UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

(no message)

(no message)

....if there is such a thing.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyLvkF2z0AQ

I always thought it was appropriate to make sure student athletes made the adjustment academically, socially, emotionally, athletically, and intellectually before being put on the big stage.

It is probably in their best long term interest.

Every early enrollment is seeing playing time - both offensive and defensive players. Just because an early enrollee is playing with the first team, does not mean they are going to start. BK has made that statement numerous times. But BK is letting those players compete now and show what they have to offer, instead of having to sit out the Spring and wait behind upper classmen. It makes perfect sense.

Buchner is playing.... we see him throwing every practice. He has as much opportunity as any freshman to earn his time. He just has a more difficult time earning playing time, because there generally is no QB rotation. They pick only one starter... where almost every other position will have a rotation of players to contribute.

I like that the freshman have a chance to go up against the veterans.... how you turned that into a negative is truly special.

(no message)

Link: https://irish.nbcsports.com/2021/04/11/notre-dame-focusing-on-early-enrollees-in-this-late-spring/

“I know you’re seeing a lot of them. I don’t want to mislead anybody by watching the film and say, ‘Boy, they must be ready to start for Notre Dame.’ We’re just trying to give them as much work as possible. They’re all making progress, but I wouldn’t read too much into it.”

Did you catch that, Irishize?

(no message)

I thought Kelly’s comments about Spindler and Fisher spoke to Irishize’s initial comment that historically it is unusual for freshman to start on the OL. I think that part is correct, for the reasons Irishize stated. I like Spindler and Fisher a lot, and think both could see some action. But either of them starting game one would be unusual. I think Kelly’s comment was fairly anodyne.

players doing well enough in scrimmage/practice to have people asking legitimate questions yet in Kelly's opinion, their time in the program does not meet his criteria for warranting real consideration for playing time.

I couldn't tell you their numbers so I don't have an opinion as to whether they look good or bad. My comments only stem from how we've seen Kelly handle these exact situations in the past. I don't expect to see either of them start strictly based on what we know as his preferred path to the field. I also know very little about OL play so I can't confirm or support their ability until game film shows they don't give up sacks and are able to block the guys in front of them.

(no message)

(no message)

Maybe I missed it.

(no message)

(no message)

There are so many guys out there who post regularly and know so much more about coaching/personnel decisions and player development than Kelly does without even being at practice. And they would probably even take the job for a much lesser salary.

(no message)

Ridiculous rant = Irishize

Thank you...you beat me to it!!!!

I believe it's up to the players to clearly separate themselves from the pack in practice, ESPECIALLY at QB. We aren't privy to all of the details that arise during practice and a player's star rating coming in is no positive indication of his ability to play right away. Having said this, has BK "missed" on a player or two being ready right away? Probably. But there's always a steep learning curve in one's first year of college with all the adjustments one must make, both in being a student and a football player.

(no message)

Happen. The guy that puzzled me in the past was Mike Heldt. He started at center as a freshman under Lou and never got a sniff at the NFL I believe. Even Tim Ruddy did not start his freshman year, as strong as he was, (got playing time though) yet Aaron Taylor did.

Spindler and Fisher were multiple year starters in high school, and both have real experience when it comes to the complex zone blocking schemes that we use. From what I've seen, most high school linemen are only familiar with man to man blocking.

There's also a big difference between the learning curve for a true freshman quarterback versus a lineman.

If the COVID-19 situation hadn't robbed Buchner of his senior season, then he could have had a more realistic chance of starting, but since we have a polished veteran ready to play right now, it makes more sense to let Coan start the year.

(no message)

What's wrong with you?

I have to think he’s just trolling (successfully). Right?

