Post Game Report Card: Purdue

Thoughts on Purdue

The spread offense definitely works for this team. There were HUGE holes on our D-line and they gave Sheets the opportunity to run for some really nice plays. This opened up the pass game for Painter and he had an OKday. Boy, did he have some time to throw the football in the first half as well! We did a bit more pressure-wise in the second half when the offense took some pressure off our D.

Two other thoughts on these guys that really stood out to me. First, you can see this is a well-coached team. They were very fundamentally sound. They generate big plays without flashy players because everyone does their job. Also, this is a mature team. They have some key leaders on the field (specifically Painter and Sheets). We have really lacked this type of guy, specifically on offense (Sullivan and Carlson have not exhibited this to me).

Quarterbacks: B-

I thought Clausen looked like a completely different quarterback today. He showed a much bigger arm throwing downfield (Pilcher, are you still convinced this kid can make the throws yet?). He also managed the team so much better.

That said, he still made freshman mistakes. The INT he threw in the second quarter across his body should not have happened. He needs to know when to throw it away or take a sack. That is an impossible throw.

Sharpley actually looked good when he came in for the injured Clausen. He forced a couple of throws but checked off to his man underneath a couple of times, got rid of the ball and made smart choices. He got help by Tate on two deep balls (not great throws in my opinion, but great catches).

So, the announcers were basically calling for a quarterback controversy in the second half. Let me go on record by saying that I think Clausen gives us the best chance to win. Yes, Sharpley came in and played with confidence. Players responded to him. But they were responding to Clausen as well.

I think it is a horrible thing to change QB’s now. This was Clausen’s best game. He got us back in this thing and started to swing the momentum. Weis made his pick and we need to stick with the kid.

Running Backs: D-

We had zero running game in the first half. Aldridge was not able to get things going early and establish the physical run. This was especially disappointing considering that is one of the only good things we did last week. Armando Allen had a couple of nice runs/catches, but fumbled again.

We pretty much abandoned the run in the second half. I think Junior Jabbie probably led our team in rushing the last two quarters (why do we play that guy?).

Fullbacks: D

Schwapp had one catch, but otherwise these guys were not on the field much. Clearly, there wasn’t a lot of run blocking either.

Wide Receivers: A-

George West looked really good to me today. He really looks special when he has the ball and a little bit of space. In the first quarter, I think he juked 3 guys to get 7 or 8 yards on a screen pass.

How is Golden Tate not playing every down out wide for us? Sick, sick catch on the up ball from Clausen in the two minute drill at the end of the first half. Then the two catches from Sharpley in the 4th quarter? Unreal. If you recall, he did a similar thing against Georgia Tech. This kid is a special talent.

Duval Kamara needs to have a bigger role in the offense. He had some really nice catches across the middle (as well as the diving comeback throw in the first half). He has huge hands (looks like he can catch pretty much anything thrown his way) and has the big body that we need to make bigger catches in traffic. Robbie Parris also had a couple of big catches.

I still think we have talent here. I said that these guys would surprise this season and today is the type of performance that I expect out of this group. We have some young guys who could be stars (Tate, Kamara, West) and an established guy (Grimes) and they will continue to get better as the season progresses and they build a better rapport with Clausen.

Tight Ends: B+

Huge, huge, huge touchdown catch by Carlson in traffic. He also caught a couple of other balls (one where he moved the pile about 5 yards after being stood up). Statistically, this wasn’t a big game for Carlson. He did show the type of effort and leadership though that builds his value to the team.

Offensive Line: C

How can we not execute on a 4th and 1 play? We failed here again this week (twice). I swear, we have faced something like 10 4th and 1’s and I don’t know if we have executed one of them. How can our guys not lean forward and get that yardage?

We also continue to pick up holding penalties. I can’t figure out how we can’t block anyone even while picking up these penalties? Sam Young, I am calling you out on this. You are the most talented guy on our O-Line and you have to stop making these dumb mistakes.

These guys are not establishing the run and still not giving Clausen great time. We had zero running game again and JC took some really vicious hits out there and was clearly banged up in the second half of the game.

The second half gave us hope though. They only allowed two total sacks and we started moving the ball at the end of the 3rd quarter. Hey, its something.

Defensive Line: C

I feel so bad for Trevor Laws. That guy’s motor is always going at about 150% and he is limited because of the inexperienced, outmanned D Line. At least Joe Brockington stepped up today. I thought he had a pretty nice game. Still, they gave up over 140 yards to a pretty average back and didn't produce a lot of QB pressure. Not all their fault, but they were far from perfect.

Linebackers: D

So last week I touted my call of Brian Smith being a “freshman surprise” after being one of our less publicized recruits last year. Well, today he sucked. He had some really dumb penalties and single-handedly sustained a Purdue scoring drive.

Otherwise, not much to comment on here. Crum is playing his heart out as always. I wish we had more playmakers here and I know we have young talent that should grow into this role (Smith and Neal), but right now I feel like this group isn’t doing much.

Cornerbacks: C

Walls giving up that ball on 3rd and 29 in the first half was really disappointing. I want to see this guy be physical. He missed quite a few tackles that led to some big plays. I am impressed with his cover skills but upset in some of the stupid mistakes he makes (as well as the lack of tackling etc).

You are also starting to see more of Rashon McNeil out there. It is nice to see a bigger, more physical CBon the field. He also looks pretty disciplined (there was an end around Purdue ran where he kept his lane and didn’t let the receiver get around him).

I think everyone had an OKgame today. I like how these guys play in man but feel that their zone defense tends to be manipulated too easily.

Safties: B+

Well, Kyle McCarthy had a nice (though pretty easy) pick at the end of the first half. Zibby also had a pick (a ball Painter shouldn’t have thrown) which was nice and played pretty well overall (he made a lot of tackles). Bruton was OKas well.

Special Teams: F

The good news is we ALMOST didn’t get shut out in the first half. The 35 year old field goal attempt was blocked with about 55 seconds left. There was definitely penetration on the right side of the line, but the kick also looked a bit low.

Brandon Walker’s missed extra point was inexcusable after Clausen’s touchdown pass to Carlson. Then Whitaker’s miss was horrible. It looked to me that there was a snap or hold issue on both of these (definitely on the second one). Whitaker finally made one on the third TD (and his third try).

Eric Maust kicking for Geoff Price? OK, I know he had a really bad game last week, but Maust just doesn’t have the same leg as Price. I wonder what happened this week that kept Price out of the game?

It is inexcusable that our special teams are this bad. A lot of this is simple execution stuff. Yeah, kickers are going to miss kicks. But how do we not get holds consistently down or block? Horrible.

Coaching: C+

Charlie finally unleased Clausen a bit on offense. As everyone saw, it made a huge difference. If we can re-establish that physical running game and keep throwing downfield we will move the ball. We can’t be one dimensional like that last two weeks, we need balance.

This just in: Charlie calls games aggressively. The 4th and 1’s to consistently rely on the back up the middle, the couple of long 4th down plays (the Tate and Parris catches), etc. These calls worked out today as a whole (not the 4th and 1’s) and I guess that is why they pay him the big bucks.

I continue to think that the team buys Charlie. You could see they were fired up in the second half. You could see they responded to changes made throughout the game. They have not given up and that says a lot on a team that is now 0-5.

Other

There is clear frustration on this team. There are unnecessary penalties (late hit at the end of the first half by Bruton, a couple of Brian Smith plays, etc.) and other stupid mental mistakes. I guess this is to be expected but we keep kicking ourselves by incurring these types of penalties.

There are three playmakers that I see on this team. The first one is Armando Allen. This is not surprising and he has carried big expectations with him since arriving on campus this January. George West also continues to impress me. He looks really shifty in the open field and we need to get him the ball with some room. The final guy who really gives me hope is Golden Tate. He is a little guy but just knows how to go after the ball. I guess I have a soft spot for a guy who is 5’10” on a good day and outjumps the defender every time a ball is thrown his way. We need to keep working the football to these three guys.

I wanted to comment on our fans again. I know that this is an easy trip/drive, but we had a ton of folks in the stadium. They were loud and made themselves known. That makes me proud when the team is 0-4 and we are reacting in that manner.

What the Hell is Happening?

So, I feel compelled to chime in and add my thoughts on all of the craziness surrounding the exodus of players from ND Football. Today, we lost our third player to transfer in three weeks with Chris Stewart, a soph. offensive lineman deciding to head home. These is still hope that he could make his way back to South Bend (the South Bend Tribune interviewed his dad and he still really wants him at ND). We should know more next week.

Stewart (maybe), Konrad Reuland (Tight End) and Demetrius Jones (QB) have all left this season. Of course, everyone also remembers Zach Frazier leaving after being eliminated from the QB race. We have lost a total of four soph. players this season and a total of 16 since Weis took over from Willingham. But what does this all mean?

Well, I think there are two angles here. None of the four players that have transferred this year had significant roles on the team. Chris Stewart is an offensive lineman who has bounced back and forth on both sides of the ball. Konrad Reuland was now our fourth string tight end after Carlson, Yeatman and just last week Ragone passed him. Everyone knows the Demetrius Jones story and knows he was never going to be the started at ND. Remember, all of these guys were 4 or 5 star recruits and definitely have a desire to play. They weren’t getting that chance at ND, even with a team starting 0-4.

