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

Players get recruited based on HS play and camp play. Lots of QBs that ND has gotten have had tremendous HS careers and even went on Elite 11 to compete. If Kelly or Rees had taken any of the 4*/Elite 11 QBs that have come through ND and turned them into something better than when they arrived, then I would look at Pyne first and criticize his abilities (physical and/or mental). However, Pyne has started 5 total college games. He played well last year in critical time against Wisconsin. He played really well in 3 games that ND won. He did everything he was asked to do during those games. It doesn't make sense that he would take such a large step back in the following 2 games. To me that points to preparation/gameplan/coaching.

The fact that ND can't claim a top level QB, in my opinion, points more to lack of development via coaches. I also know it's reported that the offense lines up against defensive alignments that are the ideal alignments for that particular play. Iron sharpens iron and I don't think iron is playing against iron in practice.

(no message)

(no message)

Strange no one else is reporting it.

(no message)

I did not.

(no message)

I questioned the statement, should be real easy to prove if true, every ND publication would be reporting it.

And it was.

(no message)

from someone you choose not to believe.

I can prove that it was reported.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

I could understand it if you were trying to show your QB, hey, if we call a play, and you get this look, immediately audible to this play because it will be awesome. You are never always going to have the best look, and your team needs to learn how to handle that.

I'm not 100% down on Pyne, I think he is serviceable, and that we could win some more games with him, but not in the way he is being asked to play by the current OC.

1. He was really athletic, both quick and fast, a real dual threat.
2. The system was tailored to his talents and he had a lot of leeway within it.
3. He was accurate and could make all the throws.
4. Passing lanes. He always talked about finding passing lanes to make up for his height. This cuts down greatly on blocked and tipped passes.

It's not impossible for a short QB to be successful, but such guys are few and far between.

Even Flutie regressed his sophomore and junior years stat wise. He only completed 46% of his passes his sophomore year. Athletes need time to develop.

Freeman, too, needs time. Rees has had more time than either in his position and hasn't shown improvement.

open up passing lanes. Even the good but taller QB’s do it. There was a pass so low by Pyne against UNLV, that while the D lineman put his arm up, it hit him in the shoulder. He didn’t even need to raise his hand. We don’t know what the coaches are teaching since we aren’t at practice, but if I had to guess, it doesn’t look like they are teaching some of these finer points.

are late on it, pick 6 comes into play.

(no message)

Drew Brees is listed right at 6" ' [ stats like height might be a little exaggerated just a wee bit...ahem ].
Russell Wilson is listed at 5'11". Kyler Murray is listed at 5'10".

Soooo Pyne would be 0-4 in those categories???? Sounds about right🤦

Some QB's are highly polished coming out of high school and are as ready to play on the college field as any. You'll have players the likes of Trevor Lawrence who can step in as a true freshman and take command of the offense as well as any cool headed veteran would. Yes, it's rare, but some already have such a high football IQ and natural talent, that they can immediately play and win.


Height helps, that it allows a QB to see over those tall earth movers protecting him, not to mention, the tall D-linemen coming after him. It also allows him to avoid having more passes batted down at the line of scrimmage.

Arm strength is important, since your QB needs that strength to reliably make a medium or long range pass. It's doubly important in the spread offense, since the true potential of the spread cannot be realized unless you can stretch the field horizontally and vertically.

Accuracy is always important, along with timing. If you can't hit your receivers in stride, then you'll cripple your offensive options.

The ability to read receivers when they're breaking open, and to trust that they'll be able to contest for many a ball is important, since locking onto one receiver telegraphs your offensive intent.

Finally, a QB who understands how to make pass protection audibles can bring up the level of his offensive line's play a notch or two.


A good QB coach / OC should be able to coach up the receiver reading part, assuming that a QB is capable of doing so, as well as teaching the QB to make the correct pass protection audibles.


That being said, you don't have to be able to do all of the above to have reasonably good success at the collegiate level. Bryce Young, for example, is 5' 11" on a good day, but has plenty of arm strength, accuracy, and the ability to go through his receiver progressions. He doesn't appear to have to make pass protection audibles, since his line is doing a fine job of pass blocking, and that he has very good mobility.

That's probably the only knock against Bryce Young, though. He was after all, the #1 QB recruit in his class, despite many a taller QB having gaudy stats.