It is clear to the coaches, the analysts and anyone that watches those minute 3 min clips that he is nowhere near ready to be a starter. He is not ready and won't be anywhere near ready for at least a year. He hasn't played football at any level in a few years and when he did, it was against very weak competition. He is very raw. He might, just might, be decent in two years at least. He is not a Trevor Lawrence once in a generation QB. Lawrence, who was super elite, and played 3 years of football against very good competition in high school did not start game 1 as a freshman. Why would you want to try to do that with Buchner? It would be foolish. Your idea that he could be a 'game changer" this year is a wet dream.

And I hope it isn't lost on anyone that Lawrence, groomed to be the "next great QB" for years, himself did NOT even start at Clemson from game 1 of his freshman year.

I have to believe Irishize is just having fun with this at this point . . . he can't be serious. Right?

another school has done it, why can't we.

I get it, it would be cool to recruit a talent that could contribute right away, but Kelly is not recruiting those QBs right now or the past several years.

Sure, there are always some kooks. But Jurkovec came in without enrolling early, and the discussion the fall about QBs was Wimbush and Book. When Wimbush came in, Kizer and Zaire were duking it out. I don't remember many here calling for either to be the starter from game one. That aside, it doesn't really have anything to do with my comment, which was simply to point out that even in the case of the great Trevor Lawrence, he didn't come in and start from game one. It is pretty unusual for a true frosh to start from game one. It happens I suppose. I'm unaware of a true freshman with as little actual football experience as Buchner doing it.

the staff with a new system

The guy didn't even play a down of football even in high school this past year. I would be all over Kelly for ruining the kid if he did what you are suggesting.
The problem here is that you do have a point regarding Kelly's past behavior in this regard, but it absolutely does not apply in this particular case.

Let him cut his teeth on a T-38 or F-5, to see if he can handle being on the field at this level.

At this point, Buchner has shown the equivalent of fantastic promise with turboprop planes. Give him a bit of time to develop, and I think you'll see a much better finished product.

In this case, there is no proof yet. But, if in the Spring Game Buchner proves the best he should play first. We saw this with Book early on. He out-performed Wimbush plenty of times and was still relegated to #2 because of yet another Kelly infatuation.

I am a wait and see, but I'm just noting the evidence that does support that Kelly is very inconsistent here and historically has made pretty poor roster management decisions.

When there is proof let it roll regardless of age or tenure. The goal is to win and to win you have to have the most cohesive group of talented players on the field. Cohesive is the keyword and for the offense, that means creating the most first downs AND scoring the most points; with the fewest stalled drives. Much of this lies on the shoulders of the QB.

Rees for example was not the most talented but he was excellent in cohesion, moving the chains, and generally in leading the team to points.

It takes three years minimum for a fighter pilot to get to your first fleet squadron unless all of the stars align, but less than 2.5 years is unheard of- slightly faster for Air Force since they don't have to land on carriers. Many pilots are 4 years post-commissioning before they show up. Sure, you can speed it up during war, but that doesn't pan out so well. They could do it in WWII because 1) they had to and 2)flying jets is harder.

Source - I was a tactics instructor, test pilot, and flight instructor in jet aviation.

regard to getting the best talent on the field to win against elite teams which he's consistently not done to date.

The team overall is MUCH better than when he arrived. There's still work to do though. Also, I'm not advocating for Buchner as he hasn't played a meaningful snap in college, but Kelly has consistently overlooked production for preception in his time at ND. And in almost every case he's been proven wrong by the time the decision is made to move to the more productive player; regardless of "upside" or "higher ceilings" that might exist for a different option.

Talent is great, but Buckner has 1 HS season under his belt - I can't think of a single starting Freshman QB that did well with a similar lack of experience. Age has nothing to do with it - it's demonstrated ability to handle complicated situations with technique and judgement. Buckner doesn't have that - yet.

of age or class as long as they prove they can. Kelly doesn't do this; particularly with young kids. And he "has to" if he wants to compete with the real teams of CFB: OSU, ALA, CLEM. He won't get there without playing with the same mindset they do.

He's done very well in a slow way, but at the same time he's not all that close to those guys either. Much better, but there is still a gap and in IMO it's in the "has to" area.

(no message)