So, is that it? Did these kids just want an opportunity to play and felt they needed to leave to do so? Maybe. I think this is clearly the case for Frazier and Jones. I think Stewart and Reuland never fully bought into the ND culture, be it because of the school or Weis. Eventually that drove them away (and this is normal, every class has this happen).

What does this mean? Well, in the media this is being twisted as an exodus. I don’t believe that. Transfers are pretty normal, especially when playing time is an issue. Is that timing good here? Hell no. Do I think this is a trend that will continue throughout the year? No, I really don’t. I think almost all of these guys are on board.

The bigger concern for me here is our verbal and future recruits. Can you imagine what they must be thinking? This team is 0-4, players are leaving and running for the hills. I am sure other coaches are having a field day with this. We are already hearing of guys like Omar Hunter getting offers from USC, even with his verbal.

What can Weis do? Simply, he has to start winning. He needs to win 5 or 6 games this year. He needs to show the world that his players haven’t given up. He needs to show glimpses of the young star power his team has. He needs to sell the 0-4 record as an opportunity to the young kids who want to come in here, experience ND and bring it back to its glory.

This can be done, but Weis needs to start this ball rolling now. A win against Purdue would be huge (and note we are 22 point underdogs going into this game). If not Purdue, then UCLA and Boston College. We need to get desperate.

I am convinced that 2008 will be Weis’ make it or break it year. People are definitely starting to doubt his coaching abilities. His seat will get warm this year if he doesn’t turn this around quickly. That said, 2008 will be a no excuses year no matter what and he is going to have to have a BCS year to get the fan’s confidence back. He needs to start building that capability now by developing our young talent.

Keep the faith guys. We aren’t going to lose the whole team to transfer and we have a killer class coming in (and losing a couple of guys if worse comes to worse won’t create a disaster). We are building talent. Hopefully we can win 5 or 6 games this year and build for 2008. We can still turn this thing around.

Post Game Report Card: Michigan State

General Comments

Notre Dame had never started a season 0-4. Until now. I know, I know, you hear this and you die a little inside. It is the first time in my life I have struggled to watch full games because of the “growing pains.”

We did manage to score two offensive touchdowns with one generated off a nice, sustained hard-nosed drive. While we slipped back into our anemic offense post this, it still showed signs of hope.

I must say I am very, very proud of our fans today. They were supportive, fired up and you could tell it had an affect on the team, especially early on. I hope this continues throughout the season as the team needs it.

A somewhat random comment, but I feel the need to point out our field position issue. Field position has been a huge killer for us all year. We have had so many plays and drives with zero progression. We have also struggled punting the ball. We have been at a huge disadvantage all year due to this. Counting the opening kickoff in the 2nd half, MSU started drives in our territory 4 times. It is really hard to be successful defensively with this being the case. Ok, onto the report card.

Quarterback: C

Jimmy Clausen is experiencing some growing pains. He is making a lot of rookie mistakes. The turnover where the ball was pulled out of his hands was inexcusable (he shouldn’t have been 10 yards deep trying to make a play happen. He also continues to hold the ball for way too long.

I am really starting to think that Clausen is going to have to step up and win games for us in order to win period. Going 7 for 13 for 53 yards just isn’t going to do it. We need to develop a passing game (with some sort of vertical threat) to make things happen. The running game can’t be our only weapon.

I don’t know enough about Weis’ philosophy on pulling Clausen these last two games. I think the kid has done an ok job. If he feels that he doesn’t want him to get hurt, I get it. But I don’t see how he thinks Sharpley is going to stimulate something (it is very clear to me Clausen is the better QB). Just a note, as we know Clausen is the starter. I just don’t like this strategy.

Running Backs: B

Aldridge and Hughes made immediate impacts hammering the ball up the middle. We looked like a pretty physical running team, especially in the first half. Aldridge’s game of 18 carries for 104 yards was solid. He showed good vision, the desire to get physical and adequate speed. I think Anthony’s points that he has made into needing this type of presence to win was proven today.

On a personal note, I was very, very happy to see Travis Thomas get the first touchdown of the year for us. He has pissed me off with his penalties (another special teams one today), but there is no one on the team who wants it more.

Fullbacks: C

I am constantly amazed that Scwapp has not been able to get us a yard this year. I know the line isn’t helping him and no one else is converting either, but it seems to me that he could lean forward and get this. Surprising. Nice to see Luke Schmidt make a catch today.

Tight Ends: D

John Carlson had 1 catch for 16 yards. I still don’t get this? Why are they not utilizing him more in the passing game? Yes, I know he has extra blocking responsibilities now, but I don’t understand how he isn’t catching at least 3-5 balls a game.

Wide Receivers: C

David Grimes made two great catches in the first half (the one he went up for and the diving catch from Clausen). George West also had a couple of nice grabs. The receivers did only make 11 total catches though, so it is hard to give them a higher rating.

The other thing that concerns me here is that while these guys are making good catches, they are not getting open. If you watch these guys downfield, they are very well covered. I don’t know what the answer is here, but we need to give Clausen a chance to find an open man. Don’t kid yourself, one of the reasons he is holding the ball so long is he can’t find open guys. You can actually see him working the progressions pretty well. Again, this worries me.

Offensive Line: C

Well, I definitely think this group played better today. They opened some nice holes for the RB’s to run through. That said, we continue to have problems on short yard runs when they stack the line (we just don’t get any push).

They also gave Clausen better protection today. MSU was the top sack team in the nation and I think only got to Clausen 3 or 4 times. We looked like we definitely progressed today. That said, we still have a lot of growing here and there is no question that it starts with establishing and building on our running game.

Defensive Line: B-

Well, Laws and Kuntz looked ok again today. Hand also looked ok. I continue to be impressed with this aspect of the ND game. The issue with these guys (and the defense as a whole) is the fact that they are working with an offense that isn’t doing much for them, having to deal with horrible field position and spending a lot of time on the field.

Today I did think MSU was more aggressive at running the ball at us (especially with Caulcrick). This was probably a wise strategy as we just don’t have the depth on the line and they wear down.

Linebackers: C

Brian Smith and Kerry Neal are two very good young backers. Its exciting to watch them play and they are becoming decent pass rushers early on. Maurice Crum had a solid game and always plays hard. I still am not a huge fan of how John Ryan plays and positions himself, but he is so young it could also just be growing pains.

I would like to see the trend towards youth continue here. Brian Smith was my pick to be a sleeper on this team and he has the speed and instinct to do this. Neal is a man child. Keep giving these guys opportunities and good things will happen.

Cornerbacks: C

Today I was a bit less happy with our secondary. They gave up 4 passing TD’s and while they didn’t give up a ton of yardage through the air (only 135), they were out of position at key times.

Darrin Walls was beaten by Bell early on and got lucky that MSU overthrew the kid. He made a great pass breakup late in the first. Ambrose Wooden also always seems to be around when we blow a play.

Safeties: B-

Huge, huge, HUGE play by Bruton picking off the ball in the end zone for the Irish. He covered a ton of ground and jumped right in front of him. Boy is that kid fast and athletic. We need these types of plays 2 – 3 times a game with such a young team.

Tommy Z is just not Yeah, his play has been solid, but he just doesn’t seem to exhibit the leadership qualities on the field that we desperately need right now. I don’t know if you guys agree with that or not, but would love thoughts on this.

Special Teams: C

Geoff Price had an awesome punt early in the game, placing the ball at the 2. Then, he shanked the next one off of his foot for 27 yards. Then later in the half, he boots a huge one 56 yards. Then he dropped a huge punt at the end of the half. His inconsistency has been really surprising considering the weapon he proved to be last year. We actually even saw Eric Maust punt late in the first quarter in response to this issue (and later in the game as well).

Otherwise not much to point out here. We gave up a couple of nice runbacks on kickoffs and we continue to not get the ball in the endzone on kickoff, but nothing disastrous here.

Coaching: B-

You have to give the staff some credit this week. The team came out ready to play and win. They clearly bought the physical week of practice and came out ready to work. That said, it didn’t hold up and by the end of the game we were worn. But give the staff credit for getting them ready to play.

I get the feeling that the staff is at a loss on how to approach things moving forward. I think the team responded to the physical practices, but it is not realistic to keep up that pace moving forward. I think they are somewhat “learning on the job” here.

Conclusion

Well, the good news is we played our best game of the year. The bad news is we lost again, gave up over 30 points again and gave up another big time rushing performance to a good back.

How do we move forward? I tend to agree with Anthony in that you keep focusing on the hard nosed running game. Aldridge and Hughes played their hearts out today and should continue to do this moving forward.

We also really need to start developing a vertical passing game. I know, the run will free this up, but we need another dimension. As soon as we fall behind in these games, they are lost. We have scored 27 total points this year (combine all of these points and we still haven’t scored as much as each opponent has scored against us) and I don’t see how we can start generating those types of numbers on a weekly basis without this aspect.

Keep the faith guys. It is going to get worse before it gets better (it is hard to imagine us beating anyone soon). But we will win this year and we will get better. We will develop young talent. Keep the faith.

Michigan State and A State of the Union

I wanted to get in a final post before I'll be away for a long time. I'm going to be MIA while my mother comes to visit and am on a business trip to Sweden. It will be after the Purdue game before I can write anything again. In light of this I'd like to give a little "state of the union" discussion as well as talk about some key points to beating Michigan State.

