Some on the board seem to be hung up on special teams. You seem to forget about the aspects of special teams that we are pretty good at and focus on “we don’t get td’s” so we suck. Well, to be frank, yardage and ESPECIALLY td’s are based on the quality of your opponents for the most part. It is a lucky (yes lucky) play to take one to the house. It generally requires the “other team” to make a few mistakes to aid in the td happening. If you look at the statistics, the better teams and conferences generally have very few special teams returns for td’s. Alabama, Ohio st, Clemson (1 punt, 0 kick returns) had ONE combined the entire year last year....hmmm guess Saban, urban liar 🤥, and Dabo all suck. With all that 5* freakish talent and they couldn’t muster any excluding Clemson’s one punt return. That’s 3 national title teams with a combined 1 freakn return that went to the house for the entire season. ND, on the other hand, did become much more sound last year and I hope it continues. We all would like a few more yards on returns, but it’s just small crumbs compared to making sure the pie is baked right lol.
P.s. you can click on punt td’s & kick return td’s for the info....they are scarce unless your team seems to play weaker competition.
Link: https://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/individual/753
Think it is all too easy to look at the few teams who are really good in this aspect of the game (Virginia Tech comes to mind) and think ND should be able to do that. However, as you note performance at this level is rare and generally needs specialized coaching and recruiting focused on finding players to implement an attack posture (something pro teams that are consistently good routinely do).
Special teams collectively are about two issues: (1) field position, and (2) scoring or denying that to the opponent.
-The first is about net punting and KO returns. Think in general the object is too at least do "ok" and not screw up (turnovers and poor downfield coverage or blocking). Teams that are good in this area force teams to kick away from certain returners (Tim Brown created a lot of those situations) and force the punter out of their normal pattern (or stop an opponent from doing that) - ideally this results in poor timing and with luck a blocked kick.
It is possible to recruit players with potential as gunners and kick blockers along with the more obvious "long snapper and FG/XP snapper" and KO and punting specialist - we haven't done the former in a long time - in the current regime think that is part because we keep having unexpected player losses so we have to keep recruiting for the O and D positions to fill those gaps.
-The second is about Red Zone offense and extra points - in an ideal world a team wants a kicker (plus the rest of the unit) that is going to convert virtually all attempts and a bonus having one with a very long range is "perfect" as this puts a lot of stress on the D. Keeping the opponents out of these situations is the role of the D but having enough of rush to affect the kicker is the goal.
Looking at the present regime my biggest concern: there have been few games in which it can be said the ST turned the tide. On the other side there have been too many games in which we were hurt by an avoidable fumble, poor coverage, etc.
I look at this aspect of FB like a doctor: special teams should be "unremarkable" as in this context remarkable means something "bad." We aren't there yet and think it will difficult to get there unless the various changes implemented in the last couple of years results in better roster retention
(no message)
to the 25--they are trying to cut down on returns.
Starting to sue over injuries. NFL, Colleges, and NCAA probably all on table for lawsuits coming up. Would not be surprised to see onside kicks removed from game as well. Heck, the entire sport may go towards flag if the softies have their way lol.
Always been intrigued with this idea.
Punts are considered to be safer for players than kickoffs. But, abolishing the kick-offs also abolishes the on-side kick. So, giving the scoring team a 4th and 15 on their own 30 (instead of a kickoff) would allow (1) a punt instead of a traditional kickoff, (2) a replacement for the onside kick by running a play to go for the first down on 4th & 15, and (3) a surprise onside kick with a fake punt.
But, if you fail in going for it, the opposing team might get the ball on your own 30, which is far worse than a failed onside kick, which usually results in the opposing team getting it on the 45 or so. But, I would think a 4th & 15 play might have more success statistically than a non-surprise onside kick?
(no message)
(no message)
Kelly and staff definitely have been in more of a play it safe mode on punt returns lately. That style definitely results in backing off and blocking instead of attacking the punt. However, what we just don’t know is if it’s because he doesn’t trust the hands or the decision making of the players ND has used as returners recently. Maybe that will change down the road with more electric talent and better hands. I still witnessed way to many bobbled balls even for fair catches lol. Scares the mess out of me. Hate to lose a tight game because we gave the ball up at our 20-30 yard line on a fumbled punt. I will take the ball at the 25 all day every day, but that’s me.
As far as blocked fg’s or extra points, I believe Jarron Jones was about one of the best I have seen in a long time.
I cannot speak to the statistics, but I suspect that they bear out that his is a better statistical approach compared going for the occasional return for a TD or big yards