Notre Dame Football Forum

2008 Elite Selection Playoff: Week Seven

2008-10-12T13:53:00.008-05:00

Elite Selection Playoff

After another weekend of losses for teams at the top has resulted in the Texas Longhorns emerging as the deserving number one in the ESP (for an explanation go here). The Longhorns sit atop all three ESP components, including the AV computer ranking (see below).

AV Computer Ranking

As mentioned above, the AV computer ranking has Texas in first, followed closely by Alabama. Trailing a bit further are the Oklahoma State Cowboys.

Strength of Schedule

Nebraska has taken over the most difficult schedule spot , followed closely by the Washington Huskies. After playing the toughest schedule in the country last year, Washington is following it up again this season with a daunting gauntlet of teams. Tulsa, BYU, and Ball State (not shown) are competing for the easiest schedule in the country. The Fighting Irish finish week seven with the 52nd ranked schedule. The details of quality wins/losses, adjusted win percentage, and margin of victory aren't shown in the interest of brevity.

Notre Dame vs. North Carolina: Keys To An Irish Win

2008-10-09T21:06:00.003-05:00

Saturday Notre Dame takes their second road trip of the year fulfilling their part of a home/away series with North Carolina.

North Carolina head coach Butch Davis has the Tar Heels pointed in the right direction, fielding a talented, albeit young, team. The Tar Heels don’t necessarily impress in the statistics columns, but have four wins and only a single loss to go along with a top 25 ranking. Relying on opportunistic play, nearly half of North Carolina’s points have come off turnovers and special teams.

Despite losing the time of possession battle by nearly six minutes a game, the Tar Heels average over 30 points a game, mostly winning the second and third quarters. Combined that with a defense giving up under 20 points per game and you have the recipe for 4-1.

On offense a strong receiving corps is led by seniors Brandon Tate and Hakeem Nicks. Both have the ability to stretch the field and Tate is also a dangerous return specialist. North Carolina is strong inside the red zone converting 55 percent of their appearances into touchdowns and 75 percent into scores. Additionally, the offensive line has only surrendered six sacks through five games.

On defense the Tar Heels frequently drop seven and rely on a stout front four to generate pressure on opposing quarterbacks. Having seven defenders in coverage has worked well, as the defense leads the nation with 12 interceptions on the year. Despite success in other areas, the defense has been generous in the red zone, allowing 53 percent of opponents’ opportunities to result in touchdowns and 84 percent in points.

Against such an opportunistic team Notre Dame must protect the football and play well on special teams, but the remaining keys to winning are more subtle.

Offense

1. Patience, patience, patience.

The Notre Dame offense must exercise patience, both in play calling and execution. The Tar Heels have an opportunistic defense that rushes four, drops seven into coverage, and forces opposing offenses to consistently execute to move the ball down the field.

Offensive coordinator Mike Haywood and quarterback Jimmy Clausen must take what the Tar Heel defense gives. Notre Dame has a tendency to take shots down field, evident by the fact that less than nine percent of the offensive plays have resulted in over 44 percent of the total yards. Against a defense that keeps everything in front of them, this won’t work well.

Additionally, it will take consistent execution, and a lack of mistakes to move the ball into scoring position. Clausen can’t force things and must continue to improve checking down to short routes. Hopefully the turnovers and mistake-prone play of the Michigan State and San Diego State games are gone for good.

2. Win the one-on-one’s.

The Irish offensive line has been exceptional protecting the quarterback this season. However, North Carolina’s defensive line will be a stiff test. The Tar Heels’ front four are big, athletic, and strong. Since there won’t be a lot of blitzing, pass protection will come down to winning matchups with the defensive line.

3. Score in the red zone.

It seems like an obvious key to winning (and it is), but the “bend but don’t break” defense North Carolina employs is an ideal match-up for an offense that lives on the big play. If the Tar Heels prevent big scores the Irish will be forced to work on a short field when they reach the red zone. Against a defense that drops seven there will be precious few windows in the passing game.

Notre Dame must prove they can run the ball in order to loosen up the defense and score points. A vertical passing game doesn’t work with little real estate to stretch the field. Additionally, the Irish must be competent in the kicking game. Otherwise, moving the ball into the red zone will be for naught.

Defense

1. Defend against the long ball.

For the first time all year the Irish do not have a distinct advantage matching up with the opposing receivers. North Carolina has at least two down field threats and they like to use them.

It will be critical for the Irish defense to get home early on blitzes. There will be one-on-one matchups down the field and Notre Dame’s secondary won’t win them all. When North Carolina calls a max protect pass to take a shot, the Irish must pressure the quarterback.

2. Force one-dimension.

North Carolina isn’t exceptional running or passing the ball. If the Irish defense can take one of these two away, it will be a huge advantage. Conversely, if Notre Dame’s defense allows the Tar Heel offense to continually mix in the run and pass, they could be in for a long day.

3. Don’t give any help.

While the Irish defense has committed very few penalties in 2008, the ones they do commit are remarkably untimely. The Tar Heel offense lives off momentum, not consistency. Giving first downs via penalty only adds fuel to the fire.

Additionally, Notre Dame has been able to force opponents into third and long a very high percentage of the time, only to allow a big play to convert the first down. Against North Carolina this must be remedied.

In short, the Notre Dame defense must make the Tar Heels work for everything, yards, first downs, and points. They cannot help the opposing offense by making mistakes of their own.

Summary

The Irish do not match up particularly well with the Tar Heels, especially offensively. The North Carolina defensive game plan is well suited to prevent scores from a team that cannot run the football and has a poor place kicking game. Turnovers and special teams should play a large factor in the outcome of this contest.

Cardinal News and Notes, Irish Style

2008-10-08T21:00:00.004-05:00

What To Do With A Lead?

Three times in the 2008 season the Irish haven’t put the game away. Against Michigan an early lead led to the Wolverines chewing yards and committing countless turnovers to preserve an Irish victory. Notre Dame was lucky the Boilermakers abandoned the run and committed remarkably untimely penalties. This week the Irish defense and special teams allowed a fourth quarter rally that nearly cost them the game.

An early lead is great, but only if you know how to protect it. The Irish have yet to close out a game in compelling fashion. With the lead, Notre Dame cannot control the ball with the running game and frequently give possession back to the opponent. It would be wise to continue airing it out, at least until something resembling a rushing attack is found.

Well, It Was Unbalanced

It took three drives of Stanford ramming it down Notre Dame’s throat before the defensive staff made the necessary adjustments to slow the Cardinal rushing attack. I say slow, not stop, because the Irish defense didn’t stop the run all day. Only a large lead and penalties forced Stanford to go to the air to play catch-up.

Stanford came out firing, using unbalanced line formations to isolate an offensive tackle on the Irish defensive ends and it worked to perfection. Against the under-sized front four Stanford ran the ball at will. It wasn’t three and four yard gains. It was seven and eight.

It is puzzling that the defensive coaching staff would take so long to make a rather rudimentary adjustment.

Presumably, the Irish staff didn’t want to expose another area of the defense. But wouldn’t it be more prudent to make Stanford beat you throwing the ball? All year they have proven they can move the football by running it. Rather than waiting to adjust to the Cardinal ground game, isn’t it more advantageous to make quarterback Tavita Pritchard prove he can beat you?

Even without defensive adjustments, the Irish linebacking corps played very poorly. Stanford ran to the unbalanced side of the line an overwhelming majority of the time. It wasn’t complicated, but it was effective. And Maurice Crum and Brian Smith failed to react quickly to relatively slow developing plays.

Emotion To Start

The questions abound. Why does it take comments from an opposing player to generate inspired play? Why does the emotional state of the Irish depend on actions of the other team? Why do Pat Kuntz and company need negative statements directed at them to finally reach the quarterback? And why is head coach Charlie Weis satisfied with this being the most fired up he has seen the team? Isn’t his job, at least partially, to have his players ready to play against every team? Shouldn’t Weis be able to manufacture motivation for the Irish?

Putting Out An A.P.B. For A Kicking Coach

One of seven. That’s what kicker Brandon Walker is for the year. Granted, only one attempt has come within 40 yards but that was a 31 yard attempt Walker missed against Purdue.

And the kicking woes didn’t just start this year. Last year the Irish converted field goals at a rate of less than 50 percent. This included 0 of 2 between 30 and 39 yards, 1 of 5 between 40 and 49 yards, and 0 of 1 beyond 50 yards.

Walker has the distance, that isn’t the problem. It’s concentration, confidence, and technique. A capable kicking coach should be able to solve this problem.

It won’t take long, perhaps even this coming weekend, for the Irish to lose a contest because of their inept kicking game.

Tell You What, I’ll Give You A Head Start

The Irish might as well give opponents a head start before the snap. In the shotgun Notre Dame has passed the ball an overwhelming majority of the time. With two backs the Irish have run the ball an overwhelming majority of the time. Only in the Ace-Trey formation has offensive coordinator Mike Haywood consistently mixed the run and pass.

Part of the reason spread offenses are so deadly is because of their ability to be balanced running the ball out of receiver-heavy formations. The formation spreads defenders sideline-to-sideline and creates lanes for running backs to pick up big chunks of yardage.

But a less obvious reason for the big offensive numbers posted by teams like Oklahoma, Missouri, etc. is their lack of formation tendency. These teams would just as soon run the ball out of a more obvious passing formation than pass out of a more obvious running formation.

Haywood needs to take notes. Defenses are keying in on the Irish. In fact, one time Saturday, the Stanford sideline yelled pass before center Dan Wenger even snapped the ball.

Man, Where Was This Offensive Line Last Year?

It is truly remarkable, and should not be understated, how far the offensive line has come since the 2007 season. The unit has gelled and is much more cohesive than any time last year. This is most apparent in the pass protection where the Irish on are on pace to surrender just over 14 sacks on the year.

Think about it, 14 sacks on the year. Many years that’s likely good for tops in the country.

But the Irish do lack proficient run blocking. And it will lose a game for them if it isn’t corrected.

Pass blocking is largely about playing together as a unit. One missed assignment leads to a breakdown in protection, i.e. it is primarily important that the offensive linemen understand the blocking scheme and work together. As such, a tremendous amount of practice time and many repetitions are needed to perform well.

As far as scheme goes, run blocking is much more forgiving. Paving the way for running backs is less about working as a unit and more about winning one-on-one battles up front. If a lineman misses his assignment it doesn’t always result in a poor run play, particularly if the play is away from him.

But if a lineman loses his one-on-one battle with the defender the play can easily falter. The Irish off-season saw every offensive linemen gain size and strength, presumably to begin winning the one-on-one battles needed to generate an effective running game. So far this season, sans Purdue, it hasn’t shown up on the field.

The offensive line wins one-on-one battles when they engage the defender. The problem lies in each individual putting himself in a position to properly take on the assigned defender.

This leads to the plausible conclusion that a disproportionate amount of practice time is being spent on pass protection. Coming off an abysmal performance in 2007 where the Irish offensive line gave up 58 sacks, it isn’t unreasonable to think the dramatic improvement is the result of a large focus in practice.

Additionally, the Jon Tenuta led defense likely helps give the Notre Dame offense exotic blitz looks in practice that help prepare them for the relatively vanilla packages they see in games. Equally likely is a scenario where the Irish offensive line isn’t challenged in practice by a relatively weak defensive front.

If this is the case, Weis must devote more practice time to the running game.

A Budding Career

Quarterback Jimmy Clausen continues to improve, not just from last season, but also from his first game this year.

Clausen has had two consecutive career days racking up gaudy numbers. His understanding of the offense is readily apparent in his pre-snap adjustments. He has pinpoint accuracy, and is spreading the ball around without forcing throws.

While there is still improvement needed in his post-snap reads and progression (isn’t there always?), Clausen is far ahead of where Brady Quinn was at the same point in his career.

Where is the rush defense?

Perhaps more alarming than the woeful running game is the inability to stop the run. The former is tolerable with the talent at receiver and quarterback and will continue to work until the Irish offensive line proves incapable of protecting Clausen. The latter is a huge liability and will lose a close game for the Irish. Notre Dame’s defense was fortunate to get three Cardinal turnovers early, helping the offense build a three score lead.

Being so inept in both areas is inexplicable and intolerable. Giving up 6.5 yards per carry to a Stanford team with far less talent is criminal. The credit must go to the Cardinal players. Much like Michigan State, the Irish defense didn’t match their intensity.

The Game Lasts Four Quarters Guys

For three quarters the Irish played fairly solid football. After seeing the Cardinal run the ball effectively for three consecutive drives the Irish defensive staff (finally) adjusted to Stanford's unbalanced line and slowed the ground game.

However, in the fourth quarter Stanford began moving the ball at will once again. And the defense wasn’t the only culprit, the Irish offense was unable to generate first downs. Meanwhile, Notre Dame’s defense suffered from a lapse in intensity and concentration. Both contributed to let Stanford back in the game.

Why So Loose?

Similar to the Purdue game, Notre Dame’s secondary gave too much cushion on the outside for much of the day. The defense is going to blitz, opposing offenses are going to get rid of the ball quickly, and tighter coverage is required to stop the short, quick passing game. Double moves aren’t a threat provided the Irish defenders get home.

You Stay Classy Notre Dame

What happened at the end of the game is uncalled for. This isn’t about any specific player and it isn’t about the skirmish. Having fire, playing to the whistle, being “nasty,” are all part of the game. Grouping together and jumping up and down in unison while facing the opponents after a victory is not part of the game, it is classless and unnecessary.

2008 Elite Selection Playoff Initial Release

2008-10-06T21:11:00.011-05:00

It's that time of year again. That's right, it's week six of the 2008 college football season, time for the release of the Elite Selection Playoff. For those new to this college football ranking system a detailed explanation can be found here.

Elite Selection Playoff

First out of the gate are the Oklahoma Sooners, largely due to the pollsters (deserved) love affair with this team. The Crimson Tide trail by less than two-hundredths of a point and sit atop the AV computer ranking.

Strength of Schedule

The most heavily weighted part of the AV computer ranking is the strength of schedule. To date, the Washington Huskies have face the toughest schedule followed closely by Nebraska. It is important to keep in mind that the AV strength of schedule is based only on games played through week six, i.e. it does not include every opponent on a team's schedule until the final week of the season.

Margin of Victory

Penn State and Oklahoma have been racking up huge victories over their opponents coming in at one and two respectively in margin of victory.

AV Computer Ranking

Finally, the AV computer ranking (only the top 50 are shown) is led by Alabama followed by Vanderbilt, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas. For the Irish faithful, Notre Dame makes their debut at number 34. Their 4-1 record is trumped by the 73 ranked strength of schedule.

Last year Notre Dame's schedule ranked sixth in the country. At the onset of this season it was estimated that the Irish would play the 60th toughest strength of schedule. So far this seems to be very plausible.

Statistically Speaking: Notre Dame vs. Stanford

2008-10-06T20:32:00.008-05:00

It was really a tale of two sides for the Irish Saturday. While Notre Dame outgained the Cardinal 430 (6.4 yards per play) to 343 (5.3 yards per play) yards, the Irish failed to perform well in several of the most important statistical categories.

The usually effective Irish coverage units had mishaps and the return teams did little to help generate field position.

The Irish scored at a 50 percent clip when in the red zone but allowed Stanford to convert all three red zone appearances into touchdowns.

Despite holding Stanford to only 22.2 percent on third down, the Irish only converted 28.6 percent of their own attempts. Additionally, Stanford didn’t need three tries to pick up a first down for much of the day.

This game was certainly won in the turnover battle as Cardinal quarterback Tavita Pritchard threw three early interceptions (Stanford also had a meaningless fumble on the final play of the game). But the Irish protected the ball for the second straight week and capitalized on Pritchard's mistakes. After giving up nine turnovers in their first three games, Notre Dame has surrendered zero in their last two.

Offense

It all starts under center for the Irish as quarterback Jimmy Clausen had his second straight career game. With offensive coordinator Mike Haywood calling passes on about 60 percent of the snaps, Notre Dame seems determined to put the game in Clausen’s hands. Over the last two contests, against porous secondaries, the plan has worked well.

Despite this pass happy approach Notre Dame has even managed to control the ball the past two games, albeit only in the second half. Against Purdue the Irish managed a better than ten minute advantage in ball control. Against Stanford the time of possession advantage dwindled, but Notre Dame still managed to hold a six minute edge.

Clausen threw to seven different targets for 347 yards and three touchdowns, completing 72.5 percent of his passes. The Irish signal-caller turn in an efficient, high-powered, and productive day. Over the past two games Clausen has completed better than 65 percent of his passes for 622 yards and six touchdowns. He has also not thrown an interception through more than eight quarters of action.

For the game Clausen averaged 8.7 yards per pass attempt and 12 yards per completion. For the year he is at 7.3 and 12 yards respectively. Both numbers are dramatically up from 2007. Clausen’s favorite targets Saturday were Michael Floyd, David Grimes, Kyle Rudolph, and Armando Allen, completing at least five passes to each.

Floyd caught five balls for 115 yards (23 yard per reception average) and a touchdown. On the year Floyd is averaging better than 66 yards per game and 15.9 yards per reception. Coupled with Golden Tate’s 79.4 yards per game and 17.3 yards per reception, Notre Dame packs a powerful one-two punch on the outside.

Grimes caught seven passes for 60 yards (8.6 yard per reception average) and Rudolph had a career day hauling in five balls for 70 yards (14 yard per reception average) and a touchdown. Finally, Allen became Clausen’s safety valve, catching seven passes for 66 yards (9.4 yard per reception average). Allen even managed to turn one short route into a touchdown.

With five different Irish players recording over ten receptions on the year, Notre Dame is starting to force defenses to cover the entire field.

The excellent pass protection continued for the Irish against the Cardinal. For the second straight week Notre Dame surrendered only a single sack. For the year the Irish are averaging one sack per game, or one per 34.2 pass attempts. That’s a phenomenal improvement from last year when Notre Dame gave up 4.8 sacks per game, or one per 6.7 pass attempts.

Although not as big-play potent as last week, Notre Dame still turned in seven big plays for 200 yards (28.6 yard per play average). For those out there keeping count, less than 10 percent of the Irish plays went for nearly half of the total offense against Stanford.

However, the Notre Dame offense also moved the ball more consistently than they had since the San Diego State game averaging 3.8 yards per play not counting the seven big plays.

Unfortunately, that is where the good ends and the bad (or really bad) begins.

Notre Dame continues to struggle getting into manageable third down situations. On the day the Irish offense faced third and five or more yards greater than 85 percent of the time. On the year the Irish suffer this fate at a better than 77 percent rate.

This is undoubtedly linked to Notre Dame’s poor third down efficiency. Against Stanford the Irish converted fewer than 30 percent of their third downs. On the year they haven’t fared much better, successfully gaining a first down on only 33.8 percent of their tries.

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. After a break-out performance against Purdue, the Irish rushing attack reverted back to its dormant ways.

On the day Notre Dame recorded only 83 yards rushing on 27 attempts for a paltry 3.1 yard per carry average. Taking out the yards from the single sack, the rushing average peaks to 3.7 yards per carry. However, 23 yards came from a fake punt, bringing the "true" average back down to less than three.

There is no excuse for such an inept running game and in a close game (e.g. Michigan State) this will continue to haunt the Irish.

Defense

The defense played well in some facets of the game and not in others.

Unable to adjust to Stanford’s unbalanced offensive line early in the game, the Irish surrendered 161 yards on 37 carries for a 4.4 yard per carry average. Removing sack yardage tips the yards per carry value to 6.5. In fact, Notre Dame allowed four different Cardinal runners to average better than 4.5 yards per carry.

Only a substantial lead early in the game saved a defense incapable of stopping the Cardinal ground game. More problematic than an anemic rushing attack, the Irish defensive staff needs to find a way to stop the run.

Against Purdue, a team converting better than 90 percent of their red zone tries into points, Notre Dame’s defense buckled down inside their twenty and surrendered points only a third of the time. Against Stanford the Irish gave up a touchdown all three times the Cardinal offense penetrated the red zone.

There were, however, some bright spots. The Irish held the Stanford offense to a 22.2 percent third down conversion rate and forced them into five or more yards on 77.8 percent of the third downs. The primary problem was that Stanford faced only nine third downs.

Notre Dame’s defense gave up a relatively modest 115 yards (33.5 percent of the total offense) on five big plays for a 23 yard per play average. Nearly all of these big play yards came on the ground (four runs for 88 yards). However, even without the big plays Stanford matched the Irish per play average of 3.8 yards.

For the year the Irish are allowing more than 42 percent of opposing teams’ yardage to come from big plays at an average of 29.6 yards per play and 159.6 yards per game.

The Irish also allowed Pritchard to complete 64.3 percent of his passes for 182 yards. On the day, Pritchard was good for a 6.5 yard per attempt and 10.1 yard per completion average. Those attempt and completion averages aren’t jaw-dropping values, but they are hardly respectable.

Notre Dame did, however, have a productive day pressuring Pritchard as the Irish registered a sack for the first time since their week one game against San Diego State. On the day the Irish logged five quarterback sacks for 48 yards. For many, a shade over one sack a game isn’t what was expected from a Jon Tenuta led defense. Hopefully the performance Saturday is an omen of things to come.

Leading the way on the defensive side of the ball was a determined and disruptive Pat Kuntz. With a fumble return, interception, two sacks, and one batted ball, Kuntz had an incredible stat line in the box score.

Following behind Kuntz were Irish safeties Kyle McCarthy and David Bruton. McCarthy logged 14 tackles (seven solo), one tackle for a loss, and an interception. Bruton turned in nine tackles (5 solo) and an interception of his own. Both McCarthy and Bruton have played extremely well all season.

Special Teams

A Notre Dame team typically solid in coverage units wasn’t on Saturday. For much of the day the Cardinal intensity on special teams far exceeded that of their counterparts.

On the year Notre Dame is allowing only 6.2 yards per punt return and 15.7 per kickoff return. Saturday those numbers exceeded 11 and 22 respectively. In particular, the Irish allowed Stanford to have excellent field position via a 38 yard punt return in the fourth quarter and gifted the Cardinal excellent field position another time with a fair catch interference penalty.

The poor coverage units showed as the Irish averaged only 32.2 net yards per punt and 40.2 yards per kickoff. Both values are down from season averages of 39 and 47.2 respectively. Against a good running team a short field is a liability and Stanford proved this.

Notre Dame also averaged only 18 yards per kickoff rerturn and failed to successfully execute a single punt return.

But the most disappointing aspect of special teams is the continued problems in the place kicking game. On the year Notre Dame is now one of seven on field goal attempts. Despite only one attempt coming from fewer than 40 yards, a 14.3 percent field goal conversion rate is unacceptable and easily could have cost the Irish the game.

Summary

Notre Dame was victorious due to a decisive advantage in turnover margin. However, statistically speaking, the Irish did not play a complete game. If not for early Stanford turnovers and big plays that built a lead, a porous Irish run defense would have likely paved the way for a defeat.

The absence of an effective run game and inability to stop the run is a precursor to another loss for the Irish. It is inevitable that Notre Dame will be unable to successfully control the ball and run out the clock. Equally probable is another close game where the defense wears down and yields to a powerful running attack late in the contest.

Notre Dame vs. Stanford: Keys To An Irish Win

2008-10-02T19:33:00.006-05:00

The Fighting Irish take on the Stanford Cardinal Saturday. Stanford head coach Jim Harbaugh has injected a dose of energy into the program, maximizing the potential of his players.

The strength of the Cardinal is a potent rushing attack and the ability to pressure opposing quarterbacks.

Through five contests Stanford has rushed for 168.4 yards per game. Additionally, their top three backs are averaging greater than 5.3 yards per carry. This comes against competition that allows approximately 129 yards rushing per game at a rate of 3.8 yards per carry.

For the second straight week the Irish will face a very proficient red zone offense. The direct result of an effective running game, Stanford’s offense is converting 92 percent of red zone attempts into scores.

With an aggressive, blitzing defense similar to that of Notre Dame, Stanford has also recorded 15 sacks.

But that is really where the good ends and the problems begin.

This season, Stanford has passed for only 140 yards per game. The defense is allowing opponents to convert on third down nearly 50 percent of the time and surrenders points 88 percent of the time they enter the red zone. Finally, the Cardinal defense has allowed nearly 260 yards per game through the air.

For Notre Dame the game plan must feature a combination of things from the Michigan State and Purdue games.

Offense

1. Score early and often. While the Irish won’t face a running back of Javon Ringer’s caliber, Toby Gerhart and Anthony Kimble are more than capable runners who form a nice one-two punch for Stanford.

Stopping the run has been problematic for the Irish, giving up 4.6 yards per carry on the year. The strategy of the Irish offense must help mitigate this problem on defense.

As such, it is important to build a substantial early lead. This will force Stanford to abandon the run, instead relying on their anemic passing attack.

2. Be a control freak. Notre Dame must control the football and win the time of possession battle. Offensive coordinator Mike Haywood needs to abandon the vertical passing game on third down in favor of a more consistent, possession offense. This will keep the Irish defense fresh against the Cardinal rushing attack.

3. Be en vogue. The Irish obviously aren’t a run-first team. Against Purdue Notre Dame showed they could open up the run with the pass. It will be advantageous for Notre Dame to use their spread offense to open up the field and get running back Armando Allen space.

In conjunction with this, it is paramount for the Irish to be efficient in their execution. Against a team that turns virtually every red zone appearance into points, the offense must change field position and prevent turnovers in Irish territory.

Defense

1. Sell out. Notre Dame’s defense must shoot the gaps on first down and sell out against the run. The strength of the defense is defending the pass. The Cardinal struggle to execute in their passing game and frequently allow quarterback Tavita Pritchard to be pressured. Getting the Stanford offense in long down-and-distance situations will go a long way to utilizing Notre Dame’s biggest asset.

2. Force Pritchard to win the game. Pritchard is tasked with managing the game, being proficient, and providing relief for the Cardinal rushing attack. He isn’t challenged to win the game. Commit to stopping the run on first down, put the game in Pritchard’s hands, and go after him. Offensive tackle Chris Marinelli has provided all the ammunition needed for an already aggressive Irish defense.

3. Continue the red zone defense. Last game Purdue entered converting 90 percent of their red zone tries into points. Despite surrendering 462 yards of offense, the Irish defense only allowed Purdue to convert one of three red zone tries. This bend-but-not-break defense will be an asset against the Cardinal offense.

Notre Dame vs. Purdue: News and Notes

2008-09-30T21:18:00.010-05:00

The Irish CAN Run The Football

For the first time in a long time Notre Dame ran the football consistently and effectively. Not only did this help the passing game via a balanced offensive attack, it also led to improved red zone efficiency and a substantial edge in time of possession.

Naturally, the improved production in the running game was partially due to better offensive line play. In particular, much maligned tight end Kyle Rudolph turned in a drastically improved blocking performance. But the real reasons for success are far more subtle.

Against Purdue the improvement in the run game was four fold.

First, offensive coordinator Mike Haywood showed a commitment to running the football. This was primarily evident in his patience as a play caller, sticking with the run after not seeing much production early on in the game.

Second, the balance of the passing game opened up the run. Passes over the middle of the field to Rudolph helped keep the Purdue linebackers guessing.

Third, Haywood used different types of running plays and blocking schemes up front. Many have been begging for this for quite some time.

Haywood called designed counters and more quickly developing run plays for most of the day. A few zone stretch plays snuck their way in, but the Irish mostly ran right at the Boilermaker defense.

Haywood primarily stuck with a zone blocking scheme, but focused on sealing the edge and gave the Irish offensive line the angles with his play calling. For the first time this season the play calling utilized the talents of the offensive personnel.

Lastly, running back Armando Allen burst on the scene with a career day. He continues to run with a tough, physical style. Allen also showed much more patience than he ever has.

For the first time in his young career his speed was a strength, rather than a weakness. He used his vision to see the play develop and accelerated through the hole when it opened. He even cut against the grain a few times for big gains.

It’s Not Great, But We’ll Take It

Haywood still has a long way to go as a play caller but he did show signs of improvement Saturday.

As mentioned above, there was much more patience sticking with the ground game. An effective rushing attack doesn’t always show up early in the game. Hopefully Haywood has learned this and will continue to be patient in the future. Haywood also kept the Boilermaker defense guessing with a good mix of runs and passes.

Most importantly, the halftime adjustments made by the offensive staff were tremendous. In addition to finding the best formation(s) to get Notre Dame’s best eleven offensive players on the field, the defense was on its heels the entire second half.

There are, however, still negatives.

The fade seems to be the only play in the red zone. Against less talented teams when there are favorable matchups this may work. But more talented defenses will take it away and the Irish must develop an alternative to putting points on the board inside the twenty.

Notre Dame goes deep far too often on third down. The Irish faced third and long more than 70 percent of the time against Purdue but that doesn’t excuse quarterback Jimmy Clausen and Haywood from taking shots thirty yards down the field. The play calling needs to evolve in order to move the ball down the field more consistently.

While not used many times against Purdue, the screen game is still suspect for the Irish. This is coupled with an absence of a running threat in the shotgun and little deception of play intent with offensive formations obviously catered to running or passing. Add it all up and Notre Dame has few weapons to slow a powerful pass rush. If the defense knows you’re throwing the ball their job is much easier. This must be rectified in the future.

Speaking of tipping off the defense, Clausen’s pass audibles are completely transparent. Not only do greater than 90 percent of his play changes result in a pass, the change in depth of the running back (from the line of scrimmage) all but screams pass protection. The Irish must work to hide these indicating factors.

Better and more talented defenses (and defensive coordinators) will force the Irish offense to be one-dimensional. Continued unpredictability in play calling and perfection in one facet of the offense will go a long way in cultivating an identity and giving the players something to come back to when they need to generate yards.

The Turtle Does Not Win The Race

Lately head coach Charlie Weis’ offense has been slow to start. In addition to not playing a complete game, this allows less talented teams to stay in the game and good teams to build a lead. Neither is desirable and the latter is deadly for a young team.

The Irish tried to prevent a slow start with a no-huddle, spread offense but it proved ineffective. Two drives into the game things looked pretty bleak and only excellent halftime adjustments paved the way for a big third quarter.

These slow starts are driven mostly by inconsistent execution and must be a focus going forward.

Is Clausen’s Jersey Still Clean?