In our case, here's my analysis of Drew Pyne.

His positives:

His short range accuracy and short range arm strength are adequate. He can make the short range throws with some zip on the ball, and can make that quick out pass.

He has some mobility, that he's not stuck in the mud like his mentor always was.



His negatives:

He's a short fellow. His being listed at 6' 0" on the recruiting sites is being overly generous, since he's closer to 5' 10". He can't see many a receiver breaking open across the middle at the short range, much less seeing how the coverages are placed. The last 4th down play against Stanford showed this when he tried to throw a short pass over the middle (which would have been too little for the 1st down) against a very well covered receiver. He had other receivers open during that play...

His ability to read open receivers isn't good at all. He locks onto one receiver all too often, and throws it to him, even when that receiver is double covered. If Mike Mayer were just an average or above average tight end, Pyne's stats would be horrible by now. There have been countless numbers of times that Lorenzo Styles was just starting to break open, and Pyne either didn't see it, or was flat out ignoring him.

His arm strength, while OK for short range passes, isn't good at all for medium range passes, much less long range passes. The same can be said about his medium and long range accuracy. It simply isn't there. He can't stretch the field vertically very well.

He doesn't seem to be making those pass protection audibles on the fly. It's as if he's trying to get the call from Tommy Rees during that "scan" offense phase, and the timing is terrible. We've had delay of game penalties that shouldn't have been so.

Finally, Tommy Rees hasn't done a good job of coaching him. After being in the program for his 3rd year now, he should have an understanding of pass protection audibles, as well as receiver reads and progressions. He should have been at least serviceable in that area by now, and he hasn't shown it. This is puzzling, since Rees was probably the best of all of the Notre Dame QB's when it came to making those audibles, and he was very good at making receiver reads and progressions. I'm surprised that he can't pass on that kind of knowledge, despite his allegedly being a natural when it comes to coaching.

I’m pretty sure that’s been covered quite a bit with him and it is an area that Rees knows how to teach.

Teaching and learning it in practice snd doing it on the field at game speed, under pressure conditions are two different things.

It's one thing if the pupil is completely incapable of learning, but Pyne seems to be a pretty smart fellow.

(no message)

I am trying to figure out if he was just that damn good that the coaching and play calling didn't matter, or would him coming and being coached by Rees just screwed him up?

Height and arm strength are generally not very coachable. You could probably tweak some mechanics to get a little more out of the arm if they aren't using proper form, but you've got what you've got for the most part.

Pyne seems to be hot/cold on his accuracy and timing. Sometimes he hits his guys perfectly, like the throw to Styles that was dropped, others are terribly behind or low to the receiver. His reading receivers and locking on also seems to be the same. There are examples of plays where he looks off the safety and hits the guy that is open by coming back and firing, and then there are the 3rd and longs where he stares all day at Mayer just waiting to throw it while other people are running wide open.

"Finally, Tommy Rees hasn't done a good job of coaching him. After being in the program for his 3rd year now, he should have an understanding of pass protection audibles, as well as receiver reads and progressions." I can't stress enough that this is one of my biggest reasons for wanting Rees gone. He has been coaching this guy for awhile now. He got playing time last year in real games. How is it that he can't have a play called, come to the line, and see that there are 9 in the box and quickly audible to something that will take advantage of it? What the hell have you been doing with this guy for the past 2+ years that you don't trust him to do this? This was one of the reasons why I was wondering if Buchner had bad OL play because they were asking him to have this responsibility, he had an interview where he claimed some fault for the bad OL play and pressure he was getting.

I don't completely agree about Pyne's arm strength being an issue. I get that he can't throw it 60+ yards, but he has made some nice throws like the 41 yarder to TM and the one last game to JT. Perhaps a little more strength would help, but he can do enough to force the defense to respect us deep. I do feel it limits the horizontal ability to the deep field side for sure though, so anything run in that area is basically dead and the defense can ignore it. But you should be able to put together a game plan that maximizes the strengths of your QB and the personnel you have, not continually ask them to do things that they shouldn't be doing. That is the whole putting players in winning positions thing.