Beating Michigan State will have very little to do with scheme and strategy and much more to do with who wants it and plays more physical at the point of attack. Essentially, the team that controls the line of scrimmage on offense and defense will win. Michigan state is a powerful running team and they will try to control the game and impose their will. We must find a way to consistently stop them and force them into obvious passing situations where we can pressure the quarterback. Then, we must actually succeed in getting pressure on the quarterback. I feel like it's been half a decade since a Notre Dame defense has actually been able to consistently pressure an opposing quarterback.

On the offensive side of the ball we must establish our running game. I know this essentially goes without saying but here it is even more true. Michigan State is tied for the most sacks in the country with 17 while we are dead last in the country giving up 23. Our chances of protecting the quarterback are poor but if we can't run the ball effectively to get them thinking about it and open up the play action passing game they will certainly be able to tee off on us and get to the quarterback.

I also think it is extremely important for at least one leader to emerge on our team. And it can't be just a leader by example. I'll talk more about this below but we need someone, anyone, to be vocal, to keep the team playing hard, and to not let anyone quit both during games and practice. Coaches can hold players accountable using methods of "punishment" such as diminished playing time. But teammates can be much more effective with this by simply encouraging each other. This allows players to hold each other accountable while improving their morale. Additionally, it doesn't seem like punishment because it comes from players that "walk the walk" rather than a coach in a superior, parent-like position.

Finally, I think it is imperative for the crowd to be in this game from beginning to end. I implore anyone going to support the team as much as possible. Be as loud as you can and, rather obviously, refrain from boo's. Try and spread this type of support and attitude to those around you as well. Hopefully the team will give you something to cheer about. The team is getting broken down this week during practice, the crowd needs to help build them back up. Of course, the easiest way to do this is a big play on special teams, something Golden Tate looks primed to do.

That about sums up my thoughts on Michigan State. I'd like to talk about a few other things, namely Weis and Demetrius. First things first, Demetrius Jones is in no way innocent in how he handled the situation surrounding his transfer. The facts are as follows. He had every opportunity to be the starting quarterback. By all accounts none of the other quarterbacks were treated with any preference. He played poorly in his one opportunity. He enrolled at another institution the day Weis announced Clausen would be the starter for Penn State, presumably because Weis indicated Clausen was the best all along but couldn't play due to injury. And, finally, he practiced for two weeks with the team, taking quarterback repetitions away from the other members of the team, after he had enrolled at another school, only to not show up when the bus was leaving to make the trip to Michigan without telling anyone. There was even a package of plays in the Michigan gameplan (if you can call it that) designed specifically for him. He says he felt mislead by Weis but he did his fair share of the same to his coach and teammates.

Those are the facts, but I've been thinking about this quite a bit and there are some conjectures I'd like to make regarding the situation. At the onset of this discussion I'd like to say that I am not trying to deflect attention away from the poor play of the team to complain about Jones. I do not blame him solely for any of our problems nor do I think he is a scapegoat. Nearly everything I have seen, heard, and read about Jones is admirable and I appreciate his comments admitting he handled the situation immaturely. The reason I am upset about this is because he knew what he said would get a lot of press and it makes Weis and our football program look bad to all who simply read and know things on the surface, i.e. most of the fickle college football fans out there.

You cannot convince me he made the decision to transfer after hearing what Weis said about the quarterback competition and Clausen. He enrolled the day Weis issued the statement which came fairly late in the day. They had practice and he also had class so it wasn't like he could spend his whole day searching for and learning the few colleges where he could loophole the NCAA rules and not lose eligibility for the 2008 season. I believe he had it planned for a while and this was just the straw that broke the camel's back, forcing him (in his mind) to make transferring his final decision. He had to see the writing on the wall. No player in a competition like this cannot look at his play vs. that of his competitors and not know where he stands. I guess the bottom line is that I just don't believe most of the things he said.

My next item of business involves Weis and all of the discussion surrounding him adapting and changing his personality/leadership and coaching philosophy. While I agree with some of the things that are being said out there (here, here, and here), I disagree with others. It has been said, somewhat repeatedly, that Weis needs to change his leadership and coaching personality to adapt better to the young team. I disagree. I think a coach is defined by his leadership and personality, combined with his philosophy on football and offensive/defensive schemes. Weis is brash, confident, very black and white, matter-of-fact, and intolerant of mediocrity from himself, his assistant coaches, and his players. That does not need to change, regardless of who is on the team. Rather, the players he recruits need to complement that, they need to understand and thrive under that type of coaching personality and who will follow his style of leadership. And it is his job to successfully find and recruit those types of players into his system. He talks about getting "his guys" all the time, he understands this.

A coach's wavering leadership sends mixed messages. A team needs a unified front, a single leader, and a consistent voice. That may be even more true now with a young team then over the past two years. When he first got to Notre Dame the team also needed it, but for different reasons. They needed it because they had no discipline and no direction due to a lack of decisive leadership before Weis. They need it now because they are lost, distraught, and severely unmotivated. His confidence and attitude are necessary to give the young players direction and let them know he will right the ship and get things going back in the right direction. That doesn't mean he can't tweak the way he leads and interacts with the players. The best example I can provide is knowing when to be overtly critical vs. when to bite his tongue and not publicly lash out at the young players. That type of difference needs to be accounted for in his attitude, but I believe he does that.

Now, on the other side I do believe he has to adapt his coaching philosophy. There are definitive differences between coaching in the NFL and college. Recruiting aside, the largest difference is preparation time. I believe Weis primarily attacks this difference by doing a lot of the outside of practice work on his own. He reduces the load on the players by thoroughly preparing himself and his staff. The other way he needs to adapt is to reduce the offense into a manageable piece at the college level. That doesn't mean dumb it down. It means that he needs to simplify it by removing the parts of it his team doesn't do well. This is even more true now, with such a young team, than it was when he first arrived. But this year he has done the opposite. He has been far too cute, broad, and gimmicky in what he has tried to do offensively.

Great coaches aren't great because they adopt other coaching philosophies. Philosophies and schemes come and go in football. The West Coast offense, 5-2 defense, triple option, etc. are all examples. The spread and other current en vogue things will do the same. The lasting things are much more fundamental, much more basic. And the great coaches are great because they excel at getting their team to perform at a high level when doing these fundamental things. Things like firing off when the ball is snapped, blocking, tackling, good special teams, and elimination of mental mistakes and turnovers. Weis doesn't need to grab from other coaching repertoires. He comes from a background of proven coaching scheme and philosophy. He needs to instill and teach, that philosophy in his own players. Part of that is making it manageable for the experience level of the players he coaches.

Another item of his coaching he must adapt is the psyche, the mentality of his team. In the NFL players play well to receive monetary incentives, because they thrive in competition, and because they are older and more mature. In college it is different. I hate to say it but it is rare that you find college football players who attend a school due to loyalty. That day and age seems to have passed. So the "playing for the pride and tradition of your school" card can't really be played. In most cases recruits play college football to get to the NFL, plain and simple. But college coaches can't just expect them to play at a high level, with motivation and determination, and in a physical manner. They have to get their players in the right state of mind, they have to make sure they are prepared to play, they and have to make sure they are motivated. And I think the way that transpires within the team stems primarily from the type of team the coach builds. His coaching personality and attitude directly extend into the psyche of the team. It's how they react to it that determines whether or not they respond to the challenge. Weis has yet to prove to me, on any level, that he has mastered this skill. Perhaps this is what people refer to when they say he has to adapt his leadership. I would contend that he merely needs to change the way he imparts the message.

Weis also needs to learn how to build leaders. On the football field, leaders can be made. Captains are elected by their peers, but leaders can be made by their coaches. Weis needs to go in search of them now. He needs to find the guys that always leave it on the field, that always work hard, and he needs to coerce them into being vocal. This team needs leaders who will hold them accountable and drive them to be more physical, aggressive, and motivated. He said in his opening press conference that his intelligence and nasty attitude would permeate down to the players. It isn't (and hasn't) because for all of the players it can't come directly from him. He has to work it into a few players that buy into it, then let their peers get it from them.

What we are seeing right now is Weis' lack of head coaching experience, especially at the college level. His future success will be determined by how fast and how much he learns. He says the right things, he holds himself accountable, and he realizes what is wrong, he understands the problems. Now he needs to develop a plan and execute it. What may be a greater concern is that he either doesn't seem to recognize these problems before they very obviously manifest themselves, i.e. before it's too late, or he does recognize them but doesn't know how to fix them (link here). I've said it several times, we are young, inexperienced, facing a tough schedule, and have little talent in our upper classes. That doesn't add up to 38-0 against Michigan and complete ineptitude on offense. That isn't an excuse. Florida has 72 freshmen and sophomores (not all on scholarship) and their team is performing at a very high level. Our coaching hasn't maximized our potential nor effectively motivated our players. The ultimate question is how fast will Weis learn, how quickly will our team improve?

Michigan

I don't think it is a stretch to say that what I saw Saturday was the worst display of college football I've ever seen. I'm not trying to be overly dramatic or cynical, we aren't even competitive. We may be the worst team in the history of the sport and certainly have to be in the lead for worst in our storied history. And there is ABSOLUTELY no excuse for it. Yes, the deck is stacked against us with a front-loaded schedule, youth and inexperience, and poor offensive line play. But our performance Saturday lacked any resemblance of a prepared football team and my confidence in Weis and his offensive prowess has diminished to nothing. There are plenty of other teams out there, both past and present, that fall into the same category as us but can, at least, move the ball. You cannot convince me that we are 38 points worse than Michigan. You cannot convince me we should have lost to our last five opponents. And you cannot convince me that we should lose to anyone by 20 points, let alone five opponents in a row.