Once a pre-season dream, good protection of Clausen is now a reality. While Clausen’s decision making and Allen’s pass protection are improved, it all starts up front with the play of the offensive line.

Statistically, Notre Dame has improved dramatically protecting the passer. Once the culprit of killed drives, the Irish have minimized sacks and made the game much more manageable. This has allowed the offense to spread the field and has been the catalyst for a more vertical passing game.

But the passing game is just the beginning.

Coming off a disappointing performance against Michigan State, the offensive line looks to have regained its footing. The emotion, toughness, and physicality that was lacking against the Spartans was present Saturday and led to more than 200 yards rushing. While the Irish still struggle to engage at the second level, improvement sealing the edge sprung Allen on many long runs.

“We’re Eating A Lot Of Hamburger But You Really Want To Be Eating Steak”

After seeing first hand in 2007 (and hearing all off-season) what a Jon Tenuta led defense can do to a quarterback many Irish fans are disappointed in the sack production of the Notre Dame defense. While the aggressive, blitzing defensive scheme has caused pressure on the quarterback, only one sack has materialized.

Naturally, the first question for Irish fans is “should we care?” Despite the lack of sacks Notre Dame has repeatedly pressured opposing quarterbacks, forced errant throws, and batted down multiple balls at the line of scrimmage. It seems like, at least partially, the defense is doing what it is designed to do.

The short answer is yes. Against a more talented offense the Irish will pay for risking single man coverage or rolling up the zone. It might not happen in the immediate future, but it’s coming. It will most certainly happen when Notre Dame makes a trip to the Coliseum but also potentially when they face North Carolina.

The defense’s inability to get to opposing quarterbacks is primarily due to four things.

One, Notre Dame lacks the pure pass rushers up front to generate consistent pressure without sending two or three more players. There is talent on the defensive line but most of it is young and inexperienced. This leaves the secondary vulnerable to one-on-one man coverage or a zone rotation.

Second, like the offense, Notre Dame’s defense has personnel tendencies that hamper its success. Harrison Smith and Sergio Brown are rarely used in coverage, spending much more of their time coming off the edge into the opponent’s backfield. Conversely, defensive backs David Bruton, Kyle McCarthy, Terrail Lambert, Gary Gray, and Raeshon McNeil rarely blitz.

Third, Tenuta has been a part of the defensive staff for less than a year. This is mostly evident in execution. Often the timing of the Irish defenders is poor and the defensive line frequently struggles to take the correct angles and generate the appropriate space for the blitzing members of the secondary and linebacking corps.

Applying pressure in the passing game is much more difficult than executing a run blitz. The latter requires simple gap responsibility. The former requires precision in timing, rotating, and disciplined coverage. More time might be needed to execute Tenuta’s scheme at a high level.

Fourth, opposing offenses counter Notre Dame’s pressure scheme with a quick, three-step drop or shotgun, short passing game. This is the correct call for the opposition but the Irish are not adjusting appropriately or taking advantage of turnover opportunities.

Far too often the secondary is playing loose in coverage. This results in space for opposing wide receivers making tackling more difficult, allowing yards after the catch, and sacrificing opportunities for interceptions. Tighter secondary play will likely result in improvement in all three areas.

If the Irish defense isn't getting to the quarterback, production from the blitz in the form of turnovers would be a nice consolation. In the second half against Purdue Notre Dame began to do this but were unable to catch the football.

What A Freakin’ Day

Not only did Irish quarterback Jimmy Clausen have a career statistical performance, he showed what the future holds for Notre Dame football.

Clausen is starting to live up to the hype. His arm strength is no longer a question, his touch is rapidly improving, and his accuracy is unquestionable. This was never more evident than on two completions to wide receiver David Grimes.

The first came on the opening offensive play of the second half when Clausen zipped a perfectly placed ball on an out route across the field and between two defenders. The second came on fourth and seven at Purdue’s thirty yard line. Clausen took the snap, Grimes got a quick release, and the ball was delivered in perfect stride for a touchdown.

Like always, there is still room for improvement. Clausen must adapt to avoiding the pass rush by stepping up into the pocket. He must continue to improve in his progressions, stop staring down receivers, and check-down. He must be more judicious deciding when to go down field. And he must refine his play action mechanics.

But Saturday was a huge step in the right direction.

Learning On The Job

If the Michigan State game showed Weis is still learning, Saturday showed he is coming up the learning curve.

Multiple young players were gaining invaluable experience by getting meaningful minutes of playing time. This builds depth. Weis didn’t do this 2005 or 2006 and it helped contribute to the disaster of a season in 2007.

Weis faced a significant challenge at halftime. The Irish had come off a disappointing loss to the Spartans and sputtered offensively for much of the first half. The team came out firing on all cylinders in the third quarter. Weis successfully navigated the psyche of his team and motivated them to play better in the second half.

Now Weis faces another challenge. Much like life after the Michigan win, the team must remain even and keep working to improve. Weis must accomplish this with a team who has experienced very little success.

Statistically Speaking: Notre Dame vs. Purdue

2008-09-29T20:02:00.003-05:00

Against Purdue the Notre Dame offense morphed from talented players into a gelling team. The Irish put up 38 points, even managing to successfully execute a snap, hold, and kick on a field goal attempt.

The Irish offense played its first complete game of the season, dramatically improving red zone efficiency, committing zero turnovers, and maintaining their respectable third down efficiency from the previous week.

The defense, however, didn’t fare quite as well. Despite holding Purdue to a season low in red zone efficiency the defense surrendered far too many yards and allowed the Boilermakers to convert on nearly 43 percent of third downs.

Offense

Where to start?

The Irish offense amassed 476 total yards for their best output since Notre Dame faced Navy in 2006. Departing from their previously one-dimensional passing attack, Notre Dame employed a balanced performance gaining 275 yards through the air and 201 yards on the ground on their way to averaging a season high 6.3 yards per play.

The Irish gained 23 total first downs, 13 rushing and 10 passing, with play calling at a near even split. Notre Dame averaged five yards per rush and 7.9 per pass attempt, both season highs.

Another season high was the six rushes of more than 15 yards. In three prior games, the Irish had zero, one, and one rush over 15 yards. Notre Dame’s offense also had five big pass plays result in 153 yards and a 30.6 yards per play average, both season high values.

The offense appeared to move the ball more consistently against Purdue than any previous opponent, mostly due to the emergence of the running game. However, the Irish had 11 big plays for 265 yards, averaging 24.1 yards per play. This comprises 55.7 percent of the total offense, the largest percentage of offense to come from big plays this season.

Notre Dame converted three of four red zone tries into points. The red zone appearances weren’t the gifts of turnovers as they were in the Michigan game, so the increased red zone efficiency is likely the result of improvement in a previously nonexistent running game. The same running game also led to the first decisive time of possession victory for the Irish, who held the ball for 10 minutes more than their opponent.

On third down the Irish built off the Michigan State game and remained consistent, successfully converting nearly 43 percent of the time. However, the Irish continue to put themselves in long yardage third down situations. Notre Dame faced third and five or more yards 10 of their 14 (71.4 percent) attempts. On the season the Irish have faced more than five yards on 75 percent of their third downs.

The Irish offensive line continues to protect quarterback Jimmy Clausen, giving up only a single sack attempt against Purdue. This is an extended good trend for the Irish as they are only surrendering one sack per 32.8 passing attempts. After ranking dead last in sacks allowed last season, the Irish have moved to 22 in 2008. Offensive line coach John Latina should be commended.

Jimmy Clausen had the best day of his young career, completing better than 57 percent of his passes for 275 yards and three touchdowns to three different receivers. For the game Clausen averaged 13.8 yards per completion (compared to 9.1 yards per completion in 2007), a testament to Notre Dame’s consistent ability to throw the ball down the field.

Clausen’s favorite target on the day was freshman Michael Floyd. Floyd hauled in six passes for 100 yards, good for a 16.7 yard per reception average. It is becoming increasingly evident that teams cannot simply double-team Golden Tate. With freshman Kyle Rudolph (three receptions for 32 yards and a touchdown) beginning to become a target in the middle of the field, Clausen has quite a few weapons.

On the ground Armando Allen had a breakout game, rushing 17 times for 136 yards and a touchdown. That’s good for an absurdly high 7.9 yards per carry. Fellow running back James Aldridge came in for mop-up duty and gained 35 yards on eight carries (4.3 yards per carry).

The enthusiasm should be tempered, however. While it was a great offensive output Notre Dame did this against an extremely porous Boilermaker defense. Coming into the game Purdue was surrendering 192.3 yards rushing (4.9 yards per carry) and 234.7 yards passing (9.8 yards per completion) against rather pedestrian competition

Excluding the yards per completion average, the Irish offense really just did what everyone else had already done.

Defense

The defense did not perform nearly as well as the offense.

The Irish defense gave up 462 yards to the Boilermakers, 359 of which came through the air. Notre Dame’s defense even allowed Purdue to average more yards per play than the prolific offense of the Irish.

Purdue’s offense had two big runs and four big passes for 193 yards at 32.2 yards per play. They averaged 6.1 yards per rushing attempt, 6.5 yards per passing attempt, and 12.4 yards per completion.

The 6.1 yards per carry were the highest allowed by the Notre Dame defense this season. Ditto the 12.4 yards per completion. About the only bright spot of the pass defense was allowing Boilermaker quarterback Curtis Painter to complete a relatively modest 52.7 percent of his pass attempts.

The defense also allowed Purdue to convert on almost 43 percent of their third down attempts, a season high. And this happened despite Purdue’s offense facing third down and more than five yards 85.6 percent of the time. Had the defense been able to get the Boilermaker offense off the field the time of possession advantage would have been even greater.

Once again, Notre Dame did not record a quarterback sack on the day. Despite some pressure, a few quarterback hurries, and some batted balls, Notre Dame’s aggressive, blitzing defense has little to show for its high-risk style of play. The Irish rank dead last in the country in sacks. Against better teams the Irish may pay for their gambles.

The Irish defense did, however, buckle down in the red zone. Purdue entered Saturday’s contest converting 90 percent of their red zone appearances into points. Notre Dame held them to just one score in three red zone tries.

David Bruton, Pat Kuntz, Maurice Crum, freshman Robert Blanton, Kyle McCarthy, and Brian Smith all notched five or more tackles for the Irish. Blanton added a 47-yard interception returned for a touchdown as well.

Special Teams

The Irish notched their first field goal of the season on 41-yard attempt by Brandon Walker.

Notre Dame also held Purdue’s dangerous kickoff returners to only 13.9 yards per return while turning in 26.3 yards per kickoff return. That’s good for over 12 yards of net kickoff difference in Notre Dame’s favor.

The Irish continue to perform well in the punting game, netting 42 yards per punt.

Summary

Through four games Notre Dame has shown significant statistical improvement from a deplorable 2007 season. It remains to be seen, however, if they can continue to build on success and maintain consistency in their play. To date, all but two of Notre Dame’s touchdowns have been scored by freshmen or sophomores. This speaks to the youth present on the team.

The Irish are 3-1 in large part because they have protected Clausen and improved their vertical passing game. However, minimizing turnovers, maintaining few penalties (41 yards per game), and a respectable running game are needed to continue winning.

Inconsistent play will cause future miscues, and this team is too young to overcome a host of mistakes, especially those that are self-inflicted.

Notre Dame vs. Purdue: Keys To An Irish Win

2008-09-25T19:38:00.004-05:00

Notre Dame gets the Purdue Boilermakers at home Saturday. After opening the season slow against San Diego State then coming strong on against Michigan, the Irish took a step back last week against Michigan State.

On paper, the Boilermakers shouldn’t be as stiff of a challenge.

Through three games against Northern Colorado, Oregon, and Central Michigan the Boilermakers are giving up 427 yards per game. That isn’t exactly a gauntlet of powerhouses.

In particular, Purdue is allowing 192.3 yards per game on the ground. That’s good for the bottom quarter of college football and is the definitive weakness of this football team. The defensive line is relatively big, but the linebackers are on the smaller side and both units are in the bottom half of what Notre Dame will face this season.

The pass defense, however, has been respectable. On the year, Purdue has given up only three touchdowns through the air and 234.7 yards passing per game. They have also held their opponents to only 9.8 yards per completion.

In other words, the defense hasn’t given up a lot of long pass plays.

The defense has also been fairly effective on third down, only allowing 33 percent of opponent’s tries to be successfully converted. Opposing offenses with scoring opportunities have done fairly well, scoring on 69 percent of red zone possessions. But the Boilermakers have only allowed 40 percent of the red zone trips to result in touchdowns.

On offense it is the Curtis Painter and Kory Sheets show as the duo leads a fairly balanced attack resulting in over 33 points per game. Painter is having a modest year by his own standards, averaging just over 250 yards per game passing. He has been efficient, though, completing just under 60 percent of his throws and averaging 6.6 yards per attempt.

Sheets is averaging over 20 carries and 117 yards per game, but the most impressive statistic is his 5.7 yard per carry average and long run of 80 yards.

If there is one thing Purdue's offense does well it has to be red zone efficiency. The Boilermakers enter Saturday’s contest converting 90 percent of their red zone tries into points. Two thirds of those points are touchdowns.

On any average day the Irish would beat the Boilermakers a high percentage of the time. But Notre Dame always gets their opponent’s best game, so average likely won’t cut it for the Irish. Notre Dame will need a better offensive performance to match Purdue’s scoring. Obviously that will take improved red zone efficiency and elimination of costly turnovers, but the keys to winning are far more subtle.

Coming off a disappointing loss to the Spartans, this game will likely determine the direction of the remainder of the season.

Offense

1. At every opportunity create and take advantage of mismatches. Notre Dame’s biggest advantage in this game is their talent. The offense must create one-on-one opportunities to make plays and trust that their talented skill position players will make them.

The offense can’t negate this talent advantage by giving away the play before the snap or lacking creativity in the running game. Purdue’s defense has struggled to defend the run against opponents that don’t use a conventional rushing attack, teams that run out of obvious passing formations. Spread the field and get Armando Allen the ball in space.

Get Golden Tate and David Grimes in the slot, matched up with linebackers and safeties. Spread the field and force Purdue to go five deep in the secondary. Get Michael Floyd with single coverage down the field. And set up the big play rather than taking blind stabs at it over the course of the game. The Boilermaker defense hasn't given up many big plays in the passing game, the Irish offense can't afford to force the issue and risk a turnover.

2. Run it red. The anemic running game for Notre Dame has been well documented. The Irish don’t need to run the ball for 150 yards to win this game. They do need to run the ball well inside the twenty yard line to improve their atrocious red zone efficiency. Leaving points on the field won’t cut it in this game and an ineffective rushing attack is largely responsible for a 36 percent red zone scoring efficiency.

3. Change the field position. Help the Irish defense by making Purdue work to get into the red zone, limiting their scoring opportunities. The Irish offense must minimize three-and-out’s and eliminate turnovers in their own territory. Manageable third down distances are also advantageous as Notre Dame’s 32 percent third down conversion rate is largely a result of facing third and more than five yards over three quarters of the time.

Defense

1. Less is more. To date the Irish blitzing game has recorded only one sack. The high risk, high reward scheme has worked fairly well through three games but the Boilermakers present a unique challenge. With Purdue Notre Dame will get a blend of two offenses they have already faced.

The Boilermakers passing game will be similar to San Diego State, their running game similar to Michigan. Attempting to pressure a veteran quarterback like Painter will not force the same errant throws Aztec quarterback Ryan Lindley made.

Likewise, blitzing can take players out of position and cause problems with Sheets on the ground. This happened with Sam McGuffie against Michigan, leading to multiple big runs. The Irish defense is best served keeping everything in front of them and forcing Purdue to consistently execute to move the ball down the field.

2. Keep Purdue out of the red zone. The Boilermakers are remarkably efficient inside their opponent’s twenty so Notre Dame must prevent them from getting there. Stopping the big play is a start, but-as stated above-not playing a high risk defensive scheme and getting help from the offense will also be needed.

3. Tackle better. It was on the Christmas wish list and has been true in weeks one, two, and three. Against Purdue good tackling will be needed, but for a different reason. The Purdue offense is designed to get the ball to the skill players in space. After this they rely on one-on-one matchups and poor tackling to create yardage. The Irish must take this away from them.

Notre Dame vs. Michigan State Game Recap

2008-09-23T19:36:00.006-05:00

Notre Dame shot itself in the foot multiple times Saturday, ultimately leading to their own demise. Coming off an emotional win against Michigan head coach Charlie Weis suspected emotionless play to be a problem, but he was hardly able to prevent it from handicapping Notre Dame’s offensive strategy.

Costly turnovers, combined with an inept rushing attack largely due to uninspired offensive line play, led to a 23-7 victory for the Spartans.

The turnovers left points on the board for the Irish and gifted points to Michigan State. The complete lack of a running game resulted in a decided disadvantage in ball control and a tired defense at the end of the contest.

Even without the turnovers, Notre Dame did not deserve to win. It may have been in a closer game, but the time of possession heavily favored the Spartans. And in a close game tired defenses are a liability.

Michigan State head coach Mark Dantonio knew this and rode running back Javon Ringer’s 39 carries and 201 yards to victory, controlling the clock until fatigue gave way to gaping running lanes in the fourth quarter.

The Irish would be wise to learn the value of an effective running attack from their opponents.

Offense

Offensive coordinator Mike Haywood is having a forgettable start to his career as a play caller. The Irish offense misses Weis’ playcalling prowess and Notre Dame is beginning to feel the impact. Haywood doesn’t think one or two plays ahead and doesn’t set up plays to stretch the field.

His approach is far more “throw it up against the wall and see what sticks” than clever planning. Whether it be via formation or down-and-distance tendencies, there is simply no creativity or intent to deceive the opposing defense.

Despite a glaring need to get short third down distances, play calling to achieve manageable third downs is a thing of the past.

Screens and draws must be used to slow an aggressive defense like Michigan State employed Saturday. Once a staple of Weis’ offense, the former wasn’t executed, the latter wasn’t used enough.

Additionally, there were multiple instances when a double move was practically begging to be called. There were also ample opportunities to execute such a play off a similar, previously used play call.

Presumably this would allow quarterback Jimmy Clausen to get the ball down the field in a manner other than trying to take advantage of a one-on-one matchup. Haywood didn’t call it once.

Despite a desire to the run the ball, Notre Dame has suffered through the better part of 15 games with a coaching staff seemingly unable to craft an effective, first-strike running scheme.

This was never more evident than against Michigan State.

The Irish were not unwilling to run the football. They were simply unable. Haywood wanted to run the ball to control the game and keep Ringer off the field. This was a good strategy and paramount to success.

But the first six offensive plays were runs that went for nothing. After that Notre Dame only called a designed run once every five plays. It isn’t difficult to stop a one-dimensional offense, no matter what dimension it employs.

Spreading the field and throwing the ball was the best option to win. The coaching staff made the appropriate adjustment during the game. The problem lies in the fact that Notre Dame is unable to run the football proficiently and consistently. And there is no excuse. In fact, it is altogether embarrassing.

The Irish have the talent to run the ball. In this game (and in most games) Notre Dame held a distinct size advantage up front. But a lack of determination by the offensive line, poorly designed running plays, and a lack of creative play calling all contributed to a woeful ground game.

There is little-to-no misdirection, the motioning tight end frequently gives away the direction of play, and no effort is made to utilize the specific talents of the three running backs or the offensive line. The staff has recruited two bigger, pounding running backs and beefed up the offensive front, but still frequently challenges the players to employ a finesse running game that takes too long to develop.

It’s like asking to fit a square peg into a round hole.

The alternative, asking a young team to consistently spread the field and execute a short drop, hot read, sight adjustment passing game, isn’t reasonable.

Admittedly, the difference between this game and 2007 was increased efficiency in this area as the Irish capably moved the ball at times. In 2007 the Irish didn’t give themselves scoring opportunities, now they simply aren’t converting them.

But relying on such a high level of precision execution with a young offense isn’t smart coaching. This is especially true when all the pieces needed for an effective running game are already on the roster.

This is no more evident than in Notre Dame’s red zone efficiency. The Irish are 4 of 11 in the red zone, potentially leaving 21 to 49 points on the field. Most of this poor efficiency is due to inconsistent execution on a short field, where going deep with the ball isn’t possible due to limited real estate. An effective running game would certainly help mitigate this problem.

Of course, the offensive line certainly didn’t help.

Poor play calling aside, there was no passion up front for the Irish. Notre Dame’s offensive line was timid and hesitant, not aggressive and dominating. The Irish got no movement off the ball against a defensive front they vastly outweighed. Lack of emotion threw the game plan right out the window.

Michigan State deserves all the credit. They took a page out of the 2007 defensive playbook against the Irish and followed the recipe well: shut down the run, play press-man on the outside, and blitz Clausen all day. Notre Dame never managed to match their intensity.

Clausen continues to struggle protecting the ball as well, averaging two interceptions per game. While some of his throws are excellent, he is still inconsistent, doesn’t move up into the pocket to evade the pass rush, and throws deep balls up for grabs rather than putting it where only his receiver (or the ground) can get it. There were several times Saturday when Clausen missed big play opportunities because he didn’t throw the ball accurately down the field.

Freshman tight end Kyle Rudolph continues to be an enormous liability in the running game and a modest contributor in the passing game. It is puzzling why he remains on the field. With junior Will Yeatman likely off the team for his second alcohol related offense, junior Luke Schmidt must step up and be a force in the running game.

There were, however, some bright spots for the Notre Dame offense.

The Irish converted better than 46.2 percent of their third downs, up from the 25 percent rate they entered the game with. This came despite continued poor execution on first and second down as Notre Dame faced third and long on over 90 percent of their chances.

The pass blocking continues to be an area of improvement for the Irish. Even though Clausen was sacked three times and pressured numerous others, the Irish protected him well for most of the day. It’s difficult to stop a defensive front that knows you are throwing the football. Notre Dame is only giving up one sack per 32 pass attempts, a dramatic improvement from 2007.

Golden Tate continues to be a playmaker and should only blossom more with time. He has a “never quit” attitude and the talent to do special things with the ball in his hands. It is puzzling why he doesn’t get it more often. Freshman Michael Floyd also had a very productive day.

But the overall offensive performance was lackluster and disappointing. Significant strides must be made to be consistently effective moving the ball in the future. Being one-dimensional handicaps the players and gives a distinct advantage to the defense. Cutting out drive-killing turnovers would also be beneficial.

Defense

The defense played very well against the Spartans, allowing quarterback Brian Hoyer to complete less than 50 percent of his passes and containing Ringer to 2.9 yards per carry if you take out his three big runs. Most of Michigan State’s offensive production came in the waning moments of the game when the Irish defense ran out of gas.

As the defense wore down Ringer became more effective and without a substantial lead (or one at all) Notre Dame couldn’t force Hoyer to win the game. As a team, Notre Dame didn’t do what it needed to do to win. As a unit, the defense held up for as long as it could.

The poor recruiting along the defensive line in Weis’ first two years is starting to show. The lack of depth along the front 3/4 ensures that the Irish must sell out to stop the run. Against Michigan State it was a matter of getting tired. Against a two-dimensional offensive football team it will lead to big plays in the passing game.

Besides Terrail Lambert, the secondary played well throughout the day. Other than a few mistakes Notre Dame tackled well and rotated into coverage. Raeshon McNeil has certainly begun to erase memories of Darrin Walls with his excellent play and safety Kyle McCarthy continues to be a sure tackler.

The linebacker play for Notre Dame continues to be a strength of the defense. A few years removed from some of the worst linebacker play in years, assistant head coach Jon Tenuta has morphed Maurice Crum and Brian Smith into a potent combination of speed, aggression, and talent. Smith, in particular, has the potential to be an All-American.

The Irish focused on shutting down the run against Michigan State and did so for most of the day. The problem typically came on third down. Despite forcing the Spartans into third and long on 90 percent of their tries, Notre Dame allowed Michigan State to convert on 40 percent of their tries.

Even with a high blitz rate Notre Dame still only has one sack on the year. Against Michigan State many of the blitz’s were aimed at filling the gaps to stop the running game. But for all the hoopla surrounding Tenuta’s attacking and aggressive defensive scheme, it certainly hasn’t been productive in the sack column.

As discussed above, the fatigue of the defense was directly tied to the inability to run the football and control the clock. This was a problem against Michigan in week two but a comfortable lead prevented it from coming back to hurt the Irish. It will continue to be a problem in close games if Notre Dame’s offensive staff fails to develop a running game.

Special Teams

Special teams are a mixed bag for the Irish. While the coverage units are solid, the return teams are inconsistent. The field goal unit hasn’t attempted a reasonably easy opportunity, but having problems with the snap and/or hold on half of the attempts don’t provide a lot of confidence.

Summary

This game is evidence that Weis is still learning how to do his job. He is learning the college game, he is learning to be a head coach, and he is doing both at the same time.

It seems like four years would be enough to get up that learning curve. But the success of years one and two never really forced Weis to do it. This isn't an excuse, it is reality. Weis has shown a willingness to change, but that might not be enough.

The excuses are running out for Weis. While still young, the Irish are plenty talented. They don’t need to win every game but they should at least be competent and competitive. The defense has improved from an already respectable unit in 2007 but the offense is still struggling even though it is Weis’ area of expertise.

The primary problem on offense seems to be Weis’ cerebral approach to the game. In the NFL this approach is an advantage, you take what the defense gives you and creatively scheme each week.

But in college it is often times more advantageous to simply impose your will and dictate the game. Teaching an offense to react to opposing defenses requires ample practice time and physically and mentally mature players. Weis is still struggling with these differences.

This is apparent in his week-to-week offensive game plan and inadequacy at motivating his players.

The Irish see-saw between game plans based on the weaknesses of opposing defenses. This creates a lack of continuity among the offensive players. Sometimes constant change creates more problems than the changes solve.

Rather than practicing multiple things each week, the Irish would be better served perfecting one facet of their offense and building around it. That doesn’t mean the Irish can’t tweak their offensive game plan based on the opposition. It just means the team needs an identity, something to build on, something the offense can always come back to when they need yards.

Motivation is also a factor. For the third time in four years Weis correctly identified passive play as a potential obstacle heading into the game against Michigan State.

In 2005 the Irish came off an emotional win over a highly ranked Michigan squad only to start slow and climb an uphill battle against the Spartans. In 2006 Notre Dame suffered a devastating defeat to the Wolverines before traveling to East Lansing and needing a monumental fourth quarter comeback to beat Michigan State. This season the Irish followed a big win over Michigan with a pathetic first half of offensive production.

Each time Weis was unable to solve a problem he correctly anticipated. It’s difficult to motivate players when you’re constantly teaching the mental aspects of the game as the key to winning. It de-emphasizes the importance of physical play. Increasing the physicality of practices helps, but a finesse-based offense doesn’t.

Game planning and motivating aside, the most disturbing aspect of Weis’ offensive approach is his staff’s inability to develop an effective running game. There are multiple, compelling benefits of a proficient ground attack and it is a necessary ingredient to consistently beat good football teams and compete for national championships.

It is difficult to imagine such an experienced offensive coaching staff not understanding the importance of running the football. It is also difficult to imagine said coaching staff being unable to develop an effective rushing scheme. But one or the other will have to give for Weis to succeed in the long term at Notre Dame.

Statistically Speaking: Notre Dame vs. Michigan State

2008-09-22T21:58:00.002-05:00

Against the Spartans, Notre Dame returned to the form they showed in their first game against San Diego State.

Turnovers and red zone efficiency improved from week one to week two for the Irish but poor third down efficiency continued to plague Notre Dame’s offense. While third down efficiency improved from 25 percent against San Diego State and Michigan to 46.2 percent against Michigan State, it was not enough to overcome the lapse in turnovers and red zone efficiency.

Three remarkably untimely turnovers left points on the field and gifted points to the Spartans. This ultimately led to the Irish loss although an embarrassing rushing output also contributed to their demise. Throw in only two trips to the red zone, not converting points on either of them, and you have a recipe for failure.

Notre Dame has yet to perform for an entire game in the three statistical categories that most strongly correlate to winning: turnovers, red zone efficiency, and third down efficiency. And despite only averaging 40 yards in penalties a game, many of them are poorly timed resulting in stalled drives or giving the opposition a first down.

Offense

About the only bright spot on offense was the increased efficiency on third down.

Despite needing to improve dramatically on down and distance management, the Irish faced third and five plus yards on more than 90 percent of their third downs. That value is up from already high numbers of 58.3 against San Diego State and 75 percent against Michigan. That Notre Dame was able to convert 46.2 percent of their into first downs in the contest Saturday is a miracle.

Notre Dame averaged 4.1 yards per play, down from 5 and 4.7 in weeks one and two respectively. The Irish gained 258 total yards with roughly 94 percent coming through the air. Offensive coordinator Mike Haywood called 22 runs and 41 passes but the run/pass play selection was really more skewed.

After running on its first seven plays for virtually no gain, Notre Dame only called ten running plays for the remainder of the game. Compare that to the 41 passes thrown by quarterback Jimmy Clausen and the Irish only ran the ball once every five plays after the first two offensive series.

To date the Irish are averaging fewer than 290 total yards per game and a paltry 78 yards per game on the ground.

Removing big plays (runs greater 15 yards, passes greater than 20 yards) from the yardage totals shows how much the Irish rely on the their down field passing game rather than consistent offensive production.

Notre Dame has had ten big plays on the season, with eight of them coming through the air. Those ten plays are worth 316 yards for a 31.6 yard per play average and over 105 yards per game. That translates into nearly 37 percent of the total offense coming from the vertical passing game. Obviously, the Irish running game is nearly non-existent.

Against Michigan State the running game was even more anemic. Notre Dame ran the ball 22 times for 16 yards, a 0.7 yard per carry average. Even subtracting the three sacks of Clausen the Irish only averaged 2.0 yards per carry. That is hardly respectable given the size advantage of Notre Dame’s offensive line.

Speaking of sacks, the Irish surrendered their first three of the season. While Michigan State only sacked Clausen three times, they pressured and hit him numerous others. Even so, Notre Dame is only giving up one sack per 32 passing attempts, a solid improvement over the one sack per 6.7 passing attempts of 2007.

