Was at the Duke game - a few observations
* Met Coach Mike Elko's parents and aunt - nicest most humble people you can meet. They were very complimentary of ND and Marcus F.
* Duke fans very welcoming and respectful of ND fans
* ND looked very flat and uninspired even during pre-game warm-ups; no enthusiasm
* As usual ND fandom travels very well - I'd say the crowd was 40%+ ND
* OL had no push all night - Duke's blitz & stunt packages had them confused all night
* Said it before, will say it again, no way the ACC (refs) don't have it in for ND - calls in this game (w/the exception of Merriweather's push-off) were some of the worst I have ever in seen in 50 yrs. against ND
* ND receivers (w/exception of Mitchell Evans) get no separation whatsoever and any pass route and when they do and the ball is thrown their way, it was dropped
* During warm ups, PK Schrader was kicking 60 yd FGs, but game time apparently is a different story for him
* Lastly, and as usual, terrible tackling - noticed when in-person , the LBs & DBs have the worse tackling techniques (or lack thereof) I have ever seen. They do everything you're not suppose to do, they don't break down, drop their head down, leave their feet and go their knees. That won't be fixed anytime during this season. Need to do those drills during spring ball and fall camp.
* Overall - great experience and most importantly ND finally won a close one.
Replies to: Was at the Duke game - a few observations
How was campus, tailgating, and the Duke fans? Seems like a great atmosphere.
(no message)
The tackling is the biggest problem. Hallmark of the quality of a defense. Elko, Lea and Diaco
defenses had it. Every other DC I've seen at ND didn't have it. Disappointed, honestly, because we heard that Golden was stressing that in the fall.
The ND noise toward the end was noticeable on TV - that surprised me.
(no message)
Has there been any actual published data on the referee situation
Besides UHND homers?
Oh yeah, they always publish data to deligitimize their officiating.
It comes out in the same report where the coaches release the next week's game plan.
Oh don't mind woody...he's our resident anti-fan.
He considers it his personal duty to fly around saving the World from us homers who have no idea what's really going on.
Having said that, we played super sloppy in this game and self induced all most all of our penalties which were mostly valid. There were a couple head scratches though (reviewing a non-reviewable play to shaft us on a phenomenal punt that would put opponent at their own half yard line, etc) and when those calls go one way week after week, it wears very thin.
Just saving you all from the constant whining
Which isn’t a good look
And why our fan base is likely the most hated in college football
Yes because no other fan base complains about bad calls
(no message)
Stop it, he's our anti-fan...we don't need to share him.
(no message)
Some of it is whining, some of it is valid
Someone as balanced as you like to portray should be able to see both sides of it.
Yes, I don’t agree with 100% of the calls but I don’t incessantly whine
About it like a two year old or claim the refs are out to get us.
It’s not everyone on here either. Just a handful of whiners who think everyone is out to get Notre Dame.
It’s a sad look. I can tell you know just what I’m talking about.
You do, however, incessantly whine about other posters
incessantly whining. Not sure if that makes you a 2 and a half year old incessant whiner, or just another 2 year old incessant whiner.
Many of ours were legit, but refs are hiding it by not calling other way-this game 16 for ND, 2forD
It was the same at NCState and others going back. The number discrepancy eventually become too big to ignore and speaks for itself.
The other inexcusable things like reversing a non reviewable call that would have altered the outcome of the game and that targeting call just further the implication. Add in other egregious calls in past 2 seasons, and you see the truth.
Agree with most of this but by rule, the targeting call was not egregious.
He hit him with the crown of his helmet which is the rule regardless of where he hits him. It is for the protection of the defense as well as the offense. So, while you don't see that specific call often, it wasn't incorrect. The worse calls were the review that shouldn't have been reviewed and the pick up of the PI flag where the DB prevented the receiver from coming back for the ball.
Here’s why it is egregious imo….
You touched on it:
They claimed with the review of the non reviewable field ruling that because the right call needed to be made, they waved the rules to keep with the spirit of the rules. Then, with the targeting call the same review people upstairs that again called for the review claimed that technically, it is a target and needs to be called to follow the letter of the law and that we should take it up with the rules committee.
They are having it both ways.
