Lea cannot do two jobs. He's proved it. This is too important. Let him go and let Elston act as DC.
(no message)
Back to threaded view
Full conversation · 23 posts
-
Level 1
Lea was not the issue. Rees had no answer for what Venables put together.
wrdomerson 2368 postsHe better find some or Alabama will do the exact same thing and shut us down in the same way.
-
Level 2
Rees was totally outclassed, you could tell that he lost focus, Kell should have taken over playcall
which would have been just as bad
-
Level 3
3/4 of the way through the first half Kelly's eyes had glazed over and he was suffering from PTSD...
TakethetrainKnute 35769 postsIt's all over once he gets that look about him...
...which is a shame because scoring points in the Clemson game was important even if ND wasn't going to win.
-
-
Level 2
How about this for starters....??? When a defense is blitzing the $hit out of you all game......
you throw at least one screen pass over the middle to either the TE or slip the RB out of the backfield. Rees didn't call 1 freakin' screen pass the whole game.....
-
Level 2
They were both a problem. Rees was bad but, Lea's defense was poorly prepared.
NDavenue 7489 posts(no message)I don't believe illusions because too much is for real.-
Level 3
As noted by others, the D faired about the same this time around as it did last time points wise.
wrdomerson 2368 postsI agree with THEISMANCARR that Lawrence's ability to run was sorely missed by Clemson in the first game. We had to adjust to respect it instead of only focusing on Etienne, which gave him more room.
They have a great offense with a lot of talent, and they made plays. Our offense did not.
-
Level 3
I keep saying it and will continue to do so....a team plays the way it practices!!! I would bet....
Kelly's teams do very little live tackling/blocking....we have seen this "Irish Clown of a Coach's" teams over the past 11 seasons, come out flat, poor tackling, lack of physicality, etc. especially after a bye week or weeks leading up to a bowl game. I have always said, Kelly is lazy and his teams show it on the field. The Syracuse game was a prime example...his team didn't want to play that game at all and their (lack of) performance showed it!
-
Level 4
Oh come on the big difference was Lawrence's ability to run the ball and execute the read option to
a near perfect efficiency. We did improve in the second half and even Lawrence cannot play to the efficiency and excellence he displayed Saturday. We can win if we play our best and they do not play their best.
-
Level 5
Read here multiple times how the Freshman we beat was just as good as Lawrence...
TakethetrainKnute 35769 postsThat was good for a chuckle...
-
Level 6
Maybe as a passer, but not runnng, or reads, progressions, etc.He threw for more yards than TL ever
ever did.
-
Level 7
He's a talent. Still a Freshman...versus the best quarterback in college right now....
TakethetrainKnute 35769 posts(no message)
-
-
-
-
-
Level 2
an interesting read...
-
Level 3
I think this is a bit of out of date.
It predates the ... uhm ... spread of tempo spread RPO offenses, on account of which Saban concluded great defense is no longer enough: you have to be able to outscore opponents. (Saban, as you may recall, tried to halt this from happening by calling for stricter rules for and enforcement of linemen down field penalties and argued it was dangerous for the health of defenders not to give the defense time to substitute. When all that failed, he went if-you-can't-beat-them-join-them ... with a vengeance.)
These links might be helpful:
X’S & O’S: RUN-PASS OPTION (RPO) SIMPLIFIED
ITP Glossary: Pre-Snap RPO Reads
lITP Glossary: Post-Snap RPO ReadsOnly one team in the playoffs does not employ RPOs as part of its base offense. Guess which one.
-
Level 4
I was trying to point out the need to do things to "constrain" what the defense is trying to do to
stop your bread and butter. Screens and the such to slow down blitz. ND made zero adjustments against Clemson.
-
Level 5
They're going to do what they do and we're going to do what we do is what he usually says.
He might add, and we're not going to prepare for anything else in case what we do isn't working. That's been ok when ND is the much more talented team -- most of the time -- not so much when it's not.
-
-
-
Level 3
Much appreciated, that was a good read.
wrdomerson 2368 postsSo do you think this was us?
"But be wary of constraint plays against very talented teams — they may be stuffing your core offense not because they are cheating, but instead because they are better than you; the constraint plays then play into their hands."
I do think losing Patterson hurt, I was worried about our chances in a revenge game, especially without our starting center. I did feel like they were "cheating" to take away the run and make Book uncomfortable, but it is beyond me to see the plays called, so I don't know what constraint plays we tried that should have been the answer to what Venables plan was. Since their plan was to make Book stay in the pocket, I feel like an answer should have been to move the pocket by design or have more rollouts. It would be nice for Greg to put together an article on what they did to us and what we tried to do in answer to it.
-
Level 4
I was surprised they didn't try some mid-line screens, quick passes to the TEs, mesh routes in the
middle of the field. Kelly's offense is largely dependent on 4 verticals, which takes times to develop. I really think a lot of the O's problem is about the route system ND uses. Watch how Alabama uses the width and depth of the field; I don't see Kelly's routes using levels and forcing a DB to make a choice of which receive to cover.
-
-
End of conversation