Clausen completed 58.5 percent of his attempts for 242 yards, but had his lowest yards per completion average of the season at only 10.1 yards per completion. His yards per attempt also dipped from 7 yards in the first two games to 5.9 yards against Michigan State. This was mostly due to the Irish offense’s inability to consistently throw down the field.

Clausen continued to throw interceptions against Michigan State, notching picks five and six on the year. At one pick per 16 pass attempts, Clausen is not on a good pace for the season. At his current rate he will finish even with 24 touchdowns and interceptions.

Receivers Michael Floyd and Golden Tate continue to impress. Floyd nabbed 7 balls for 86 yards and a touchdown while Tate caught 5 passes for 83 yards.

For the second straight game Notre Dame was beaten in the time of possession, with Michigan State holding nearly an eight minute edge. This showed late in the game as the Irish defense struggled to contain Spartan running back Javon Ringer.

Defense

For over three quarters the defense played well. Despite facing a short field twice, the defense only surrendered thirteen points and kept Notre Dame in the game. The inability to get off the field on third down and lack of running game by the Irish offense to control the time of possession doomed them in the end.

Against quarterback Brian Hoyer and the Spartan passing game, Notre Dame more than held their own. Despite giving up 5.5 yards per attempt and 11.9 yards per completion, the Irish allowed Hoyer to complete only 46.2 percent of his passes for a paltry 143 yards.

On the year Notre Dame is only surrendering just over 215 yards per game through the air, allowing opposing quarterbacks to complete only 53.1 percent of their passes.

The problem was defending Ringer and the running game for four quarters. Ringer ran for 201 yards and two touchdowns against the Irish at a rate of 5.2 yards per carry. However, over 47 percent of his yardage came on three plays. Without those big runs Ringer averaged a modest 2.9 yards per carry. The Irish defense really contained him, save three long runs.

Once again Notre Dame got solid play from its secondary and linebackers. Linebacker Brian Smith racked up ten tackles-one for a loss-and forced a fumble on a very aware play. Smith looks to be headed towards All-American status in the future. Veteran linebacker Maurice Crum also added eight stops for the Irish.

Safeties Kyle McCarthy and David Bruton notched nine and ten tackles respectively. McCarthy continues to be one of the better tacklers in the country.

Special Teams

The special teams improved in one area but regressed in the others.

The Irish punt coverage unit continues to be solid, giving up only one return for ten yards despite punting five times.

But the field goal unit has yet to convert a single attempt. On the year half of Notre Dame’s field goal attempts have been resulted in a poor snap and/or hold.

Kickoff coverage also looked spotty Saturday as the Irish averaged only 36.5 net yards per kickoff. Compare that to Michigan State’s 44 net yards per kickoff average and you get a first down’s worth of field position change.

One good kickoff return and another good punt return gave the Irish respectable averages in both categories but the remainder of the day saw mediocrity in the return game.

Summary

The Irish lost this game with turnovers. However, even without the turnovers Notre Dame hardly played well enough to win. Had it been a closer game down the stretch there is still no guarantee of a win as Michigan State’s ability to run the football, control the clock, and wear down the Irish defense paid huge dividends in the fourth quarter.

Head coach Charlie Weis and his staff would be well served learning a lesson on the importance of ball control from this loss. After all, the benefits of a solid running game are numerous and the Notre Dame offense is built to run the football.

Notre Dame vs. Michigan State: Keys To An Irish Win

2008-09-17T19:50:00.005-05:00

Notre Dame travels to East Lansing this weekend to take on the Michigan State Spartans. Notre Dame hasn’t played well on offense, defense, and special teams for four consecutive quarters, but that is likely what will be needed to produce a win as this is arguably the toughest challenge to date for the Irish.

The game will pit Michigan State’s strength against Notre Dame’s weakness.

Michigan State enters the game rushing for 192 yards per contest and 4.1 yards per carry. Spartan head coach Mark Dantonio is more than happy pounding the ball with stud running back Javon Ringer.

For the season Notre Dame has given up four yards per carry to Michigan (124 yards per game rushing) and San Diego State (35 yards per game rushing). The defensive front three/four for the Irish has been fairly weak against the run and at only 278 pounds per man, give up well over 30 pounds to the Michigan State offensive line. It will certainly be a test of size and strength versus speed and quickness.

It is imperative that the Irish negate the Spartan advantage in the ground game. Special teams must continue to play well, giving Notre Dame an advantage in field position and forcing Michigan State to face a long field all day.

The offensive and defensive units must also work together to neutralize Ringer.

Offense

1. Score early and often. The Irish have shown they can go deep in the passing game and be successful as indicated by a better than 12.3 yard per completion average on the season. If quarterback Jimmy Clausen can find Golden Tate, Michael Floyd, and Duval Kamara behind a suspect Spartan secondary it bodes well for the Irish. Getting a large lead early would potentially force the Michigan State offense to get out of their comfort zone and go to the passing game in an attempt to play catch-up.

2. Chew the clock. Against a Michigan stout front seven surrendering less than one yard per carry Notre Dame was able to run the ball relatively effectively. The Irish averaged 3.3 yards per carry even though the Wolverines knew they were trying to kill the clock in the second half. Notre Dame would be well advised to go back to the power running game and keep Ringer off the field.

3. Stay ahead in the down and distance. Notre Dame has been atrocious on third down, converting only 25 percent of their opportunities through two games. Part of this poor performance can certainly be attributed to execution. However, far too often the Irish playcalling has been aggressive on first and second down. This has resulted in third and middle-to-long two thirds of the time. Head coach Charlie Weis said there will be an emphasis on third down playcalling and execution this week, but first and second down are equally as important.

Defense

1. Force Brian Hoyer to win the game. The Spartan signal caller is a capable quarterback in many respects but lacks playmakers at the wide receiver position. If asked to win the game it is unlikely he will be able to live up to expectations against a strong Irish secondary. This task is much easier if the offense can build a substantial lead early.

2. Keep Michigan State in long down and distances. Lock up on the edge, sell out against the run on first down, and force Hoyer to throw on second and third (and long) to move the ball. The Spartan playbook is significantly reduced in size if the Irish can produce these long down and distance situations. If Notre Dame can neutralize the run on first down it will go a long way in helping them win the game.

3. Tackle better. It was true in week one and in week two, but will be even more important this week. Ringer is a back that gets better as the game goes on and as he gains momentum running the ball. Taking him down with the first defender is paramount to success. This was a pre-season focus and should continue to be a point of emphasis for the Irish defense.

Statistically Speaking: Notre Dame vs. Michigan

2008-09-15T19:45:00.008-05:00

Despite surrendering roughly 50 percent more yards to the Wolverines, the Fighting Irish came out on top 35-17. The tale of the game was six Wolverine turnovers, largely the result of carelessness and poor weather conditions. All in all Notre Dame produced 28 points off these Michigan miscues.

But credit should be given to the Irish as they made Michigan pay dearly converting the first two Michigan fumbles into touchdowns that gave Notre Dame a 14-0 lead only four minutes into the game. After a Michigan drive stalled in Irish territory quarterback, Jimmy Clausen wasted no time and connected with Golden Tate for a 48 yard strike. This gave the Irish a 21-0 lead with 4:51 left in the first quarter.

Michigan was never able to battle back.

Offense

The Notre Dame offense improved over last week in red zone efficiency and turnovers. The Irish converted three of four red zone appearances into touchdowns and reduced the number of turnovers by two. Despite converting only 25 percent of their third down attempts for the second straight week, these two areas show good improvement.

The Irish offense averaged 4.7 yards per play running the ball 34 times while attempting only 21 passes for a 61.8/38.2 percent run/pass split. Total offense was down from 342 yards in week one to 260 yards. However, the total yardage in the game was misleading as Notre Dame faced a short field many times in the first half and spent much of the second half killing the clock.

The Irish lost the time of possession game by more than four minutes. The first half, in particular, saw the Wolverines grab more than a nine minute advantage before Notre Dame went to the ground in the second half attempting to shorten the game. With a thin defense and suspect front four, not controlling the clock in the future could be problematic for the Irish.

Notre Dame ran the ball for 113 yards. That translates to 3.3 yards per rush, slightly up from their 3.1 yards per carry output against San Diego State. The Irish gained only five first downs on the ground but did manage to score twice running the football.

This leads one to believe the rushing performance was poor. That may not have been the case. Michigan entered the game yielding fewer than one yard per carry. Additionally, many of the Irish rushing attempts occurred in the second half when Michigan knew Notre Dame was going to run in order to run the clock.

Robert Hughes led the way on the ground, taking 19 carries for 79 yards and two touchdowns. At 4.2 yards per carry, Hughes definitely looked like the workhorse back preseason prognosticators forecasted.

The Irish added only four more first downs through the air, but two touchdown passes of more than ten yards and a Golden Tate 60 yard slant route certainly lowered that number.

Clausen completed less than 50 percent of his throws, down from a much more efficient game against the Aztecs. His yards per attempt stayed steady at seven but his yards per completion increased from 11.3 to 14.7. Compare that to 9.1 yards per completion from 2007 and it is evident that the Irish are much more adept at the vertical passing game. Cutting down on interceptions would be advised as Clausen is averaging one per 13.8 passing attempts.

Once again, the Irish protected Clausen. Michigan entered the game second in the nation in getting to the quarterback, but the Irish did not surrender a single sack. This is week two of a welcomed new trend for the Irish.

Tate had a monster day hauling in passes from Clausen. To date Tate has caught ten balls for 220 yards and two touchdowns. That 22 yard per reception average is certainly indicative of his ability to stretch the field.

Finally, all five of the Irish touchdowns-even Brian Smith’s fumble return-were accounted for by sophomores. That bodes very well for the future, and for Weis’ recruiting efforts.

Defense

The defense looked suspect at times, particularly in the first half. As mentioned above, Michigan owned a more than nine minute edge in first half time of possession. This was evident in poor tackling and a lack of effort on many plays.

The credit, however, goes to the defensive coaching staff as the Irish adjusted well at halftime. After allowing Michigan running back Sam McGuffie to gash his way to more than 80 first half yards, the Irish defense stiffened, holding the Wolverines to only 2.5 yards per carry in the second half. Additionally, Notre Dame gave up zero second half points.

Notre Dame surrendered 5.5 yards per play to Michigan, with 8.2 yards per play coming through the air. That’s up from only 5.6 yards per pass attempt in week one. Michigan was able to get 12.1 yards per completion as well. That isn’t as productive as the Irish passing attack, but it is significantly higher than the 10.7 yards the Irish gave up to San Diego State.

In terms of sacks, the Irish blitzing attack was relatively inefficient (again). Despite applying pressure for much of the day Notre Dame failed to record a single sack. This can expose the secondary and exemplify the high risk defense the Notre Dame scheme dictates.

Once again, the Irish safeties led the way with David Bruton notching 15 tackles and Kyle McCarthy getting ten. Throw a forced fumble and interception in for Bruton, and the senior play-maker is starting to show his true colors.

Special Teams

Special teams continue to be a bright spot for the Irish, at least compared to 2007. For the second straight week Notre Dame had more than a 15 yard advantage in field possession.

The Irish punt and kickoff coverage units held the Wolverines to negative punt return yards and only 11.4 yards per kickoff return. Gunners Bruton and Mike Anello are excellent.

Notre Dame averaged 51.5 net yards per kickoff compared to Michigan’s 43.8. However, the Wolverines got the better of the Irish in the punting game with 49.8 yards netted per punt compared to 44.2 for the Irish.

But the real bright spot came in the form of Anello’s fumble recovery on Michigan’s second kickoff return. Anello was the first Irish special teams player down the field and proved, once again, that heart matters.

Summary

Notre Dame really put this game away early in the first half by capitalizing on two Michigan turnovers. The total yard statistics favor the Wolverines but the Irish were really just trying to run the clock leading with inclement weather. To be certain, it was not a dominating effort, but red zone efficiency and turnover margin ultimately led to victory.

Notre Dame vs. Michigan Game Recap

2008-09-15T16:39:00.000-05:00

After needing fourth quarter heroics to beat a significantly less talented San Diego State squad, Notre Dame came out and put the Michigan Wolverines away early. The Irish played a more complete game than they did in week one, capitalizing on six Michigan turnovers en route to a 35-17 victory.

Forget the specifics, the intangibles, the Michigan turnovers. There is no reason to hash out who played well and who didn’t. This was a statement game, not a statement win. It was a statement that the program is back moving in the right direction. And the Irish made their statement in convincing fashion. They came out swinging, went for the jugular early and often, and rode the clock (and wet weather) to victory.

Despite having a down year, Michigan is still Michigan. They have ample talent (particularly on the defensive side of the ball), a non-conventional offense that is difficult to defend, and they look to be improving. But the Irish came away with a confidence building victory over their rival opponent that had taken them behind the wood shed the past two seasons.

To be certain, Michigan lost the game as much as Notre Dame won it. Committing six turnovers is nearly impossible to overcome. But that doesn’t take away from the magnitude of what the Notre Dame players have accomplished since a deplorable 2007 season.

Facing an off-season of adversity, the Irish look like they have turned the corner. There is discernable improvement everywhere on the team starting with the most maligned unit of 2007, the offensive line. The Irish have established a down-field passing attack, are beginning to control the line of scrimmage, have dramatically improved special teams play, and have found a more than capable signal caller in quarterback Jimmy Clausen.

The recruiting of head coach Charlie Weis is also starting to show. The talent along the offensive line is growing to reach its potential and the players are gelling as a unit. The Irish have three legitimate running backs, several wide receivers with play making potential, and the quarterback to get them the ball.

The secondary is fast, athletic, and has excellent coverage skills. The outside pass rush is effective, and the linebacking corps has improved dramatically from last season. Unfortunately, the defensive line is still a liability, even with solid minutes from some of the younger players.

But the defensive line is only the tip of the iceberg. There is no question that the Irish must improve to extend their win streak. Tackling was suspect Saturday, the running game hasn’t been consistently effective, and Clausen et. al. must continue to minimize turnovers. Failure to control the clock and win time of possession in the future could come back to haunt an already thin defense.

That thin defense is trying to execute a high risk, high reward scheme. Blitzing frequently to apply pressure to the quarterback leaves the secondary vulnerable to big plays. Through two games Notre Dame has only generated a single sack. If the Irish aren’t getting home on many blitzes it seems unjustified to continue risking the big play with little promise of a reward.

Additionally, an Irish defense with ideal personnel for the spread didn’t stop a Michigan offense still struggling to execute. The Irish also continue to exhibit a baffling lack of commitment to the running game and playcalling that is frequently too cute. The former, coupled with the latter, will allow more disciplined opponents with fewer turnovers to come away with a win.

But the fact that the team has come so far in only twelve months shows the arrow is pointing in the right direction. Execution is inconsistent (particularly on third down), but the Irish are young and there are far more positives than negatives to glean from Saturday’s performance. Namely, red zone efficiency and turnover margin improved from week one and are the two biggest reasons for the win.

Notre Dame is by no means an elite team, but there is definitely progress being made and the credit has to go to the head man. In the face of mounting criticism Weis stuck to his plan, believed in his philosophy, and implemented off-season changes that have certainly paid dividends.

On top of all that, he showed a commitment to the program and to his players Saturday, remaining on the sideline after a serious injury and watching the team get their first meaningful win in over a year.

For a Notre Dame squad that lacked fun for most of the 2007 season, they seem to have exorcized the demons. The Irish players certainly appeared to be having a good time on Saturday. Enjoy it boys. Enjoy it and get back to work. The season has just begun and improvement is still needed. Michigan State is next, and it will take a better performance to come away with a win.

Notre Dame vs. Michigan: Keys To An Irish Win

2008-09-11T19:22:00.003-05:00

With the Irish and Wolverines both projected to have poor seasons, the game Saturday is a must win for both teams. Effort, physical play, and determination should go a long way in determining the winner as the contest should be a low scoring affair decided in the waning moments.

Offense

1. Establish the run. As was true last week and will be true all season, Notre Dame must run the ball successfully to be consistently effective on offense. The running game chews the clock, wears down the defense, opens up play action, and takes pressure off quarterback Jimmy Clausen and the passing game. As Michigan has one of the more talented defenses on the Irish schedule, running the ball well is paramount to success on offense for Notre Dame.

2. Minimize mistakes. If the Irish can avoid the offensive mistakes that plagued them through three quarters of play against San Diego State they should win the game. Turnovers, poor execution on third down and missed opportunities in the red zone nearly cost them the game.

3. Execute the screen and draw game. If the Michigan coaching staff is worth anything they will lock down on the edge, put eight in the box, stop the run, and apply pressure to Clausen on obvious passing downs. The Irish passing game showed improvement against San Diego State, but the performance carries an asterisk as the Aztecs aren’t a good defense. To slow the pass rush and prevent Michigan from blindly rushing the passer the Irish offense must give them pause.

Defense

1. Tackle well in the open field. Like last week the Notre Dame defense must tackle well to prevent long gains and get the Michigan offense off the field. Michigan head coach Rich Rodriguez will make every attempt to get his offensive players the ball in space, one-on-one with an Irish defender. Notre Dame must tackle well to stop the Wolverine offense.

2. Call off the dogs. The Irish don’t have to stop blitzing all together but caution is advised. Multiple times against San Diego State Irish defenders took themselve out of the play by blitzing with little control. The zone-read is tough to stop, if the Irish blitz and take themselves out of position they could be in for a long day.

3. Help from the reserves. This figures to be a physical game and with Michigan spreading the field the Irish will frequently play nickel and dime packages. The secondary needs help from backups Robert Blanton and Gary Gray and the defensive line needs help from reserves Ethan Johnson and Maurice Richardson. This should keep players fresh and help executing tackles in open space.

Notre Dame vs. San Diego State Game Recap

2008-09-09T20:56:00.008-05:00

Notre Dame came away with a victory Saturday despite a lackluster offense for three quarters. The Irish certainly did not “dive right in,” struggling in the three most important statistical categories which resulted in a much closer game than most anticipated. Only a dramatically improved fourth quarter effort rescued the Irish from losing their season opener.

Reminiscent of Tyrone Willingham’s woeful offenses, the Irish played down to their opposition, looked unprepared, and definitely did not display the schematic advantage Weis promised upon his arrival in South Bend. The lack of a physical, efficient, and effective running game has left many Irish fans wondering if “nasty” is merely a buzzword.

Beating a struggling San Diego State squad by only eight points and trailing late in the game isn’t the script head coach Charlie Weis would have written for his team. However, there are some positives to be gleaned from an offensive effort that, in many ways, mirrored the ineptitude of 2007.

Defensively the Irish looked good and special teams have improved from last year. But one game of progress in these areas is hardly enough to offset the marginal growth of the offense, particularly when that was Weis' supposed forte.

Offense

Despite scoring only once in five red zone possessions and converting on a paltry 25 percent of its third downs, there were positives on offense for the Irish. En route to a 14 point fourth quarter, the Irish dominated time of possession and total yards. At times the offense showed improvement from 2007 but much more consistency is needed for Notre Dame to extend their win streak to four and beyond.

On many plays the difference between a modest gain and breaking a long run were minimal, but the fact remains that the offense clicked when it had to. Losing in the fourth quarter last season, a victory would have been very unlikely.

Quarterback

Against the Aztecs quarterback Jimmy Clausen had a coming out party. Showing marked improvement Clausen completed nearly 62 percent of his passes for 247 yards, three touchdowns, and two interceptions. One of his two interceptions was largely not his fault and his play was one of the bright spots for a unit that struggled to consistently move the ball.

Clausen didn’t panic when the team went down, saving his best play to lead the Fighting Irish comeback in the fourth quarter. He looks more comfortable in the pocket, has a very quick release, has much more velocity on his throws, and showed great touch on his deep passes. Often the timing of his passes was perfect.

Like the offensive line, Clausen still struggles in some areas of his game. His mechanics on play action passes are lacking, he made a few poor reads (including the second interception), and he still stares down his receiver on occasion. Perhaps to silence his critics, Clausen also seemed to be putting too much behind some of his throws in the first half. Hopefully these are sophomore mistakes that will improve with time because the physical talent is certainly there.

Running Back

The running back position was thought to be a strength of the team, but Saturday’s performance was a mixed bag. The talented trio of Armando Allen, Robert Hughes, and James Aldridge was cut to two as Aldridge saw no playing time.

Allen ran with more patience on Saturday than at any time during the 2007 season. He showed grit and determination, also providing some fireworks on a punt return. His pass protection has dramatically improved and he showed good hands and ability in the passing game.

But Irish fans have to be concerned about Allen’s speed. Once thought to be a homerun threat, he seems to have lost a step from 2007. His cutting ability and acceleration are good but he isn't able to separate from defenders in open space.

Despite running tough at some points during the game, Hughes seemed timid at others, not displaying the decisive running he showed at the end of the 2007 season and misreading his blockers.

Hughes did, however, continue to impress with his agility and balance, showing soft hands in the passing game and the ability to create on screen passes. As the game progressed and the Aztec defense wore down he became more effective.

Wide Receiver

Once thought to be a potential weakness, the wide receiver position may be an emerging strength.

Clausen complete passes to four wide receivers with most of the production coming from sophomore Golden Tate. Tate’s improvement from 2007 is readily apparent. Armed with elite speed, a better understanding of the position, increased route running ability, and excellent hands, Tate proved to be the deep threat Notre Dame needs. If he can improve his blocking and release off the line of scrimmage, he will continue to be a valuable receiving weapon for the Irish.

Freshman Michael Floyd got into the mix at the end of the first half taking a Clausen audible 22 yards to pay dirt. Floyd looks athletic and agile running routes. His release off the line of scrimmage is strong and quick, allowing him to get behind the defender on multiple occasions. Through one game of action he certainly looks like he has very good potential despite only catching one pass.

Dependable senior David Grimes had a good game for the Irish catching 5 passes for 35 yards and a touchdown. Absent were the drops from 2007 that killed drives. Grimes also blocked well down the field despite an undeserved flag for holding.

The biggest disappoint of the wide receivers had to be Duval Kamara. Despite an excess of ability Kamara seemed lost at times and lacking concentration at others. He was directly responsible for Clausen’s first interception and showed poor effort for much of the day. The Irish receiving corps needs his play, but concentration problems and a lack of effort may allow other talented players on the roster to surpass him.

Tight End

Notre Dame spent much of its day in multiple tight end formations, using Will Yeatman, Luke Schmidt, and Kyle Rudolph as blockers. Yeatman and Schmidt performed admirably, blocking very well for most of the afternoon.

Rudolph, however, showed that he is merely a freshman. He has tremendous upside but will need to considerably improve his blocking to be on the field in all situations.

Offensive Line

With nowhere to go but up, the offensive line play has improved considerably for Notre Dame.

Despite the off-season size increase, the offensive line looked more athletic than last season indicating a better understanding of their assignments and more reaction in their play. This is a welcomed change from a unit that looked hesitant and inept much of last season.

The entire front five played with determination for much of the game despite an incompetent offensive game plan (more on this later). They were physical at the point of attack, got good push off the line of scrimmage, showed good effort, and didn’t give up a single sack through 34 pass attempts. This was to be expected against a San Diego State defensive line missing seven players but was encouraging just the same.

Left guard Eric Olsen played well for much of the afternoon and right tackle Sam Young’s leadership is evident in his effort. The pass blocking technique of Young and fellow tackle Mike Turkovich has improved dramatically and all five members of the unit showed progress cutting the defensive line.

There is room for improvement, however, as the interior players struggled to engage defenders at the second level and drive after contact. Additionally, blocking away from the play was mediocre at best. Olsen and right guard Chris Stewart must improve their hand position when blocking linebackers and members of the secondary. Scooping on the backside must also improve as several runs were stopped by pursuit running down the play.

Defense

The Irish defense performed admirably holding Aztec quarterback Ryan Lindley to less than a 50 percent completion percentage and under five yards per pass attempt. Despite an excellent game plan by San Diego State head coach Chuck Long and good effort from the Aztec players, Notre Dame repeatedly pressured Lindley, sacking him once and batting down eight passes. San Diego State was also fairly ineffective on third down, converting only 31 percent of their attempts.

The defense was fast and aggressive, blitzing repeatedly. This forced Lindley to get rid of the ball quickly, after which the secondary mopped up the Aztec receivers with good tackling.

There is room for improvement as the philosophy for the Irish has changed considerably from last year, and it will take some time to perfect the new, blitz-happy scheme.

Mostly, this improvement needs to come in how the Irish blitz.

At times defenders were slightly out of position, allowing Aztec players to evade the rush. The Irish defenders need to be more controlled, able to make a play on the ball rather than wildly rushing the quarterback.

Notre Dame's defense also needs to work on timing. Often Irish defenders showed the blitz too soon, enabling the San Diego State offense to recognize it and subsequently pick it up. They would be better served showing the same pre-snap formations and executing the blitz after the snap.

Finally, San Diego State was able to cut onrushing Irish defenders with relative ease. Notre Dame needs to work on avoiding these types of blocks with hurdles or creating more space to allow players to avoid the blockers.

Defensive Line

The Irish defensive line looked good at some times, poor at others. It seems evident that Notre Dame will not be able to get pressure with the front three/four. Despite a somewhat makeshift offensive line, San Diego State was able to handle the Irish defensive linemen with relative ease.

Defensive linemen John Ryan and Justin Brown were the biggest disappointments, taking several plays off and not showing consistent effort. Ian Williams had a decent day, but still struggles to shed blocks.

There were, however, some bright spots. Kerry Neal looked good for much of the day and freshman Ethan Johnson showed some excellent pass rushing skills. Johnson really uses his hands well and has good explosiveness off the ball.

Linebackers

It seems that the days of poor tackling, errant pursuit angles, and slow reacting are gone for Notre Dame. While Maurice Crum still looked hesitant on some plays the Irish backers played well for much of the day.

In spite of two costly penalties that kept an Aztec drive alive, Crum performed admirably. He rotated into coverage when the Irish dialed up pressure and tackled in the open field. He recorded the only sack as well, but it was mostly a product of fellow linebacker Brian Smith.

Smith seemed to be all or nothing on the day, taking some plays off and showing exceptional athletic ability on others. His pass rushing ability is excellent, whether he uses his strength coming up the middle or his speed on the outside. He is a true talent and only figures to improve with more time.

Harrison Smith was quiet for much of the day. His play will benefit with more time. On the majority of plays he was easily picked up on the blitz, trying to use his brawn rather than his speed and quickness to reach the quarterback.

Secondary

The brightest spot on the defense was, by far, the secondary. Notre Dame tackled very well, rotated into coverage with great timing, and locked up on the outside. Even without playing time from capable backups Gary Gray and Robert Blanton, the Irish secondary looked very good.

Safeties Kyle McCarthy and David Bruton led the Irish in tackles. While this usually spells disaster, in the Irish scheme they fulfilled their duties. McCarthy is a very sure tackler and Bruton patrols the two-deep as well as anyone.

On the outside Terrail Lambert and Raeshon McNeil displayed excellent cover skills and blanketed the Aztec receivers for much of the day. Early in the contest Lambert and McNeil gave too much cushion, but adapted quickly. McNeil needs to work on his tackling and both must improve in their situational football, but overall the coverage on the edge was very good for the Irish.

Sergio Brown emerged from relative obscurity to contribute very solid minutes in the Nickel package for the Irish. Whether it was in coverage, blitzing, or special teams play, Brown made his mark on the field, translating his athletic ability into a capable performance.

Special Teams

The Irish Special Teams showed more good than bad against San Diego State. Despite narrowly missing a 47 yard field goal attempt and botching the snap of another, the overall special teams impression was good.

The return game was improved on both punts and kickoffs and the coverage was also excellent for both units. Coming off a horrid performance in 2007, the Irish improved dramatically in nearly every special teams statistical category, and Weis and special teams coach Brian Polian deserve credit.

Coaching

In a football game coaching is most evident in three respects. First, the coaching staff cultivates discipline and develops execution during practice. Second, the coaching staff scouts the opponent and prepares the plan of attack. Finally, the coaching staff adjusts said plan of attack during the game to counter the scheme of the opposition. The players merely act out this chess match on the field.

Notre Dame did not play with discipline on Saturday.

A disciplined team does not give away four turnovers (two inside the opponent's red zone) and commit seven penalties, many of them poorly timed.

Furthermore, a team that executes well does not convert 25 percent of its third down attempts and only score once in five end zone tries. Yes, the players are partially culpable, but the ultimate responsibility falls on the coaches.

With a young team self-inflicted mistakes are deadly, and the Irish committed more than their fair share Saturday.

Defensively the game plan was solid. The Irish wanted to pressure Lindley, forcing him to get rid of the ball quickly, relying on solid tackling by their secondary to prevent the long gain.

No adjustment was needed as the game plan worked. While there were a few breakdowns in the secondary, they were minimal and Notre Dame looked like a well-coached football team.

Offensively the Irish coaching staff failed on both accounts.

While Weis showed better judgment attempting to convert fourth down, his promise of pounding the ball was abandoned on the third play of the game. And it wasn’t even a question. After running for four yards on each of their first two plays, the Irish spread the field in an obvious passing formation and promptly proceeded to throw an incomplete pass.

That shows no commitment to the running game. And it doesn’t even disguise the offensive intent for the Aztec defense. The fruits of a consistent power running game don’t show up on the first drive, they show up in the second half. Weis needs to have the patience to stick with it.

The entire rushing scheme for the Irish was suspect. The offensive line for Notre Dame is big and strong. The San Diego State defensive line is small and quick, not to mention injured and missing. Instead of running right at them Irish offensive coordinator Mike Haywood repeatedly called zone stretch plays.

Newsflash: asking larger, slower players to beat smaller, faster players to the point of attack is an act in futility. Doing so with Hughes, whose power and strength are his biggest assets, is an act of stupidity.

Line up, run right at them, and negate the speed. Don’t hand the ball off five yards deep every play and take a year for the run to develop. If you have size and strength, use it to your advantage: narrow the space, cut down splits, use base, isolation, blast, or wham blocking techniques. Get a hat on a hat and help your offensive linemen engage. Don’t handicap them by not giving them the angles.

Additionally, the Irish offensive staff either didn’t see the adjustments or refused to implement them. The Aztec linebackers didn’t take a wrong step all afternoon. In other words, they knew where the ball was going.