I don't have the emotional capacity to write anything specifically about this game. It was just pathetic. For the third straight time we had virtually no gameplan and for the first time our defense played poorly, our team, uninspired. I was downright embarrassed by our performance, at one time suggesting we punt on first down to avoid losing field position via penalties and sacks. And it isn't just that we don't execute, we didn't even play hard for most of the game.

I didn't expect us to win many games this year. I thought eight was achievable, but didn't necessarily expect it. However, all of my predicted success was based on the conjecture that we had a coaching staff in our employment. At the moment, there is sufficient evidence to suggest otherwise. What is further disheartening is the fact that we didn't play like we cared or with any emotion and/or determination. It's time to panic, the loss of recruits and/or transfers are imminent.

Weis continued to commit a series of fatal blunders by "opening up the offense" and giving cause for more pathetic execution. I've said it several times, and I'll continue to say it. This team should be practicing a few things, doing them well, and always coming back to them. You can't score if you can't get first downs and we can't get first downs because we are trying to do a million things. Trying to do that simply results in doing many things poorly, instead of a few things well. And it looks like people out there are starting to come around to my perspective (here, here, here, here, and here). The failure to execute is the largely the players' faults, but I can't blame them much when they are having a million things thrown at them. We should never have used the spread, we should be practicing what Weis knows and what is proven, and we should be supremely focused on a physical and punishing ground game.

Mike Patrick made some good comments about "it all starting up front" for us. And, to a certain extent, he's right. Much of the blame can be placed on our poor offensive line play. But that doesn't solely contribute to 38 point beat-downs. Neither does youth and inexperience at many of our positions. Michigan doesn't have that much more talent than us. We are in a catch-22, to be certain, keep in seven and give Clausen time but with no hope of only three in routes getting open or sending four or five into a pattern only to have Clausen broken in half. Without a running game and solid offensive line to fall back on, e.g. Michigan, we are left with nothing.

On the bright side if we maintain the recruiting success we've had in the past at least the next coach won't have to suffer through what Weis is right now. And that's exactly what will happen, we will get a new coach, if Weis doesn't evaluate how he is running things and create leadership and motivation to put the ship back in the right direction.

Demetrius transferring was in no way responsible for this loss. Perhaps he was supposed to take that direct snap instead of Armando on the first play but we shouldn't be doing that gimmicky crap anyway. The fact that he took reps in practice after being enrolled at another school for nearly two weeks is terrible. The fact that he would leave the team because he isn't playing and not tell anyone about it speaks volumes about his selfishness. By all accounts he seemed like a stand-up kid to me. My opinion of him has dwindled, however, after hearing the situation surrounding his transfer.

Michigan Keys To Winning

Just a quick few notes on the Michigan game....

Offense

Again, as it will important in every game this year, we need to be able to run the football. We need to do it consistently and, most importantly, we need to be able to pick up third and short situations on the ground. The more we keep their defense on the field the better chance of winning we have.

It goes without saying that our offensive line play must improve in order to run and pass the ball but there is another, more specific, reason we need it in this game. From the last two games Weis will know that beating Michigan is all about stretching the field. And that's exactly what his offense is designed to do. It is designed to make you defend every player, both vertically and horizontally. That doesn't necessarily mean going deep early and often, but he has the scheme to get it done.

In order to do this you need to be able to stretch the middle of the field as well as the sidelines. We can stretch the sidelines with outs, hitches, and some arrow, quick hitch throws from Clausen. Additionally, we can use flares to get Armando out in space (I'm still surprised we haven't tried about three to four screens a game with him). That will get their linebackers pursuing to the sidelines and open up the middle of the field for Carlson. However, if the line can't block, we will have to keep him in, and the ways in which we can attack their defense will be diminshed.

We DO NOT need the spread offense with Demetrius to win this game. Situationally it may prove useful but it isn't the complete answer to winning the game.

Defense

There is one defensive key to stopping Michigan in this game: contain Michael Hart. We have the ammunition to do it (as he publicly guaranteed a win for Michigan) and that should help motivate the defense. But we can't allow him to get 30-35 carries for 130-140 yards. We need to hold him to a <3> yards per carry and force them into long third down situations to give us a better chance of getting off the field.

Mallet will play fine as long as he doesn't have to do everything, i.e. as long as they aren't in obvious passing downs like third and long. His offensive line will give him time but in those types of situations we can apply pressure. If we don't get them into third and long and then get them off the field we are in for some trouble. I know our secondary is improved but they haven't been repeatedly and consistently tested. Michigan, even with Mallet, has the capability to do this. If we get them into third and long and successfully apply pressure, we can win. It would be nice if we were on the giving in of a fast, aggressive, blitzing defense getting 5+ sacks rather than on the receiving end.

Penn State Follow Up

I thought about our football team a lot today. I thought about Weis, the success he's had over the past few years, and the recent struggles we have had as a football team and program. I organized my thoughts to present facts suggesting Weis is a good coach followed by some arguments supporting the recent notion I have suggested that he isn't a good coach. Before I begin, I'd like to say that I don't think there is a comprehensive body of work from which to definitely claim Weis is or isn't a good coach. This will only be a list of supporting and refuting evidence. I will not draw a conclusion from it. I just wanted to put something out there to help ease my doubts, concerns, and pain.

I'm going to try and avoid comparisons between Weis and his predecessor(s) but sometimes they are necessary to illustrate his competence and ineptitude. I'd also like to say that these lists of positive and negatives are in no way comprehensive. If you feel there is something I am missing please feel free to submit a comment and I'll include it.

Positive: The thing that Weis obviously has that Willingham didn't is the ability to recruit consistently. His first class was really a half class, partially put together by Willingham and held together by Weis while still working for the Patriots organization. That class wasn't great but it did have a few solid players in it. The next two classes have been top-notch and the current class is ranked #1 by many of the countries recruiting services. So to his credit, Weis had definitely upgraded the talent level at ND. And he has done it consistently.

Sure, he has lost a few premier players we really needed, but most of those were on the defensive side of the ball (with Benn being the lone exception I can think of) and that is as much a result of Minter's ineptitude as a recruiter as anything else. Now that Brown is on board and closing out our top targets, I feel much better about the future on that side of the ball.

Positive: Weis has also hired premier name coaches in nearly every capacity. Everyone he hired came with good accolades, experience, and high recommendations. He made a concerted effort to get coaches that had ND ties, that had a history of effective recruiting, and that understood how to succeed at a place as unique as ND. Minter was an aberration and a second choice of Weis as he tried to hire Brown his first year.

Positive: In his first year (arguably two) Weis took essentially the same players that Willingham had and improved the team's record by three or four games. He hasn't lost to anyone he is supposed to beat and he has, in many cases, hung with some of the best teams in the country. The loss to Michigan last season is the only game we had no business being in. But we had five turnovers and I can hardly pin that on Weis. The other games we were supposedly "blown out" in, namely USC and LSU last year, we were in through at least the first half, having dropped balls, mental mistakes, etc. that, in many cases, I don't believe Weis is directly or primarily responsible for. This suggests Weis has the capability to a) develop talent and b) effectively utilize the strengths of his personnel.

This success, however, was largely due to the junior class of players he inherited from Willingham. A class that included McKnight, Stovall, Samardzija, Fasano, and Quinn, among others was the highest ranked recruiting class Willingham had. It was something like fifth in the country I believe. Ahead and behind those players (in terms of eligibility) were some players sprinkled with talent but there wasn't an entire class of quality players. That typically showed in games where we didn't put the opponent away early, i.e. games where we had a lot of mental mistakes, penalties, poor special teams play, and/or turnovers. We never have had the talent to make up for those mistakes during Weis' tenure.

Positive: I've seen a definite shift in the attitude of our team from the Davie and Willingham era. A Willingham coached team would never have rallied against Michigan State last year or nearly come back to beat them the year before. That does speak positively of Weis and his ability to transfer his "never say die" attitude to the team.

Negative: Weis' coached football teams have racked up some pretty dubious records. The first two games of this year have been the worst two rushing outings for a Notre Dame football team in the history of our program. Our defense under Weis has also given up the most passing yards in a game during the history of our football program. There are others as well, most receiving yards given up to one receiver and most consecutive 20+ point losses also come to mind. These
obviously aren't good things for our football team. In most cases they resulted in the loss of a game, or at least very close to one.

But records can be suspiciously circumstantial. For example, we had 44 yards rushing on 23 attempts against BYU in 2005 but I didn't see anyone complaining when Brady threw six touchdowns and we won handily. Similarly, 15-20, maybe even 10, years ago barely anyone we played attempted enough passes to set records for passing yardage against our defense. So while there have been some negative records accumulated during Weis' tenure as coach, I think they need to be taken in context.

Negative: To say that we have struggled offensively over the past few games would be a gross understatement. I have voiced my concerns over the offensive gameplan and approach (here and here) and at least a few authors out there agree with me here, here, and here). We need to take a more physical, downhill approach to our running game utilizing angled blocking schemes. Right now, as a young team, We don't need to do a lot of things offensively, we need to do a few, simple things well.

