First, if you're a simplistic "Kelly can never get us there" or "Kelly sucks" or "Kelly always fails on the big stage" guy, this post isn't for you. I'm hoping to have an accurate discussion about what's going on.
Had Notre Dame hired a new coach prior to 2017 and this coach had the exact same results as Kelly has the past two years, most everyone here would say that things are vastly improved and looking up. But the thing is, Notre Dame did basically get a new coach prior to 2017. Anyone who doesn't see that Kelly 2.0 is very different from Kelly 1.0 simply isn't being honest. I realize Notre Dame is about national championships, I get that, but in the current climate of the superteams, Alabama and Clemson, championships are difficult to come by for everyone else. The overall culture and ability of the Irish program are still improving, and the team could break through at any time. Making the playoff field is a big deal, and in year two of the coaching reboot, this was accomplished.
As for the Clemson game specifically, the absence of Julian Love in the 2nd quarter was much larger than you might think. Take a look at this: Score for three quarters with Love in the game - Clemson 10, ND 3. Score for one quarter without Love - Clemson 20, ND 0. But more telling is Trevor Lawrence's stats. Without Love, 15 for 18, 247 yards, 3 TDs. Without Love, 12 for 19 for 80 yards. Ifs and buts, I know, but had Love stayed healthy, there is no way the score would have even been close to 30-3. Not saying the Irish would have won, but the dynamics of the entire game are different if Love stayed in, because while he was in, both teams looked very evenly matched.
Also, ND's glaring weakness, the O-line, was greatly exposed in this game. People want to blame Book, but when your O-line is that bad, no offense, no matter who is at QB, can do much. Hopefully this weakness somehow becomes a strength in 2019. And every bounce seemed to go against ND, which didn't help.
So no, Notre Dame isn't that far off. But improvement still needs to be made, obviously.
It's pretty convenient to only look at two years of a coach's nine year tenure, especially when one of the two years was a 12-1. It's also very shortsighted, irresponsible and homeristic thinking, but as you can see I can do it too....and have, just to present a comparison between our coach 'Brian Kelly' and this alleged Kelly 2.0 of your imagination.
So the coach we had in years 3 & 4 is a whopping one game better now in years 8 & 9, but you're telling us "Notre Dame did basically get a new coach prior to 2017". This is the ultimate four year old 'he changed the way he wears his hair, so now he's a different person' mentality. It completely obfuscates the true picture of his performance as a head coach, which the shit show from 2016 IS a part of.
It also leaves out another similarity between our coach then and ""our couch"" now:
•In '12 and '13 three of Kelly's five losses were by double digits to the tune of 11, 14, 28
•In '17 and '18 three of Kelly's four losses were by double digits to the tune of 18, 27, 33
-So our selectively brand new coach's two year peak equals an .846 win percentage and in 75% of his losses he was beaten by double digits with an avg margin of loss by 26 pts
-While our selectively old and ""basically replaced"" coach's two year peak equals an .808 win percentage with only 60% of his losses coming by double digits with an avg margin of loss by only 18 pts
Hmm, one could almost argue that we shoulda just kept the old guy.
But really, this isn't the most significant thing your Kelly 2.0 stupidity ignores. The most telling part of this, showing he isn't a changed or new coach, is that none of the changes that were made were by his own decision...they were force fed to him by the admin. He's the same coach now that he was then, he just had a leash put on him and was forced to hire new assistants. How noble..
over a one lost or possibly even a two loss power conference team. They are clearly overmatched against superior teams and that won’t change whether Kelly stays or goes.
(no message)
We get the shit kicked out of us and you are in denial there are better teams out there at #5-10?
That right there is comical.
I imagine UCF would love a piece of us.
We scored 3 points and they called off the dogs at the end.
Maybe he could have played QB and blocked.
(no message)
(no message)
Sure the Oline was bad, but the offensive game plan was horrendous. Totally unimaginative. I don't understand why.