Notre Dame repeatedly gave away the direction of the run with their formation and motion in the backfield. Furthermore, the Irish offensive staff never called any misdirection or counter plays. Even a play action pass to a tight end on a curl or a wide receiver on a drag over the middle was missing. Nothing was done to give the San Diego State linebacking corps pause, preventing them from flying to the ball.

Summary

The Irish showed progress from 2007 on Saturday, but offensively it was marginal. Despite showing some improvement in the passing game Notre Dame failed to commit to the run, turned the ball over, and didn’t execute for three quarters of play.

Since Weis' first season in 2005, Notre Dame’s trend in offensive performance has declined every year. Besides a few runs by Rashon Powers-Neal he has failed to install an effective power running game, underestimating its value and instead choosing to open up the run with the pass. He doesn’t seem to grasp the differences between the NFL and college game, and his staff is seemingly inadequate at developing much of the talent they recruit.

It is only one game, but if I’m Jack Swarbrick, I have a short-list of head coaches on speed dial. It is very possible that Weis may not pan out. Then again, turnovers-especially untimely ones-are one of the easiest things to correct and teams reputedly improve more between the first and second game than any other time during the season.

Statistically Speaking: Notre Dame vs. San Diego State

2008-09-07T22:12:00.007-05:00

The Irish looked awful at times on Saturday, failing to put a significantly less talented team away in the first half. Despite facing an opponent partially crippled by NCAA sanctions and injuries, the Irish needed a solid fourth quarter effort to win.

A look at the box score and comparison to the woeful 2007 team leads to some interesting conclusions.

The three most important statistical corollaries to winning football games are turnover margin, red zone efficiency, and third down conversion percentage. The Irish failed miserably in each, committing four turnovers (two of which were virtually in the San Diego State end zone), scoring only once in five red zone tries, and only converting on a quarter of its third down attempts.

Performing poorly in one of these three areas is typically indicative of a rough outing, struggling in all three spells disaster more often than not.

Offense

Notre Dame averaged five yards per play running and throwing the ball at an even split, with 34 attempts on the ground and through the air for 342 total yards. This produced a fairly even time of possession result, with the Irish holding a slight edge (1:44).

The production of the running game was not as good as that of the passing game as Notre Dame yielded 30.7 percent of its yards on the ground to 69.3 percent in the air. The first downs also support this trend with 12 coming via passes and only four from running the football. San Diego State also gifted the Irish four first downs from penalties.

The Irish netted only 105 rushing yards on 34 attempts for a paltry 3.1 yard per carry average. That is poor production especially considering there were no sacks to lower the average. Armando Allen and Robert Hughes split the carries with 17 and 16 respectively. Both averaged nearly 3.5 yards per carry, down from 4 and 5.5 respectively the previous year. Despite the running game being a point of emphasis in the off-season it appears there has been little improvement from 2007.

The passing game, however, has improved. Notre Dame was sacked 58 times in 389 attempts last year, or roughly once every 6.7 attempts. Through 34 attempts against San Diego State the Irish didn’t surrender a single sack, even though no improvement from 2007 would have suggested five. Granted, the opponent was San Diego State, but Navy, Air Force, Duke, and Stanford all recorded sacks in 2007 against the Irish.

Additionally, Notre Dame quarterback Jimmy Clausen completed 61.8 percent of his passes and averaged 7 yards per attempt and 11.3 yards per completion compared to 56.3 percent, 5.1, and 9.1 in 2007. The improvement in these areas indicates increased efficiency and the capability to go down the field with the ball, something better pass protection against the Aztecs allowed.

Clausen’s favorite targets were David Grimes and Golden Tate. Grimes caught 5 balls for 35 yards and a touchdown while Tate provided the deep threat with 6 catches for 93 yards and a touchdown.

Defense

On paper the defense played pretty well. Notre Dame held San Diego State to 345 yards on 74 plays (4.7 yard per play average) despite the Aztecs attempting 59 passes and throwing the ball on just under 80% of their offensive plays.

The Irish secondary limited San Diego State quarterback Ryan Lindley to less than a 50 percent completion percentage and only 4.6 yards per attempt. Most of the passes were underneath as the Aztecs netted only 9.4 yards per completion. Additionally, the Irish defense held San Diego State to 31.3 percent conversion percentage on third down.

The defensive production against the passing game improved over last season when the Irish allowed opposing quarterbacks to complete 52.6 percent of their passes at 5.6 yards per attempt and 10.7 yards per completion.

Notre Dame gave up 71 yards on 15 attempts on the ground. That’s good for a 4.7 yard average but increases to 5.6 yards per attempt if the lone sack is removed. This is up from an already large 4.3 yard per attempt value form 2007, but may be a little misleading given the fact that San Diego State didn’t try to establish the running game with any consistency.

The defense didn’t hit home on as many blitzes as anticipated. Despite rushing the passer frequently Notre Dame only recorded one sack for a loss of seven yards. However, eight throws were batted down and many other times Lindley had to alter his throwing motion due to onrushing Irish defenders.

Safeties Kyle McCarthy and David Bruton led the way with 14 and 7 tackles, respectively, and outside linebacker/defensive end Kerry Neal recorded the only Irish interception on a screen pass.

Special Teams

Although the Irish blotched one field goal hold and missed a second from 47 yards, the special teams actually performed pretty well.

In the return game Notre Dame averaged 13.7 yards per punt return while surrendering only 1.7 to San Diego State. The net punting average for Notre Dame was just under 39 yards, while the Aztecs only netted 25.7 yards per punt. Obviously the punt return blocking and coverage was much better for the Irish.

Similarly, the Irish gained 24.7 yards per kickoff return and gave up only 12.5 to the Aztecs. These return averages translated into 48 yards netted per kickoff for Notre Dame and only 39.3 for San Diego State.

That’s good for a 20 yard difference in field position as the average starting field position for Notre Dame was their own 43 while San Diego State averaged starting at their own 23. This is a substantial difference, on average requiring two fewer first downs for Notre Dame to score.

These values are nearly all improved over the results of 2007.

Summary

It is only one game against a weak opponent, but statistically comparing the Irish vs. San Diego State on offense, defense, and special teams suggests improvement in all areas of the game except rushing offense and (potentially) rushing defense.

It was turnovers, poor execution in the red zone, and poor execution on third down that led to such a close game.

Notre Dame vs. San Diego State: Keys To An Irish Win

2008-09-03T21:40:00.006-05:00

The Fighting Irish of Notre Dame open their season this weekend against a significantly less talented opponent. Facing such an opponent Notre Dame should only need to show up to win. In this vein there aren’t any “keys to victory” as typically precede an Irish gridiron matchup. Therefore, in atypical fashion, three things the Irish should accomplish on offense and defense this weekend.

Offense

1. Establish the run. Weis has said it, the Irish are built to do it, and with offensive coordinator Michael Haywood now calling the plays one would suspect it’s coming. But Notre Dame needs to stop talking and start producing on the ground. Work out the kinks early, run the ball with authority, and form the building blocks of offensive confidence and identity that can be sustained into the season.

2. Develop the play action pass. In conjunction with running the football, give Jimmy Clausen (presumably) easy throws off play action. It will build his confidence, should be open with success in the running game, and should really be the only passes the offense attempts. Furthermore, the play action passing game should be some of the most easily executed passes in the playbook.

3. Don’t open it up. There is no need to attempt more than 20passes, no need to go down the field more than a handful of times, no need to show any future opponents any more than a power running game headed by James Aldridge, Robert Hughes, and Armando Allen. This team is still young, it can still make mistakes, and there is no reason to give Michigan et. al. any unnecessary advantages.

Defense

1. Rattle Ryan Lindley and do it early. Apply pressure to the opposing quarterback, force hurries, and hit him often. This doesn’t means showing the entire blitz package from every 3-4/4-3 personnel alignment. Just like the offense, there is no need for the Irish to tip their hand to future opponents. It just means getting Lindley out of a rhythm early on in the game.

2. Tackle well in the open field. The Irish haven’t been the best tacklers in recent history and against teams like San Diego State that like to spread the field it is of paramount importance. Good tackling against teams who like to get the ball to players in space is very often the difference between a three-and-out and a sustained drive.

3. Play the inexperienced secondary players. The Irish have a wealth of talent in their secondary, but most of it is inexperienced. San Diego State provides a perfect opportunity to give the younger players the game experience they are going to need to effectively contribute as the season progresses.

2008 Fighting Irish Fall Practice Review

2008-09-02T18:04:00.006-05:00

Coming off a 2007 campaign that left much to be desired, the Irish have a lot to prove. To some extent, Fall (and Spring) practice can answer lingering questions about deficiencies the Irish failed to correct last season. However, uncertainty will inevitably remain until September 6 when the Irish face San Deigo State.

This Fall head coach Charlie Weis has issued a “Dive Right In” mentality, challenging them to bring a determined work ethic to practice. This bodes well for the Irish as it promotes good tempo, quality repetitions, and physical play. Practices have looked more intense, emotional, and fun. Weis has also issued an edict banning the team from discussing the 2007 season, another tactic aimed at getting Notre Dame off on the right foot in 2008.

The off-season saw quite a bit of change for Notre Dame with all the offensive linemen in the two deep tipping the scales at over 300 lbs. Additionally, the interior defensive linemen increased their squat to above 600 lbs and the running backs all upped their bench by 100 lbs. These measurables were off-season targets to address issues with poor physical offensive line play at the point of attack, insufficient run support from the front three on defense, and running backs frequently going down on first contact.

Many Fighting Irish fans were excited to see the impact of the freshmen. With Alabama’s recruiting class suffering from defections, academic ineligibilities, etc. Notre Dame’s incoming class of recruits is now the top in the country according to Rivals. Other than the defensive line, the Irish likely won’t need contributions from the youngsters, but some of them may be too talented to keep off the field. At other positions the freshmen will be counted on to build depth, driving competition and increasing the overall level of team play.

Notre Dame fans are also optimistic for the 2008 season, with many predicting eight or more wins. Generally speaking, the most player improvement occurs between the first and second seasons. With so many freshmen gaining valuable playing time in 2007 and a much more favorable schedule, expecting improvement isn’t unreasonable. But moving the win total from three to eight would be a significant achievement.

It should be noted that drawing meaningful conclusions from practice footage is a risky endeavor. The film typically includes relatively benign parts of practice: stretching, basic drills, etc. Additionally, many times it’s a half-full/half-empty proposition with one unit of the team looking good and casting doubt over the performance of the opposing unit. It is also typical for practice situations to create artificial advantages for certain positions. Finally, the camera angles are atrocious, not allowing much to be gleaned from the little video available.

With those disclaimers in hand, a summary of the Fighting Irish Fall practice camp and an outlook on the personnel heading into the 2008 season follows.

Offense

Quarterback

From very limited video Jimmy Clausen looks to have picked up right where he left off in the Spring. Physically, Clausen is a different player and it shows as he has considerably more zip on his passes. He also looks more comfortable in the offense suggesting his grasp of the playbook has progressed.

Sharpley is the entrenched backup behind Clausen. He should serve as a dependable second signal caller should the Irish need him. Dayne Crist is the most imposing physical specimen at the position. He has a very strong arm but his accuracy leaves quite a bit to be desired. To date, Crist doesn’t seem that comfortable in the offense as his “happy feet” indicate. If Weis’ comments are any indication Crist won’t see the field this year, redshirting and giving the third string duties to the son of former Notre Dame great Joe Montana.

Running Back

If there is one position where Notre Dame has top-to-bottom talent, it’s running back. There is size, speed, and quickness in surplus and the increased strength in the off-season should pay dividends in yards after contact. The Irish have three legitimate contenders for the starting role but will likely employ a “running back by committee” approach. Junior James Aldridge and sophomores Armando Allen and Robert Hughes head the triumvirate, with Hughes likely getting the majority of the carries.

Hughes might have lost a step in straight-line speed from a year ago but his cuts are more decisive and his power is exceptional. He can move the pile, something valuable in short yardage situations. He also has exceptional balance and agility for a back in the 240 lbs range but could benefit from running with a lower pad level. His ball skills are good, protecting the football before contact and always keeping the ball on the outside.

Aldridge is much of the same but with a little more quickness, especially in his cuts. He runs just as tough as last season and the competition at the position seems to have brought out the best in his effort. He also looks to have increased his speed in the off-season.

Allen has to be the most improved back in the mix. He is running with more authority and patience, something he desperately needed to develop after the 2007 season. Allen has showed better vision, waiting for holes to develop rather than charging ahead through the line of scrimmage, and his balance is nearly as good as Hughes. He has elite speed and quickness, rarely slowing to make a change of direction. This, coupled with good hands and increased pass protection skills, and Allen could be very dangerous in passing situations. He has run tougher this Fall than last season, but his shiftiness prevents defenders from getting a solid hit on his small frame which should help his durability.

Lost in the mix of the top three are junior Barry Gallup Jr. and freshmen Jonas Gray. Gallup seems to be an afterthought after a Spring switch from wide receiver, but he has looked very good in the Fall. He has very good cutting ability in space, rarely slowing down to change direction. While not the first choice for getting carries, Gallup could provide solid minutes if needed.

Gray has been one of the most impressive freshmen through the Fall. He is built like a truck and very explosive for 230 lbs, accelerating through the whole with tremendous power. His vision is excellent and he keeps his legs churning on contact. Some (including myself) have doubted his speed but the doubts are ill-founded.

Wide Receiver

The wide receiver position has been a mixed bag for Notre Dame under Weis. Upon arriving Weis and his staff turned relative unknowns Rhema McKnight, Jeff Samardzija, and Maurice Stovall into household names. After multiple seasons in relative obscurity, McKnight, Samardzija, and Stovall dramatically elevated their play. The receiving corps during Weis first two years broke multiple records and it looked like the future for the Irish wide receivers was bright.

Behind the trio of McKnight, Samardzija, and Stovall was nearly no experience. Only senior David Grimes logged any meaningful minutes during 2005 and 2006. Recruiting at the position was solid over Weis’ first two years but has really taken off the last two. The Irish have talent, but it remains to be seen if it will develop.

Generally speaking, all the wide receivers look better this Fall than during the 2007 season. Route running has improved and blocking down the field should create more opportunities for the offense to gain big chunks of yardage in the running game. However, most of the wide receivers still seem to have trouble getting off the line of scrimmage against press coverage. This deficiency has haunted the Irish passing game in the past and is an area that needs vast improvement going into 2008.

The known commodities in the receiver corps are sophomore Duval Kamara and Grimes. Kamara has locked up one starting receiver spot after missing some practice time in the Spring. Coming of a record setting freshman season, the 6’5” Kamara has excellent speed for his size. Improving his consistency catching the ball will be imperative to increase his production from last year.

Grimes holds the other starting spot showing good leadership in the Fall. Easily the most experienced receiver on the team, Grimes should serve as the most dependable pass catcher in 2008. His route running and hands are very good but his size may hold him back from having a very productive year. Juniors Robbie Parris and George West have been hampered by injuries but should be able to contribute admirably if needed.

Even with the optimism surrounding Grimes and Kamara, the talk of Fall camp has been Golden Tate and Michael Floyd. Despite his diminutive size, Tate proved in 2007 that he has the speed and athleticism to stretch the field. However, he had trouble transitioning from running back in high school to a complete wide receiver in his first college season. The word from practice is that Tate’s understanding of the offense and nuances of the wide receiver position have grown considerably. His ascension on the depth chart certainly seems to support this notion and could provide Notre Dame with the deep threat it needs.

Floyd has been creating his own buzz in the Fall with complete wide receiver play. He arrived on campus with the size and strength necessary to contribute immediately, and hasn’t done anything to disappoint so far. Running excellent routes, showing good strength blocking, and snagging just about everything around him, Floyd should see the field a lot in 2008.

Freshmen Deion Walker and John Goodman have also shown flashes of greatness in practice. Walker is a very fluid route runner with the ability to get yards after the catch. Goodman has shown great speed. While both need to add size and strength to consistently contribute, the future looks bright for these two freshmen.

Tight End

The tight end position has been a recruiting dream under Weis. The athleticism of the tight ends on the Irish roster is second to none. The depth chart took a blow with the knee injury of Mike Ragone as he was slated to be the starter and looked poised for a breakout year after a good showing in the Blue & Gold game. It’s a tough break for the sophomore who worked diligently in the off-season to add the size and strength needed to shore up his blocking skills.

Behind Ragone are a trio of talented, albeit inexperienced players. Juniors Will Yeatman and Luke Schmidt give the Irish flexibility. Both are solid blockers and receivers with Yeatman playing more on the line and Schmidt likely taking on a H-back role. Schmidt, in particular, looks very comfortable after moving from fullback last Spring. His blocking technique and physicality at the point of attack will prove to be valuable assets for the Irish running game.

The wildcard in the mix is freshmen Kyle Rudolph. Anointed with the starting duties by Weis, Rudolph comes to Notre Dame with much acclaim. He has great size at 6’6” and 250 lbs with a frame that can handle more weight. For his size, Rudolph possesses good speed and agility, giving him the edge over Yeatman and Schmidt in stretching the field. He also has great hands, catching the ball away from his body. The knock on Rudolph may be his blocking ability. While his technique makes up for a strength deficiency, improvement will be needed if he is to become more than just a situational player in 2008.

Offensive Line

Arguably no other unit was more maligned in 2007 than the offensive line. The word on the street is that the unit is improved. However, the little practice footage available doesn’t definitively confirm this.

As mentioned above, the offensive line added size across the entire two deep in the off-season. At times in practice they have looked slow coming off the ball, possibly an artifact of the added weight. Many of the offensive linemen have shown improved technique, staying low, engaging the defender, and keeping their feet driving. When they are able to get good hand position, they usually win the battle as their size and strength prove to be good assets. Cutting the splits down has also led to fewer untouched defenders in the backfield by minimizing space and playing to their size advantage.

Engaging the defender may be the crux of the problem for the offensive line. More speed and quickness off the ball enables an offensive lineman to more easily engage the defender. At this point the questionable speed and quickness of the offensive line may be a liability. Fortunately the running backs are good enough to make up for some deficiency in offensive line play.

As far as individual performers go, each of the starting five has his positives. Sam Young will anchor the right tackle position. Young is a very lean 6’8” and 330 lbs, coming into Fall camp in exceptional physical condition. Perhaps the top offensive tackle recruit in his class, Young has yet to live up to his potential. It has been reported that he is taking more of a leadership role, and, as the experienced veteran of the unit, this bodes well. The primary problem Young faces is balance as his height makes it difficult to stay low. At times he can over-compensate, extending his body too far from his center of gravity.

To Young’s left, manning the right guard position, will be Chris Stewart. Stewart also has good size at 6’5” and 337 lbs. He took a while to develop into his role, needing to lose weight and improve his speed, but the work has paid off as he has shown improved quickness to go with his size. Stewart really looks poised to have a very good junior campaign.

Dan Wenger will man the center position for the Irish in 2008. He played admirably in limited duty at the end of the 2007 season, replacing the injured veteran John Sullivan. Wenger has exhibited a physical, aggressive mentality in his play during the Fall, something lacking from the 2007 version of this unit.

Lining up at left guard will be Eric Olsen. Similar in stature to Wenger, Olsen also brings toughness to the Irish offensive line. He comes of the ball quicker than most of the other linemen on the roster, staying low and driving his opponent.

Perhaps the most surprising outcome of the Fall practices has been senior Michael Turkovich winning the battle for left tackle. Turkovich spent most of his time at guard in the past but won the position battle for left tackle with Paul Duncan due to improved quickness and footwork during the Fall.

Defense

Defensive Line

Most of the Irish defense appears solid heading into the 2008 campaign. The lone exception may be along the defensive line. The primary challenge for the Irish defense appears to be against the run, particularly on first down. If the Irish can force opponents into long down and distances the rest of the defensive personnel is built to pressure the quarterback and lock down receivers in man coverage.

There are few big names along the defensive front for Notre Dame where the modus operandi seems to be smaller, quicker personnel. Pat Kuntz returns after missing all of the Spring, moving outside from the interior of the defensive line. Kuntz has a work ethic that is second to none, and will contribute valuable minutes in 2008. His lack of pure athleticism, however, prevents him from being an overwhelming presence on the field.

Pressing for playing time behind Kuntz is freshman Ethan Johnson. Johnson came to Notre Dame with much fanfare and hasn’t disappointed so far. He has a very large frame with room to add weight, shows good explosiveness off the ball for his size, and has good technique for a freshman. The knock on Johnson, like all freshmen along the offensive and defensive fronts, is his strength. While he does have good size (275 lbs) and speed to contribute early, his strength will likely prevent him from playing an high number of minutes. Still, he will be looked upon to contribute depth to the defensive end position.

Justin Brown and Maurice Richardson will man the other side of the defensive line. Like Johnson, Brown has good quickness and agility, but his size may be a liability. At 277 lbs, he may struggle against larger offensive lines late in games. Richardson will no doubt be spelling Brown, trying to ease the fatigue and keep both players fresh. He seems to be settling in nicely to the defensive end position after switching from outside linebacker in the Spring. Richardson has shown excellent quickness, balance, and hand technique throughout the Fall. If he is able to increase his weight from 255 to 285+ lbs he could be an every-down contributor for the Irish.

The wildcard in the mix may be freshman Kapron Lewis-Moore. While somewhat under-sized Lewis-Moore has shown excellent athleticism in his limited time on campus and may be a promising pass rusher. With the lack size all along the defensive front, an added body to share the load will help keep a regular rotation of fresh linemen.

Coming off an All-American freshman season Ian Williams will now start at nose tackle for the Irish. The move to a full-time playing role is a change he welcomes and he certainly has the size and strength to play well. Williams continues to play low and uses good leverage. He also sheds blocks well but his recognition, at times, is slow. He will be counted on to control both A-gaps against the run, as well as provide a pass rush surge up the middle. Effectively performing both duties is a tall task for any one player and Williams may need help.

Behind Williams are junior Paddy Mullen and a promising freshman. Like Williams, Mullen has good size and strength, but lacks the athleticism of freshman Brandon Newman. Newman certainly has the physical build at 6’ and 310 lbs, giving him a low center of gravity and allowing him to play with good leverage. What he lacks in straight-line speed he makes up for in explosiveness off the ball. Most of the Fall practice footage indicates he has excellent footwork and agility for his size. Newman also seems to have the requisite strength to contribute right away, something the majority of the other freshmen lack.

Linebackers

The linebacker corps will be led by senior Maurice Crum. This Fall has been all about business for Crum, trying to lead the redemption movement from the 2007 season. A four year starter, Crum has played outside and inside linebacker in his career at Notre Dame. He has a nose for the football, good athleticism, and good speed, and should thrive as the weak inside linebacker in the 3-4 scheme if the front three can occupy blockers.

Moving from the outside linebacker position next to Crum is sophomore Brian Smith. Smith showed exceptional athleticism in his freshman season, prompting the defensive staff to move him to the interior where he is free to make more plays. He has looked excellent in the Fall and could have a great 2008 campaign. Smith has all of the physical tools to be a great linebacker: size, strength, speed, and instincts. And in assistant head coach Jon Tenuta’s aggressive, blitzing scheme, he should wreck havoc on opposing offenses.

Behind Smith and Crum the options are a little thin for the Irish. Toryan Smith was the projected starter at inside linebacker before the move by Brian Smith to the interior. With good size, Toryan Smith could be a capable force against the run, but his lack of speed has hurt him dropping into coverage in the passing game.

The outside linebacker position for Notre Dame will feature a strong/weak look with sophomore Harrison Smith occupying the strong-side linebacker position. Despite not having ideal size, Smith will serve as the defensive coordinator Corwin Brown’s answer to the spread offense. He has excellent speed and athleticism, always ending plays around the ball. Smith has adapted well to his new roll this Fall and as long as Brown doesn’t ask him to play strong against the run on the edge he should be a big asset to the Irish defense.

The weak outside linebacker position will be manned by junior John Ryan and sophomore Kerry Neal. Both will likely play down on the line of scrimmage in 4-3 looks for the Irish, with Ryan contributing more effectively against the run and Neal being the pass rush specialist. Neal showed a knack for getting after the quarterback in his freshman campaign but struggled to consistently play well against the run. Both players have looked solid in the Fall as the defensive end look of the 4-3 defense seems like a much more natural fit for Ryan than his outside linebacker position in the 3-4.

Two freshmen may enter the mix as well with Darius Fleming and Steve Filer showing promise and excellent athleticism in the Fall. In the very least these two should push the others at the same position, helping improve the play of the linebacker corps through competition as well as creating depth.

Secondary

Arguably the strongest position on the defensive side of the ball coming out of the 2007 season, the Irish secondary took a hit before the season started with the loss of projected starting cornerback Darrin Walls. Walls was easily Notre Dame’s best cover corner and his loss leaves the secondary with a lack of experience at one of the cornerback positions. There is talent waiting in the wings as this may be the most athletic group of secondary players since the Holtz era, but Walls’ backup and projected starter Raeshon McNeil will need to grow up quickly.

Manning the other corner spot is two-year starter Terrail Lambert. Lambert possesses top end speed and has developed good instincts for the position. Taking on a leadership roll in the Fall, Lambert looks to be developing into a solid senior player for the Irish. He and McNeil have the speed, quickness, and ability to be very good players for the Irish in 2008.

Behind Lambert and McNeil are four players who could see duty in Nickel and Dime packages. Sophomore Gary Gray, juniors Sergio Brown and Jashaad Gaines, and freshman Robert Blanton have all had very good Fall practices and should contribute in 2008. Brown and Gaines both possess excellent athleticism, speed, and range, and it seems that they are finally learning the nuances of the position. Gray turned heads all last season will recovering from an injury and has pressed McNeil for the starting role. Similar to McNeil, Gray is exceptionally smooth coming in and out of breaks and making plays on the ball.

Blanton has also been making a good impression on the coaching staff during the Fall, pushing to see the field. While he doesn’t have excellent speed, his long frame and agility allow him to break on the ball exceptionally well. He may be too small to hold up against the run every down but Blanton could provide some solid minutes if needed.

At the safety position the Irish have one of the most under-rated players in the country. After a great off-season senior David Bruton is poised to have an break-out performance in 2008. With exceptional power, agility, and range, Bruton is ideally suited to play center field for the Irish. Having a front seven that puts more pressure on opposing quarterbacks should also help to increase his interception production.

Filling in for the departed Tom Zbikowski is senior Kyle McCarthy. McCarthy had an excellent Spring and continued to impress in the Fall with a knack for showing up near the ball. While he doesn’t possess elite speed, McCarthy does have good size and quickness, and is a very dependable tackler. He reads the run quickly and takes excellent angles to fill gaps on the outside. If he can prove to be unsusceptible to play action the Irish may see an upgrade in play at the strong safety position.

In short, the Irish secondary has excellent athleticism and speed, making them good candidates to play tough, press-man coverage and allow the front seven to pressure opposing quarterbacks. This plays right into Tenuta’s scheme and should pay huge dividends for the defense in 2008.

Off-Season of Change: Has Charlie Weis Swung the Pendulum Too Far?

2008-08-18T21:48:00.006-05:00

For Notre Dame football coaches, players, and fans, the 2007 season was a nightmare. The Irish limped through twelve games finishing 3-9. Improvement wasn’t apparent during any point of the season leaving little hope for the future.

Following such a poor season, something must be done to right the course of the program. After a period of self-evaluation, head coach Charlie Weis has initiated many changes from giving up play calling duties to adding size and strength along the offensive line to taking a more active role in special teams. Weis should be given credit for his admission of a poor coaching performance and willingness to change.

But has Weis over-compensated for not anticipating the problems of the 2007 season by taking drastic steps to correct these problems? The circumstances that contributed to the poor performance of 2007 will not necessarily challenge future Irish squads. Consequently, the resulting repercussions of his off-season remodeling job may negatively impact the performance of the 2008 Fighting Irish.

Anticipating the Problems of 2007

Notre Dame faced a litany of problems in 2007: a true freshman quarterback struggling through injuries, a front-loaded schedule with tough defensive teams, youth and inexperience at many skill positions, three new starters on the offensive line, a lack of leadership and talent in the upper classes, and a new defensive scheme. Many of these things acted together to intensify their negative impact. It was inevitable that a team with so many first-time, underclassmen starters would struggle.

As numerous and substantial as they were, these challenges do not add to 3-9. It is impossible to hold Weis solely responsible for the problems listed above, but he certainly did his share to contribute to the woefully inept offense the Irish fielded in 2007. Not anticipating the problems of his inexperienced roster, Weis made a series of coaching decisions that amplified Notre Dame’s weaknesses. Despite having far more talent than Navy and Air Force, Notre Dame still lost to both.

He complicated the offense by installing the spread, zone-read: consuming valuable practice time, overloading the players with information, and departing from his area of offensive expertise. He restricted contact in practice, likely fearful of the impact of injuries on the lack of depth at many positions. And he did both in the spite of a young offense struggling to find an identity and learn the playbook.

He created a lack of continuity from the revolving quarterback situation. And he refused to develop an effective running game, something extremely beneficial for the inexperienced offensive unit. These poor decisions are alarming evidence of Weis’ inability to anticipate the problems faced by the 2007 Fighting Irish football team.

It is difficult to imagine a coach with Weis’ experience not anticipating the problems of 2007, exacerbating those struggles with the decisions he made. It proves Weis is on a learning curve. The college game is different than the NFL and Weis is still understanding these differences.

Swinging the Pendulum

In response (at least partially) to the offensive struggles of 2007 Weis relinquished play-calling duties to offensive coordinator Michael Haywood. But is abandoning play-calling duties and surrendering the self-proclaimed “schematic advantage” really the answer? Weis is one of the best offensive minds in the game. Perhaps a more tempered change such as focusing on an effective running game, something imperative to consistent success in college football, would have been more advantageous.

Notre Dame’s 2007 offensive line lacked physical play at the point of attack, desperately struggled to protect the passer, and achieved only moderate success run blocking. Was it necessary to improve the physicality of the offensive line by gaining weight via an off-season training program when they were repeatedly getting beat off the ball in 2007?

The hesitant play of the inexperienced offensive line may have been due to information overload. Sacrificing speed and quickness by getting bigger and stronger might hurt the unit’s performance. Simplified blocking schemes and more full speed practice repetitions would likely solve the problem.