Negative: Our offensive line is playing worse than I've ever seen them play. I don't understand it at all. It completely baffles me. We have plenty of talent to perform adequately even in their infancy. Although they are young, there are many teams around the country that are breaking in young offensive lineman that have far less talent. The ineptitude I have seen in our offensive line play is absolutely inexcusable.

The strange thing is the fact that Weis praised this group repeatedly last Spring and this Fall. This leads me to one of two conclusions. Either Weis' always sticks up for his guys, will never intentionally speak ill of them publicly, and will consistently maintain a positive, confident front for the media, OR he didn't know how poorly the offensive line was going to perform. Many would say they prefer the former and I would agree, at least on the surface. I think it is great that Weis is always in players' corner. I don't fault him for that at all. But if he knows that the offensive line is a problem area and is just using a facade to "back his boys" and not give away information to the opposition, how can he not address the problem with an entire Spring and Fall of practice?

Furthermore, given the results of game the Georgia Tech game, how can he not adjust his scheme to roll the QB, simplify the protection schemes and run blocking, and use running backs more effectively in protection? I don't know which is a bigger problem, not knowing you have a problem, or knowing you have it and not being able to fix it.

Negative: If this current level of play is maintained what will happen to recruiting? For better or worse, opposing coaches are going to whisper things into these kids' ears and try and use our poor play and record to generate a negative recruiting buzz about our program. Weis needs to maintain his connections with his recruits and continue to work to close them, getting them to sign on the dotted line next February.

Negative: It seems that many times Weis is unable to get his players mentally ready to play in the game. Whether it is a lack of effective leadership or motivation is irrelevant, the bottom line remains that we are unprepared from a mental standpoint in many games. The game against Michigan State last year is a primary example. How can you not be motivated to make amends after a loss like we had to Michigan? I understand we went on to win but the point remains.

Negative: The strategic X's and O's advantage and nasty play Weis' promised has yet to consistently materialize. I've seen times when he has been a brilliant mastermind of playcalling. I've also seen times when we have played inspired, physical, nasty football. But that hasn't consistently been the case. Even in our first year we didn't always play nasty. I think we (including myself) overlooked the fact that we were winning with a finesse passing style of offense and a bend but not break defense. Being a nasty football team means you dictate the tempo and nature of the game while also winning the battle at the point of attack. Being nasty means you make third and short by running it right the heart of the defense and succeeding. I'm not sure we've done that once on offense this year.

One could argue that we are simply suffering from what Willingham left us, poor talent in our junior and senior classes. I've heard it said that it was known this was coming, but we just weren't prepared for how bad it would really be. To some extent I think that's true, but I don't think it is reasonable or correct to place all of the blame on the poor talent in our senior and junior classes. Some of this is coaching and Weis needs to learn to adapt to his situation, his players, and his opponents.

The points above lead one to believe that it is possible we will see a large improvement in the team once the young talent matures, gets experience, and develops under the the tutelage of Weis and his staff. That may be the case. I, for one, am waiting to reserve absolute judgment until I see the improvement (or lack thereof) in our team play over the course of this season. Next year may indeed be a better year to take these observations (and those of the future) and draw some more solid conclusions. In the meantime, at least we can take solace in things like cute kids in Irish football attire.

And I Thought Tyrone Willingham Coached At Washington...

What I saw Saturday night looked a lot like a Tyrone Willingham coached football team. Last week I said there is no excuse for losing 33 to 3 to any team on this schedule. We have too much talent to lose like that and it means there is a coaching inadequecy. Well, this week is no different. There is no excuse for us to be last in the country rushing. There is also no excuse for us to give up 15 sacks through two games or to have more three-and-out's than I can even count. Our third down conversion and red zone touchdown scoring percentages are downright awful. I'll concede that a new, inexperienced offensive line, with a young, inexperienced quarterback, and defenses that stack the line of scrimmage and play press-man coverage make it tough to move the ball. But 15 sacks through two games and dead last rushing in the country? There is also no excuse for going 10 quarters of play without scoring an offensive touchdown and suffering four 20+ point losses in a row.

The reasons for playing like this are two-fold, coaching, and players. First, I'll delve into the coaching. We played not to lose rather than playing to win on Saturday. Our offensive strategy was conservative. That's acceptable (in fact it's preferrable) coming out of the gate trying to break in a new, young quarterback, but at some point you have to take the reigns off and try and win. He did what I suggested in my keys to winning, he got the ball to Allen in the open field, added some screen passes into the game plane, and he grew Clausen's confidence with short, safe routes. But Penn State's defense is pretty good (albeit not great) so it was expected that they would zero in on what we were trying to do. We never made an adjustment to open things up and stretch the field. We had two inexcusable penalties the coaching staff was directly responsible for, a delay of game and twelve men on the field, both after time outs. If that isn't classic Willingham I don't know what is.

Now, I know what I said above is true: we have a young, inexperienced offensive line and quarterback, and defenses are going to put eight in the box and force us to throw it. I also know that we have very little talent, relatively speaking, in our two upper classes. That does spell disaster for our offense. However, the results thus far haven't been disastrous, they have been catastrophic. If you have a young, inexperienced offensive line, you simplify things. You change your blocking schemes to something simple like man-on, man-inside. You focus on a physical, angle-based blocking, downhill running game. You cave everyone down and kick the defensive containment outside. You don't use zone run blocking schemes or complex pass protection schemes. You dumb it down until they can handle it and then you expand from there.

That is why I thought our offense would look entirely different this year from the previous years. In 2005 and 2006 (especially in 2006) we used the pass to open up the run. The running game was much more of a finesse running game predicated primarily on zone blocking schemes and consisted of a lot of draws and runs we could utilize in our play-action passing game. Since I didn't expect us to have much of a passing game this year with a young, inexperienced offensive line and quarterback, I thought our running game philosophy would shift to one that was more straight ahead and more physical. It's tremendously more easy to execute and it lends itself to bootleg and roll-out passes. Unfortunately, Weis hasn't adopted this running philosphy, preferring to stick with this more finesse running game. Without a passing game to open it up, we are left with very few options. And adopting the spread option shown against Georgia Tech isn't a viable option. You stick to what you know, you stick to the type of pro-style offense that is proven. But you only use the simple parts of it that you can practice often and perfect. The offensive progression so far, to me, has been a coaching disaster.

I think some of our struggles are related to the bad combination of our offense and the defenses we have faced thus far. But I think the rest has to be pinned on coaching. The offensive football genius and strategic X's and O's advantage that I believed we had with Weis (and he promised) has evaportated. We need dramatic improvements on the offensive side of the ball, and we need them quickly.

It doesn't help when your players don't hold up their end of the bargain. When you are young, playing with a conservative gameplan that isn't going to stretch the field, you can't afford turnovers, penalties, and poor special teams play. Last week it was turnovers, this week it was penalties and poor special teams play. And both weeks it has been a lack of physical play up front on our offensive line. That isn't Weis, that is poor execution, poor decision making, and the attitude of the players. Some of it can be attributed to a lack of team discipline and attitude and that has to fall on the shoulders of the coach but he isn't the one on the field. Against Penn State and Georgia Tech we were in the game until our defense tired and couldn't carry us on their shoulders. And we were in the games despite the poor player performances in the form of turnovers, penalties, and poor special teams play. To me that says two things: our defense is playing pretty well and Penn State and Georgia Tech really aren't that good.

I'm not saying we need to panick and fire Weis. It's been two really bad games. But I am saying there is plenty of evidence to believe that Weis may not be the person to turn things around. I think a better indication will be how much we improve by season's end. However, playing the lower quality teams on our schedule might not be the best indication of our improvement. I'll briefly go into our offense, defense, and special teams without talking too much about the overall game. I think most of our problems lie in what I said above.

Offense

I'll get it out of the way up front, Clausen looked good. There are concerns, but not many. I'd like to say that it's impossible to project a quarterback's success based on a single game's performance. That said, I'll try and detail what I saw. He played with poise, he played loose, he didn't force anything. On the balls I saw that he did "force" he pretty much put it where only our guy could get it. He ran the offense pretty well. His statics were decent but were really better as quite a few of his incompletions were balls he threw away or dropped passes.

Many times he held the ball too long. Many times he starred down his receiver. Some of it was deeper routes by our recievers, some of it was Clausen not being experienced, and some of it was just the adrenaline, environment, and crowd. Additionally, his mechanics weren't great. Many of his motions were rushed, he didn't execute play action very well, and his footing wasn't the best. But that is mostly expected in his first start. The bottom line is that he showed the tools to be a very good quarterback and the mechanics, the execution, and the speed at which he plays will improve with time. His release and mechanics were what really jumped out at me on his high school film. He hasn't lost that, he just needs a little time. In fact, I thought we should have gone no-huddle starting in the second half.

My only major concern with Clausen is his arm strength. I'm not sure he has the velocity on his ball and strength to a) stretch the field and b) throw the deep out. The former is something we desperately need and the latter is a staple of Weis' offense.

The running backs didn't look bad. I thought Jabbie looked pretty good. I thought Allen looked pretty good but a little slower than last week. Again, no one had much room to work due to the poor offensive line play. Thomas looked timid again and hasn't, to date, shown me he is the physical running back he's been advertised as. I'm not sure where Aldridge was. I think he's the best back of the bunch. Schwapp missed a huge block on the third and short that Thomas couldn't pick up on the sweep. Coming into the season I thought this was going to be a strength of ours. We have yet to prove that is the case.

