more than they need Book to "take a big step forward". This team is probably an 8-4 team the last few years without Book. Is he perfect? Heck no. But the 4 areas ESPN mentioned are needed a heck of a lot more than we need Book to "improve". So, even if they did just "look at the stat sheet and depth chart" their analysis was more accurate than what I read. Admittedly, I did not watch the show but the angle you started within the Book point seems very slanted.
Again, you guys rely on the savior mentality and seem to give little support to the idea that it's a team game.
I like Book a lot more than most Notre Dame fans and think he has the chance to be elite, but don't think he's there yet.
Yeah, Notre Dame needs its running backs and wide receivers to win a title - even if ESPN showed they had no knowledge of the actual personnel on the Notre Dame roster - but without better quarterback play, it won't make the difference against Clemson or Wisconsin.
Does Clemson win in 2018 without Trevor Lawrence going off? Does LSU win last year without Joe Burrow making the huge leap he did between 2018 and 2019? No, they don't. LSU had weapons all over and a great defense, but until they got elite QB play, they were a good but not great team.
Notre Dame doesn't need Book to be Burrow and it would be ridiculous for anyone to expect that kind of leap, but they do need him to be better this fall to beat Clemson and Wisconsin.
isn't required. It just sells articles, T-shirts, and Heisman campaigns.
Don't get me wrong. It would be nice to have, but remember we have Brian Kelly so don't expect an elite QB anytime soon. We could use an upgrade and consistency at RB, OL, WR, CB and special teams and those are just the easy ones. QB depth, sure but our starter is just fine.
As much as people knock on last year's Michigan game that was easily as much terrible game planning and calling, as it was QB play. What team on earth throws it 30, 40+ times in a monsoon? Only a Brian Kelly team. Those stats prove why you don't do it.
The bad Clemson game? I'd say Clemson's D made Alabama - Tua & Hurts look worse than ND and Book looked. I'd say those two QBs are probably better than Book and they looked worse against the same D. All QBs and teams looked bad against Clemson in the playoffs that year but ND survived them much better than Ala regardless of the scores. The ND game was much closer.
Notre Dame hasn't, and probably won't ever, recruit on defense at the level of Alabama right now. Things can change in the future obviously, but it seems like that just won't ever be in the cards for ND in current environment. So to me, the only way ND wins a title in this day and age is with elite play at QB. That's the equalizer. Clemson beat Bama two years ago because Trevor Lawrence played out of his mind in the title game.
When Saban got there. Granted, he doesn't play by the same rules as everyone else but that's where the want to comes into play.
I'm not advocating for ND to do the same as Bama, but Bama decided they'd turn and look the other way on a lot of stuff in order to get to where they are. The rules of engagement have changed quite a bit in the last decade, but they still don't hand out National titles. Unfortunately, unless a team gets lucky then schools have to make winning a priority. Otherwise, other institutions will. I'm not condoning it, it's just the reality of how the game is won today.
The guy looked great in spurts last year. I think he has a chance to be really good.
(no message)
I highly doubt that is true.
we've seen across the WR group. We've yet to have a really solid group of WRs so it's not like he'd be taking time from anyone and he's been productive in the few spots where he's been highlighted.
I do say this but only for guys who've proven themselves at least for more time, especially when the play of those getting the minutes is suspect or unproductive.
One of MANY...We've heard and seen guys who get in the proverbial doghouse and can't get out.
Guy could have a breakout game and won't be heard from for weeks or the rest of the year.
He really practicing that bad week to week but just had a fluke Saturday afternoon?
Well...so what. Lots of players are game day players. There's lots of guys who were mr. all american Monday-Friday and shrunk come game day. Who wants that??
You learn to adjust your overall strategy to include what works best for the team to win without losing your standards.
Lots of coaches just rather not deal with a player like that and blame the player and move on...A great coach finds a way to get great players on the field while maintaining the team integrity. It's not easy.
Missed a year with a broken leg. Set back by his arrest. Was looking promising in 2019 until he was sidelined 4 games with a sprained foot. He could certainly contribute in 2020 if he is healthy. If not100% he should probably move on.
(no message)
Maybe this whole covid thing has delayed stuff. I can't see any reason why he wouldn't get in- he just graduated Mendoza with a major in Marketing and a minor in Chinese.
There would have been players whop likely would have figured out their future by how the depth chart worked it's way out during spring ball. A guy like McKinley might have either been impressive and moved up the depth chart or may not have and self selected out as either a grad transfer to another school or just end his college football career. The lack of spring ball may have also limited his options for a transfer since other teams may have been in the same boat and thus limited his options for other schools. I would speculate that the decision has already been made and that he isn't being given a 5th year but either a) McKinley hasn't announced it yet or b) Kelly is waiting on the final decision re: Kevin Austin. My guess is if Austin is on the team then McKinley isn't. Or Kelly is waiting in decisions by other players re: medicals, transfers or grades to see what his scholarship count is before he can commit to McKinley.
Right now ND is +5 which means 5 current scholarships have to go. It is too easy just to say no to a 5th year for a guy who hasn't set himself apart from the crowd at WR ( there are 12 guys at WR) than it is to force someone off the team unwillingly ro perhaps take a scholarship away from former walk ons. The fact that school is "closed" is also backing up the announcements.
I would guess that 2 WRs, at least one LB, probably 2 DL and possibly a RB are in the mix.
(no message)
While I think McKinley has looked fine when he has played, he was hardly stuck out .. We are deep at WR where you can through a blanket over the top 6 guys even if you include McKinley in that group. In addition, they are high on two incoming freshmen (Johnson and Watts).
I believe we are currently at least +3 (or is it +4 with the added rb?) on scholarships. In short, it is prime territory for some roster trimming. The most "acceptable" way to trim the roster is to limit the 5th years you hand out. If Kevin Austin is reinstated, I think McKinley is off to the next chapter in his life.
He was part of the team for the 1 spring practice that was held, but final decisions on 5th years weren't finalized prior to the shut down.
I like McKinley and wrote a few times last year that I thought he should get more looks, but I don't think the staff would have pursued Skowronek if they had big plans for McKinley in 2020.
Head coach Brian Kelly provided some potentially good news following the first spring practice when he announced he did not expect any issues from the school when it comes to McKinley getting a fifth season. That is not what sources reported back in the early winter, so if Kelly is correct it would provide a major boost to the offense.
(no message)