Was it necessary to move special teams coaching responsibilities from Brian Polian in 2006 to the whole staff in 2007 and then to Weis and Polian in 2008? Notre Dame’s special teams have not fared well in the recent past, but these drastic changes disrupt consistency.

On some level it is puzzling why Weis would make so many dramatic changes this off-season. The 2007 season was only one year of failure among many successful ones. Weis has a history of offensive success in the NFL and the 2005 and 2006 Irish offenses broke numerous passing and scoring records.

Additionally, many of the problems the Fighting Irish faced were largely out of his control and seemingly temporary. If Weis keeps recruiting at such a high level he won’t ever field a team as young as the 2007 Irish squad. If he and his staff can develop their recruits from athletes into football players, Notre Dame will enjoy more success than 2005.

Knee-Jerk Reactions?

Obviously there are lessons to be learned from the struggles of the 2007 Fighting Irish offense. Good things can and will come from Weis relinquishing play calling to offensive coordinator Michael Haywood. It is also evident from his comments that Weis’ self-evaluation has led to a better understanding of working with a young team.

But these changes seem like knee-jerk reactions to problems that should have been anticipated prior to 2007 and that won’t exist in the future. Changes in the program need to be consistent, well-scoped, and anticipatory, not flagrant and reactive. At some point a lack of continuity creates more problems than the changes solve.

Presumably Weis took the appropriate steps to determine what went wrong for the Irish in 2007. He determined where the team failed (virtually everywhere), isolated what caused these failures, and formulated a solution to each of the causes. The amount of growth and improvement shown by the Fighting Irish in 2008 and beyond will prove whether or not he swung the pendulum too far.

Can Notre Dame Get Christmas In September? Six Gifts For Irish Football

2008-07-21T21:05:00.032-05:00

The 2007 Fighting Irish football season was arguably the worst in Notre Dame’s illustrious history.

However, many of the Irish faithful are optimistic about the 2008 season mostly due to a wealth of talented freshmen and 17 returning starters spread over both sides of the ball.

If 2007 was any indication, it takes far more than talent to win games as Notre Dame’s young and inexperienced team was plagued by inconsistency throughout the season. Without question, the Irish fielded more talent than Navy and Air Force but still lost to both.

Returning a host of starters should help, but coming off a three win season, winning seven or more games in 2008 would be a dramatic improvement.

So what will help Notre Dame field a competitive team in 2008? Some pundits have pointed to a weaker schedule that stacks-up more favorably than the gauntlet the Irish faced in 2007.

As discussed here, here, here, and here, more optimistic Irish fans (myself included) believe Notre Dame should win no fewer than 8 games in 2008. To achieve eight wins the Irish coaching staff and players should be focused on a small subset of things that can dramatically improve execution and scheme on both sides of the ball.

In other words, the Fighting Irish should be asking for their Christmas presents in September.

Offense

1. For the love of God, run the damn football.

For Notre Dame to be successful in 2008 they must commit to running the football. Simply put, a potent rushing attack is the most powerful offensive weapon in college football and the 2008 Fighting Irish are built to do it well. There is talent on the offensive line and in the backfield. Not all of it has reached its potential, but the building blocks for a productive running game reside in South Bend.

Running the football is advantageous for several reasons. There are fewer and less detrimental outcomes of a running play as opposed to passing play. It controls the clock, keeping the Irish defense off the field. It wears down opposing defenses such that 3-4 yard runs in the first half turn into 6-7 yard runs in the second half. It takes pressure off the quarterback. It is easier for the offensive line to execute, something imperative for Notre Dame’s young, rather inexperienced squad. It opens up the playbook by creating favorable down and distances and providing for effective play action. Lastly, running the football is the most proficient way to out-talent the opposition.

The Irish offensive line brings both “star power” and excellent size at each position. The projected starters (from left to right) are Paul Duncan, Mike Turkovich, Dan Wenger, Chris Stewart, and Sam Young. Reserve Eric Olsen may also get in the mix.

According to Scout these six linemen comprise an average ranking of better than 4 stars. As offensive linemen rarely achieve 5 star status, this is a pretty impressive group. Furthermore, they have good size. They average nearly 6’6” in height and 314 lbs in weight. The right side of the line in particular is 6’5”, 340 lbs (Stewart) and 6’8”, 330 lbs (Young).

In the backfield the Irish also boast size and strength. Much maligned fullback Asaph Schwapp is 6’0”, 261 lbs of pure muscle who is an excellent isolation blocker despite shortcomings in other areas of his game. Tailbacks James Aldridge and Robert Hughes are 6’0”, 222 lbs and 5’11”, 240 lbs respectively, giving the Irish plenty of power but not without surprising speed and agility. Throw incoming freshman Jonas Gray in the mix along with the speedy, more elusive Armando Allen and the Irish have a diverse and capable stable of running backs.

2. No more Chris Kuhar-Pitters.

Five Eight. Fifty-eight sacks. You almost have to try and let the defense sack you that many times, but that is how many sacks the Fighting Irish surrendered in 2007. That is more sacks than Notre Dame allowed the previous two years combined. Besides playcalling Fighting Irish fans may have lamented more over this offensive deficiency than any other.

A sack is like a penalty; it’s an insurmountable setback that kills an offensive possession. And this is especially true for a young and inexperienced team for two reasons.

First, it limits the play calling to plays-usually passes-that can overcome long down and distance situations. This, in turn, allows the defense to aggressively rush the quarterback, exacerbating the very problem that caused the situation to begin with.

Second, young and inexperienced offenses are naturally prone to inconsistent execution. Many offensive drives in 2007 stalled for the Irish because of one small mistake: a single zero-to-negative yardage play, a false start, a missed blocking assignment, etc.

These types of inconsistencies are more or less expected for a young team and, at times, will cause problems moving the ball. In other words, stringing together a series of plays with good execution and few mistakes is a significant challenge for a young team. But adding 58 sacks to the mix is absolutely devastating.

Blue-Gray Sky did a great analysis of the problems the Irish offense had in 2007 when trying to protect their quarterbacks. By and large the problem was a combination of poor quarterback and offensive line play. However, some blame should also be placed on the receivers since they didn’t get good separation against many opponents.

While quarterback Jimmy Clausen and the four returning starters on the offensive line have more experience, they aren’t by any means veterans and cannot afford to put themselves in long down and distance situations. This is especially true with the youth the Irish have at the skill positions.

Obviously a productive running game reduces the number of opportunities for sacks but Clausen must improve his internal clock, be quicker and more decisive when distributing the ball, and learn to move forward-rather than laterally-in the pocket.

Likewise, the offensive line must work better and more cohesively as a unit to prevent miscommunications and break-downs in assignments. Fortunately, these areas of play can be improved with more practice repetitions.

3. Get started on the right (read touchdown) foot.

In 2005 head coach Charlie Weis’ offense scored a touchdown on the opening drive an overwhelming majority of the time. This was instrumental to the success of the offense as it established confidence, set the tempo of the game, put the opposing defense on its heels, and gave the Irish defense some latitude to work with.

In 2007 the Irish offense rarely scored at all, let alone on the opening drive.

If the Irish offense can work to duplicate the opening drive results of the 2005 team, it will go a long way to helping win football games. Weis is notorious for always receiving the ball in the first half. When you score touchdowns a large percentage of the time this is an effective strategy.

But suffering a three-and-out on the opening drive is a momentum killer, and many times gives the ball back to the opposing offense with good field position. Weis and offensive coordinator Mike Haywood must work diligently to strike first and put seven points on the board. A field goal or shift in field position is good, but scoring a touchdown on the opening drive would help the confidence and swagger of a young and highly criticized offensive unit.

Defense

1. First (down) and foremost, stop the run; where there’s long down and distances, there’s hope.

Notre Dame’s defense is built to pressure opposing quarterbacks and play tight, man coverage. The secondary is talented, athletic, and rangy; ditto for the outside linebackers. And there’s no one better in college football at applying pressure on a quarterback than Jon Tenuta (more on this later).

All this is for naught, however, if the Irish can’t consistently stop teams from effectively running the ball on first down. Notre Dame has the defensive backfield to be tough against the pass. If the Irish can stop the run on first down they put themselves in great position to utilize the strength of their defense by forcing opposing offenses into long down and distance situations. From a defensive standpoint, long down and distance situations are like being able to run the ball effectively. It opens up the playbook and allows the defense to take risks.

But the Irish surrendered more than 185 yards per game on the ground in 2007 and lost their best defensive lineman and team MVP Trevor Laws to the draft.

To the credit of the defense, they were often on the field much longer than their offensive counterpart, but the Irish must become more stingy against the run, particularly on first down. This has to be the No. 1 concern for defensive coordinator Corwin Brown going into the 2008 season.

The Irish return three defensive linemen with significant playing time in Justin Brown, Pat Kuntz, and Ian Williams. All three are capable players if not asked to carry too much load, but none are game changers.

Brown is quick off the ball but is under-sized and will wear down against bigger, stronger offensive lines. Kuntz is a workaholic who never takes off a down but he lacks strength and athleticism. Williams is coming off a Freshman All-American season but still has trouble shedding blocks.

Behind these three are two outside linebacker turned defensive ends in John Ryan and Maurice Richardson. While Richardson is extremely quick and athletic, both he and Ryan lack ideal size for a defensive end in the 3-4.

There is no other position that freshmen will be counted on more than on the defensive line. The shortcomings of the Irish defensive line can be masked via a platoon system, playing multiple players at each position. The defensive linemen don’t have to make plays, per se, but they need to tie up the offensive lineman and let the linebackers run. Freshmen Ethan Johnson, Brandon Newman, Haffis Williams, and/or Sean Cwynar will be needed to provide quality minutes along the defensive front.

2. Be aggressive, B-E-Aggressive.

As history has proven, offensive and defensive schemes come and go. Currently the en vogue offense is the Spread. Like the Run-and-Shoot and West Coast offenses before it, the Spread first and foremost aims to make defenses defend the field both laterally and vertically.

While the West Coast and Run-and-Shoot offenses accomplished this mostly through play design and scheme, the Spread achieves this primarily through the use of personnel, frequently employing four and five wide receivers to get more speed on the field. This dictates the tempo of the game and allows the offense to impose their will, forcing the defense to read and react rather than attack. Once an offense accomplishes this, the defense is at a distinct disadvantage.

Consequently, defenses have evolved to use five (nickel) and six (dime) defensive back packages as well as base defenses like the 3-4 and 3-5 that get more athletic and quicker players on the field.

Schematically, these defensive adjustments correct the personnel mismatches that existed between the Spread and defenses like the 5-2 and, to a lesser extent, the 4-3. But the reading and reacting disadvantage still remains.

Enter Jon Tenuta. Weis and Brown need to learn from Tenuta and employ his style of aggressive defense that turns reading and reacting into creating chaos for opposing offenses.

Tenuta believes in “never allowing a quarterback to set his feet,” “getting downhill,” “playing on the opposite side of the line of scrimmage,” and “blitzing 80% of the time.” And in this day and age of offensive philosophy, his style of play is a welcomed commodity. His defenses at Georgia Tech were excellent, only surrendering a shade over 300 yards per game with players far less talented than those currently on the Irish roster.

Add to this the fact that there are far more “looks” and blitz packages in the 3-4 than the 4-3, and Brown’s base defense should meld nicely with what Tenuta brings to the table.

Weis and Brown need to turn Tenuta loose and let the Notre Dame defense, rather than opposing offenses, dictate the tempo of the game. They need to use the athletes they have at the linebacker position like Toryan Smith, Brian Smith, Kerry Neal, Steve Filer, Maurice Crum, and Darius Fleming to confuse, frustrate, and pressure the opposing quarterback. They need to let the defense fly around and create chaos. They need to let the front seven move, shift, and stunt because the secondary is good enough to cover for them. And they need to do it early and often.

3. Open the tackle-box.

It seems like forever since a Notre Dame defense tackled well and 2007 was no exception. Defenders frequently took poor pursuit angles, didn’t wrap up, and weren’t physical at the point of attack, particularly at the linebacker position.

This must change and the responsibility for this change rests squarely on the shoulders of the defensive coaching staff.

Granted, Brown and company were restricted last year by practices that didn’t allow contact, but good tackling fundamentals can be taught in drills as well. Regardless, the Fighting Irish cannot suffer through another season giving up significant amounts of yards after contact and/or whiffing in the open field.

The talent and athleticism is there at the linebacker position and in the secondary. The coaching staff needs to take that those talented athletes and turn them into football players.

Summary

If Weis and his staff can provide leadership, elevate the sense of urgency and physicality in the team’s play, and accomplish the six items above, the Fighting Irish should be competitive in 2008 and could win as many as nine games. The level to which they succeed in accomplishing this will go a long way in determining the current coaching staff's future with the Notre Dame football program.

For many reasons the 2008 season is a crossroads for Coach Weis and his staff. The Willingham recruiting excuses-as many and as valid as they were-are nearly exhausted and certainly don’t add up to 3-9. Only Weis and his staff are to blame for any remaining personnel deficiencies. The schedule is much more manageable than in the recent past, the team is young, but not entirely inexperienced, and the roster is loaded with talent.

To some, the crux of the problem for Weis is player development and motivation. The 2008 season for the Fighting Irish will be a good litmus test to this end.

Interviewing With The Guys At Pigskin Podcast

2008-06-29T21:08:00.004-05:00

The guys at Pigskin Podcast interviewed me again during their 2008 college football season preview to talk about the upcoming Fighting Irish football season. You can check out the interview here or search for the keyword PIGSKIN on iTunes. The interview starts about eleven minutes in.

Fighting Irish 2008 Season Predictions Results

2008-06-23T19:45:00.007-05:00

Thanks to those of you who participated in the 2008 season predictions. There was more participation this year than last (link here), albeit still not as much as I would have liked. I have included the results below.

Similar to last year the predictions look optimistic with greater than 60% of those who participated in the poll believing the Irish will win at least eight games. Even with a much weaker schedule (as discussed here) improving the win total by five games will be a tall task for the Irish. For the statistics' fans out there the average number of predicted wins was 8.5 with a standard deviation of 1.7.

As shown below, 8-4 and 9-3 were the most popular choices for the 2008 Irish record with 10-2 falling closely behind. But a few folks believe the Irish will fair similarly to 2007-despite a seemingly easier schedule-with two people predicting a 4-8 and 5-7 record. Overall, however, the consensus is that Notre Dame will win between 8 and 10 games in 2008.

There seems to be relatively little dispute on what games the Irish win and lose. As shown below, 100% of those polled believe the Irish will beat San Diego State, Stanford, Navy, and Syracuse. Additionally, 92% of those polled believe the Irish will lose to USC while 83% believe Michigan State will beat the Irish. Only games against North Carolina, Pittsburgh, and Boston College seem to be in doubt.

Charlie Weis: Offensive Genius or Overrated Playcaller

2008-05-11T23:04:00.012-05:00

After a 3-9 season that saw the Fighting Irish plummet to the bottom of the national rankings in every meaningful offensive category the question on many minds is whether head coach Charlie Weis' reputation as an excellent playcaller and offensive genius is fake or founded.

Weis built a reputation for being one of the most innovative offensive minds in the NFL while working under Bill Belichick in the New England Patriot organization. Not only did he develop an excellent offensive playbook, he was also one of the better playcallers in the NFL due to his meticulous preparation and uncanny ability to adjust his offensive strategy during the game.

To be certain, this was one of the reasons Notre Dame found Weis to be such an attractive hire. After two seasons of what many considered to be an under-performing offense under then head coach Tyrone Willingham and offensive coordinator Bill Diedrick, athletic director Kevin White hired someone to bring life to a woefully ineffective and inefficient Irish offense. With his offensive prowess and NFL pedigree, Weis seemed like a good fit at his alma mater, albeit not many peoples' first choice for the job.

Weis hit the ground running in his first season at Notre Dame taking Brady Quinn from relative unknown to household name. His reputation for excellent quarterback tutelage proved true as Quinn orchestrated the offense to multiple record-breaking performances. Had a few things broken a little differently for the Irish they may have had a shot to play for the 2005 National Championship. But after the 2005 season things seemed to turn for the worse.

The 2006 version of Weis' offense seemed to regress. It struggled against more talented defenses, not being able to protect the passer or gain separation against more physical and athletic secondaries. With virtually the same offensive personnel this was puzzling. While there was a little less depth and some more youth at a few offensive positions the expectations going into the 2006 season were high, leading many to question if defensive coordinators had adjusted to Weis' playcalling and strategy.

A closer look at the defenses the Irish faced in 2005 and 2006 sheds a bit of light in the situation. In 2005 the Irish offense faced no great defenses and only two decent defenses when they played Michigan and Ohio State, scoring only 17 and 20 points respectively. In 2006, however, the Irish faced two decent (Michigan and Georgia Tech) and two very good defenses (USC and LSU). Against these teams they struggled to protect the passer and get receivers open.

Enter the 2007 season when the Fighting Irish offense simply imploded. As discussed here Weis made a bad problem worse by taking an extremely young team and installing a completely new offense. Not only did this move away from the strength of the team-it's under-used running attack-it also confused many young players thrust into first-time starting roles. In particular, the way Weis handled the quarterback situation was suspect, with two of the four quarterbacks vying for playing time subsequently transferring to other schools. The Irish looked incapable of blocking, throwing, and catching for the overwhelming majority of the season. This display of offensive ineptitude led many to question the "offensive genius" handle so oft attached to Weis' name.

One poor season of offensive production does not undo the contribution Weis made to the Irish offense in his first two seasons at Notre Dame, nor many others in the NFL. While the Fighting Irish offensive production in 2006-especially against Michigan, Georgia Tech, USC, and LSU-didn't meet expectations, those expectations would never have been so high if it were for the performance of Brady Quinn et. al. in 2005. In summary, the tougher slate of defensive teams in 2006 and raised expectations from 2005 hurt the perceived performance of the 2006 Irish offense.

But even the most ardent optimist becomes a skeptic after a 3-9 record and few-to-no exciting offensive statistics. This begs the natural question(s): Is Weis' prowess as an offensive designer, playcaller, and developer of quarterback talent over-rated? Have defensive coordinators caught up to his offensive strategy and design, adjusting to better defend against his offense? Or, perhaps more appropriately, does Weis' offense and playcalling strategies translate from the NFL to the college level?

The Weis Offense

The Good

The strength of Weis' offensive playcalling, strategy, and design lies in three primary facets. First, as a playcaller Weis has an extraordinary ability to set up plays. He is frequently one or two plays ahead of opposing defensive coordinators. He waits for the perfect moment to dial up the perfect play, and this value of his playcalling abilities should not be overlooked or underestimated. Weis also adjusts his playcalling during a game as well as any other offensive coordinator. His ability to find something that will work is uncanny.

Second, Weis uses multiple formations and personnel groupings extremely effectively as the foundation of his offensive strategy. He believes in playing to the strengths of his offense and the weaknesses of opposing defenses. This sounds basic, and it is, but it is the way in which he goes about it that is exceptional. Weis uses formations and personnel groupings as well as any coach, generating the best possible matchups for his offense.

His offense creates these matchups by utilizing play and formation groupings that force the opposition to defend multiple plays from the same post-snap motion and different pre-snap formations. It isn't that his offenses run that many plays, per se, it is that he designs his offense to run the same play from multiple looks, i.e. several formations and personnel groupings. This gives his offense extreme breadth and the appearance of great depth while seemingly not increasing its complexity.

Third, Weis is meticulous in his pre-game preparation. On a week-to-week basis he dissects opposing defenses, scavenging for weaknesses and exploiting them. He has an excellent record of scripting plays, scoring on the opening drives of games a remarkable percentage of the time.

The Bad

As good as Weis can be as a playcaller, developing offensive strategy, and preparing for games there are drawbacks to his approach. As a playcaller Weis typically gets too creative when it isn’t necessary. This has often been his critics’ biggest complaint. Rather than stick with something basic and effective, he frequently tries to get cute or complicated. More often than not this backfires when something simple would have been effective. In 2007, for example, there was no reason to run the ball all the way down the field only to call a play action-pass in the red zone in hopes of catching the defense off guard and scoring.

Additionally, Weis' offenses are typically pass-first. While the play calling percentage is frequently near 50/50 run/pass, the run is not used as a "strike-first" weapon. Rather, it is used to complement the passing game and keep opposing defenses honest. Weis focuses mostly on offensive and defensive mismatches in the passing game, and over the majority of his career hasn't employed a power running game. Because his offense is pass-heavy, it needs fairly experienced football players to execute it. Precision in the passing game also requires excellent timing between the quarterback and his receivers, making practice time a commodity.

Finally, Weis’ offense relies heavily on a very high level of quarterback play. The quarterback must not only know his own assignment, he must also know the assignments of every other position. This isn’t uncommon for any offense but due to the complexities of the route adjustments, hot reads, and audibles, the quarterback is tasked with a high level of responsibility.

Fulfilling this level of responsibility requires more than a minimum abount of intelligence and specific physical tools. It requires repetition and practice. It requires the quarterback to be able to read defenses, understand the offensive play call, and then adapt to what the defense does both before and after the snap. And it requires that the quarterback perform these tasks in a very short amount of time.

Memorizing the playbook and being able to make the throws are only the beginning of a quarterback's responsibilities in Weis' offense. The most difficult task is taking the mental part of the game and translating it into the physical. The most difficult part is reacting, rather than thinking and then doing. However, since Weis has a great reputation and proven track record for developing quarterback talent this need of his offense typically isn’t a concern.

The NFL vs. College Game

Football is football. At its heart it is about blocking, running, and tackling. The things that make a good football player are nearly the same at any level. However, at different levels of the game some things are more important than others.

The NFL has parity amongst its rosters. Not only is there depth of talent, the players are far more developed than at the college level. Players are more polished upon entering (and certainly leaving) the NFL than they are in college. They are more physically mature and have a better understanding of offensive and defensive philosophies due to their previous years of playing experience. Because of this, player and talent development is far less important in the NFL than in college. This also makes it far easier to run more complicated offenses and defenses in the NFL as the players’ prior experience enables them to execute at a higher level.

One could even stipulate that success in the NFL is more predicated upon the cerebral aspects of football. NLF rosters are made of experienced, developed, and knowledgeable players. Success is largely driven by mental factors, i.e. how players are able to use their physical abilities in conjunction with the evolving mental challenges of the game.

Obviously there is no replacement for great talent, but it is less valuable in the NFL than in college. College rosters are comprised of raw, talented athletes who may or may not become complete football players. Most outperformed their peers at the high school level via sheer athletic ability rather than football acumen. Thus, in order to become more complete football players, it is important that they develop from good coaching and tutelage.

Additionally, motivating college players is enormously important. Some of the best in the business-Pete Carroll, Mack Brown, Les Miles-are very good motivators. Players are young, impressionable, and not motivated by a salary. There is a sense of team, camaraderie, and loyalty to their universities and teammates. In the NFL there is little to no affinity with the team organizations. Players are motivated more by their paycheck, and not as much by the fans, their teammates, and the cities they play for.

In college, player and coaching preparation isn’t as important as it is in the NFL largely because there isn’t as much time for it. Offenses and defenses are simplified out of necessity, with shorter practice times and less developed players not permitting anything more complicated. While coaching preparation is always important, motivating and developing players are bigger components of the recipe for success at the college level. Often times teams will simply out-talent other teams in order to win.

The three attributes of Weis’ offensive strategy, design, and playcalling discussed above are extremely valuable in the NFL. With large amounts of time spent in practice, studying film, and adapting the offensive game plan from week-to-week, having a thoroughly diverse offense gives teams a distinct advantage. It allows offenses to shift identities, so to speak, without adding or subtracting plays. It also allows offenses to attack defenses in a variety of ways. With the complexities of NFL defenses, matching flexibility on the offensive side of the ball certainly has its advantages.

In short, the NFL game is much more about the “chess match” being played by the coaching staff on the sidelines and players on the field than it is about talent, development of talent, and player motivation. It is of primary importance to create schematic advantages to give a team the opportunity to win.

Conclusion

Obviously there are many aspects of Weis’ offense that are very valuable. However, many of those aspects seemingly don’t translate from the NFL to the college level. Weis’ ability to prepare is certainly of value in the NFL but less so with the players’ time restrictions in college. His ability to set up and call plays at the perfect time, and the capability and flexibility of his offense to create mismatches in the passing game and attack defenses differently each week are all of value. But most of these attributes of his offense aren’t as valuable in college as they were in the NFL.

Motivating and developing offensive players is far more important, especially if they are expected to run a precise offense. Execution isn’t a foregone conclusion with a complicated, pass-heavy playbook. Weis' first two years at Notre Dame the offense was productive but it was with a more developed and experienced team. Additionally, it isn’t always necessary to generate a schematic advantage to get the upper hand. Sometimes working more diligently to improve a player from a talented athlete into a disciplined, fundamentally sound football player is more important. It is also more advantageous at the college level to utilize talent disparities to win.

The lack of a significant running game also severely limits the effectiveness of Weis’ offense at the college level. Running the ball is the most effective way to win games at any level. Fewer things can go wrong on a running play than a passing play. Running plays require less precision and are easier to practice, master, execute, and perfect. Running the ball controls the clock, wears down defenses, takes pressure off the quarterback, and opens up the play-action passing game. In the NFL it is difficult to generate mismatches in the running game due to the talent and athleticism of the defenses. Teams use the passing game because it opens more opportunities for success. In college this isn’t necessary.

If it takes experienced, developed, polished players for Weis’ offense to be effective then he may be in trouble. Many college players will not develop until very late in their careers, especially at certain positions. Injuries, transfers, recruiting woes, and other attrition factors make it difficult to consistently field a team that is, as a whole, very polished and experienced. Couple that with the need for a very high level of quarterback play predicated upon consistency and repetition, and it is difficult to believe Weis will be able to field a powerful offense year in and year out.

The crux of the problem Weis faces is player development. If he and his staff can consistently develop the talent he recruits he can be successful with his brand of offense. If he can achieve a high level of quarterback play without requiring his first string quarterback to take ninety percent of practice snaps-preventing any development of a backup-he can field a productive offense. But he would be better served cutting out the fringes and focusing on motivating and development. He would also be better served listening to offensive coordinator Mike Haywood about the importance of an effective rushing attack. These things will be the determining factors to the future success of the Fighting Irish offense.

Spring Forward: Notre Dame’s Blue Gold Game Recap

2008-04-27T19:44:00.006-05:00

Coming off an abysmal 3-9 season, many Fighting Irish faithful flocked to South Bend last weekend seeking evidence of an improved Irish football team on display at the annual Blue Gold Spring game. While the Fighting Irish did show promise, it is difficult to accurately predict how the team will perform when they take the field in 2008. Many times open Spring scrimmages may show excellent results in one area, leaving doubt in an opposing area.

This year was no different. The Irish looked good running the ball, averaging nearly four yards per carry when sacks were subtracted. However, it was difficult to determine whether or not this was due to improved offensive line play or a lack of talent and poor play along the defensive line. Similarly, the wide receivers gained little separation against their defense secondary counterparts. Again, it was difficult to ascertain whether this was due to poor speed and quickness at the position or excellent coverage skills on display in the secondary.

Typically the expectations lie somewhere in the middle. The offensive line play has likely improved for the Irish, but the defensive line also showed signs that they may struggle in 2008. Likewise, the wide receivers aren’t incapable of getting open, the secondary simply looks be a strength of the Fighting Irish defense next season.

With that disclaimer in hand, a breakdown of what was seen at the Blue Gold Saturday follows.

Offense

Quarterback

To say that the physicality of Jimmy Clausen’s play has improved since last season would be an understatement. He had much more zip on his ball, throwing several deep balls with excellent strength and improved accuracy. Additionally, he threw the ball on intermediate routes with much more authority and moved much more quickly when evading the pass rush.

Clausen’s numbers were nothing spectacular; 10 of 27 for 183 yards, 1 touchdown, and 1 interception. They were, however, a little skewed. Several very catchable passes were dropped by his receivers, and at least two or three other balls were thrown away to avoid taking a loss. In short, his accuracy, strength, and mobility showed demonstrative improvement.

Perhaps the best thing Clausen showed in the Blue Gold game was his ability to throw a very catchable ball. It isn’t that he is accurate, he certainly is. It is that his release point is excellent, he throws a very tight spiral, and the ball arrives in excellent position. Essentially, Clausen makes it easier for his receivers to catch the ball. Even more important, the timing of his passes is exceptional. The ball arrives when the receivers come out of their cuts, making it very difficult for defenders to anticipate and intercept his passes.

While Clausen did show signs of improvement during the Blue Gold scrimmage, some of the same question marks from his 2007 play remain. He still seems to have a “move laterally first” mentality when evading pressure from the defense. Many of the best quarterbacks have mastered the ability to move forward in the pocket. This gives advantages to the offensive lineman, making it easier to handle speed pass rushers on the outside. Clausen’s speed isn’t one of his strengths and he would be best served developing this skill.

Even though Clausen showed improved decision making skills, this area of his game is not yet developed enough for him to perform at a high level. He understands defenses and showed an improved understanding of the offense, but he doesn’t look off his receivers. Rather, he drops back, knowing where to go with the ball, and stares that particular receiver down until he makes the throw. Obviously this gives defenders a distinct advantage.

Lastly, Clausen seems to have too much confidence in his abilities. At least twice on Saturday he threw passes to tightly covered receivers. The first was a deep seam route to Mike Ragone. Ragone was nearly perfectly covered by Brian Smith on the play. Even though he was able to make a tremendous catch for a large gain, the pass should not have been thrown. The second pass was intercepted and returned for a touchdown by Harrison Smith who was draped all over Ragone on a soft flat route.

If nothing else, Saturday proved that the recruiting hype surrounding Clausen was well founded. He has excellent mechanics and it is now appearing that his lack of strength in 2007 was due to injury. There are areas in which he can improve his game but the Irish have a talent capable of playing at a very high level.

Running Backs

When utilized, running back play was a strength for the Fighting Irish offense in 2007 (as discussed here). The running back position picked up at the Blue Gold Spring game right where it left off in 2007, very strong. The Big Three of Robert Hughes, Armando Allen, and James Aldridge averaged 4.4 yards per carry in the Blue Gold game. With three very solid and dependable backs, this is a position of depth for Offensive Coordinator and Running Backs Coach Mike Haywood.