(no message)

The game is fast, people want a scapegoat so they blame Rees. The same people can never say what play was called, what protection was called, was there a read, was the correct read made, was the play changed, was it changed correctly, were blocks missed, were the routes run correctly. There are a lot of factors that go into the success of the play. If you go to the games you can see people open that are not thrown to, he locks on to one receiver (usually Mayer) too much.

If that evidence existed I would gladly say "well I guess Pyne just isn't good enough because obviously Rees knows what he is talking about."

It can't always be the fault of the player and never their QB coach.

You do realize he was second string so not getting first team reps? If you want to blame Rees, go ahead.

Developing a player would mean that player doesn't make the same mistakes repeatedly, like locking on to Mayer on 3rd and long.

Rees has been the QB coach since 2017. He's been the OC since 2020. He had Book from 2017 through the 2020 season:
Season GP Passing Rushing
Cmp Att Pct Yds Avg AY/A TD Int Rtg Att Yds Avg TD
2017 10 46 75 61.3 456 6.1 4.7 4 4 119.3 38 206 5.4 0
2018 10 214 314 68.2 2,628 8.4 8.6 19 7 154.0 95 280 2.9 4
2019 13 240 399 60.2 3,034 7.6 8.6 34 6 149.1 112 546 4.9 4
2020 12 228 353 64.6 2,830 8.0 8.5 15 3 144.3 116 485 4.2 9

Sorry if the format comes out bad, but Book was basically the same from 2018-2020. All under Rees, and once with Rees as the OC.

In 2021 Coan was brought in, and he put together an offense that was completely unsuited for him, which had to be scrapped after the bye week and finally they got him going. That was with Kelly there to be in charge.

This year we started with Buchner, and the offense had issue with Ohio State, and followed it up with a terrible performance at home to Marshall. Pyne comes in and looks bad vs Cal for a half, has two solid games against UNC (really good) and BYU (not as good but a win), then looks like shit again against Stanford (that's regression). UNLV was the score it was because of special teams and great defense in the first half more so than amazing play by the offense. The best drive of the game was the first drive, which had very little if no check with me/scan offense at all and they just lined up and ran the plays.

There is nothing in his career at ND that shows that Rees can consistently develop a QB or get him to play his best ball, or that he actually game plans around what his offense is actually good at. He is failing at both of his jobs and it is not even close.

Interesting.

You said "it is really easy to see during the games. You do realize he was second string so not getting first team reps? If you want to blame Rees, go ahead."

I took that as you saying the evidence of him being able to develop a QB was in the game, and that somehow you see him getting better now that he is getting first team reps and starting the games.

I replied that evidence is not easy to see.

I don't know why you are hung up on the 2nd string part. I had already told you previously I agreed with 2nd string for a reason.

I noticed that you said nothing about what I actually put into my post. Do you actually think Rees is doing a good job?

We get it, you don’t like Rees.

He didn't ask if he was the second string QB he asked about evidence that Rees/Kelly can develop a QB. I'm still not sure why you are holding onto him being the 2nd string QB.

You are dying on a hill that it isn't Rees, it is the QB. He has had Pyne for 3 years now and this is the best he can do with a formerly 4* top 250 player that he recruited. You tell me why it isn't Rees' fault, build your case, show me some evidence. I am serious, I would really like to understand why I should think it is much more on the player than the coach. I'm trying to figure out why Pyne is playing like crap, and it isn't on Rees.

I did, I provided evidence that since Rees has been here no QB has flourished. I provided stats. I showed how Pyne is regressing faster than anyone before has.

Tell me why you don't think that has anything to do with how good a coach Rees is.

I bet you won't.

I’m not dying on anything, Pyne was second string for a reason. If you want to hold on to it’s Rees fault go for it.

The only person in this thread mentioned that Pyne was second string was you. I agreed with you that he was for a reason. GA changed the subject by asking you to show some evidence because you said people just want a scapegoat and blame Rees. The argument is about it just Pyne can't do it or is there a coaching problem. All you did was say he's second string, he was getting second string reps. You ignore that he's been getting first team reps and all the game reps since Marshall. Do you think Rees is doing a good job or not? Simple question.

I would much rather blame the coaching that is responsible for getting the players ready to play, rather than saying the players suck. But that's just me, I guess you're fine talking about how all the players suck, you do you buddy.

Have you ever played a sport? I’d guess a huge no.

