The Notre Dame Offense vs Modern Defenses

[Old Man Mike]

I hope that this thread will be useful to us folks who are less adept at Offense Analysis than others on the board, and I was motivated to toss it out there since I could use our better football peoples' insights. It would also be nice if we talked football here rather than objecting to Coach's play-calling, since that will derail this thread like it always does.

Here's what I think that I see, but honestly don't have much of a clue: As the season has progressed, a few things have changed from the first few games.

A). Defensive coordinators seem to think that if they don't stack the box, Notre Dame will rush their eyes out and they cannot win the game;
B). They also recognize that they can almost never get away with single coverage on Will Fuller, or they will see the number 7 from the backside three times a game in the end zone;
C). So, they give support to their corner over the top, and not only NOT play simple base upfront, but usually rush at least five and often six while keeping one safety fairly close or blitzing. They jump around from one type of sell-out-vs-the-run-defense to another to try to confuse Kizer enough to get stops. Put another way, they do not believe that the "other" receivers can beat them in the long run, and hope that Kizer cannot. Sometimes that works. We have survived because Kizer [having to carry the load far more than one would like] has been up to the task.

Kelly's normal response to this would, under ideal circumstances, beat this strategy by utilizing tight ends in both run-blocking, blitz pick-up, and mid-range receiving. BUT, when Smythe went down, we no longer had a TE who could both run-block AND receive. AND when Luatua got dinged, we weren't any good at double TE sets [or "H-Back" play] so that weapon disappeared. The diminution of "sixth blocker" availabilities has meant that the Iron Five Mountains often cannot contain all the opponents who need to be blocked. A TE [or two] needs to do some of this. This also places a priority on the RB blocking for Kizer.

OK. That's my really amateurish view as to why these defenses seem to be catching up to our offense a bit. I've put that out there in the hopes that these ideas are dismantled and replaced with more insightful analyses, so that I can watch the last few games more intelligently.

 

[BearGB]

Bumping this so I remember to try to add to conversation later. This is way too good of a forum topic to not be on the front page for a couple of days.

 

[kmoose]

I think what is happening is that teams are loading the box presnap, then dropping 7 or 8 into coverage at the snap. Kelly has never hidden that each play has a run/pass option. The QB has both a run play, and a pass play, that he can run out of the formation. If the call in the huddle is a pass play, then the defense lines up with two deep safeties and LBs playing deep, the QB will audible into the run call. Or the opposite if the run play is called in the huddle and the defense lines up with 8 guys in the box. I think opposing DCs are just taking advantage of Kizer's inexperience and disguising their coverages, causing Kizer to think they are loading up against the run, then bailing into coverage. Or vice versa.

 

[Wild Bill]

I'm always amazed when I see Fuller in single coverage. I mean, it's going to happen at some point but it's just ridiculous how many times this kid has ran down the field with some poor asshole trying to cover him one on one the last two years.

If I'm a D coordinator prepping for ND, I would roll coverage to Fuller's side the entire day and I would not bring an extra man into the box to stop the run. If Prosise and Adams take a few extra yards on their 25 carries, so be it. That safety is far more valuable to me if he's preventing Fuller from popping the top off my secondary or if he's preventing a slot receiver from finding a seam for a big chunk of yardage. Make them sustain drives and execute in the red zone. Those two things have proven to be far more difficult for this offense than finding the big play or a chunk of yardage when they need it most.

 

[kmoose]

I'm always amazed when I see Fuller in single coverage. I mean, it's going to happen at some point but it's just ridiculous how many times this kid has ran down the field with some poor asshole trying to cover him one on one the last two years.

If I'm a D coordinator prepping for ND, I would roll coverage to Fuller's side the entire day and I would not bring an extra man into the box to stop the run. If Prosise and Adams take a few extra yards on their 25 carries, so be it. That safety is far more valuable to me if he's preventing Fuller from popping the top off my secondary or if he's preventing a slot receiver from finding a seam for a big chunk of yardage. Make them sustain drives and execute in the red zone. Those two things have proven to be far more difficult for this offense than finding the big play or a chunk of yardage when they need it most.

never mind........ I misread your post, sorry.

 

[Old Man Mike]

What I'm most concerned about is whether the defensive coordinators have seen enough of us to have figured us out, or if our various injuries have chipped away at what we can do to oppose their schemes.

USC couldn't stop either our run or our pass. We rolled them for 476 yards, 10.5 per pass, and 6.1 per run. ... an offensive thrashing.

Temple despite appearances didn't have too much better luck. We rolled for 467 total, 8.3 per pass, and 5.4 per run. Temple was a very good defense, and if we hadn't hurt them so badly [the coach said that six starters couldn't practice due to the beating the following Monday], they'd still be good.

Pitt decided to shut down the run, of which part of that was Prosise and Luatua feeling the wear and tear no doubt, and we fell back to 437 total yards and 4.2 yards per rush. Kizer still pierced them for 10.1 per pass however, and we were OK.

