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.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Penn State Follow Up
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