Football, basketball, baseball, golf, bowling, to name a few that I was decent at, but certainly not D1 college level. I already said I never played QB in organized football. How about you? What are your qualifications since you want to put that out there. How many years of D1 QB play do you have under your belt there skippy? How many seasons have you been an OC or QB coach? If you are the real deal, send your actual credential to Mark the board mod to verify and back you. Otherwise your opinion mean just as much as anyone else here, which is nothing, just like mine. There is nothing more sad than when someone has to start saying "I bet you never played sports!" This just continues to show that you have absolutely nothing to hang your hat on in the argument. If you could, you would, and you don't, which means you can't.

Again, you avoid the question, do you think Rees is doing a good job of coaching his guys up? You know, the guys that he personally recruited to play for him? These are pretty simple yes or no questions that you can't seem to bring yourself to answer.

The whole purpose of me posting the question actually had nothing to do with Pyne/Rees and who is right or wrong, I just seriously wanted to hear some opinions as to how much impact the coaching can have on things like the game slowing down and seeing the field. I guess I'll put you in the camp of the coach can't do jack or shit for those which is why Pyne still can't seem to do either.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

I get your point about he was second string and all. Generally I prefer to feel like the coaches know how to evaluate and develop talent. But the reality is there isn't any evidence that Rees can develop a QB. If Rees requires a college ready QB such as Trevor Lawrence then he will fail more than he succeeds as a QB coach. There aren't that many of those players around.

(no message)

I understand that there are plenty of things that go into the play. The question was how much is it on the coaches and how much is that it simply has not or may never click for Pyne?

First round QB busts are a real thing, sometimes you just can't take it up to the next level. How much of that is on the coaches vs the player reaching the limit of their mental ability? Is that what we are seeing with Pyne? How can you possibly know that when you are scouting the guys at the HS level when even the pro level makes mistakes?

I am trying to get the other side of the equation since I'm on the bandwagon of Rees needs to leave at the end of the year, to see if there is any reason for me to not feel that way.

(no message)

(no message)

We've had this discussion before

Buchner also missed a lot of HS ball

I was hopeful that he would get to grow this year, but alas injury has gotten him sidelined again. I'm a little pissed because I think his shoulder was already dinged up from the OSU game, and they could have held him out of Marshall, although we probably still would have lost.

But if the issue is seriously Rees, which is the side I'm solidly leaning to, then I don't know that he would have improved and probably would have been asked to do more shit he was not ready or prepared to do, and then been blamed for the poor performance.

Pyne just has to adjust to the quickness of the game. A competent running game would help him immensely. People who watch the film know why the plays are not working, Freeman will cut Rees loose if he is the issue, he talks a lot to Tressel and I'm sure knows where the problems are.

coached. I do think it will be interesting to see what changes are made after the season. MF did get hosed a bit by not having 100% say as to who his coaches were.

(no message)

or is not, passes get batted down without passing lanes. I don't buy the argument that a lineman does a poor job if the guy they are blocking bats down a pass. The lineman is blocking from low to up and often the defensive lineman is beaten and as a last resort sticks his hands up. That said Pyne has missed by a lot on wide open receivers deep. I think Buchner's deep ball at the end of the first half was not that far overthrown and that Lenzy could have made a better effort. The deep ball at all levels gets overthrown a lot but not by as much as Pyne has missed. Pyne did throw a beauty to Merriweather but missed him twice by a lot. Coan underthrew a few last year but many times gave his receiver a chance. Our wide receivers, are pretty bad and have dropped numerous balls. Austin would have made a big difference this year. Seeing the field means knowing where every option is and demands preparation and/or smarts and vision. Vision is the most important trait for a running back too. Very few QBs make the transition from being the best player on the field as a high schooler to having a command of the offense as a freshman in college. Escapability is a very big plus for a QB because it creates havoc on the defensive side and somebody usually gets open or the QB can make a good gain with his feet.

and the QB throw another way?

But this is where my issues with personnel stem from. If your QB consistently can't see it, can't throw it, then why consistently call that play? Is it just for the live game reps to get him to learn from it? Or is it just being stubborn? Why are you throwing bubbles in space to your TE or the big WR and not the small fast WR or RB? Why is Tyree in on a 3rd and 1 in a power run formation and not Estime? Where the hell did the two back sets that were killing it at UNC go?