Hughes looks to be taking over the starting spot as he performed very well in the Spring scrimmage, rushing for 100 yards on 22 carries. Hughes has good speed, exceptional balance, excellent agility, and makes very quick, full-speed cuts for a running back weighing 235 lbs. He has the ability to move piles of defenders, and rarely doesn’t gain an extra yard or two after contact. Hughes’ combination of size, strength, and power, along with the cutting ability and excellent agility make him a rare talent at tailback.

Hughes is, however, limited in what he can do. Rarely is he used in pass protection (presumably because it is a deficient part of his game) and he is not the break-away threat you’d like to see from a running back. As such, he doesn’t have big play potential, but he can still carry a team down the field by chewing up nice chunks of tough yardage on the ground.

Allen also had a nice performance in the Blue Gold game, rushing for 50 yards on 11 carries. Some are skeptical about Allen’s top-end speed. After watching him run Saturday there is no need to be. He has exceptional quickness, speed, and agility as well as surprising toughness for a back of his stature. Allen is a bona fide home-run threat.

Allen’s play is restricted by two factors. The first is vision and patience. While Allen does possess premier speed, he doesn’t seem to understand when to use it. Many times he rushes too quickly to the hole, when a little more patience would be prudent. Other times he hesitates to get to the outside, when using his speed would create larger gains. Hopefully time and experience will correct these two areas. While he did run with more patience Saturday, there is still room for improvement.

The second factor limiting Allen’s playing time is his ability to effectively contribute in pass protection packages. His positioning, feet wide, knees bent, and shoulders square to the pass rusher, has improved relative to 2007. His strength and ability to slow the defender hasn’t. Several times during the Spring scrimmage he merely tweaked the onrushing defender’s trajectory to the quarterback rather then stop or significantly alter it.

Aldridge wasn’t showcased much during the Blue Gold game. Barring an unknown injury this is surprising. Aldridge has consistently exhibited the best pass protection skills of the three. Additionally, he is a tough runner that rarely gets moved backward. While he still hasn’t shown the speed he had in high school prior to a serious leg injury, it would be foolish for the coaching staff to give up on his ability to contribute at this point in his career.

Aldridge is a nice blend of Hughes and Allen. He is faster (albeit not as quick) as Hughes, but slower than Allen. He runs tougher and harder than Allen but is not as powerful as Hughes. He blocks better than both. In terms of pure versatility and as an every-down back Aldridge seems to have more capability than either Hughes or Allen.

Tight End/Receivers

One of the more disappointing performances during the Blue Gold game had to be the tight end and wide receiver position. Blocking by both positions in the run game was below average, many times lacking physicality. There was also a distinct inability to gain separation from defenders and multiple dropped balls.

At times during the 2007 season certain players at the receiver position showed promise for the Fighting Irish. David Grimes, Golden Tate, Robbie Parris, and Duval Kamara all showed flashes of good to very good play. However, on the whole, the group was largely inconsistent; a dropped pass can kill a drive and inadequate blocking from the wide receiver position on running plays prevents long gains.

Looking forward to the 2008 season the receiver position looks deep on paper, especially with the freshmen talent arriving on campus in the Fall. They still, however, have a lot of room for improvement in terms of consistent play. If the Spring scrimmage was any indication, the strides made in this area have been small.

Grimes looked very quick coming in and out of cuts. Kamara went after deep, high balls with a more aggressive attitude. Tate showed off his excellent speed catching a 57 yard pass from Clausen. But all these bright spots were overshadowed by the aforementioned concerns: lack of separation in route running, inconsistent play, dropped balls, and poor blocking.

Mike Ragone also fit this bill. While he made a tremendously athletic catch and showed excellent speed for a player his size, he failed to control the line of scrimmage at the point of attack on running plays. He lacks ideal size to be an effective run blocker and will need to improve his strength and effort to compensate.

This position has to be a concern for the Irish heading into 2008. The talent on the current roster is more than adequate and will receive an upgrade with the Freshmen in the Fall. It will be up to the coaching staff to develop it into a good on-the-field product. Maurice Stovall, Jeff Samardzija, and (to some extent) Rhema McKnight all improved dramatically under the current coaching staff and had very productive years. The question remains, however, if this was a function of the offensive system and Brady Quinn, or good coaching and player development.

Offensive Line

The most maligned and oft blamed unit of the 2007 Fighting Irish 3-9 campaign showed some signs of life in the Blue Gold game. The largest difference in play was a more aggressive attitude and more physical play. May times in 2007 the offensive line hesitated rather than attacked. This was not on display during the Spring scrimmage.

In general, the blocking in the run game was vastly improved. The offensive line was physical at the point of attack and frequently got to the linebackers at the second level. All of the players seemed to play with more confidence, pride, and determination. After the performance of this unit in 2007, there should be a huge chip residing directly atop their shoulders.

In particular, Chris Stewart and Sam Young played very well together on the right side. Both weigh North of 330 lbs but show surprising quickness and agility, both in run blocking and pass protection. Dan Wenger also showed good quickness and ability to get to the second level at the center position.

The line wasn’t, however, without miscues. The left side of the line was still beaten badly at times by pass rushers coming off the outside. This has to be a major concern heading into 2008 as protecting Clausen is of paramount importance. There were also some blown assignments in pass protection, reminiscent of last season.

In summary, the offensive line looked improved, but remain a weak unit heading into 2008. If the progress in the Fall is similar to that of the Spring the unit may become respectable, particularly given the schedule the Irish face in the upcoming season. But this still looks to be the unit holding the offense back come September.

Defense

Defensive Line

It was difficult to tell if the offensive rushing prowess was a result of better offensive line play or poor defensive line play. Going into 2008, defensive line is one of the biggest question marks for Notre Dame. This unit lacks depth and most of the talent won’t be on campus and able to contribute until the Fall. The Blue Gold game did little to dispel the notion that other teams will have little trouble running against the Irish in the upcoming season.

Coming off an All-American Freshman season Ian Williams played well for the Irish in the Spring scrimmage. He seems to have improved his ability to shed blocks and his quickness off the snap is as good or better than it was in 2007. His most glaring need is improved ability to rush the passer, but in a 3-4 defense the nose tackle isn’t primarily responsible for generating a pass rush. Other than Williams, the Irish lack any proven contributor at the nose tackle position. More bodies will arrive in the Fall, but the lack of depth at this position has to be a serious concern for the Irish faithful.

On the edge the Irish lacked any sort of dominating presence. Justin Brown and Maurice Richardson lack ideal size to play defensive end in a 3-4 defense. Sean Cwynar and Emeka Nwankwo have better size but Cwynar is young and needs to gain strength to be able consistently contribute while Nwankwo has little game experience. Again, more bodies will arrive in the Fall but expecting immediate contribution from Freshmen is a tall order.

The defensive line position may prove to be the crux of the Irish defense next season. Most of the players at this position can generate a decent pass rush but even with a platoon-type player approach it will take a significant improvement to consistently stop the run against teams who try and pound the ball inside. Fortunately for the Irish they do not face that many teams next year with power running games.

Linebacker

Notre Dame seems set for a few years at the outside linebacker position. Kerry Neal is a beast to handle on the outside when rushing the passer. Brian Smith has freakish athleticism for his size, excelling at both pass rushing and playing sideline-to-sideline against the run. While both continue to struggle in pass coverage, adding free safety Harrison Smith to the mix in passing situations will seriously improve the coverage abilities of this position.

While the outside linebackers looked good, the inside linebackers seemed to struggle at times. Toryan Smith played consistently better in the Blue Gold game than at any time in 2007. He brings a hitting mentality to the position, something James Aldridge felt a couple of times when Smith blitzed. He still struggled when asked to drop back into pass coverage, but if he plays to the strong side of the formation, supporting the run, Corwin Brown and Jon Tenuta can scheme themselves out of this weakness.

Maurice Crum played better as well. He took better pursuit angles and seemed quicker getting to the edge. Crum still struggled filling gaps inside against the run, but (as stated above) Brown and Tenuta can use Smith for this purpose and free Crum to run. Much of Crum’s success in 2008 will be determined by the play of the defensive line. If he is left free to run he can be an excellent inside linebacker in the 3-4 scheme. However, if he has to take on/shed blockers, fill gaps, and support against the inside run the Irish will have their hands full.

Much of the success in stopping the run will be the responsibility of the Irish linebacking corps. While not on display Saturday, Tenuta may be able to blitz his way out of some of the talent and depth deficiencies of the front seven. But ultimately, with a secondary that looks to be a strength, stopping the run will become a huge priority.

Secondary

If the Blue Gold game is any indication the Irish have four solid corners heading into 2008. Terrail Lambert, Darrin Walls, Raeshon McNeil, and Gary Gray all proved they have excellent quickness, speed, and athletic ability. Walls and McNeil, in particular, anticipated and broke on the ball extremely well.

In 2007 it seemed that the knock on Notre Dame’s corners was a lack of physical play, especially when supporting the run. From what they showed Saturday, this shouldn’t be a problem in 2008. Walls, Lambert, McNeil, and Gray all showed improved physicality jamming receivers at the line, going after the ball when it was in the air, and supporting the run. Walls, McNeil, and Gray are developing into the type of players that can lock-down opposing receivers. This completely opens the defensive playbook, something Tenuta must love.

At the free safety position David Bruton also looked good. He is as sure of a tackler as there is, has exceptional range, and has excellent leaping ability to go after the ball when it is in the air. His knowledge of the game is improving, rarely letting a receiver get behind him. Bruton is looking to be every bit of a first round draft pick provided he performs up to expectations in 2008.

Kyle McCarthy also played well at the strong safety spot. Another sure tackler, McCarthy may not have the killer instinct of departed safety Tom Zbikowski, but he does read and react better. Irish fans accustom to Zibi biting on play fakes will be pleasantly surprised by how much better McCarthy reads a developing offensive play. McCarthy is also a very physical player and seems to always be in the right position.

Behind Bruton and McCarthy is a group of capable backups. Ray Herring played well against the run in limited action, Sergio Brown has superb athletic ability albeit a lacking understanding of the defense, and Harrison Smith is playing so well the defensive coaching staff believe they must find a way to get him on the field. Smith covers ground extremely well, is a very sure tackler, and has the athleticism that has been lacking in the Irish secondary prior to the recruiting efforts of Bill Lewis. In many ways he could become the hybrid safety/linebacker/rover Nebraska employed during the Osborne era.

Special Teams

Eric Maust had an inconsistent day punting the ball for the Irish on Saturday. His first few punts were long and high, having excellent hang time. His last few were shanks that could put the defense into a difficult position like they often were in 2007.

Brandon Walker had a much liver leg when kicking field goals on Saturday. He was only one of two, missing a 46 yard attempt off the left upright, but he had plenty of distance on all of his kicks. Judging by what has been said about Walker during Spring practice, it appears that at least part of the woes in the Irish kicking game have been solved.

Summary

The Fighting Irish coaching staff looks to have focused on the appropriate areas heading into the 2008 football season. The offensive line play Saturday was improved. Although this unit isn't consistently performing at a very high level, it could become respectable after gaining more experience in the early part of the 2008 season. The play at receiver appears to be suspect, something that should be a concern for the Irish coaching staff. Poor play from either position in the form of a sack or a dropped pass will kill a drive.

On defense the front three must improve in order for Notre Dame to have success in 2008. While the defensive coaching staff may compensate for poor line play via scheme and blitzing, this leaves the linebackers in poor position to play the pass.

In summary, the Irish made progress in several areas but cautious optimism seems to be a more appropriate expectation than enthusiastic hope.

Fighting Irish 2008 Season Predictions

2008-04-27T19:36:00.006-05:00

Similar to last year (click here), a 2008 Fighting Irish season prediction poll will be conducted on Notre Dame Football Forum. Admittedly, last season’s predictions were a bit optimistic as can be seen here. This season some background information will be provided to aid in the polling process, hopefully producing more reasonable (and accurate) results.

First, a review of the Notre Dame Spring Blue Gold scrimmage can be found here. The Irish made progress in several areas but cautious optimism seems to be a more appropriate expectation than enthusiastic hope. The Irish do, however, face a much more reasonable schedule in 2008. Next season Notre Dame will play San Diego State, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Stanford, North Carolina, Washington, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Navy, Syracuse, and USC. As discussed here, this slate of teams looks much less formidable than those who lined up across from the Blue and Gold in 2007.

Second, using the Notre Dame Football Forum Elite Playoff Series (ESP) college football ranking system (click here for an explanation of the ESP), a 2008 Fighting Irish strength of schedule prediction was generated. The ESP rated Notre Dame’s 2007 schedule the sixth most difficult in the country, similar to that of Sagarin. Using the 2007 season results of the future 2008 Fighting Irish opponents, Notre Dame should have a strength of schedule ranked approximately 60th most difficult in the country.

The teams with the ESP rated 55-65th most difficult schedule in 2007 were Purdue, Arizona State, Wake Forest, Texas, SMU, Rutgers, Eastern Carolina, Mississippi State, Oklahoma, Miami (FL), and Clemson. These teams averaged approximately 7.4 wins in 2007, but SMU brought that average down winning only a single game and could be considered an outlying data point. If SMU is excluded, the remaining teams averaged eight wins in 2007.

Admittedly, assuming any team will replicate their 2007 season results in 2008 is a stretch. Boston College and Michigan alone lose several starters from their 2007 squads making their 2008 season performance predictions a very uncertain proposition. This should merely serve as a starting point by which to gauge the difference in the opponents the Fighting Irish faced in 2007 versus those they will line up against in 2008.

To participate in the Notre Dame Football Forum 2008 Fighting Irish season prediction poll please submit a comment below. List each team Notre Dame plays in 2008 along with a win or loss, i.e. don’t simply stating the number of wins and losses. The results will be tallied, analyzed, and posted in the future.

Notre Dame Football: 2008 Position Group Preview

2008-03-21T11:21:00.007-05:00

It's the offseason so there isn't a lot to typically talk about. Last offseason a win prediction survey was conducted regarding the upcoming season win predictions (click here). Obviously most folks were a little overly-optimistic, myself included. The same will be done this year, likely sometime after the Blue and Gold game in April.

In the meantime, a little look at where the Irish stand at each position is in order. In many cases the offseason is a time to discuss the break-out players for next season, e.g. Heisman hopefuls etc. With the youth at most positions on the Irish roster this is more of a risky endeavor naturally leading to an analysis on a position-by-position, rather than player-by-player, basis...

Quarterback:

The talent at quarterback for the Irish is exceptional. While it wasn't readily apparent in the win-loss column, Jimmy Clausen performed pretty well in his first season. He put up better numbers than Brady Quinn did in his, even while spending much of the time running for his life. Admittedly, he made multiple freshman mistakes, but that's exactly what he was, a true freshman. His arm strength is still suspect, but it is tough to tell if that is primarily due to his lingering arm injury and/or the beating he took while on the field.

Evan Sharpley will likely never be a great starting quarterback but he is a capable backup. He tends to force the issue, often times throwing into tight spaces and/or having too much confidence in his arm. But he was also trying to play catch-up for most of his playing minutes last year.

Dayne Crist is somewhat of an enigma. After last season most of those following recruiting are waiting to jump on the Crist bandwagon. Some are quick to dismiss Clausen already, forgetting that he was much more highly rated and recruited than Crist one short year ago. It is tough to overlook the obvious, however. Crist has all of the physical tools to be a great quarterback. But he must develop his game-improve his understanding of offensive philosophy, work on his accuracy on the out and intermediate over-the-middle routes, and learn to play more from under center-if he wants to contribute early.

The fact of the matter is Notre Dame can win football games with all three quarterbacks. While none of the current roster quarterbacks have proven they can put the team on their back and win a game down the stretch in the final minutes, at least two have the potential to turn into those types of players. The important thing for their continued development is to take pressure off them by controlling the clock and developing the running game.

Quarterback isn't a break-out position for the Irish, yet. But with continued development at this position over the next two seasons the pass-happy offense Head Coach Charlie Weis used with Tom Brady and Brady Quinn could return. The immediate and most pressing factor in the development of this position will be if Weis can build a running game to allow them to develop at their own pace rather than throwing them to the wolves with an offensive line that can't protect them.

Offensive Backfield:

Running back is probably the deepest position on the Irish roster in terms of very little talent drop-off among the first three backs. James Aldridge, Robert Hughes, and Armando Allen would start for 95% of the teams in the country. Jonas Gray only adds more depth to the position. Additionally, the talent is diverse, with Aldridge and Hughes being powerful, inside runners and Allen being a much faster, quicker back. All three are tough to bring down and had they been more utilized last year may have helped spur the Irish on to more victories. The rushing totals (and averages) Aldridge, Hughes, and Allen put up last year are more than respectable as shown here.

That isn't to say all three backs don't have room for improvement (as discussed here). But the depth, talent, and competition at this position should pay huge dividends for the Irish over the next two years. Many are quick to jump on the Hughes bandwagon after a few very good games late in the season. It is important to remember the level of competition the Irish were facing in those games. It is also important to remember that Aldridge and Allen both averaged around four yards per carry in 2007. All three are very capable backs with different attributes that should be utilized by a good offensive gameplan. The running back position, with improved offensive line play and more opportunities, will be a break-out position for Notre Dame in the 2008 season.

At fullback the Irish have the bruising Asaph Schwapp and the more agile Luke Schmidt. Schwaap, at times, took a step back in his play last year, but it is tough to not like his attitude and toughness. Schmidt drew rave reviews out of high school, having great speed for his size. If he can develop in the passing game the Irish could have another weapon for defenses to contain coming out of the backfield.

Fullback isn't a position typically featured in a Weis offense. As such, Schwapp and Schmidt aren't likely to make a huge impact next year.

Wide Receiver:

The wide receiver position should be a strength of the Fighting Irish in 2008. No other position on the Irish roster has so many players with good to great talent. The top receivers from last season all return in David Grimes, George West, Robbie Parris, Duval Kamara, and Golden Tate. Additionally, Weis and his coaching staff brought in what is arguably the best Irish wide receiver class in the last fifteen years, and likely the best any program has had in the last five years. Michael Floyd, Deion Walker, and John Goodman all have good size and speed at the position. Floyd, in particular, seems to already give the Irish a player that can stretch the field.

Grimes and West are lightning quick receivers that excel in the slot position. While both Grimes and West were inconsistent catching the ball, both have the ability to create yards after the catch. Parris and Kamara are taller, more rangy receivers that showed promise in 2007. However, Parris struggled, at times, to get open and Kamara still has room to grow into the position. If both of these receivers can continue to utilize their size to shield defenders, the sky is the limit. Improved speed on the part of Parris could also increase his game as he often struggled to gain separation from defenders.

Like Crist, Floyd is a receiver that has all of the physical tools to be great. He has good, albeit not great, speed, great size, excellent field vision, smooth route running ability, and catches everything thrown near him. Goodman has great speed for his size. While his hands are suspect, a forty-plus yard kickoff return average shows his ability to get yards after the catch. Walker is exceptionally fluid cutting in his routes, needing only to gain strength before being able to consistently contribute at the collegiate level.

The wide receiver position is extremely deep and talented and has great potential to be a break-out position for the Irish in 2008 if the Irish offense can protect the passer. With so many young, talented players look for multiple members of this group to make an impact rather than a single player.

Tight End:

Notre Dame took a serious hit to their tight end depth when Konrad Reuland transferred and Will Yeatman ran into trouble with the law. Despite the absence of these two highly recruited high school athletes (even though Yeatman may return in the future), there is a great deal of talent left at this position.

Mike Ragone received considerable playing time last year, most of it coming by way of special teams. He has excellent speed for the tight end position but still lacks the size and strength to be an effective blocker.

The Irish will also receive an upgrade in talent at this position in the fall when Kyle Rudolph and Joseph Fauria arrive on campus. Rudolph is an exceptional athlete with great height and speed. Like Ragone, he will also need to bulk up to handle blocking duties but his speed, route running ability, and height cannot be overlooked. Coupled with an innate ability to catch the ball with his hands, away from his body, Rudolph should be a dangerous receiving threat from the tight end position in the very near future. Fauria is the blocker to go with Rudolph's receiving skills. He already possesses the size to contribute right away and has the height to also be an effective receiver. Look for both Rudolph and Fauria to be visiting a red zone near you.

The Irish have significant talent at the tight end position. However, much of it is very young with very little experience. While there is reason to suspect great things down the road, this position will not be a strength for the Notre Dame in 2008.

Offensive Line:

Most of the last year's miserable season was attributed to poor offensive line play. Much of this criticism was deserved, some was misplaced. The Irish struggled woefully against aggressive defense fronts, often incapable of picking up the blitz and protecting the passer. At times the offensive line play was timid and passive, two words that spell disaster describing the play on an offensive front. While Notre Dame returns several players at this position with good playing experience, the question remains whether they can gel and significantly progress in the offseason to improve in pass protection.

Perhaps more importantly, however, will be the improvement in run blocking. The Irish ran the ball effectively at times in 2007 (click here), but were terrible converting short yardage situations on the ground. With talent in the backfield and youth at the quarterback position, improvement in run blocking will go a long way to winning football games in 2008.

Super recruit Sam Young regressed in 2007 after a pretty solid freshman campaign. The move to left tackle didn't go as smoothly as the Irish coaching staff hoped and Young struggled with his first step against smaller, quicker defensive ends. The Irish return Paul Duncan at the other tackle position. In his first year starting Duncan didn't particularly impress. He lacked aggressive play and committed many mental mistakes that resulted in sacks for the opposition.

Both guards in 2007 were first time starters. Matt Carufel (who later transferred) started for the first part of the season alongside Michael Turkovich. Later in the year this position would be anchored by Eric Olsen, Dan Wenger, and Chris Stewart who also logged minutes at tackle. At times there were bright spots in the guard play, particularly for Olsen and Wenger, but more often than not the results were very inconsistent.

At center Notre Dame says goodbye to fifth year senior John Sullivan. While Sullivan had a less than stellar final campaign his leadership and experience will be missed. Wenger is likely to slide over and fill the need at this position, something he did admirably in the final games of 2007.

The Irish also have several young players waiting in the wings. Current players Matt Romine and Taylor Dever are joined by freshmen Braxton Cave, Lane Clelland, Mike Golic, and Trevor Robinson. Most feel Robinson has the best chance at competing early, especially since he arrived on campus in January. It is, however, still too early to pass on Romine, Dever, Cave, and Clelland. All were highly recruited in high school and, with a little time, could develop into very solid players.

Offensive line is a notoriously difficult position for young football players. Not only does it require time to gain size and strength to compete at the college level, it also requires significant repetitions in practice to learn complex blocking schemes. Additionally, cohesion and playing as a unit is more important along the offensive front than anywhere else on the football field.

The Irish are certainly talented at the offensive line position. However, the talent is mostly young and inexperienced such that it is too much to expect dramatically improved play along the offensive front in 2008. More physical and aggressive play would go a long way in run blocking, something Notre Dame desperately needs to take pressure off Clausen and get the ball into the hands of their talented backs. The offensive line likely won't be a break-out position for the Irish in 2008.

Defensive Line:

No where do the Irish suffer more from a lack of quality depth than on the defensive front three. With the departure of Derrell Hand (injury) and Kuntz (unknown) this position group took an even harder hit in the offseason. While Kuntz insists he will be back, the defensive line will still need contributions from the younger players on the roster to put together a decent performance in 2008.

Among the upper classmen at the position are the aforementioned Kuntz and Justin Brown. Both lack ideal size to play on the line in a 3-4 defensive alignment. Kuntz will likely move to end to give the Irish experience on the outside. While he plays with a very high motor, he will likely struggle against larger offensive guard and tackles. Both Kuntz and Brown are quick off the ball, but size, strength, and endurance are concerns.

On the outside Kuntz and Brown will likely be spelled by freshmen Sean Cynwar, Ethan Johnson, and Kapron Lewis-Moore. Cynwar is a bigger body, more suited for the 3-4, with above average burst off the line. Johnson was generally regarded as one of the better outside pass rushing defensive ends in the country last year but initially may be more suited to play on the outside of a 4-3. Lewis-Moore will need to gain size to play on the interior of the 3-4. Rising junior Kallen Wade could also contribute at this position provided he continues to gain size in the offseason.

The middle of the defensive front will likely be manned by sophomore Ian Williams. A member of the Freshman All-American team, Williams logged 45 tackles in limited action in 2007 and has ideal size to protect the middle of Notre Dame's 3-4 front. Backing Williams up will likely be a combination of freshmen Hafis Williams and Brandon Newman. Newman was particularly impressive at the Army All-American game and the word on the street is that Williams is a dark horse in the most recent Irish recruiting class. It remains to be seen to what extent both will be able to contribute along the defensive front in 2008 as freshmen.

On paper, defensive line is the weakest position on the Irish roster. Much can happen in an offseason but asking for dramatic improvement from multiple players is wishful thinking. The Irish should employ a defensive line by committee approach in 2008, but that won't mask the problems stemming from a lack of depth and experience on the defensive front. Defensive line will be a position exploited by many teams on the Irish roster, very susceptible to giving up yards up the middle on the ground.

Inside Linebacker:

The Irish return three year starter Maurice Crum at the inside linebacker position after a solid 2007 campaign. While Crum doesn't possess ideal speed for an inside linebacker in the 3-4, he is a veteran player who will be counted on for valuable leadership. Better pursuit angles and fundamentals would go a long way to improve his play on the field as this position will be asked to mask the depth of the front three.

Many Irish faithful hope 2008 is the break-out year for Toryan Smith. To date, Smith has shown the ability to stuff the run, but has consistently struggled in pass coverage. He is a strong, physical inside presence that plays with great leverage, but his lack of speed and inability to quickly change direction has kept him off the field to date.

Steve Quinn, Aaron Nagel, Steve Paskorz, and Kevin Smith have contributed thus far as backups and will likely not see the field in 2008. Quinn may be the exception as he is a more versatile player, but the influx of talent in the freshman class and potential emergence of Smith may keep him on the sideline.

The fall brings new talent to this position in the form of Anthony McDonald, David Posluszny, and Steve Filer. While Posluszny likely needs some time to develop, McDonald and Filer could contribute immediately. Filer, in particular, possesses the sideline-to-sideline range coveted on the inside of the 3-4.

With time, the inside linebacker position could be a strength for Notre Dame. McDonald and Posluszny should develop into capable players, Filer has the talent to be an excellent inside linebacker, and Toryan Smith could be a stalwart for the Irish if he can improve his coverage skills. This will take time, however, and the Irish may continue to struggle at the inside linebacker position in 2008.

Outside Linebacker:

Perhaps as much as any other position on defense, the Irish roster is loaded with talent at the outside linebacker position. Primarily focused on generating pressure off the edge and stopping outside run plays, the outside linebacker in a 3-4 defense must possess a rare blend of size, strength, and speed to be effective. Notre Dame has no shortage at this position. The Irish coaching staff has done an excellent job in the last couple seasons identifying and closing on young athletes to fill their needs.

In Kerry Neal and Brian Smith the Irish have two extremely athletic sophomores to man the outside linebacker position. Both have size, strength, and speed, even at a young age. While over-aggressive at times in 2007, another year of practice and improved understanding of the 3-4 defense should go a long way in improving the play of Neal and Smith in 2008.

Backing up Neal and Smith should be two very capable players in John Ryan and Maurice Richardson. While Ryan struggled against the run in 2007, in short duty he should be an admirable backup. Richardson is an excellent pass rusher from the outside, creating mismatch problems for many offensive tackles with his speed and quickness.

Scott Smith and Kevin Washington will likely not see the field in 2008 due to the arrival of Darius Fleming in the fall. Fleming is another excellent athlete capable of providing quality minutes for the Irish. He will need to gain some size and strength to consistently contribute, but seeing Fleming on the field in 2008 is not out of the question.

The 2008 season may not be the one for Notre Dame's outside linebackers to break-out. However, they are on the verge of being a strong point for the Irish defense, both in run support and as a point of attack in pressuring opposing quarterbacks.

Defensive Backfield:

If there is a more talented position than outside linebacker on the Irish defense, it is the defensive backfield. In Terrail Lambert and Darrin Walls Notre Dame has two very talented and fairly experienced corners. Walls, in particular, has excellent speed and quickness giving him the potential to be an excellent lock-down corner. What Walls and Lambert give in cover ability, however, they lack in physical run support. This makes it imperative for the Irish defense to be able to contain the run from the outside linebacker position.

Joining Walls and Lambert are rising junior Raeshon McNeil and rising sophmore Gary Gray. McNeil and Gray also have excellent cover skills making them very capable backups and contributors in nickel and dime situations.

Complementing the more finnesse play of Walls, Lambert, McNeil, and Gray are soon-to-be freshmen Jamoris Slaughter and Robert Blanton. Both Slaughter and Blanton are more physical than any corners on the current Irish roster.

The Irish bring back free safety David Bruton from a solid 2007 campaign. Despite it being his first year to start, Bruton logged significant minutes and numbers in 2007. He has exceptional range and size, making him an excellent center-fielder in the Irish secondary.

Losing Tom Zbikowski will be tough for Notre Dame's defense. However, there are capable replacements waiting in the wings. Ray Herring has played sparingly in the past. His performances have been largely inconsistent, showing some bright spots. Kyle McCarthy provided solid minutes in 2007, playing in three safety sets when the Irish moved Zbikowski into more of a spy role. Perhaps the most promising player to secure the starting strong safety spot is Harrison Smith. Smith has excellent speed for his size and drew rave reviews in practice. While more suited to play the free safety spot, it isn't out of the question for the defensive coordinator Corwin Brown to move Smith or Bruton into a strong safety roll to maximize the athleticism in the secondary.

The wildcard in the mix is Sergio Brown. Brown has freakish athleticism but has, to date, lacked consistently fundamental play, often times blowing assignments. If Brown is able to better grasp the mental aspects of his assignments, he could bring real promise to the safety position in 2008.

The Irish secondary performed well in 2007 giving up only 161.6 yards per game, good for third best in the country. With improved depth and more experienced starters in 2008, this looks to be a position of strength. Ironically, the team liability during the last two years of Coach Tyrone Willingham's tenure (ranking near the bottom of the country in pass defense) has now become a strength for the the current coaching staff. This is, in no small part, due to secondary coach Bill Lewis both in recruiting and developing solid talent in the secondary. With Corwin Brown's success coaching the secondary in the NFL and the talent and depth on the Irish roster, the defensive secondary is poised to break-out in 2008.