The good:
1. The talent gap has significantly closed. Our defense did very well IMO. But for one mistake, we totally shut down their vaunted RB.
2. Our coaching has improved tremendously (last night's offensive plan being the exception).
3. We were 12-0 because we were a very good team. We deserved to be in the playoff. It was not smoke and mirrors.
4. Kelly has 2 undefeated seasons and nobody has done that since Frank Leahy. That doesn't happen by accident.
5. We are trending up since Kelly's 2.0 reboot. Like with a new coach, year 3 should be a peak. We will see.
6. Defense still wins Championships and we are there on defense. We have recruited well in the secondary so hopefully we are getting deeper and better there. This year's recruiting class is loaded on defense.
The Bad:
1. We are still not deep enough at a few positions. That showed at CB last night.
2. We still do not have an elite QB. Maybe it can be Book. Maybe it will be Phil. Maybe not. TBD.
3. We can play with elite teams. FSU in 14, Clemson in 15, maybe Oklahoma in 12. But for some reason we are still unprepared in the post-season. That was the case on offense last night. This needs to be fixed.
4. The Oline has talent and should be a strength but has struggled. This needs to be fixed. Kelly should be looking for a new coach here.
5. Related to number 3, we made too many mistakes and mental errors last night. That can't happen when you are playing against the best. Clemson was nearly flawless and we were not.
6. We don't have any game breakers on offense (Dexter was, but now he is gone). Maybe there are some on the roster (Lenzy?) but that remains to be seen. TBD.
I don't see any of the "Bad" areas that can't be fixed so I'm pleased with where we are and where we are headed. The one area of concern is why we still fall flat in the big one. We were ready on defense last night but you have to be prepared on both sides of the ball. I think we can get there.
The difference in performance between the two teams with him in or out was incredible. I agree it shouldn't have been that way, but Vaughn was a complete liability.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
You sound ridiculous.
(no message)
ly isn't the issue.
(no message)
nce, then you need to start questioning the coach.
(no message)
They are severely limiting our ability to win!
(no message)
The cold weather
Calculus
Ugly girls
South bend
That's what I retain from your post and it's very true. The reason is simple. If you can't recruit difference makers like the superteams do, you start off with 2 strikes against you. Last year, for example, Clemson recruited five 5 stars, including the best quarterback recruit. Top notch recruiting enables teams to plug and play (Dexter Lawrence's absence was hardly felt) and to reload instead of rebuilding. Notre Dame recruits ok but way below superteams (Georgia, Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State).
I have no idea how this can get fixed, but until it is, no coach can bring ND to the promised land.
Kizer was a wonderchild, then the world was waiting for Wimbush to mature and then Book was the next Flutie and now we have posters saying Jurkovec should be playing. That's a lot of misses. There is a point in time when coaching needs to be examined.
those 4 have more people athletes and depth. that's it.sometimes you aren't as good
unique in our prep for Clemson—based on film study, tendencies, etc. After falling behind, I saw nothing that resembled in-game adjustments to counter what Clemson was doing. I think a staff always has to have a Plan B game plan if things go south. Perhaps worst of all, and perhaps I’m sorely mistaken, once we got behind I saw no fight in our Irish.
adjusting and then says the players just need to execute better. Any objective viewer of ND this year was painfully aware the OL sucked and all DB's outside of Love were suspect. Nothing was done to compensate for the OL, and it's scary to think what next year's defense will look like if there were no other DB's that could replace Love and no concept available to protect his replacement.
He can improve i think. There is some young talent that can be developed too. Gillman made an uncharacteristic error (aided by Love's absence too). Bad spot to make that mistake, but he has been very good.
(no message)
And it is a very tight ballgame. With Love, we had a shot. And we did belong talent-wise.
But you are correct, these games are won in the trenches and our OLine was not quite good enough.
We are bringing back a ton, have a great recruiting class coming in, and a great and cohesive coaching staff that is staying put. We will have the potential to make a run at it again next year. And avoiding penalties and mistake, maybe that is when we break through.