I recall in one of the broadcasts that they were saying Rees draws plays up on the board and when they asked him about the play design his response was basically I don't care as long as it goes to 87. If your OC/QB coach thinks that way, how can your QB not also think the same thing?

wide open receivers wasted when he was laser locked on Big Mike.

Secondly, design a scheme that works around his limitations rather than demanding he do what he can’t.

spoiled.

That's the whole point of the check with me crap. But it is too slow, and the defense reacts to what you are calling in. It also doesn't take into account that they might be giving you that look specifically because they know you like to change to a certain play and will get out of the look they gave you once you change the play.

If he wants to audible, he needs to teach his 3rd year QB how to read the defense and audible to something that will work better if necessary.

(no message)

(no message)

takes hold and they no longer have to think before reacting. I was a baseball player, and I equate it to learning to hit a curve ball. Over time, you see it enough you don't even think about rolling the shoulder and driving the ball into right field. it happens naturally. There is a great book on this topic called the Sport Gene. I highly recommend it.

Game reps always are best, but simulating a game works. Who knows how ND prepares it QB's. I would say given the track record, not very well. For instance, how "real" are 7 on 7 drills? The game also can slow down for a player but he lacks the skills to compete against a specific level of competition. I have no doubt the FCS is filled with very good players who don't have the speed, strength and size to compete at the Power 5 level.

to your point about playing time and reps, this is why I don't think Buchner will ever be a serious QB for ND. Since his sophomore year of high school, he's had maybe the equivalent of 12 games of playing time. For much of his "career," he hasn't even been able to take snaps in practice. Unfortunately, I think his development has been stunted and always will be a project.

As it pertains to the offense, is Rees giving Pyne the ability to succeed within his skill set and knowledge of the game? I've heard the offensive playbook is huge - like War and Peace huge. Can Pyne ever get into that unconscious level of play where things come to him like breathing, where it happens without thinking? I've always felt the Kelly offense puts way too much focus on the QB position once there has been even the smallest amount of success with a simplified plan. Every QB Kelly and now Rees touched at ND has regressed with time. What I see are QB's who excel with a simplified game plan and then the entire kitchen sink is thrown at them rather than adding just a bit at a time. They start to miss reads, play hesitant and their performance suffers. Think about how Golson collapsed with time.

Rees is looking for a unicorn, and there only are so many of those around. What's worse is it's unlikely they are going to choose ND when the offense is so anemic.

I am also worried that Buchner won't have the time/reps to ever get to where he could have gotten to. I like that he had mobility, and I think he has a better arm than Pyne as well.

I don't mind if the playbook is War and Peace huge, as long as you only use the chapters that your QB can actually succeed with. Designed QB runs should be thrown out with Pyne in. Deep outs to the field as the primary should be out as well. I am in complete agreeance with you on the simplified vs everything mentality that seems to happen with our offense. I also don't understand why Rees seems to hate play action.

Rees does seem to need a 6' 5"+ QB with a cannon for an arm and a photographic memory in order for his offense to work at times.

QB's under Brian Kelly and Tommy Rees did seem to regress for the most part. The only ones who didn't were Deshone Kizer (he actually carried the team in 2016) and Ian Book.

This seems to go against conventional wisdom, since a spread offense is supposed to be a pretty simple one implement, and that the playbook isn't supposed to be very complex. QB's in the spread offense are supposed to be able to pick it up pretty quickly, and the simplicity of the scheme is supposed to help them develop rapidly. In a nutshell, they're supposed to read through 2-3 quick progressions, and if none are open, then dump it off to the safety valve or take off scrambling. With the field spread horizontally, someone should be open at some time or another.

To put it this way, if AAC and Sun Belt teams can implement some form of the spread offense and make it work, then it shouldn't be too complex, right?


Implementing a pro-style offense at the collegiate level isn't easy, but it can be done with the right coaching and personnel. Even a system as complex as the Erhardt-Perkins offense can be used with good success, as long as you don't try to use the entire playbook. Charlie Weis put up some good offenses (with the exception of 2007) with the right people, but it was as clear as day that he wouldn't / couldn't use the whole Erhardt-Perkins offense.