I thought our receivers, once again, looked good. They caught the ball well minus a few exceptions and they seem to be very capable of getting open. If we could only protect our quarterback long enough to get the ball to them. I don't know where Carlson and company are. I echo Dave's observation concerning Carlson. He's still the same player he was last year but the perception at the end of this season may be that he isn't as good as he used to be. In the NFL draft where momentum seems to be every bit as important as production and level of play, Carlson might have lost himself quite a bit of money coming back this year. It seems completely obvious to me that a great way to stretch the field is throwing down the middle to our trio of excellent tight ends. I guess it's just too obvious for Weis to do it.

Our offensive line played horrendously. I'm in favor of benching Paul Duncan for whoever we have that can stand and take up space. For the second straight week he was abused. On the play where Clausen was clocked Duncan, playing left tackle, took his first step with his RIGHT foot. That is punishable by death in some states. Apparently, Indiana and Pennsylvania aren't two of them. I still don't know why we don't have our running backs chipping to the side of Duncan. If we don't improve our play here in a hurry we are in for a very long season. Latina might be looking for a new job at season's end.

Defense

I thought our defense really played well given how long they were on the field. Occasionally we gave up some inside runs we should have stopped, but we were physical, we played fast, and we were aggressive. I really think our defense is night and day from last year. It might not show up on the scoreboard or in the yards surrendered but that is as much about special teams play and field position as it is anything else. At the end of the game Penn State's two and three yard runs showed up as seven and eight yard runs as our defense wore down. An offense that does nothing but three-and-out has that effect.

Trevor Laws was unblockable. He had a superb game. Kuntz was disruptive at times but he also plays his way out of position at times.

The linebackers had much better containment this game, although I'm not sure they were challenged as much. The only negative I would say we had on defense was that our inside linebackers, particularly Smith and Brockington, still have trouble shedding blocks. We may need a solution for John Ryan on the outside. He can't play in space due to a lack of speed, he doesn't generate pressure from the outside, and he doesn't play well at the point of attack.

Our secondary played well. We didn't give up but one big play and I thought that was a good one to give up. At that point of the game Bruton had to gamble to try and make something happen. We kept things in front of us and tackled well for the most part.

Special Teams

The punt and kickoff returns were terrible. Zibi's return was nice and Bruton continues to impress as a gunner on our punt squad. I thought Whitaker showed a huge leg. Overall, this has been a disappointing group for us. We have too much potential to not make this area of our team a difference maker.

Going Forward

Things might get worse before they get better. Right now Michigan is the talk of the town but the attention will quickly shift to us if we lose to them next week. And just wait, since a mobile quarterback and spread offense has tormented Michigan for the past two weeks, Weis might get cute again and pull Demetrius back out of his bag of completely useless tricks. Additionally, I thought Boston College looked like one of the better teams in college football on Saturday. And if you think Georgia Tech and Penn State have good defenses, just wait until USC comes into town.

If Saturday proved anything it's that there aren't many good football teams or coaches out there. Many teams were in games they had no business being in from a talent perspective. Anyone can beat anyone on any given day. This is something we should all take solace in as we move forward in this season. It may provide the only palpable hope we have for watching our games.

Post Game Report Card: Penn State

Quarterback: B+

I give him a B+ because he pretty much did everything he was asked to do. For his first start, I thought he was superb. I know he wasn’t perfect so I can’t quite get him to A range, but he didn’t really make any big mistakes (especially at critical times). Below is a more detailed assessment.

First Half: Its hard to argue with Weis’ strategy here keeping Clausen throwing short passes. He was very accurate on these passes but threw for under 100 yards. The last 6 drives were pretty much unproductive. Weis did not let him loose at all which I was surprised with. I know you have to keep it short and safe, but it become clear early on that he was going to have to stretch the field. He did throw a very nice looking ball down the sideline just out of the reach of George West where only he could catch it (great coverage on the play by Justin King).

Second Half: It just looked like Clausen had no time to throw or no guys open. It appeared to me that he stayed cool in the pocket or on the roll. He moved pretty well but just couldn’t find open guys. Finishing 17/32 with one INT was not a bad result after trying to make some things happen in the second half.

Overall: I will say the kid just looks cool under pressure. Yeah, he held the ball too long a couple of times. Yeah, he didn’t make any huge plays. But in front of 107k people, to perform like he did was pretty admirable. He almost always made the smart decision and didn’t force many balls (he had a couple of times he missed his guys but put it only where they could have gotten it in the first place). This kid is going to be good, there is no question.

Running Backs: D

The running backs still couldn’t do much today again. They generated 25 yards on 16 carries (actually had 0 factoring in Clausen’s 10 attempts for -25 yards). Weis began the game using Armando Allen as a receiving back on a lot of swing passes and that was somewhat effective on the first drive, but didn’t work after that.

Interesting to see Armando Allen start the game today. Rob McColgan, you got your wish. Travis Thomas is definitely not the most talented guy on this team, but he sure runs hard north and south. I still think these guys have talent, but aren’t getting the chance to develop a rhythm or hit holes (as there have been very few of them).

Fullback: C

Schwapp laid a sick block on a PSU defender on a Clausen scramble in Q1. Past that I didn’t see much of him yesterday.

Tight Ends: C-

Yeatman and Carlson combined for 2 catches for 11 yards. I really don’t get this here. With a young QB you would figure that these guys would be over-utilized. I have a feeling as Weis loosens the reigns in future weeks these guys will catch more balls. All I know is if I am John Carlson right now, I am wondering why I came back for this.

Wide Receivers: C

I thought the wide receivers looked ok in the first half. They really didn’t have much of a chance to show their stuff as pretty much everything was a swing pass to a RB. In the second half they caught a few more balls (9 total). David Grimes pulled in 5 balls for 45 yards and looked solid catching the ball but did nothing after the catch. George West also caught 2 balls but they were also not much to speak about.

Robbie Parris really looks good to me. He has the size that we need on the field and seems to have a bit of the Shark’s instinct after the catch (that was a great run on his 35 yard catch). He did tip a ball that caused Clausen’s only interception. Yes, it was thrown high, but he has to catch that. Kamara dropped a touchdown in the end zone that would have made things a little more respectable. Also, the Golden Tate catch that was called back showed some awesome athleticism.

Offensive Line: D-

Paul Duncan looked shaky to me on the blind side. He got beat a couple of times in the first half and had a false start on the first play of the game. Besides a few of those plays, I thought the line did a better job pass blocking in the first half (though they were only blocking for swings). They gave Clausen ok time (not great but ok). I will say

The second half they looked crappy. They consistently pressured Clausen rushing only 4 or 5 guys. Also, Sam Young had a couple of huge penalties (especially on the Golden Tate Catch that came back downfield). I think they generated 7 of the penalties we had yesterday. These guys are so far away from being good it is nuts.

Defensive Line: B-

I thought we consistently got ok pressure from the front guys in the first half. In the second half they wore down (and rightfully so, they were on the field a ton). Scott had a good day running the ball, picking up 116 yards with a 4.1 average per carry. They just grinded and there is only so much you can do with the limited bodies we have to throw in there. I will say that Trevor Laws looked very, very good today.

Linebackers: C

Do we even know who started at LB? I don’t think I heard these guys names called at all today. I thought they did a better job containing the back on the outside and they have helped limit any huge plays, but they haven’t done much else. I really want to see these guys generate some big defensive plays and get more physical.

Cornerbacks: B-

Great coverage and pick by Darrin Walls on his first half interception. I loved the return as well, he showed great patience and vision (maybe he should be returning kickoffs). Otherwise, I thought our corners played well. Morelli, who in my opinion is a pretty decent quarterback, was only 12/22 for 131 yards with one td and one int. I thought coverage was good, especially given the time he received at the end of the game when our D-Line was beat.

Safetys: C

David Bruton went for a play on the ball on Bell’s big catch that led to the one big play we have given up on the year. This was just a bad judgment call that gave up huge yards. Otherwise, these guys played ok, but again not seeing the game-changing plays being generated from these two guys.

Special Teams: D

Giving up the punt return to Derrick Williams was horrible. It killed our momentum in Q1. The second half kickoff return was also horrendous. They get the ball on the 27 to start the second half and immediate momentum. We were lucky to hold them to a 3 and out field goal.

On the other side, Zibby’s return was awesome. That was classic sophomore Zibby and he definitely looks faster than he did last year. That was a huge play for us, even though we could only generate a field goal.

The missed field goal in the first half by Whitaker was not a bad miss and boy did he show off his leg. That was good from 60 and was just slightly off. Considering it was his first kick ever in a game, I was not upset. The Brandon Walker kick was solid from 22 and I was happy to see him get another easy opportunity with low pressure.

Geoff Price had a much better game today. He averaged 45 yards per punt and showed that big leg we love. He still isn’t in great form yet, but he was more of the weapon that we thought he would be this year.

Coaching: B-

I somewhat liked the first half game plan. We came out conservatively on offense and that was probably smart. I thought they should have opened up the game plan a bit at the end of the half (when Clausen was a little more settled), but being down by only 7 at the half was a great position for a young football team in a hostile environment.

The second half is a tough one to assess. I thought Weis continued to make decent calls and opened up the playbook a bit. My only complaint was that he was late in doing so. Also, I would have liked to see him let Clausen loose a bit more downfield and get his feet wet.