You're Gonna Do What?: Charlie Weis To Give Up Play Calling Duties at Notre Dame

2008-02-09T14:06:00.002-05:00

Coach Charlie Weis dropped a few bombs on the Fighting Irish football faithful Friday, stating-among other things-that he would relinquish offense play calling duties to his offensive staff. This effectively allows Mike Haywood to do what his job title states: be the offensive coordinator.

Weis also announced that Jon Tenuta will coach the linebackers, moving defensive coordinator Corwin Brown back to work with the secondary. I believe this is a positive move given the quality of linebacker play Georgia Tech exhibited over the past few seasons along with the fact that Brown's experience in the NFL was coaching the secondary.

Weis mentioned the conversations that he had with both Brown and Tenuta before Tenuta was hired. They discussed their coaching relationship, how they would work and interact, and the responsibilities each would have going forward. All three agreed on the way things would work, believing that only good would come of the situation despite Tenuta having less responsibility and no play calling duties.

The move by Weis to give up play calling duties is puzzling, given that his background is as an offensive coordinator, developing a reputation for being one of the most innovative offensive minds in the NFL while working under Bill Belichick with the New England Patriots. Weis is an exceptional play caller not only because he can scheme and attack opposing defenses, but also due to his innate ability to set up and call the perfect play, at the perfect time. It is this last characteristic of Weis' offensive play calling abilities that makes him one of the best in the business.

Ultimately, this decision by Weis leads to the following question: Does losing his offensive play calling prowess and scheming advantages outweigh the positives associated with this move?

The Good

This decision by Weis doesn't come without positives. It shows a willingness to change, to distance himself from what he is comfortable with, to move outside his comfort zone. This must be a truly difficult thing to do. Weis is stepping away from doing what he does best for what he believes will ultimately lead to Notre Dame becoming a better football team and he becoming a better head coach. In the past Weis' stubborn and domineering personality has caused problems, not allowing his assistants to properly perform their jobs. The fact that Weis specifically commented on how he was restricting the creative capabilities of his offensive staff reiterates his belief that this move is for the greater good of the team.

This move will allow Weis to manage the team, the game, and his staff better. A great deal of being a head coach is doing just that, managing your players, making critical decisions during the game, and developing your staff. In the past, decision making in games has been an often criticized component of Weis' coaching. This move frees him up to hopefully make better in-game decisions at critical points of the game.

With his extra time Weis plans to get more involved with special teams, even making a trip to see Frank Beamer in the off-season. Beamer is an excellent special teams coach and Virginia Tech has had excellent success in the past blocking punts and field goals as well as in the return game. Weis also plans on using the extra time to become more involved with the players. He wants to become more approachable and less intimidating for the players, specifically with the younger players:

"I talked to former players and current players, and I think the biggest issue as I looked at this is if you're playing freshmen and sophomores, it's not the same as when you're playing juniors and seniors. The maturity level of the players is not the same. So you can't take for granted that 18 and 19 year olds are the same as 21 and 22 year olds as far as how you can coach them and the maturity level. You know, I never looked at it from that perspective before. But if you think about it, a kid right out of high school is not the same as somebody who's been weathered for four years in the program.

So therefore as I look at it, we're going to be playing those kids, and a lot of those freshmen and sophomores that you played last year are really only in the program for the second or third year, might have only played for one year. And I just felt that too many times when a guy makes a mistake, the only thing they're concerned about is getting yelled at, versus when you make a mistake, being concerned about letting your team down.

So I'd like to move in the direction that if a guy made a mistake he was more concerned that he was letting his teammates down than worrying about the fear of is Weis going to yell at me. The fear of a kid, the younger guys, too many times they play with that mentality. So what do you do? You get it so that they know you better so if you yell at them they know that it's not personal.

The first two years were a little bit easier to be honest with you because when you're playing with older guys, they've already been through that process. You can be harder on them because they're older and they've been more weathered. I played a lot more younger guys this year, and I think in self evaluation, which is what you're talking about right now, I don't think the freshmen and sophomores are really quite ready for the full load, so to speak. I think you have to -- they're not going to change. You're going to bring another group of freshmen next year. They're still going to be freshmen. You're not going to change, you've got to be the one that changes."

Weis' comments indicate he has evolved and adapted, and he has more understanding with one of the primary differences between coaching in college vs. the NFL. This move by Weis is an attempt to create a better team, building it from within and starting with himself. Spending more time with the players will build closer relationships with him, creating loyalty to Weis and leading to more motivated play.

Weis will still be involved with the offense, primarily with the quarterbacks and interjecting when he feels necessary. This is important for two primary reasons. I believe this will allow him to continue to have influence on the timing of the offensive play calls. It will also allow Notre Dame to continue to bring in top quarterback talent, as he has a superb reputation for developing quarterbacks.

Without Weis calling plays control of the offense will go to Michael Haywood, who's background is in the running game. Haywood played running back at Notre Dame, he coached the running backs at Texas (including Ricky Williams and Cedric Benson), he currently coaches the running backs at Notre Dame, and I believe he will renew the Irish commitment to running the football consistently and effectively.

If there have been any criticisms about Weis' play calling in the past, it was that he was too cute, that he didn't develop a power running game to convert short yardage situations and have an effective goal line rushing attack. With the talent up front along the offensive line and at the running back position Weis and his staff have brought in over the past three years, this could bode very well for the future of the Irish rushing game.

The Bad

Losing Weis' excellence in offensive play calling aside, what puzzles me most about this move is the timing. While I think that ultimately this is a good decision, having two very young and inexperienced coordinators on the same staff has the potential to be problematic. Weis must have confidence in Haywood, otherwise I don't think he would allow him to call plays, but the fact of the matter is that Haywood has no experience calling plays in a game.

The problems associated with this lack of experience at both coordinator positions may also be mitigated by having Weis' presence with the offense and Jon Tenuta's presence with the defense. Still, I believe this introduces an area of concern for the near future and the importance of losing a play caller like Weis cannot be overstated.

The 2007 Notre Dame football season was a disaster due to a combination of problems all occurring at the same time. Three new starters on the offensive line, youth and inexperience at many of the offensive skill positions, a true freshman quarterback, lack of depth at the defensive line position, a new defensive scheme, coordinator, and terminology, and a front loaded schedule with good defensive football teams all contributed to a 3-9 season.

In the history of college football there may have never been so many unfavorable factors facing one team.

In 2008 many of these problems will either be reduced or gone. There will still be youth at many of the offensive skill positions. However, there will be more experience. The offensive line returns four starters. Jimmy Clausen should be healthy, have more practice time with his receivers to improve their timing, and have a more developed understanding of the offense. The defense should be more adept with the new 3-4 scheme. And the schedule is much more manageable.

Only the depth issues along the defensive line will remain as big problem of a problem as it was in 2007.

By making this decision now Weis has introduced another factor that could negatively contribute to the 2008 season. It isn't having one weakness or problem area that makes it difficult to win football games. One problem area can typically be covered via adjustments and scheming. It's when there are several weaknesses and problems that winning becomes difficult because opposing teams can more easily adjust to exploit multiple weaknesses.

It remains to be seen whether or not this decision by Weis will be a good move or bad. However, when one lines up the positives and negatives it looks like a forward step for the Notre Dame program.

The Weis Is Right: Notre Dame Nets Stellar Recruiting Class

2008-02-06T20:42:00.002-05:00

To all Notre Dame football fans, everywhere, I'd like to take the time to introduce you to the class of 2012. On Wednesday, coach Charlie Weis and the Notre Dame football program received twenty-three faxed letters of intent from high school football players around the country. Depending on who you talk to this recruiting class is ranked from 1 to 7 in the nation. Most believe it to be, in the very least, a top-three class once it is all said and done. Many programs which signed more players will lose some due to academic casualties and/or cannot accept all of their scholarships.

First things first, Weis and the entire coaching staff deserve a great deal of credit.

Last year at this time the Fighting Irish unexpectedly lost a few recruits to other teams. Even during the rest of the recruiting season there were undertones of recruits misleading and/or wavering from their verbal commitments. Weis adjusted his recruiting style and the "rules" surrounding it to come away with a grand slam haul this year. This very well could be the best class Notre Dame has had since the Lou Holtz/Vinny Cerrato era. After last year's 3-9 season, this is a welcomed breath of fresh air in South Bend.

It isn't like the past two recruiting classes Weis has brought in have been bad, they have certainly been far from poor. The reason this class is so phenomenal is three-fold.

First, the needs up front on the defensive side of the ball have been addressed, as much as they can in one recruiting class. Second, the skill position players on offense, save at the running back position, are top notch football players. Dayne Crist, Deon Walker, John Goodman, Michael Floyd, and Kyle Rudolph are all excellent high school football players, and each one brings something unique to the table for Notre Dame.

Third, this class has intangibles. The recruits are already close; they have been talking to each other, bonding, and are convinced that they are going to put Notre Dame back at the top of the college football world. The quotes from their high coaches virtually all read: "The amazing thing is, he's a better person than football player." They have bought into the concept of Notre Dame, what it means, how special of a place it is. They have leadership, toughness, and determination that is evident in both what they say and in action, as they stayed loyal to Notre Dame and Weis despite Notre Dame's poor season.

All those things will be for naught, however, if Weis and his staff are unable to develop the talent they have worked so hard to bring in. I don't put a lot of stock in recruiting rankings, mostly because they judge more on talent and athleticism than actually attempting to quantify how good a high school football player is going to be in college. Many times this is an impossible feat; the competition in high school just isn't good enough to extrapolate the talent on the field to the college level. That said, the recruiting rankings of Notre Dame's past three classes indicate that the talent and athleticism in South Bend come Fall Camp will be seriously upgraded from the initial group Weis inherited. You can't create talent and athleticism; you can coach it into good football players. This will be the task of Weis and his staff moving forward, in addition to continuing to recruit well.

Now on to my take of how the Irish did at each position...

Quarterback

Dayne Crist is as good as there is out there. Physically he has more tools than Clausen. That doesn't mean he will necessarily be a better quarterback than Clausen, but he does have more size, speed, and strength. He really can zip the ball but he lacks the accuracy and polish that Clausen has. Crist will surprise you with his speed and elusiveness, but he also needs to adjust to lining up under center, as he took the majority of his high-school snaps from a shot-gun formation. What really impresses me about Crist is his already teeming leadership abilities. He already says and does all the things you want in a veteran quarterback.

Running Back

I'm not overly impressed with Jonas Gray. The speed all the recruiting services list for him is overstated. He doesn't have as good of speed as advertised. He does run tough and keeps his pad level low. I can see him being a solid player for us but I think Aldridge and Hughes will keep him on the bench for the foreseeable future.

Tight End

Kyle Rudolph and Joseph Fauria make a great combination of tight ends in this class. Rudolph is an exceptional athlete for his size. He's got great height and the frame to put on more weight. He can really go up and get the ball but the things I love about him are those that make a great receiver. He gets his hips very low when he cuts on routes, allowing him to move in and out of cuts very quickly. He also catches everything with his hands, away from his body.

Fauria is of a different mold. He already has the size and strength. I think he will be a better blocker than Rudolph but both will be great weapons in the red zone both in tighter formations and split out wide.

Offensive Line

Most of the offensive line recruits we signed are more of the project variety. Mike Golic certainly has the fundamentals to be a great one. He just needs to gain size and strength. I think Lane Clelland and Braxston Cave are more polished and will contribute sooner but I don't know if they are really do go just yet. Cave does have a great mean streak and Clelland has great feet for a tackle but I think both will need to adjust to the speed at the college level, as all linemen do.

Trevor Robinson, I believe, is the exception. I think Robinson can compete almost immediately. He has the size and strength needed to compete at the college level and enrolling early won't hurt his cause.

Wide Receiver

I firmly believe this could be the best wide receiver class Notre Dame has ever had and is also probably the best wide receiver class any school has signed over the past 5-10 years. Michael Floyd is a man among boys. He has deceptive speed and quickness, strong hands, and the ability to stretch the field. He isn't going to run away from everyone, but he isn't without the ability to generate yards after the catch. He catches everything thrown in his vicinity and I think he has the potential to be the best possession receiver in Notre Dame history. I think he is like Maurice Stovall (in his later years) but with better hands and more speed and quickness.

Deon Walker is a very fluid player, really quick in and out of cuts and accelerating through his routes. I believe he lacks the strength to be a consistent contributor right away but he could be a great receiver down the road.

John Goodman is a very under-rated wide receiver prospect. In any other year he would be rated much higher; this year's wide receiver recruiting class is extremely deep. Goodman has great speed and good quickness. While his hands are somewhat suspect, playing quarterback in high school will help with potential trick plays like double passes.

Defensive Line

At the defensive line position the Fighting Irish got both quality and quantity. While losing Omar Hunter hurt, the glaring depth needs at the position were met. Sean Cynwar, Brandon Newman, and Hafis Williams have the size to contribute early and to help stop the run, something Notre Dame didn't do particularly well last season. Kapron Lewis-Moore and Ethan Johnson both have the speed to become great pass rushers and get penetration off the snap against the run. Hopefully all are better than advertised, as they will very likely need to contribute next season.

Linebacker

I think my favorite recruit at this position is Anthony McDonald. He has a reputation of being very coachable and is a student of the game. Although he won't blow you away with his speed, he plays with good technique and typically takes good pursuit angles, both of which can help make up for a lack of physical ability.

David Posluszny is small and will need to gain strength but his instincts for the ball cannot be ignored. I think he is someone who will contribute, albeit a little further down the road. Steve Filer and Darius Fleming are the more athletic guys of the group. Both can run sideline-to-sideline, something essential to playing inside linebacker position in the 3-4. I think they, particularly Fleming, could press for playing time next season.

Defensive Backfield

I absolutely love this class of defensive backs. Jamoris Slaughter and Robert Blanton are cut from the same mold. They may not have the best 40 times, but they fly all over the field and neither are afraid of contact. They love to hit and they bring the lumber every time. They are the perfect complement at the corner position to Darrin Walls, Gary Grey, and Raeshon McNeil who are much more cover corners.

If I could use one word to describe Dan McCarthy it would be range. While he may not have the pure speed of Harrison Smith, he can really move laterally, cut, and close ground in a hurry. McCarthy is also a very physical player. All three of these guys are really, really solid athletes and football players.

Interviewing With the Guys at Pigskin Podcast

2008-02-05T21:25:00.002-05:00

This Thursday I am going to be interviewed for a podcast to be posted on Pigskin Podcast. It should be available late that evening or Friday morning. The interview will also be available on iTunes (search keyword PIGSKIN). We will discuss the ESP and AV, as well as some other recent things related to Notre Dame football. They have a preview of the interview up at their website here and here.

Edit: The podcast of the interview is now posted here.

Jon Tenuta...Come On Down

2008-02-02T14:54:00.000-05:00

First, let me say thank you to Bill Lewis for being an excellent coach and recruiter. Every time I saw even a glimpse of practice the man was coaching his heart out. Rarely was his voice at full go simply because he never stopped talking, teaching, coaching. He recruited hard, he coached hard, and he worked hard for the University of our Blessed Mother. I don't like to see a good coach go, but I am very pleased that he has decided to remain a part of the Notre Dame athletic family. It just serves as another example of how special ND is and how it can really grab ahold of a person with its mystique.

If Lewis had to go, and he did due to a double hip replacement, Jon Tenuta was about as good of a hire as we could have made. To get a coach of his caliber as a position coach is astounding. He is a high profile name, an excellent defensive mind, and a no-nonsense coach. All of these things are tangible additions to our football program. This hire isn't a home run, it's a grand slam. Tenuta is among the top defensive minds in all of college football. He ranks with Charlie Strong, Bud Foster, the Stoops brothers, and our very own nemesis Pete Carroll.

Tenuta is the perfect complement to Weis and Brown. Brown is a sideline coach, involved in the game, motivating the players, creating energy in the play of the defense. Tenuta is a press box defensive tactical guru. He schemes, he adjusts. His presence in the defense will not only be felt in improved toughness and aggressive play, it will be evident in a improved ability to adjust to opposing offenses. The 3-4 is built to blitz, to confuse, to apply pressure to the quarterback from all over the field. Tenuta's background and experience is in aggressive, pressure applying, blitzing defensive schemes. Brown is new, raw, inexperienced. Tenuta is polished, he is battle worn, he has years of coordinating experience.

Tenuta will change our defense, he will make it faster, tougher, more aggressive. Our defense will dictate what opposing offenses can do, the tempo of the game, and will force our opponents out of the comfort zone. Brown tried to do this some last year, particularly in the UCLA and Boston college games. Tenuta is excellent at it. He has a background coaching in the secondary, but he also has a reputation for producing excellent linebackers. I could see either he or Corwin coaching the secondary and/or the linebackers with great success. Tenuta's style of defense is the epitome of what great defenses do: pressure and confuse the quarterback while playing press-man and/or roll zone coverage. His style is what all defensive coaches should aspire to. He has run it with pretty good success at Georgia Tech with average talent. Let's see what he can do with the talent Weis and Brown are bringing in.

Tenuta is a no-nonsense type of guy. He will make our practices tougher and more intense. He will give our offense a multitude of looks, making practice more like games. He isn't afraid to tell Weis when he is wrong, he isn't afraid to tell him how he would attack his offense, and he isn't afraid to speak up when he believes he is doing something wrong. On top of that, Tenuta explicitly stated that he took the job because of Weis and Notre Dame, to bring Notre Dame back to where it belongs in the college football landscape. Weis again hired a coach he didn't do well against in the past, upgrading the talent of his staff, and bringing in someone who's philosophy on the defensive side of the ball will upgrade our performance on the offensive side of the ball.

And the icing on the cake is the fact that Brown and Tenuta talked about how they would work together prior to Tenuta arriving. My one concern regarding this whole situation was a "too many cooks in the kitchen" type of thing. The fact that Weis got Corwin on board prior to the hire means he will be open and receptive to advice from Tenuta and will work well with him.

Welcome to Notre Dame Mr. Tenuta, I look forward to watching our defense play in the future.

I'll Take Grab Bag For $200...

2008-01-02T18:31:00.003-05:00

Apologies to those who don't get the SNL skit referenced in the title of this post. There is an assortment of things to discuss, things not dissimilar from a grab bag, and thought I'd bring some humor to bear. Among these items are Notre Dame's schedule next year, the AV BCS game winner predictions, the state of college football, the 2007 seemingly anemic running game, and John David Booty and the Trojan offensive machine. With that, let's get started.

2008 Notre Dame Football Schedule

The 2008 Notre Dame football schedule is as follows:

September 6 San Diego State
September 13 Michigan
September 20 @ Michigan St.
September 27 Purdue
October 4 Stanford
October 11 @ North Carolina
October25 @ Washington
November 1 Pittsburgh
November 8 @ Boston College
November 15 @ Navy (Baltimore)
November 22 Syracuse
November 29 @ Southern Cal

At first glance the 2008 schedule is clearly less daunting than the 2007 schedule was. Second, only two teams on the 2008 schedule (Michigan and USC) have even a shot at having the same talent the Irish will have next season, young and inexperienced as it may be. With the turmoil at Michigan, losing a lot of very important offensive players, and getting a new head coach, I'd say only USC should be a decided favorite in any game. That said, Notre Dame is still a bit young and Weis has to prove he can adapt and overcome last year's poor performances.

The Irish have no business losing to San Diego State, Stanford, North Carolina, Washington, Navy, or Syracuse. San Diego State isn't even remotely as talented as the Irish. Stanford falls into the same category. North Carolina has some talent but it is young, it is sparing, and there are many critical elements not in place for them to be a successful football team, depth among them. Washington is a Tyrone Willingham coached football team who is largely untalented and unimpressive save Locker who, if he's smart, will transfer to a spread team with more talent around him. Navy will go back to being Navy without Paul Johnson. And Syracuse is absolutely horrid.

Michigan State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, and Boston College provide more interesting challenges. Dantonio has really transformed MSU from a team that is undisciplined and chokes to a team that is physical and doesn't hurt themselves (save the bowl game this year). It is a home game for them and, depending on how good of a running game they have, might give the Irish a tough contest. Pitt has quite a bit of talent despite not seeing a lot of it showing up on the field. They have the pieces, but it remains to be seen if Wannstedt can put it together. Purdue is Purdue. Tons of precision in the passing game which typically opens the run, but terrible defense and far less talent than the Irish. Boston College loses a ton of senior leadership and talent not to mention Matt Ryan. This is another away game for the Irish otherwise they might fall with the former group of six. Notre Dame should win two of these four games at a minimum.

Michigan is a wild card, there's a lot of uncertainty surrounding the program with so many offensive players and seniors leaving, a new coach, and a possible change in offensive philosophy. It is a home game and (hopefully) the Irish will be vengeful after the debacle in 2007 (and 2006 for that matter). I can see Notre Dame getting a win but really it could go either way. USC is far too talented and deep for the Irish to compete with at this point.

This adds up to no fewer than eight wins. The Irish actually have a realistic shot at eleven. I think there is only one team on the schedule that has more talent and equal-to-better coaching. That said, the Irish are still a bit young and lack depth at certain positions. If Notre Dame does not get eight wins, the long-term answer for Weis as head coach of Notre Dame should be a resounding no. Additionally, the talent and experience disparity (not youth, but experience) between Notre Dame and the teams on the 2008 schedule isn't large enough to warrant a lop-sided loss. If the Irish lose by more than two or three scores, the long-term answer for Weis should also be no. Unfortunately, eight wins and competitive play in the other four games will mean the jury is still out. Weis has to prove that the 2007 season was an aberration. That will take quite a bit of time.

The AV BCS Game Winner Predictions

Well, the AV wasn't as successful this year as last picking the winners of the BCS and National Championship games. Last year the AV was four of five, only incorrectly picking the winner of the Michigan/USC contest in the Rose Bowl. This year the AV only successfully predicted two of the five games correctly, incorrectly picking the winners of the Rose, Fiesta, and Orange Bowls. This brings the total to six of ten, not quite a sterling percentage. With this season being so wild I anticipated a poorer showing as well even putting a caveat on the Rose Bowl pick (link here). Hopefully next year will be different.

The State of College Football

If there is anything I have learned this bowl season it's that college football is going downhill fast. Not only has ESPN and general media coverage ruined the academic integrity of college football athletics by completely over-sensationalizing the sport, but there are also more teams with little or no class than I can ever recall. By increasing the coverage and marketing every aspect of college football ESPN and other media outlets have made college football more about money than education. This has led schools to inexcusably focus on making money with their football programs, rather than developing their student athletes into young men with integrity and an education with which they can forge the rest of their lives.

On top of that, the lack of class exhibited by the likes of USC and Florida in their bowl games and the behavior of Urban Meyer and other head coaches in recruiting has cast a shadow on the college football landscape. There is no place for front flips into the end zone, taunting the opposition at the middle of the field, and negative recruiting in a game with integrity. Celebrations should occur with your team, the source of the individual player's success. They should not be aimed at the opposition or involve the crowd. Additionally, the lying, dishonesty, and negative recruiting employed by many coaches is absolutely intolerable. I don't say this in the wake of Omar Hunter's de-commitment out of spite (although admittedly he was one of the two players in Notre Dame's recruiting class they couldn't afford to lose). It has been prevalent for years. That doesn't, however, make it excusable. Coaches should do more than sell their souls and integrity to win. They have a responsibility to make their players into good people.

Notre Dame's 2007 Seemingly Anemic Running Game

Through various email conversations I started thinking and digesting our running game during the 2007 season. At first, I thought the Irish were not only inconsistent, but also widely unsuccessful. I was wrong. At the onset of this discussion I would like to credit Sam Martin for looking up the statistics and providing a majority of the insight into this analysis.

Here are the touches for Notre Dame's top three backs (Armando Allen, Robert Hughes, and James Aldridge) for each game:

Georgia Tech: 9 for 44 yards, 4.9 yards per carry
Penn State: 9 for 8 yards, 0.9 yards per carry
Michigan: 19 for 75 yards, 3.9 yards per carry
Michigan State: 27 for 150 yards, 5.6 yards per carry
Purdue: 12 for 34 yards, 2.8 yards per carry
UCLA: 25 for 71 yards, 2.8 yards per carry
Boston College: 13 for 32 yards, 2.5 yards per carry
USC: 15 for 61 yards, 4 yards per carry
Navy: 49 for 219 yards, 4.5 yards per carry
Air Force: 24 for 92 yards, 3.8 yards per carry
Duke: 34 for 179 yards, 5.3 yards per carry
Standford: 24 for 140 yards, 5.8 yards per carry

Looking at these numbers a few things become readily apparent. First, when sacks and other player running attempts are taken out, the numbers really aren't bad. Only against Penn State, Purdue, UCLA, and Boston College are the yards per carry not respectable. Additionally, in the games against Michigan State, Navy, Duke, and Stanford when Allen, Hughes, and Aldridge carried the ball often, the Irish gained significant rushing yardage. Finally, against Georgia Tech, Penn State, Purdue, Boston College, and USC, Notre Dame really didn't attempt many running plays. This is understandable in the Purdue and USC games when Notre Dame was behind and needed to throw to get back into the game. This isn't understandable in the BC game where it was close for most of the contest and highly desirable to keep Matt Ryan off the field.

Looking at the rushing game from a player perspective Allen and Aldridge both averaged around four yards per carry with Hughes averaging closer to five. This ultimately leads to the conclusion that, when Notre Dame used these three backs and ran it often, they were consistent and successful. And this was, in large part, while teams were stacking the box to force the Irish to throw.

The running game was seeminglu unsuccessful due in large part to the inability to gain yardage on third and fourth and short, i.e. when the Irish really needed it. However, looking at these numbers it is baffling why Weis didn't identify this as a strength of the team, develop it, perfect it, and plan his offense around it at the beginning of the season, using it to open up the passing game and control the clock.

John David Booty and the Trojan Offensive Machine

Does anyone else want to be John David Booty? For the second straight year he put up phenomenal numbers in the Rose Bowl despite not making a single difficult throw. He is the next coming of Matt Leinart and Jamarcus Russell, an over-rated quarterback with tons of talent around them to make yards after the catch and in front of them to give them a ton of time. Mark Sanchez, Mitch Mustain, are you ready to be gifted an NFL draft pick?

ESP Week Fourteen and BCS Game Predictions

2007-12-02T21:26:00.001-05:00

If I were Missouri, I'd be pissed. You go into the weekend #1 and don't even make a BCS bowl game? I know they were beaten soundly by Oklahoma, but that just seems wrong given that teams like Kansas (who they beat), Hawaii (who hasn't played anyone and nearly lost to a horrendous Washington team), and Illinois (three losses and who also lost to Missouri) all made BCS games. It just doesn't make much sense to me to leave them out.

Place your bets. The AV predicts the following BCS game winners:

Orange: Virginia Tech over Kansas
Rose: Illinois over USC
Sugar: Georgia over Hawaii
Fiesta: Oklahoma over West Virginia
National Championship: LSU over Ohio State

With so few good teams this year these predictions might not be terribly reliable (particularly the Rose Bowl prediction where I think USC is going to spank Illinois). I'll just keep a running tally of how good the AV is at predicting BCS game winners (currently 4 of 5 as shown here).

The ESP ranking:

The 8 team ESP playoff bracket:

The AV ranking 1-25:

The strength of schedule (SOS) , adjusted win percentage (AWP), quality win/loss (QWL), and margin of victory (MOV) rankings:

Stanford Recap and A Wishlist For Next Year

2007-11-26T21:23:00.003-05:00

Again, I forgot to DVR the game. Without this excellent technology my ability to critically evaluate our play is significantly diminished. I'll take a shot at a few things offense, defense, and special teams followed by a wish list for next year.

Offense

Jimmy Clausen took a step back in this game. He went back to evading the pass rush by moving laterally instead of forward in the pocket. He needs to develop a pass rush clock in his head. He ran out of bounds several times, taking a loss, instead of throwing the ball away. His interception was a horrendous decision. And his deep balls lacked strength, were thrown too late, and had too much air under them. That said, he threw the ball on the short and intermediate routes very well. When given time, he is a very accurate quarterback. Elimination of the freshman mistakes and gained speed and strength will go a long way in improving his game.

Once again Robert Hughes ran well. He is showing why he was so highly regarded in high school. Despite his good play there is no excuse for James Aldridge not getting carries, save an injury or lingering pain. Armando Allen should also get a minimum of ten touches a game. It doesn't matter if that comes in the form of returns, receptions, or carries, but he looked two steps faster than any Stanford defender when he was on the field.

David Grimes played pretty well. Duvall Kamara did also, at least at times. He has to be more aggressive when the ball is in the air using his body to shield the defender. George West is the best blocker of the group and showed it during the game.

Again, the offensive line play against Stanford was horrible. There were times when they played better, but they were still far too inconsistent. Sam Young and Michael Turkovich are starting to play much better in the run game but Young still has to be quicker in his first step off the ball, particularly in the passing game.

Notre Dame cannot turn the ball over four times and win many ball games. This is especially true when they turn the ball over going in to score and/or on their end of the field. The fact that the Irish only gave up fourteen points despite turning the ball over so frequently is a true testament to the play of the defense. Of course Stanford helped, turning it over several times of their own as well as not being as talented of a team.

Defense

Hats off to Corwin Brown (again), the defense went back to playing inspired football. That was true for no one more than Tom Zbikowski. He played much harder in this game than he has in recent weeks. Trevor Laws deserves a medal for his play this season. It's going to be a shame that he is left out of All-American discussions. No one makes that many tackles playing defensive end in a 3-4 scheme, no one.

Notre Dame's tackling, at times, was absolutely atrocious. It was like defenders were bumping chests. It was very, very disappointing at times.

David Bruton is steadily improving. He made the biggest impact the Irish secondary this year. Not only is he a lights-out gunner on the punt team, he is so rangy he has really helped our secondary improve in the passing yards they give up. Notre Dame is third in the country in passing yards surrendered per game at 161.6 (link here). That is a huge improvement over previous seasons. Part of this improvement is due to a more porous run defense, i.e. teams didn't need to throw the ball. But some of it is certainly due to improved play in the secondary.