Brian Kelly's spread offense is different, since it's more of a pro-style / spread hybrid. It resembles more of Marv Levy's K-gun pro-style offense that Jim Kelly had run as the Bills' QB during those Super Bowl runs, and that's a pretty complex offense in and of itself. When you try to combine it with the spread offense, then it becomes even more complex. Demanding that a college level QB, who isn't named Trevor Lawrence, be able to run all of it isn't exactly an easy thing to do.

A playbook doesn't have to be overly complex. It simply has to have enough plays in it that can be run competently, and one that doesn't telegraph the play calling.

(no message)

(no message)

Book, because of his winning percentages, does deserve his place, even though he didn't quite have the talent to take the team to the top tier. He was good enough to get us to the top 10, and even two playoff appearances, but that was the limit.

Kizer rightfully deserves his place, contrary to many people's opinion here. He did a fine job for us in 2015 as a true sophomore / redshirt frosh, and the offense was operating at near peak effectiveness. He was a strong, accurate thrower, could make the right reads, and had reasonably good mobility. That, plus having Will Fuller to vertically stretch the field opened up many other WR's.

Folks will knock him for 2016's poor record, but they fail to understand that Kizer's stats were quite good in 2016, and that it was his QB play that kept us in many of those games, despite not having a polished WR1 at his disposal.

That should have been a 10+ win team with any level of competent defensive coaching...

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

Still, a win against #1 is a win against #1, and Brian Kelly can say that's when he got his signature win.

(no message)

...a win is still a win.

To put it bluntly, 1990's Colorado team still won the national championship, despite two tainted wins (the 5th down game, and then the phantom clipping call against us in the Orange Bowl).

Bill McCartney still got his national championship, and most folks today care less and less about the circumstances as time goes on.

defensive players returned to the lineup...sadly negated that as a "signature win".

I get why people, especially BK, want to hold onto it...

I recall a stat somewhere that rematches in college are over 80% of the time won by the team that lost the first game, so I kind of expected it. Recall the BCS championship rematch with Alabama and LSU, which LSU won the first game like 6-3, and I recall Alabama winning something like 21-0 in the rematch (did not look it up). That's why I don't believe it takes away from it being a very good win. Add to it that they were missing players and that reportedly students were telling Lawrence bye bye when they rushed the field, that put a chip on their shoulder something serious. They came out fired up to prove that they were better.

It also did not help that in the first game ND went all out with a great attacking game plan, and the rematch it looked like they were just trying to play it safe and hope to get into the playoffs.

I have a huge Clemson fan here at work, and he still thinks it was a great game, and according to him DJ played the game just fine and the loss of Trevor is greatly overblown.

Irish went on to get outscored in ACC title game and Rose Bowl 65-24 when everyone was at full strength.

(no message)

Great as in went on to the NFL and was great there too? Great in college?

Obviously we have not had any world beaters in the NFL in a good long while.

Quinn was pretty damn good in college. Clausen on this team would have this offense running with very little problems. Kizer would probably be a hit as well. Book had his issues but we are at least 6-1 with him, but I don't think he would fit in your list of "great."

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

As far as pure passing ability, Clausen was the best in recent history. Some of the most beautiful passes were Clausen to Tate.

Didn't he lose 23-21 to Navy among others, as a senior.A lot of those losses, he had chance to win,failed to deliver.

Jon Tenuta was the second worst defensive coordinator in modern ND history (we all know who the absolute worst was).

He kept trying to run that stupid jailbreak blitz, all but emptying the linebackers out of coverage, hoping to shoot the gaps quickly.

The problem was, that our defensive linemen couldn't shed the double teams needed for the LB's to quickly shoot the gap, and we got burnt badly in each of those losses, even against Navy, who would simply grind out 4+ yards each time.

If anything, the best performances by the defense came when we didn't blitz, and simply dropped back into read and react coverage.

Michigan, USC, Navy, Pitt, Connecticut, and Stanford were all easily winnable had we simply played a more conservative defense, and not idiotically tried to jailbreak blitz almost every damned down...

That 2009 team was very much capable of going to a BCS bowl, and Weis' choice of Tenuta as a DC doomed him in the end.

People bag on Weis all the time here, but his offense was actually pretty damn good overall, he recruited pretty damn well, and if he had picked a good to great DC we might not have ended up with Kelly.