Corwin Brown had the defense prepared well for this game. 10 of the points given up were directly related to special teams and we let stuff slip a little bit at the end. That said, the D essentially gave up 14 points in the three quarters we were in it. I am happy with that considering the amount of time we spent on the field defensively and the fact that this was a pretty talented offense.

Other

Penalties killed us in the first half. We were flagged 8 times. Again, 8 times in the first half. I realize that PSU was a hostile environment, but 8? Not good. Also, what was up with the Travis Thomas personal foul? I don’t know if I missed something, but definitely looked like Thomas basically attacked the PSU guy. I do not like our guys doing that.

Also, Anthony and I had a very brief discussion post the game last night. He and I disagree on Clausen’s ability to have the big Brady Quinn type arm to really stretch the field. I have a feeling he is still not at 100% velocity and I think he will be more impressive with his arm strength moving forward.

Wow, what has happened to Michigan? They were DESTROYED by Oregon today 39-7. I just don’t know what to think here. I will be very interested to see how they come out and play us next week. They have got to be desperate. Henne also got hurt and it will be interesting to see if he plays next week (actually, late word says that freshman Ryan Mallett will play against us).

Conclusion

Well, it seems like Weis has gone into rebuilding mode. I know he says he hates that word, but it seems as if he is building for the future. I hope that these kids will build on this experience quickly (I still think we can win 6 or 7 games this year if they can). Here’s to wishful thinking.

Penn State Keys To Winning

Just thought I'd write a couple of quick things about our keys to winning when we play against Penn State this weekend.

Offense

I think this game, as it will be in nearly all of our games this year, it is imperative that we establish a consistent running game. We don't have to run for 200 yards to win, but we do have to consistently get three to four yards when we try it. This will be challenging because of their linebackers but Carlson stretching the middle of the field (as he did last year) will go a long way in keeping them hesitant to commit to stopping the run. Not only will running the ball consistently allow us to maintain time of possession and move the ball down the field creating better field position, but it will also take pressure off Clausen and open up the play action game. Running the ball effectively will keep us out of third and long, allowing Weis to use a larger portion of his playbook, and not forcing us into obvious passing situations where they can send the house.

Secondly, I think it will be important to give Clausen a few easy, comfortable, high percentage passes early in the game in non-obvious passing situations. That may be rolling him out of the pocket on play action bootleg passes or getting him in the shotgun and utilizing some play action draws with Allen in the backfield. Whatever it may be, I think it's important to get him a little confidence early on in the game. I also think we need to take some chances down field with him. It is essential that we stretch the field be it keeping seven in and giving Clausen time with plenty of blockers or a skinny post off play action. Finally, Clausen must be better in the short, quick passing game whether it be called plays or hot route reads. The inability of Sharpley to make the appropriate reads and get rid of the ball as well as the lack of execution making sight and hot route adjustments doomed our offense last week. Penn State's corners are aggressive and fast so it is also important for Clausen to not lock onto a target as he seemed to do last week against Georgia Tech.

These two things will be important in our win. However, to me, the factor in this game that is more important than anything will be turnovers and big plays. Turnovers are important in all games as it is the number one correlator in wins and losses but with our offense likely incapable of coming back from being down multiple scores, field position is paramount and turning the ball over, as we saw last week, spells disaster. Hopefully we will be able to execute some screen passes and get the ball into Allen's hands with some open field.

Defense

On defense I believe we should sacrafice the run, at times, to control Penn State's passing game. I'm not sold on Morelli as being a composed quarterback but Penn State has excellent receivers across the board. Give him time and our secondary is unlikely to hold up. As we didn't (again) generate consistent pressure on the passer last week, even when blitzing, we may have to give them the running game a bit more to protect our secondary. In obvious passing downs I believe it is important to play soft, keep everything in front of us, and tackle well. Their receivers' talent lies mostly in their RAC (run after the catch) capabilities so they will likely try to exploit our defense through slip/bubble screens, slants, and other short routes that get the ball into their receivers hands with space.

I believe we will need to both generate some turnovers on defense and also prevent the big play. We need to keep this a low scoring, grind it out, field position game. On defense this comes down to getting them off the field on third down, containment, and physical, aggressive play. The first of these is best served by playing well on first and second down, forcing them into long third down situations, and making Morelli beat us while applying pressure. The second has hopefully been addressed this week in practice, learning how to "set the edge" (as Weis calls) it by maintaining containment with our ends, outside linebackers, and corners (depending on the particular defense). Finally, playing physically and agreessively is purely attitude. We need to come out hitting on all cylinders early and often in this game. If we don't start off well we may have to play from behind which is not our strength and may prevent us from winning.

The Georgia Tech Meltdown

First of all, there is no excuse for losing 33-3 to any team on our schedule. Georgia Tech does not have more talent than we do on their team. That said, I don't believe the game was as bad as everyone in the media has portrayed it to be. Remember, you are never as good, or as bad, as it seems. I'm going to go over a litany of things here. I'll try and wrap some organization around it as it is mostly stream of consciousness.

Offense

The Good

Yes, believe it or not, there was good on offense Saturday. First of all I believe that George West had an excellent game. He did have the one drop I thought he could have made, and it did come at a critical time, but other than that Georgia Tech couldn't cover him...at all. Grimes had a similarly good game and Parris proved that he can really catch the ball, even in traffic. I thought if we could have protected our quarterback a little better we really could have exploited their secondary. We got a lot of separation from defenders on the plays where we tried to throw the ball. I thought the entire corps of receivers played well for the most part. Looks like Dave might have been correct when he said he thought this was going to be a surprise group.

I thought Armando Allen looked good in limited duty. He hits the hole so quickly the offensive line really doesn't have to block for very long. That is primarily why he had three plays for good, positive yardage. I also thought Aldridge looked good. He broke at least one tackle every time I saw him carry. The negative plays were results of him not having a bunch of room to operate.

Sam Young really had a good game from what I saw. There were several times where I saw him make an initial block then move on to the next level and make another block. He has the athleticism to really be good. The times where he didn't look so good I felt he was having to compensate for the interior lineman next to him.

I also thought Sharpley looked good when he was given time. He has surprising velocity on his throws and put the ball on the money, for the most part, when he wasn't pressured. Minus the miss to Grimes on the long ball I thought he was pretty accurate. Clausen also looked good while he was in there. He was easily the most composed of the quarterbacks. I thought it was an excellent testament to his experience as a quarterback when he slightly overthrew the long ball to Hord (which it looked like he slowed down running on) and it didn't even seem to phase him. I would caution to hold judgement a little bit on his performance in the Georgia Tech game because it was the second team defense and he was mostly given a good bit of time by our offensive line. But he does seem to be the most qualified for the position in terms of the intangibles. And he threw some nice balls in the game.

The Bad

There were (obviously) also some bad things on the offensive side of the ball. Travis Thomas didn't seem to play well. He seemed hesitant when given the ball, although he had little room to operate the times he did get it. The thing that surprised me the most about him was how poorly he played in pass protection. He wasn't physical and was pushed around a lot in the backfield by blitzing Georgia Tech defenders. We will desperately need better pass protection from him in the future.

Obviously the offensive line played poorly at times but Paul Duncan looked terrible. He was owned by Darrell Robertson most of the plays he went up against him. Sullivan didn't look particularly good either. Again, I think it may have been compensating for the youth around him but it showed up. I think a lot of the problems with our offensive line stems from a lack of experience playing with each other.

Demetrius looked bad. The package of plays for him were limited but I just felt like he was restricted by what he was doing. I really can't see him starting for us in the future. He may come in for spot duty or in special situations, but his throwing motion is so poor and he looks so uncomfortable that I don't believe he will be able to function in our offense. It really seemed that Weis has no confidence in his ability to throw the ball. And despite everyone's optimism about Clausen, he did seem to stare down every receiver he threw to and his play action skills were seriously suspect.

The Ugly

The offensive line play, as a whole, was poor. But what disturbed me even more than letting the occasional defender through untouched was the lack of physical play at the point of attack. We couldn't control the line of scrimmage and more often than not we were pushed back by their defensive line. Since we out-weight them by quite a considerable amount, there's really no excuse for that. It is mostly will on will and Georgia Tech seemed to want it more.

I don't think anyone realizes how much we missed Brady Quinn on Saturday. Yes, we gave up a lot of sacks and couldn't effectively run the ball (although the statistics are skewed due to the yards lost on sacks) on a consistent basis pointing to poor offensive line play. But it's more complicated than that. If you go back and look at the game there were multiple times where we ran a three step drop and the quarterback just didn't get rid of the ball. Result? Sack. On a three step drop our offensive line is taught to cut down the defensive linemen's legs so they can't get their hands up. If the quarterback doesn't get rid of the ball the defensive line has a free shot. There were multiple times when they sent more than we had to block, meaning someone has to be open, and our quarterback froze, unable or unwilling to release the ball. Brady would make defenses pay for that. Saturday, we didn't. I underestimated the importance of having an inexperienced quarterback and offensive line facing the type of defense they faced on Saturday.

Defense

The Good

Holding Georgia Tech to nine points with the type of field position they had through their first four possessions was a feat in and of itself. I thought we really played well in the first half minus the critical Justin Brown penalty that really changed the game. We likely would have been down 9-0 at halftime and it is a much different ballgame.

Tevor Laws was unblockable most of the game. Pat Kuntz also played surprisingly well. I thought, between those two, Kuntz caused some havoc in the center of the line and Laws really held his side of the line. I thought Vernaglia played pretty well. He was solid at the point of attack on most plays. He could still use some work getting off blocks but he played pretty well. Brockington also played decent and seems to be moving around better than he did last year.

