up 24.1; they forced 21 turnovers to our 14; they had 28 sacks to our 25; they gave up 95.4 yards rushing per game to our 175.6; and they gave up 173.2 yards passing per game to our 197.1. What I can't speak on is how their recruiting on defense compares to ours. Lets face it: ND has been focused on recruiting the offensive side of the ball for the last few years. That's not to say they haven't gotten some big name defenders, but the focus has been on offense. So do you think they were really digging as deep, trying to find the diamonds in the rough, so to speak, on defense? They've done a good job of identifying them on offense. CJ Prosise, Everett Golson, Cam McDaniel, Nick Martin, and Josh Adams were all 3* guys on offense, who have made significant contributions to the team. I anticipate that Kelly now has his offense to the point where the staff can turn their focus in recruiting to the defense. I think we will see significant improvement. I can't guarantee it, but it is my best guess.

I'm sorry but that is crazy. Kelly said in his first year that you can manufacture offense but need to recruit defense. If he really has only focused on the offense for the first six years than he is an idiot (which I do not believe him to be). The fact is that either through coaching, recruiting or a combination of the two, Kelly has failed to build a championship level defense in year six (though we did have one in year 3). I'm with the rest who think it would be great if there were any reports of BVG busting his butt recruiting. I've not seen any reports of that from people close to the program.

 

[Calabrese's People]

Didn't get to see a full Wisconsin game this year, so I couldn't really comment with any real insight. But a cursory look at the statistics shows that Wisconsin's Defense was significantly better than ND's. They gave up 13.7 points per game, while we gave up 24.1; they forced 21 turnovers to our 14; they had 28 sacks to our 25; they gave up 95.4 yards rushing per game to our 175.6; and they gave up 173.2 yards passing per game to our 197.1. What I can't speak on is how their recruiting on defense compares to ours. Lets face it: ND has been focused on recruiting the offensive side of the ball for the last few years. That's not to say they haven't gotten some big name defenders, but the focus has been on offense. So do you think they were really digging as deep, trying to find the diamonds in the rough, so to speak, on defense? They've done a good job of identifying them on offense. CJ Prosise, Everett Golson, Cam McDaniel, Nick Martin, and Josh Adams were all 3* guys on offense, who have made significant contributions to the team. I anticipate that Kelly now has his offense to the point where the staff can turn their focus in recruiting to the defense. I think we will see significant improvement. I can't guarantee it, but it is my best guess.

Would a Defensive Co-ordinator that doesnt shy away from recruiting help? Or do you think that BVG is going to try extra hard this year.....

 

[kmoose]

Would a Defensive Co-ordinator that doesnt shy away from recruiting help? Or do you think that BVG is going to try extra hard this year.....

I'm assuming that it's not all on BVG. I assume that the staff identifies kids that they want as a team. In other words.... I would imagine that each coach is given a certain block of kids, or maybe a block of high schools, or just a geographical area; and then they all get together in a room and each coach presents his list of guys(offense or defense) that ND "wants". Then the coaches pick their choices apart, and at some point a decision is made to pursue, or to pass on, each kid. If the coaches are instructed that offense is a priority, then they naturally will spend the majority of their time focusing on looking at offensive guys. There's only 24 hours in each day, so every hour spent looking for an offensive diamond in the rough is one less hour that they can spend looking for a defensive diamond in the rough.

That's based on a lot of assumption on my part, but I think it makes logical sense.