Comments on: Betting on a Long-Shot

By: Ryan in SD

Ryan in SD — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 01:01:48 +0000

SEE,

Kelly explains why he abandoned the run and went almost exclusively pass in his press conference on yesterday Tuesday. BK said something to the effect that going with Rees in the shotgun with no backfield forced the Michigan defense into a consistent look (I think BK said it brings the free safety to a center deep position?) that gave Rees 1-on-1 match-ups from which he could pick and choose. That strategy obviously did not produce a comeback win, but it answers your question as to why Kelly employed the strategy.

Essentially BK states that his hand was forced because UM was dropping 8 into the box and ND was down 14. And that running the ball against 8 man fronts is difficult and that you have to take what the defense gives you. Even my grandma knows this is the tried and true strategy to beat the Rees-lead offense. And every team we play will continue to employ it until ND can beat it.

It seems to me the most important strategy in all of this is for ND to get ahead in the scoring column so that it is not forced to throw 50 times a game to catch up. But that strategy is just as obvious as saying we need to lead with the run to achieve balance on offense.

The bottom line is ND is in a terrible predicament given our QB’s limitations–as you point out. Rees is not likely improve beyond his current ability and execution level and we will continue to face 8 defenders in the box to take away the run or 8 in space on obvious pass downs.
ND is left with this conundrum and must find ways to be productive nonetheless. How you successfully solve the conundrum is the (literally) multimillion dollar question. You think that running more is the answer. I don’t disagree. But without a precision execution in the pass game, it will be easier said than done. I’m fairly certain we have the manpower to beat inferior teams like Navy and Air Force into submission upfront, but I have serious doubts that we can do it against physical teams such as OU, ASU, Pitt, and Stanford. Add in MSU and SC for good measure.

By: 2013

2013 — Wed, 11 Sep 2013 02:04:44 +0000

Totally agree. Running controls the clock and establishes a physical presence. You start this pass happy philosophy, and defense is going to give up tons of points. The fact Kelly is talking about the offense when the defense gives up 41 is nuts.

By: DJS

DJS — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 19:10:36 +0000

When Kelly was hired he seemed like someone who understood the major shifts occurring in football, and to a certain degree that’s still true. But read any advanced discussion of today’s football and it’s obvious that running the ball has not eliminated from the game. If anything it’s become more important. If the passing obsession continues Kelly will be unmasked as less of a successor to Harbaugh and Chip and more of a pretender.

By: eddie the geek

eddie the geek — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 17:12:57 +0000

“Kelly should be shocked with a dog collar every time Notre Dame goes into an empty set backfield outside of a 2 minute drill.” – that is a CLASSIC. I couldn’t agree more. You can see the opposing defense SALIVATING when Tommy stands back there all alone.

What I don’t understand is why pretty much the entire world can see that but our newly-enriched and extended coach cannot. And it’s no secret of management theory that you maximize your strengths and minimize your weaknesses. Only the worst, most narcissistic of managers insist on doing it their chosen way every time, all other facts be damned.

By: BKBLOWS

BKBLOWS — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:36:56 +0000

You’re right on. This ND, you have the athletes, you don’t need a gimmick offense to win. Unless You think Tom Rees is Tom Brady, ignore the pass happy stuff and follow Saban’s offense.

By: canuck75

canuck75 — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 13:42:59 +0000

These 7-5 predictions are so absurd they really shouldn’t be responded to,but nevertheless… We lost a close game against another very good team, and it took a questionable call to do it.
I am not disagreeing with the general premise of more runs, but only a few more. GA dropped 3-4 passes that might have turned into something. I am still waiting to see the faster tempo approach. I believe it would unsettle D’s more than anything else.
Finally, perspective is everything. Several years ago on 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 Charlie called handoffs to his 250 lb fullback. Poor Shwapp was stuffed every time and the majority of us called for play action.

By: ccb

ccb — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 04:16:41 +0000

Kelly won’t change until he’s forced to. I don’t want to see it happen. But, a 4 game skid against
MSU, OK, ASU and USC is possible. They have to be intelligent enough to look at the game tape and see Kelly’s mega huge achilles heel.

Even though USC and MSU looked horrible last week, they will be energized against an immobile QB w/ a mediocre arm and a ridiculous pass/run ratio.

If Kelly persists in his UM game plan, 7-5 is the best we can hope for.

By: Mugs (class of 1982)

Mugs (class of 1982) — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 04:03:45 +0000

Running the ball is definitely something we need to do more of. Our offensive line is a seasoned group and we have a bevy of running backs, all of whom have looked good thus far. Brian Kelly does need to utilize Atkinson, Carlisle, McDaniel, and the freshman backs to a greater degree. As others have noted, it will only enable Reese and help sell the play-action as well. One can only hope that Coach Kelly also sees it this way.

By: flirish

flirish — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 01:05:56 +0000

a pass primary offense can succeed if you have the right personnel. ND does not have that with Rees. It is not the offense but rather the personnel. Oregon doesnt hold the ball long, ball control and clock control are not as important as scoring. we dont score well in the red zone. that again is because of personnel and also largely due to very poor offensive play calling and game planning. Kelly has been a total let down with his game plans and game preparations.

By: SEE

SEE — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 00:04:07 +0000

In reply to Please.

You realize I wrote the first article attacking his passing philosophy in 2010? I like Kelly. I don’t like his passing fancy. The day he was hired I noted it as a weakness. I’ve never defended the TOP argument.

I predicted he would learn a hard lesson and switch.

There certainly is no “writing in the wall”