I thought Bruton showed flashes of brilliance. He is very rangy, he moves well, and he reacts well. He doesn't have great change of direction so I think it's important to keep him in a defensive package that doesn't make him make too many reads, but overall I'd say he played well.

I also thought our corners played well. I only saw one time where a receiver was running free and, fortunately for us, Bennet overthrew him. Walls played more physical at times, but also got pushed a round a little. Both Walls and Lambert, as well as Wooden, covered well in one-on-one situations. Take this with a grain of salt, however, as Georgia Tech really didn't try to exploit the passing game much. They didn't have to.

I saw us get more pressure on the quarterback from the outside than we had in the past. We also did a better job of pressuring the quarterback when we blitzed. Finally, I thought we showed consistently good effort until the defense got tired. The offense didn't do much to help by way of time of possession, field position, etc. and it started to show more at the end of the game.

The Bad

We took ourselves out of position several times in this game. Since we played so much man-to-man defense on the outside our outside linebackers have to contain the outside running game. When we blitzed they went too far upfield, taking themselves out of the play. John Ryan was particularly guilty of this. We have to work better at playing outside-in defense and forcing the runners back to the middle of the field where our pursuit is.

The only exception I have to the good defensive line play of Laws and Kuntz is that we can't seem to get a consistent pressure in the middle. We also didn't move the offensive line back often, although the 3-4 is more about pursuit down the line of scrimmage than penetration beyond it. The side of our defensive line opposite Laws played poorly pretty much all day long.

I know I've been high on him but Toryan Smith had a very poor game. He reacted slow in addition to not being very fast. He also seemed to play timid when he needed to be physical which is supposed to be his strong suit. Crum also didn't play very well taking poor pursuit angles most of the day. It looks like he has lost a step with the weight gain.

While the corners played well in coverage, many times they didn't fight off their blocks in run support. Most of the outside runs Georgia Tech had featured their wide receivers effectively blocking our corners. Zibi also didn't particularly impress.

The Ugly

How can you not stop a direct snap to the running back? That play worked every time they ran it. It's the en vogue thing to do in college football right now, line up a running back as a quarterback and then run it with him, run a play action flanker sweep series, and occasionally throw the ball. Thank Malzham for that one. But what I don't understand is why you wouldn't make that running back throw the ball out of that formation to beat you. The purpose of doing it is to get another blocker in for the running game. How can we not know it's coming and stop it? That killed us. If you take those runs away it is a completely different game. Our inability to stop that play is a huge coaching and player error.

Special Teams

The Good

Allen looked like he is poised to break a kickoff if we can block it for him. Bruton, as usual, was very good on punt coverage. We made our only field goal attempt which is good considering it is supposed to be a weakness. We also kicked the ball pretty well on our kickoff's.

The Bad

Our punt return team couldn't block anyone. They gave Zibi no room and as good as he is on punt returns, we could have used the help in field position. Price looked mediocre at best on his punts. Our blocking on kickoff returns is horrendous and Golden Tate doesn't look like he's ready for the prime time quite yet.

Coaching

The Good

The only thing I can say that was good about our coaching is that our defense looked respectable in the early going. I think later in the game we took some chances to try and force a turnover and that resulted in some of the yardage we surrendered. Give Bill Lewis some credit as the secondary looked better than it has in the past few years.

The Bad

Obviously our execution was bad on offense. But most of the remaining comments I have fall into the "ugly" category.

The Ugly

Three points (Weis is averaging just over two points per quarter against Tenuta), nine sacks, the worst home opening loss in our illustrious football history, 122 yards of total offense, and 265 yards rushing for the opposing team are really unacceptable for this Notre Dame football team. This was not a talent gap, this was the result of a team that was unprepared on the offensive side of the football and whose psyche wasn't in the right place. Read on.

The one thing that baffled me more than anything else in this game can best be described by the following question: "How does a wildly successful offensive coach in both the NFL and college completely shelve the offense he knows best in order to learn something he's never coached before?" I don't understand the logic behind trying to run the spread option with Demetrius Jones. First, Weis knows very little about it. Second, it's only successful if you have a passing game and very mobile offensive lineman to accompany it. It is a very difficult blocking scheme to perfect. Third, it takes absolutely FORVER to practice and perfect the zone read. And fourth, Weis' current offense is so broad and complete it allows him to do just about everything you could ever want to do. It stretches the entire field, uses all the players, and really makes it tough for the defense to ignore any single type of offensive play. I'm completely baffled by this decision of Weis. It was as if Weis was using surprise as his ultimate, and only, weapon. That isn't going to cut it against a team of Georgia Tech's caliber. I understand Weis wasn't counting on the two fumbles by Jones but that is irrelevant. My point is that he could have spent all of the time in practice installing a new offense getting Sharpley a little more ready to make the reads needed to get rid of the ball. Maybe, just maybe, we wouldn't have had seven sacks while he was in the game. I don't even think we had a hot read package installed. I didn't see one receiver or tight end adjust their route the whole game. And it's likely that we didn't have it because we spent too much time installing the zone read package with Demetrius. Weis is notorious for being too "creative" with his play calling. It looks like this time he was too creative with his entire offensive scheme. To me this decision was inexcusably wrong and jeopardized future wins for this football team. Again, read on.

Now, I'm not trying to say there was no merit in his attempt(s) to try and run the ball. I just think it took too much time away in practice. This will likely set our offense back even more this year because we will have to play catch-up on the "regular" offense. Considerable amounts of practice time has been spent on new terminology, blocking schemes, formations, and play calling for this spread option offense. Furthermore, it seemed like this was just something Weis installed for just this game. That seems like a lot to do for only one game. Blocking the zone read is challenging for any offensive line, let alone one that is young and inexperienced. If you want to run the ball against a blitzing type of team you run it right at them. You cave one side of your offensive line down, you use your big, strong fullback to kick out the defensive end, and you use your big backs to physically punish the defense. That's as simple as it gets, it pits your talent on their talent, it cancels out all that blitzing, and you minimize your opportunity for turnovers. I didn't see us run one inside isolation play all day long. I just don't understand this coaching move at all. And on top of that, how can you not call a single screen pass against a defense sending seven or eight every play? Allen is a perfect screen back, get him in the open field with the ball.

I know Jimmy wasn't ready to play. I know Weis must not have had many options with Sharpley, but trying something completely new seemed to me to be a disaster waiting to happen. I know he wanted to do everything he could to win this one game but, as a coach, you have to look down the road and see what is going to happen in the future. Weis knows more about football than I but it seems like his arrogance clouded his judgement in this case. Weis claimed to always have the strategic X's and O's advantage, there seems to be evidence to the contrary.

What further troubles me is that Weis seems to be ineffective as a leader and motivator. This type of lopsided loss is an indication of a team being completely unprepared. We played largely uninspired football and were not at all ready for what was coming. The same thing happened against Michigan and Michigan State last year. I would stipulate that the LSU and USC games of last year were a little different, we kept it close in both contests early on and had our opportunities but it was such that the end result looked worse than it was. However, it has been three consecutive games that Weis has lost by 20 or more points. That isn't good and reeks of a lack of "nasty" play. This also adds fuel to the Willingham comparisons.

Going Forward

Here is my annual shot at the front office. If we had the last four games on our schedule as the first four, we would be in much better shape this season. It may mean the difference between winning 6/7 vs. 8/9 games. Georgia Tech isn't the type of opponent to warm up an inexperienced offensive line and quarterback. We could have worked out a lot of our kinks against more poorly coached and less talented teams. I've been saying that we shouldn't judge this season's success on wins and losses alone. Rather, it should be about how hard we play and how close the games are. I'm going to add one more. I'm going to add how much we improve as a team. The honeymoon is over for Weis. We have talent, it may be raw and inexperienced, but it is certainly there. There is no excuse for us to not improve every week and get better as a football team. If we don't improve the ability of our coaches' acumen has to be called into serious question.

Weis announced today that Clausen will be the starter for Penn State. He said Clausen was the best at the end of the Spring but that the injury kept him from being able to practice enough in the Fall to be ready for the first game against Georgia Tech. Weis said mentally he is ready to play but he just didn't have the health to practice consistently enough to prepare himself. It seems like Clausen will be the future of our football team at the quarterback position. I liked Clausen's play against Georgia Tech. I think he has the tools to become a great quarterback. But it will be a learning experience. He may be the right person to play but he will hit some bumps along the way. Don't expect him to be our savior coming out of the gate. We still need to run the ball effectively to take pressure off him, we need to give him relatively easy passes to build confidence, and we need to protect him as he is the least mobile of the three quarterbacks we have. Be patient with his development. I will also say this, we're going to find out tough Clausen is in a hurry.

Stay the course with this team. They are young. While I didn't feel we would play as poorly as we did against Georgia Tech, it's one game out of twelve (hopefully thirteen) games. But also be prepared for it to get worse. Georgia Tech isn't the best team we will face this season. They may turn out to be very good, but they aren't the best team we will play. The reason things turned out as badly as they did is because of the type of defense that they played. Granted, other teams may watch this film and try and do what Georgia Tech did, but they won't have defenses built the same way to be as effective doing it. I think while we will play better teams than Georgia Tech, we may match up better with them. Take that for what it is worth, but some outcomes may be less predictable than others.