I don't believe anyone claimed they waived the rules to keep with the spirit of the rules.
If someone did, you'll need to post that link. The problem was none of the officials knew that the play was not reviewable. The targeting call was valid based on the rules. You can't hit another player with the crown of your helmet.
Notre Dame has been the victim of the targeting rule far more than opponents.
The clear problem is that it isn't equally applied.
Sorry but when you are the one crying foul, you have to stick to complaints that are actually valid
The review of the punt spot was bullshit from the jump..the pickup of PI flag is bad because they claim ball was uncatchable...the ball in the end landed pretty close to Merriweather, and if he's not interfered with there is no way of knowing if he comes back and catches making everyone say 'oh I didn't even think that was catchable. Picking up that flag is bullshit because that is the purpose of the rule.
The targeting was correct call, can't play the hardly called crap...show me another play in this game where a Duke player did the same. He dove at the ball carrier, intentionally put his head down and struck him with the top of his helmet. It's a penalty, end of story and it should be. And if we were coaching our defenders better we would be seeing better tackling and not seeing guys putting their head down.
You nailed the two obviously bad, potential game changers. I have no issue with the targeting
call. It was clear and right in front of the official. I can’t say I was looking for it, but didn’t see anything else like that from Duke on Saturday. Maybe there was though, but it hasn’t been pointed out so far.
Nope. Most of the penalty calls on us yesterday were legit. Think that the beef is with them
calling it tight against us, but not against the ACC opponent. Have seen some of that this year and in prior years. Picking up that PI flag is a good example. Wouldn’t bet the farm that gets picked up going the other way. Defender was mugging the receiver and the ball was in the area. That’s PI. Or reviewing unreviewable on field calls. Nonetheless mostly agree that the calls against us were correct.
The two that were egregious: Bothelo and punt review
(no message)
The only thing that was egregious on Bothelo play, was him putting his head down like that..
It was a valid penalty that should always be called, because that is how defenders break necks.
And picking up the PI flag, and the penalty disparity when there were clearly uncalled holds on Duke
(no message)
Bro, I was seated on the 5 yd. line were the punt should have been marked out of bounds
at the 1 yd line...that was a terrible (overruled call). Even a the Duke people sitting next to me said that ND got jobbed on that one...the replay on the jumbo proved that. And the targeting penalty, no way....
You can't convince some people the sky is blue. Breath is wasted on them.
(no message)
On any of the egregious calls, did Marcus engage the refs, let alone work them?
(no message)
He ragged on one ref vs OUS for that horrendous non-call re: Flores
Freeman went out of his way to got in his face after every play for 3-4 plays.
For all the criticism they get (a lot of it valid) this D doesn’t give up many points, 17 to OSU and
14 to Duke. Same with the prior warm up games. A decent team on O should win handily with that play. What am I missing?
This reminds me of past teams with bend don’t break solid D but offensive woes
(no message)
I agree Frank, the D has played well enough that ND should be undefeated. The O still struggles to
score points against better teams. Scoring around 20 points won’t cut it against top 10 teams.
That’s my thought. D has played well enough to be undefeated. Are there deficiencies, sure.
Overall though they have played pretty well so far this year, if yah look at the scoreboard and stat sheets. How many yards did top 5 pick Harrison have?
The million dollar question. Is the lack of WR separation scheme/route designs or talent issue?
I’ve noticed the same thing and go back and forth as to the problem. Maybe it’s a combination of both. Just the simple fact that Flores and Greathouse have been playing as true freshman a lot tells me not exactly a ton of WR talent in the upper classes. That said, the formations and routes can allow for better separation if schemed correctly.
Scheme will help vs a zone defense. Against man, the receiver needs to beat the DB.
No scheme will help that absent putting one of the receivers in motion.
I’ve been saying they should put Tyree in motion just like Bama did with Devanta Smith.
(no message)
Talent/speed….and our 2 best of 3 consistent targets that can get open were also out. Enter the TE O
(no message)
I believe it's not so much "lack of talent", but lack of technique in beating press coverage. That
needs to be coached and practiced.
For anyone not a freshman, shouldn’t this have been taught
And learned by now?
Or inexperience, or D’s with good secondary’s in the last 2 games? But that is certainly true.
(no message)