Darrin Walls play in pass coverage continues to be impressive. If he can get stronger and learn to be more physical coming up to stop the run, he will be one of the best corners in the country. It's time for Notre Dame's secondary to become a strength. With Walls, Bruton, McCarthy (Dan and Kyle), Harrison Smith, Raeshon McNeil, Gary Gray, and the two freshmen Jamoris Slaughter and Robert Blanton, Notre Dame has a solid nucleus of players to build upon. Combine that with more talent up front to apply pressure to opposing quarterbacks and the defense should be drastically improved in the near future. There will be some growing pains with the younger players and it is still imperative that the coaching staff continue to build depth, especially on the line, but the Irish are moving in the right direction.

Special Teams

Special teams continue to be poor. If it isn't penalties on punt returns, it's poor blocking on kickoff returns. The Irish have the athletes and speed to return a kickoff, there really is no excuse for not getting one this year, especially with the level of competition Notre Dame faced down the stretch. Add to that the fact that Notre Dame can't kick touch backs or make very makeable field goals and this is a huge area of concern for the Irish.

Wish List For Next Year

My wish list for next year is broken into two parts. The first part is the players themselves. The second part is for Weis and the rest of the Irish coaching staff.

Players

1) First and foremost has to be improved play on the offensive line. This improvement must occur in several areas. The offensive line must improve getting to the second level. They must improve the physicality of their play, particularly on short yardage situations. They must improve their communication with each other. They must improve their pass protection. And they must do all of this to allow us to go four and five wide to challenge the depth of opposing teams' secondaries.

2) The inside linebacker play must improve. This isn't all about athleticism, this is about coaching and learning by the players at that position. They don't scrape with their shoulders parallel to the line of scrimmage, they don't read and/or react quickly enough, they don't take proper pursuit angles, they don't take on blocks with the proper shoulder, and they don't tackle well. Yes, they may not be fast enough to chase down backs to the outside. Yes, they might not be strong enough to shed blocks. But the problems stated here are purely technique. Talent and athletisicm via improved recruiting will correct the speed and strength issues, coaching has to correct the technique and fundamental play.

3) Special teams must improve in all areas. There is no excuse for Notre Dame to hesitate kicking a field goal from forty-five yards in. There is no excuse for the Irish not having 30-40% of their kickoffs result in touch backs. There is no excuse for not having at least one punt or kickoff return for a touchdown given the athleticism in the return game. And there is no excuse for all of the penalties in the kicking game. Special teams won't win many games on their own unless the team performs at a very high level. They will, however, lose a team many games if they aren't competent.

4) Clausen must improve his speed and strength over the off-season. Forget staring down receivers. Forget not getting through his progressions as quickly as he should. If Clausen does not improve his arm strength and speed he will continue to suffer when pressured and throwing down field. His leadership is there, his competitiveness is there, his toughness is there, and his accuracy on short and intermediate routes is outstanding when given time. But his first step towards improving his play has to be getting stronger and faster.

5) The wide receivers for the Irish must improve their blocking. There were so few long runs primarily due to poor wide receiver blocking. The yards gained on hitch and arrow routes in the past weren't there due to poor wide receiver blocking. The Irish can't even run sweeps due to poor crack-back blocking by players at the wide receiver position. And double move routes, faking the block, weren't executed well because the receivers didn't do it well the rest of the time. This is imperative to improve the running game.

6) If Stanford proved anything, it's that getting a hat on a hat when executing a screen play is paramount. This is partly the offensive line's responsibility. This is partially down field blocking by the receivers. But having an effective screen game is such a huge weapon on offense. It isn't just that it slows down a pass rush, it's that when you can call and execute a screen pass on non-obvious screen downs (i.e. downs that aren't obvious pass pressure downs by the defense) it gives defenses a totally different thing to worry about. Defending the screen is difficult when properly blocked and Notre Dame's ability the past two seasons to execute it nearly every time they ran it was supremely under-estimated.

7) Improved play at the running back position is also highly desireable. All need to work on pass protection and ball security. Allen needs to work on patience, waiting for the holes to open (link here). He has the speed to be a break-away back. He just needs to wait for the holes to open and then accelerate through them. Hughes and Aldridge both need to improve their speed. They are physical runners who make the most of what is given to them. They just need to be more of a deep threat. Finally, Weis needs to make adjustments in the depth of the formation sets to accommodate the differences in speed and quickness of each back. Aldridge and Hughes shouldn't be set as deep as they are.

8) The Irish really need to be able to get to opposing quarterbacks when Corwin dials up the blitz. This is imperative to take pressure off the secondary. Too many times over the past two years Notre Dame has tried pressuring opposing quarterbacks via blitzing only to fail. There aren't many quarterbacks out there that can execute the short, quick (three step drop) passing game effectively and consistently. Even if they do, the speed in the secondary is able to minimize run-after-catch yards provided they tackle well.

9) The Irish need young players to step up and be leaders.They need players to drive accountability across their peers. And it needs to be something at each position group. Offensive linemen to hold other offensive linemen accountable. Linebackers need to hold other linebackers accountable. This needs to be true for each position and is imperative, it can't be only the coaches driving responsibility.

Weis

Where to begin? Despite all of the things stacked against this team this year, nothing adds up to 3-9. It's simply inexplicable, and some part of it was poor coaching. Weis has to become a more consistent leader. He must adapt how he prepares the team for the game such that they come out firing at the beginning. Too many times the offense dug their defensive counterparts into a hole they couldn't get out of via three-and-out's or turnovers in Irish territory.

Weis has to adapt from the NFL style of coaching to the college style of coaching. This includes changing practice schedules to include more time for fundamentals and drills as well as improving practice physicality. This includes a more (read different) approach to special teams. This includes trying to slim down and simplify the playbook. There is no need to increase the number of things the offense is trying to exectute in an effort to gain an schematic advantage. Sometimes the answer to not doing something well isn't to try something else, it's to practice that thing until you become better at it. Notre Dame must first improve in a limited number of areas that their talent and personnel are suited for. You can't run a double screen or a stretch zone running play without knowing how to block first. And Weis must re-evaluate the effectiveness of his style of offense at the college level when presented with youth at one or multiple positions.

Weis must find and develop leaders amongst his players. If players don't step up and do this on their own Weis must initiate it. This includes increasing the development of talent at the position level. Weis must put his assistants in a position to improve the play of the players or he must find assistants who are more capable of doing so.

Finally, Weis must change his play calling. That doesn't mean going for it less on fourth down. It doesn't mean not calling running plays that havne't been historically successful on third and/or fourth and short. This doesn't mean going down field more or less. This is about changing his philosophy of attacking opposing teams. Weis can't design his game plan soley around what they do poorly and what he thinks we do well. He must realize the risk associated with calling certain plays due to the chance of properly executing them versus the reward achieved by successfully executing them. He must recognize, based on past game experience in similar situations, with similar talent, and with similarly experienced players, the appropriate rate of success associated with executing his play call. College football isn't the NFL where a large percentage of plays are executed at a very high level. He must also realize the importance of sticking with what is working. Virtually all of this comes down to understanding not just what the Irish do well and the opponent does poorly, but also the future game implications of his decisions.

Weis can be successful at Notre Dame. There is no doubt about it. In fact, the Irish faithful will have their long-term answer to his success very early next season. It is too much to expect a great team next season, but the Irish also might not play any. Going 8-4 or 9-3 versus 11-1 next season will be all about Weis' abilities as a coach to implement constant team improvement as the year progresses. There is little evidence the Irish made any this year. That will continue to occur as long as the players don't get the blocking, route running, tackling, fundamental, etc. part of the game down before moving to the playcalling and scheming part of the game. This is even more true now, with such a young team, than it may ever be again (if he continues to recruit so well).

With this in mind, this argument may be a moot point. Notre Dame may gain experience and fill the upper and lower classes alike with depth and talent. However, Weis must still develop them. When he arrived he had experience, players that knew fundamentals. But his coaching staff didn't teach this to them, the previous one (as bad as it was) did. With little to no improvement this year there is reason for concern that Weis and his staff cannot teach these things, cannot instill fundamentals, cannot develop the talent they recruit. If they can't Notre Dame will never become a great football team with Weis at the helm. If they can, watch out. Imagine Weis' offense the first two years of his coaching tenure with more depth, greater athleticism, and a talented defense.

ESP Week Thirteen

2007-11-25T23:04:00.002-05:00

No real comments to make this time except that the AV predicted the outcome of the Missouri-Kansas game last week (link here). Based on the AV, LSU should handle Tennessee in the SEC championship game and Missouri should beat Oklahoma in the Big Twelve Championship game. I tend to believe the former more than the latter.

The ESP ranking:

The 8 team ESP playoff bracket:

The AV ranking 1-25:

The strength of schedule (SOS) , adjusted win percentage (AWP), quality win/loss (QWL), and margin of victory (MOV) rankings:

Finally, Another Victory

2007-11-19T18:15:00.001-05:00

I was at the game this weekend and didn't remember to DVR it. Without being able to see it on TV (and with the powers of rewind) I wasn't able to critically evaluate it. As such, I don't have a ton to say here. I was, however, able to see some things at the stadium that I couldn't have on TV.

First things first, hats off to Weis. Once again he proved he is a Notre Dame man by allowing a young cancer patient to attend practice and the pep rally, have a sideline pass, and be intimately involved with the team's routine during the game weekend. I will continue to point these types of things out because I believe them to be imperative to whomever our football coach is. I've said it before, Notre Dame football occupies a special place in many peoples' hearts allowing it to be a stage on which we can broadcast the University's message of charity and integrity. What could be more important?

Offense

Jimmy looked much better in this game. Sure, the Duke defense isn't very good, but many of the things I saw had nothing to do with the defense. He moved in the pocket much better, he tucked the ball and ran when he knew he could get the first down, he had much more zip on his throws, and he was very much the leader in the huddle. What you couldn't see on TV was him slapping butts, hitting helmets, and giving fives to the players around him making good plays. The first pass to Grimes was an NFL throw, on a rope, threaded between two defenders, and where only his man could catch it. If it weren't for Hail Mary types of passes, dropped balls, and throwing the ball away to avoid sacks his statistics would be much better.

Think about it, this kid is a true freshman who had to play while recovering from an arm injury, then while banged up due to poor offensive line play, then had to sit the bench. He had never lost a competitive football game before arriving on campus, now suffering through nine of them. He has shown leadership, toughness, and a selflessness many said he never had. His deep balls, which seem to float a bit too much, are about the only area I haven't seen improvement. The last two weeks he has looked much stronger when throwing such that I have fewer concerns about his arm strength and certainly now believe it is something that can be corrected with an off-season of strength and conditioning.

In addition to Clausen showing more leadership Sam Young also displayed improved leadership traits. He was more energetic, enthusiastic, and vocal. He was congratulating any of his cohorts when they did something good. I can only hope he was chastising them an equal amount of the time but I didn't really pay that much attention when things went badly for the offensive line. I will say that I saw Young lying on top of his man about 5-7 yards down the field for much of this game.

What seemed to be a strength early in the year has now turned into a weakness. Our receivers dropped several balls they should have caught. I understand the conditions were poor for throwing the football but if the ball hits you in the hands you should catch it, period. On top of that, our receivers can't block, both for each other and for our running backs. We have had very few long runs and this is nearly always due to poor wide receiver blocking down field. On top of that, the receivers can't block for each other on that stupid arrow route that Weis has to call twice a game. It worked his first year because Stovall was great at blocking for Samardzija. It didn't work as well last year because McKnight wasn't as physical as Stovall. And it doesn't work at all this year because the receivers we have are too small and/or weak. I thought the catch by Kamara for a touchdown was a great example of how to use your body as a receiver. I would, however, like to see him come down with a few more of those deep balls down the sideline when he has an obvious size advantage over the defender.

One more thing that stood out to me on offense was the disparity in success of our running backs. While Hughes ran wild, Allen and Aldridge were held in check for much of the game. Over the course of the season I have been watching these three backs and something stood out to me this game that hasn't before. It seems that, right now, Hughes is the best back we have. I don't say that because I am jumping on the bandwagon after one good performance against an inferiorly talented defense. I say that because I think his combination of size, balance, vision, and agility make it easier for the offensive line to do their job.

The past two seasons Darius Walker made the offensive line look good on many occasions with his ability to cut and stop/start. While Hughes might not be as nifty as Walker, he is agile and possesses incredible balance. Additionally, while Allen hits the hole too quickly and Aldridge too slow, Hughes has the patience to wait, but speed to arrive at the hole while it is open. Allen, many times, runs past his blockers before they can get to the second level and tie up the linebackers. Aldridge gets to the hole too late, forcing the offensive line to engage their man for an extended period of time. Hughes, however, is quicker off the ball than Aldridge, allowing him to get the hole faster. His patience and vision allows him to see things happening and explode through the opening. Hughes also possesses the right amount of shiftiness to run through defenders rather than over them. While Aldridge will punish a defender by running over him, Hughes has the agility to maneuver himself into a favorable position and run through the defender. With any of these backs you can't lose and I'm just happy to be having a conversation where I argue the merits of one versus the other. It's been a while since I could do that.

Defense

Not a lot to say here. When you shut someone out (I don't count the last touchdown) you are playing well. I don't care what offense you are facing. Duke has put up some points on pretty good defenses. We played well on Saturday.

Once again Laws was unblockable. It didn't show up on the stat sheet all that much but Duke went away from him pretty much all the time. I wish, for his sake, we had some more wins. He would be an All-American if it weren't for our record.

Darrin Walls is quickly becoming a leader in the secondary. I still believe he has to be more physical on the edge but he is vocal with the other players and doesn't hesitate to get up in their face.

Weis

I think it lacked class to put Zibi in at quarterback. That's a high school move in my book. Have fun in practice goofing around. In the game it shows disrespect to your opponent. I also think the personal foul and other penalties are evidence that there exists a lack of team discipline. This is Weis' responsibility and it needs to be fixed.

Weis said he plans to do an evaluation at the end of the season to identify the problems the team has had, ultimately sharing the blame and developing solutions. He plans to employ the Patriots organization to help critically evaluate the entire season from a coaching perspective. I think this will be both good and bad. First, I think it is good because Weis respects the Patriots' coaching staff. This ultimately means he will listen to them. I also think they will be blunt and tell him the truth. Second, this shows Weis' ability to adapt, and to place his pride on the shelf in an effort to right the ship. The negatives I see are also two fold. I think it is problematic to seek the type of advice he is getting outside of his organization if he is also not seeking it from inside his organization. I'm not sure this is the case, but it is a slap in the fact to your coaching staff if you aren't seeking advice from them as well. Lastly, trying to look to a professional organization to analyze problems at the college level may also have its drawbacks. As I have discussed, it seems that many of the problems our team had this year were directly related to differences in the game from college to the NFL. It is unlikely NFL guru's will be able to provide the answers if that is the case.

The one thing I hope comes out of Weis' meeting with the Patriots organization is improved offensive line play. We really haven't seen good offensive line play since Weis arrived. While I know we were thin in depth last year and young this year, I would expect someone coming from the Patriots (who have excellent offensive line play) to know the value of a good offensive line. There are theories about Latina's coaching forte not matching Weis' scheme. This may be true but something has to give. We have the talent at this position, now we need to develop it and move forward.

Going Forward

At any rate, it was good to get another win under our belt. Closing out with one more victory at Stanford would go a long way in helping to end this season on a positive note.

ESP Week Twelve

2007-11-19T18:09:00.000-05:00

And so goes the ESP for week twelve. There are a few interesting things to note. Notre Dame's schedule took a slight dive down to number four after playing Duke this weekend. Anticipate it moving further South after next week's game against Stanford. Many of you may notice that Kansas is ranked number two in the BCS but number six here in the ESP. This is primarily because they have played the 116th weakest schedule in the country. I anticipate Kansas' luck running out this coming week or next. You may also notice that Georgia is ranked very highly despite two losses. This is due to its relatively tough schedule.

The ESP ranking:

The 8 team ESP playoff bracket:

The AV ranking 1-25:

The strength of schedule (SOS) , adjusted win percentage (AWP), quality win/loss (QWL), and margin of victory (MOV) rankings:

Coaching Hires Are Like...Relationships

2007-11-15T20:16:00.001-05:00

Well, Mr. Stewart Mandel has given me a perfect opportunity to introduce my next topic: When and who should you hire as a college head football head coach?

Take a look at Stewart's article which can be found here. He makes many good points about the differences between coaching at the college and NFL level. However, he fails in one specific area in that he doesn't include facts/opinions that do not support his ultimate conclusion: Weis is a terrible college football coach. I have touched on this lack of information inclusion by "sports journalists" before (link here) and this article is no different. I'll break down a few specific points.

1) Mandel writes "Prior to his 2005 arrival in South Bend, the 51-year-old New Jersey native had never played or coached at the collegiate level. His credentials for the job were: a) his reputation as an offensive guru; b) his anticipated recruiting cachet, what with those four Super Bowl rings; and c) the fact that he graduated from Notre Dame." This is a false statement. Weis has had college football coaching experience. He was an assistant at the University of South Carolina from 1985 to 1988. That took me 30 seconds on Google to discover. I guess I'm a super sleuth.

2) Mandel also claims "Tom Brady and Weis' other Patriots protégés arrived as fully developed professionals." He might want to lend his powers of foresight to the other 31 NFL teams that passed on him through six rounds of the NFL draft. If it was such a foregone conclusion that Brady would be a great professional football player why didn't anyone else draft him?

3) Mandel starts the article with "Let's start with a fairly obvious realization: Charlie Weis is a terrible college football coach." but then goes on to say "It seemed clear at the time that Weis was the perfect guy to return the Irish to glory -- and maybe one day he will." The former statement is in direct contradiction with the latter. How can he believe, on the one hand, that Charlie Weis is a terrible college football coach, but, on the other hand, think that he may someday lead Notre Dame (a team he believes to be one of the worst in the country) back to glory? It is a complete dichotomy of ideas and it doesn't exaclty inspire me to believe he has a lot of conviction behind his argument.

4) Mandel also writes "Weis, however, is one of the few vested parties who will not pay a price for this disastrous season. He will still pocket his $3 million-plus for what has essentially been a year of on-the-job training. Meanwhile, the 80,000-plus spectators who pack Notre Dame Stadium every week -- many of them traveling great distances to be there -- have wasted untold dollars and energy supporting a woefully prepared team, not to mention the immeasurable humiliation their university has suffered. Lord only knows how much money NBC has lost on its investment." That may all be true. I doubt Weis isn't paying a price, I'm sure he isn't happy about the way this season has gone, he cares too much. But it isn't Weis' job to make NBC money, it isn't a waste of money to ever attend a Notre Dame football game (the campus alone is worth it, not to mention the Folk Choir Mass at the Basillica) regardless of how bad we are, and the fact that people are still making the pilgrimage to South Bend speaks volumes about the loyalty of the fans and the fact that it's more than just football at Notre Dame. Finally, he fails to mention the fact that while Weis is earning a hefty salary himself, we are still paying Willingham for driving our football program into the ground.

5) Stewart also says "In October 2005, seven games into Weis' tenure, school administrators decided they'd seen enough from the former New England Patriots guru to merit investing an additional 10 years and more than $30 million in him." but he fails to mention that the contract extension was not based solely on his performance. Rather, it was also to guard against many NFL teams expressing interest in his coaching services and to give recruits an assurance he would be the coach both now and into the future.

6) Finally, Mandel points to the inexperience and youth of the team as being possible explanations for our struggles this season but he fails to mention that we faced very good defenses for nearly all of our first eight games and one of the toughest schedules in the country.

There are six reasons that Mandel's article is full of holes, I'm sure there are more. He either states facts that are false or he leaves out opinions, arguments, and/or facts that do not support his argument. These things aside, I think he makes some good points about the differences of coaching in college versus the NFL. He talks about motivating and managing players, teaching players to play instead of simply teaching them a playbook, and dealing with the problems the kids will ultimately face as young adults.

This all got me thinking (although I have been thinking about it quite a bit lately anyway) about when and who should be hired as a college head football coach. First, let's examine the situation surrounding Weis' hiring. To me, the way in which we hired Weis was similar to ending a relationship in pursuit of another potential partner. Bear with me...

When you are with a person in a relationship it can be human nature to recognize and focus on the negative aspects of that person. This can, at times, ultimately lead to finding another person attractive if they have strong traits and characteristics in the weaker areas of the current partner. I think this is what happened when we hired Weis.

Admittedly, I didn't see this at the time. I wasn't sold when we hired Weis. I was impressed by his success in the NFL and partially won over by what he said at his introductory press conference. I was more impressed when he turned our once dormant offense into a scoring machine. I was even more impressed when I read his book "No Excuses" and heard the things he said to the team upon his arrival at Notre Dame. And eventually, I think I moved from skeptic to believer.

And I think I did this because Weis' strengths were the weaknesses of our past two coaches. Think about it. Weis is brash, confident (almost to a fault), and direct. Willingham was timid, guarded, and lacked transparency (also almost to a fault). Davie seemed to always have a canned response. Davie and Willingham fielded offenses that lacked explosion, consistency, and production. Weis' offenses set record after record. Neither Davie nor Willingham "got" Notre Dame and what it stood for. Weis not only gets it, he embraces it, and is one of our own. Willingham was lazy, Weis never stops working. Willingham couldn't recruit, Weis has hauled in three (God willing) straight top classes. Davie and Willingham couldn't win the games they were supposed to, Weis, for the most part, has.

So I think Notre Dame Nation, including myself, was enthralled by his strengths, by what he brought that the previous two coaches lacked, and by his affinity towards and inclusion to the Notre Dame family. But does that mean that Willingham and Davie didn't do good things as college football head coaches? No. Furthermore, does it mean that Weis is infallible? Obviously not. I didn't have the foresight to see it then, but this season has certainly proved it. I have said before, this season may have been necessary to really pound the differences between the NFL and college game into Weis' stubborn head (link here). But that doesn't mean it can't also enlighten us to his shortcomings as a coach. But the future can always hold change. What were his weaknesses can be turned into strengths.

So this then begs the question: When and who should you hire as a college head football coach? (At the onset of this discussion I am not trying to portray a Weis versus Willingham argument. It may seem like that at times but there are just many convenient examples between the two that illustrate my points.) I'll dissect them one at a time. First the when.

There are obvious situations when a coaching change must be made. If the program isn't consistently performing up to expectations, a change should be made. A change should also be made if there is relatively no change in the structure of the program, i.e. the coaching staff, athletic director, facilities, etc., but a negative trend in performance on the field. A change is necessary if all the pieces of the puzzle are there but the performance isn't. If Urban Meyer and Les Miles hadn't averaged about ten wins through their first few seasons I would say changes are needed. Both schools have talented athletes, facilities, and a strong support base. And finally, if there are numerous problems with the student-athletes off the field such that the coach has lost control of the team, a coaching change is definitely needed. There are probably more than what I have listed but those are the ones that occur to me off the top of my head.

What is less obvious, perhaps, is when a coaching change must not be made. A coaching change should not be made if the future repercussions for the program outweigh the immediate ramifications of retaining the coach. For example, the public relations hit that Notre Dame took by firing Tyrone Willingham did not out-weigh the future potential for Willingham to do irreparable damage to the football program with another few terrible recruiting classes. On the flip side, it would not be prudent to fire Weis on the conclusion of this season for three primary reasons. One, barring any dramatic change(s), there aren't any exceptional candidates out there. Second, this season, at least to date, is an anomaly in Weis' career. Additionally, despite poor performances on the field, he has recruited exceptionally well. And third, firing Weis would virtually eliminate the possibility that another coach would want to come to Notre Dame. Would you want only three years to prove you could do your job well in a business where it takes (arguably) four years for your product to be produced? Unfortunately for Willingham, we suffered through five plus years of mediocre football with Davie. He didn't have the luxury of time. Weis has earned some leniency with good recruiting and two trips to the BCS. So for these reasons, it isn't really possible to fire Weis.

The question of who to hire is much more difficult to address. At a minimum, I would say the following criteria must be met:

1) The head coach must have experience as an assistant (preferably offensive or defensive coordinator) in a football program (college of professional) that has had consistent success. Too many times coaching hires are made based on the performance of one or a few seasons. A coach must be proven, and in college football the only way that occurs is if there is consistent success.

2) The head coach must have offensive or defensive coordinator experience. This doesn't mean he has to have it at a high profile college program or NFL team. He just needs to understand what it takes to gameplan and prepare for a game week in and week out.

3) The head coach must be able to relate to younger players. He must understand young adults, the challenges and problems college students face, how to effectively motivate and lead, and how to connect with his players. His personality must be one that relates to young people and the constant changes they undergo in their journey through life.

4) The head coach must be able to recruit well. There are a ton of things that go into this, proven success, being able to relate to the high school kids, forming relationships with high school head coaches, working tirelessly, and hiring a staff who can also recruit.

5) The head coach must be able to recognize and hire excellent and talented assistant coaches who can develop the talent he recruits.

6) The head coach must be disciplined, well organized, and consistent, and he must maintain a team with those same qualities.

7) The head coach must have goals that are aligned with the athletic department and University for which he is employed.

I am sure there are more things that make an excellent college head football coach than what I have listed above. But at a minimum, I believe he must have these qualities. And at a quick glance, Weis has them all save, perhaps, number three. For this reason, I would say a coaching change isn't necessary. Right now there are no other viable coaching options available. Right now, due to the mound of things working against this team I've listed a dozen times (youth, inexperience, lack of leadership, tough schedule etc.) it's tough to argue for or against Weis' ability as a coach. Right now the statement it would make to fire another coach after three years outweighs the negatives of keeping Weis around. Right now, we need continuity in the leadership and coaching philosophy of our football program.

Like I've said before (link here), I want Weis to succeed. I am hoping that this season is an aberration in his tenure as our head football coach. He is a Notre Dame man that understands the mission of the University and embraces success without compromising integrity. We must support him and the team. We have no choice. The only time it is acceptable not to do so is when a coaching change is not only needed, but also possible. Right now, that just isn't the case. Besides, my Godson gives him a thumbs-up (OK, he hasn't quite learned how to do it yet).

ESP Week Eleven

2007-11-13T20:50:00.000-05:00

Here is the ESP for week 11. For the record, the AV predicts Duke will beat ND this weekend. It's only a small margin though, such that it's probably a toss up.

The ESP ranking:

The 8 team ESP playoff bracket:

The AV ranking 1-25:

The strength of schedule (SOS) , adjusted win percentage (AWP), quality win/loss (QWL), and margin of victory (MOV) rankings:

Unfriendly Skies

2007-11-12T15:00:00.001-05:00

We lost to Navy, we were blown out by Air Force. Once again our defense proved completely ineffective stopping a significantly slower, smaller, and less talented offense. And that was only the start of our problems. We couldn't move the ball consistently on offense and really only gained yards late in the game after Calhoun had called off the dogs. I am, once again, completely speechless. There is just no explanation for how poorly we have played this season. Say what you want about our difficult schedule, even with our youth and inexperience we have more talent than Stanford, Duke, Air Force, Navy, Purdue, and Michigan State. I look at next year's schedule and see no fewer than nine wins based on talent alone. Anything less, to me, would be a failure. In fact, I think an eleven win season is very do-able. Then I think about this year's performance and lack of improvement and believe we will be lucky to go 0.500.

Some will point to Clausen's play as a bright spot. I thought he made a couple of very good throws. I think his arm strength was improved, but still has some more room to grow. I think he needs to become more consistent and I think the success he had was really only after Air Force stopped blitzing, giving him some time to find receivers down field. Of course, it would have helped Clausen to not have several dropped balls. I also thought Allen and Aldridge ran tough again, when given room by our absolutely terrible offensive line.

The fifth year seniors, save Laws, have cashed it in. Not one of them have provided leadership to a team in desperate need of it. Laws has played out of his mind, but he alone hasn't been able to hold other players accountable for their effort (or lack thereof) on the field. I never thought I would see what I saw on Saturday, Tom Zbikowski not hustling to the ball. In fact, save the first drive, our defense really played largely uninspired football. There are some exceptions: Bruton, the aforementioned Laws, Walls, Brian Smith, Kuntz. But for the most part I did not see the effort I expect from players who wear the blue and gold.

And it was no different on offense where, even taking out the sack yardage, we managed to average fewer than three yards per carry against a defense we outweigh by 40+ lbs per man up front. There is just no excuse for it. At one point I saw Chris Stewart get stoned by a defensive end on Air Force who he outweighed by close to 80 lbs. Eighty freakin' pounds! Just lean on the guy. And it wasn't that Stewart was out-quicked, he was stood up, pushed back, and rendered utterly ineffective. That isn't talent, that isn't size, that isn't strength, that is a lack of will, determination, and heart.

I don't have the energy, effort, emotion, or time to write about the schematic blunders of this game. It was similar to the Navy game, run all the way down the field and then try three inexplicable passes to score, ultimately settling for a field goal. The first four offensive possessions put us in a hole we were never able to recover from. It's just pathetic.

And now Weis seems (and I stress seems) to be blaming the players for their lack of taking what he teaches and applying it to the field. He says he has been able to teach football at every level, to every different type of experienced student (although one could argue he has never had a team this inexperienced before). This is a slippery slope he is dealing with. The players and coaches are down and defeated, pointing the finger elsewhere at them isn't the thing to do. I empathize with him, he has tried everything he knows but still cannot explain the differences between what he sees in practice and on the field in a game. I do not envy his position, you can't beat them when they are down, but you can't allow them to continue to deliver the lackluster performances they are displaying on the field each weekend.

These guys need something to play for, they need the fans' and students' support, they don't need to hear boo's or see empty seats in the stands, something I never imagined would happen at a Notre Dame home game. We aren't out there working in practice every day. I understand there is a lack of effort by some players but we need to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. And Weis needs to find those who aren't playing hard every down and call them out on it. Some public humility may go a long way. And if they don't respond it may be time to get some younger players more experience.

I don't know what else to say. This season needs to get over quickly. These guys need a fresh start. I am uncertain about the future of our program under Weis. Like I said last week (link here), I want him to succeed because of the person he is, but I am not sure he can get is pointed back in the right direction. I don't see what an off-season and fall camp of more practice can do to improve a team that hasn't been able to improve all season. I can only hope for the best...and take solace in tOSU losing after walking through a terrifically easy schedule.