Then comes Wake. Our offensive production tanks. 282 total yards; 5.8 yards per pass and only 111 yards passing. Rushing looks OK with 171, but 98 on one play still makes one think that this too was generally shut down. Did Wake do this, or did we? I noticed that Coach was in desperation mode trying to fix the blocking problems by basically starting Hounshell all game. Without "attention-to-detail" on pass blocking by RBs [no Prosise] and TEs [dinged Luatua], we failed to provide protection consistently. Or was it defensive scheme?

I am hoping obviously that whatever this is will not linger.

 

[phork]

Frankly I believe the game plan vs Wake was to just shut it down. Do enough for a W and get ready for Stanford.

 

[kmoose]

What I'm most concerned about is whether the defensive coordinators have seen enough of us to have figured us out, or if our various injuries have chipped away at what we can do to oppose their schemes.

USC couldn't stop either our run or our pass. We rolled them for 476 yards, 10.5 per pass, and 6.1 per run. ... an offensive thrashing.

Temple despite appearances didn't have too much better luck. We rolled for 467 total, 8.3 per pass, and 5.4 per run. Temple was a very good defense, and if we hadn't hurt them so badly [the coach said that six starters couldn't practice due to the beating the following Monday], they'd still be good.

Pitt decided to shut down the run, of which part of that was Prosise and Luatua feeling the wear and tear no doubt, and we fell back to 437 total yards and 4.2 yards per rush. Kizer still pierced them for 10.1 per pass however, and we were OK.

Then comes Wake. Our offensive production tanks. 282 total yards; 5.8 yards per pass and only 111 yards passing. Rushing looks OK with 171, but 98 on one play still makes one think that this too was generally shut down. Did Wake do this, or did we? I noticed that Coach was in desperation mode trying to fix the blocking problems by basically starting Hounshell all game. Without "attention-to-detail" on pass blocking by RBs [no Prosise] and TEs [dinged Luatua], we failed to provide protection consistently. Or was it defensive scheme?

I am hoping obviously that whatever this is will not linger.

I didn't get to watch the game as closely as I normally do, this past weekend. I was at an ND Club gamewatch, so I was doing as much socializing as I was, watching. But I did listen to the post game show, and sent in a question..... which Jack(Nolan) read on the air and he and Reggie(Brooks) both answered. I noticed that Kizer had been averaging about 7 runs per game this season. But last weekend, he was credited with 13 carries. That's not a lot for a QB who is a dual threat, but it is almost double his normal average. So I asked why they though that was............ did Kelly just give him more of a green light to take off if he saw an opening, or did Wake Forest just do that good a job of covering, that he couldn't find anyone open and had to run. Reggie's answer was that, to him, it looked like Wake had decided that they were not going to allow Josh Adams to beat them with his feet. So they did a lot more crashing down on the zone read, leaving Kizer to read QB run. I guess the idea was that Kizer, while a fine runner, was not the same threat to break off a long run. Not that he couldn't, but that the odds were less than if Adams got the ball. So maybe that is what caused it?

 

[clashmore_jon]

maybe this is fringing too much on talking about playcalling, but i'm curious what the solution is, in the case that we have been 'figured out'. I don't know football beyond a fans perspective, but there has to be a new wrinkle we can show to force a defense away from doing what they want to do? Clemson game for instance, we had a ton of luck with crossing routes over the middle...i wonder if coach has some maybe quick screens over the top or similar tee'd up that he can use to burn the next group that gets too aggressive and thinks they have us figured out. Honestly from a dummy's perspective it doesnt seem like anything we've been doing is all that complicated, and it seems likely that we've got a couple things up our sleeve, no?

 

[Old Man Mike]

Possibly at least some factor in this. My old jock intuition has been that Deshone isn't very comfortable with the read option and sort of guesses as to whether to hand it or keep it. If true, and I was a DC, I'd try to force as much of that as I could, since we do not seem to be real competent at it.

 

[kmoose]

maybe this is fringing too much on talking about playcalling, but i'm curious what the solution is, in the case that we have been 'figured out'. I don't know football beyond a fans perspective, but there has to be a new wrinkle we can show to force a defense away from doing what they want to do? Clemson game for instance, we had a ton of luck with crossing routes over the middle...i wonder if coach has some maybe quick screens over the top or similar tee'd up that he can use to burn the next group that gets too aggressive and thinks they have us figured out. Honestly from a dummy's perspective it doesnt seem like anything we've been doing is all that complicated, and it seems likely that we've got a couple things up our sleeve, no?

Probably. The other thing that you need to consider is that maybe Wake just matched up well enough to do some things defensively that other teams will NOT be able to do. Temple's corners are pretty good. Neither is likely to be an All-American, but they are good enough to play 1v1 on most college receivers not named Will Fuller. And they tried to play 1v1 on him here and there. So Temple could do some things with their safeties that maybe other teams won't be able to do.

 

[Wild Bill]

maybe this is fringing too much on talking about playcalling, but i'm curious what the solution is, in the case that we have been 'figured out'. I don't know football beyond a fans perspective, but there has to be a new wrinkle we can show to force a defense away from doing what they want to do? Clemson game for instance, we had a ton of luck with crossing routes over the middle...i wonder if coach has some maybe quick screens over the top or similar tee'd up that he can use to burn the next group that gets too aggressive and thinks they have us figured out. Honestly from a dummy's perspective it doesnt seem like anything we've been doing is all that complicated, and it seems likely that we've got a couple things up our sleeve, no?

A college coordinator can figure out an offense or tendency but it doesn't necessarily follow that he can stop it with his roster. College football works a bit different than the NFL in this regard. ND just has better horses than most teams on our schedule or in the country. To an extent, Ronnie Stanley could tell the defensive end what he's going to do to him and still do it once the ball is snapped. He's just that much better than the guy across from him (we don't enjoy that type of mismatch all around the field, I'm just making a point with Stanley).

That said, I think the film on Kizer is helping some teams out, i.e., that we don't want to run him (maybe that's why Kelly ran him more on Saturday...to break the tendency), he's patient in the pocket, whether he's better throwing against a zone or man, etc.

 

[anarin]

Frankly I believe the game plan vs Wake was to just shut it down. Do enough for a W and get ready for Stanford.

Or maybe with an extra week of practice wake was able to put in a great defensive plan?

I would bet that's closer to reality.

 

[Chi_IRISH]

Probably. The other thing that you need to consider is that maybe Wake just matched up well enough to do some things defensively that other teams will NOT be able to do. Temple's corners are pretty good. Neither is likely to be an All-American, but they are good enough to play 1v1 on most college receivers not named Will Fuller. And they tried to play 1v1 on him here and there. So Temple could do some things with their safeties that maybe other teams won't be able to do.

I think one of the hardest things to do is question the initial play calling of a game. These just like all coaches are privy to so much game tape, that early on they try to exploit weakness based on previous tendencies. The best coaching is done with constant adjustments made throughout the game. This is were at times, personally, I think BK does an "OK" job. Again based solely on pervious tendencies a coach has a game plan, but I feel arrogance of being out coached at times plays a role in not adjusting. This is the human side of coaching.

As far as the read option is concerned, as long as you are not out manned in the box by 2 or more a run should go. You are taught to leave the end man on the LOS alone, in order for the QB to read him. This takes tons of time and practice, and to get it rolling well it tends to take great tempo. We speed the game up at times, but with the multiple formations we run it isn't easy. Ideally when you have a team "loading" the box you need an in-line TE to help with the blocking scheme. This obviously limits pass catching ability.

As far as Will Fuller is concerned, I cant imagine anyone not rolling coverage to his side the rest of the year. Again for our sake hopefully arrogance take over. The beautiful thing with this offense is with the emergence of Tory Hunter, CJ, and Adams it is becoming even more dangerous. We have to also take in consideration that DK is still learning, and the game will continue to slow down for him in games/years to come. I'm super optimistic about the future of this offense. It may end up becoming one of the best in the NCAA in years to come.

Sorry for being all over the place! Hopefully we stay in the top 4, and the big 12 beats the crap out of each other the rest of the way!

 

[NCDomer]

Wake has seemingly played most teams rather well this year outside of UNC and NC State. It seems like they tend to lose because team that stick to their run game can impose their will on Wake's undersized DLs. Very few teams have had great passing games against Wake. They largely outplayed FSU earlier in the year, though that was without Cook for a large part of the game after he left with an injury following a 94-yard TD.

 

[NDdomer2]

Possibly at least some factor in this. My old jock intuition has been that Deshone isn't very comfortable with the read option and sort of guesses as to whether to hand it or keep it. If true, and I was a DC, I'd try to force as much of that as I could, since we do not seem to be real competent at it.

I'm still not convinced we call much true read option. I believe most are called gives/keeps with an occasional true read. Given that Kizer hadn't much meaningful practice reps with the 1s until this summer, I'm inclined to believe the above.

I also thought I read somewhere at beginning of year that Malik was the first qb under Kelly to run true reads on a regular basis.

To your other points, our offense has missed a true receiving TE threat. As far as the wake game, I think with us having Adams only really limited what we could do. Stop the run and double up on Fuller. No other homerun threats existed.

 

[Irish#1]

maybe this is fringing too much on talking about playcalling, but i'm curious what the solution is, in the case that we have been 'figured out'. I don't know football beyond a fans perspective, but there has to be a new wrinkle we can show to force a defense away from doing what they want to do? Clemson game for instance, we had a ton of luck with crossing routes over the middle...i wonder if coach has some maybe quick screens over the top or similar tee'd up that he can use to burn the next group that gets too aggressive and thinks they have us figured out. Honestly from a dummy's perspective it doesnt seem like anything we've been doing is all that complicated, and it seems likely that we've got a couple things up our sleeve, no?

One way to counter stacking the box is to run more counters or misdirection. Let the D take themselves out of the play. That means less zone blocking which we've been using a lot.