Post BC Thoughts

After watching this game I had a lot of thoughts on many things. I'll try and break them out here. On a side note, Ismail is an idiot and very much looks the part while on camera.

1) Boston College and Matt Ryan
2) The quarterback controversy (again)
3) Weis
4) Brown and the Defense
5) Offense and Special Teams
6) Going Forward

Boston College And Matt Ryan

Boston College tried to give us that game in a few ways, namely with a lot of inopportune penalties. The bottom line is we didn't do enough to win offensively. Make no mistake about it, Boston College is a solid football team. They aren't flashy or overly talented, they aren't a great football team, but they have solid players at nearly all the skill positions and Matt Ryan is very, very good. In a typical football year I would say they are a top ten team. This year, in the absence of any great teams, they might be a top five team. If they run up against a team with much more talent they may have a difficult time winning.

In many ways Ryan reminds of Brady Quinn only he looked a bit more poised. He doesn't throw the deep out as well as Quinn but he is bigger, reads play development more quickly, doesn't force or make poor decisions, and seems to have a little better touch than Quinn. Plain and simple, he was one of two reasons we lost this game.

I really believe the other reason, excluding our play and focusing on theirs, was Andre Callender. He is a very versatile player and really created matchup problems for us. Eventually we adjusted to compensate (something I'll discuss below in the Brown section) but he still killed us with screen passes.

The Quarterback Controversy (Again)

I thought I'd get this one out of the way near the beginning. No, I do not think Sharpley is a better quarterback than Clausen. Yes, he moved the ball, at least at times. And yes, he may give us a better chance to win in the here and now. However, his play, even in this game, was erratic and potentially disastrous. Anyone who says differently needs to go back and re-watch the film to make certain they believe what they're saying. I'm not trying to say that Clausen is without flaws. I have as many doubts about him as I do about Weis and the future of our program under him. But I think that Clausen, in the pure sense of the word, is a better quarterback. Let me elaborate.

Clausen

Clausen's strength is his accuracy. When he does throw the ball he puts it on target a large portion of the time. The kid is completing nearly 60% (57.4% to be exact) of his passes and he has to throw a large portion of them away to avoid taking a loss on the sack. Taking that into account, he is actually probably closer to a 65% passer. Part of this is because most of his throws are of the shorter variety. He hasn't completed many deep balls with the exception of a few bench routes (which he throws better than most quarterbacks I've seen). But there are other things I believe are strengths for him. He is very tough and is competitive as hell. He wants to win and will do whatever it takes (even selflessly in many cases) to do so. He may know and/or believe he is the best quarterback of the future but he isn't blind, he understands Sharpley leads the offense to scoring drives and is still excited for the team as a whole when we score.

When watching Clausen's high school film I thought there were a few things that stuck out to me. First, of course, was his accuracy. Second, was his release. He has a very quick release and can really get the ball out quickly. In seven-on-seven he was virtually unstoppable. Third, he understood the offense. He felt pressure coming from the right places, could escape it a large portion of the time, and then threw well on the run. And fourth, his mechanics were flawless. His play fakes were perfect, his feet were perfect, his ball placement was perfect. He was the perfect example of how to execute the mechanics of the quarterback position.

I think there are a few things holding him back. I've mentioned it before but I think he is still struggling with the difference in speed between high school and college. If he isn't comfortable with a play, he hesitates. I've noticed that on a certain set of passing plays he really looks good. He gets the ball out quickly, puts it right on the money, throws it prior to the cut, and makes the right read. On other plays he doesn't. In college, that hesitation gives the defense time to react more. I don't think it is that our receivers never get open. I think that many times he doesn't make the read fast enough and doesn't get the ball out on the cut or slightly before giving the secondary time to break and close down the gap. This results in receivers not being open. The window of a receiver being open, so to speak, is smaller between high school and college. To me, this is the biggest reason he hasn't succeeded and manifests itself in him holding onto the ball too long. With the quickness we have at receiver in Grimes, West, and Tate they will be open unless the defender jumps the route. The key is to get the ball there in time while they are still open.

Second, I believe he is still unfamiliar with how the offense. Part of this is a relatively low number of reps, part of this is on Weis for not simplifying things, and part of it is just a natural adjustment to a more complex scheme. I also believe Clausen is still feeling the effects of the injury. He looks to still be banged up from all the hits he has taken in addition to lacking the arm strength I thought he had. I never thought of him as having a cannon, but the film I've seen of him in high school he was making throws look effortless. Now it seems that he has to put everything he has into every throw. It could be that his arm is weak, not from the injury directly, but indirectly from the time off throwing and lifting. It could also be the lingering effects of all the hits he's taken. It will be paramount for him to get stronger and faster in the off-season. And finally, I think his mechanics have regressed. I think this is mostly due to him not adjusting to the speed of the game as well as being "rushed" as he spends a good deal of time running for his life. His play fakes are poor, his footwork average, and his ball placement OK. These things that were largely his strengths have regressed due to the game moving at a faster pace and no time when he drops back to pass.

So I'd say that I think, from a quarterback intangibles perspective he is a little hit or miss. His accuracy is excellent, but his reads, his ability to get the ball out quickly, and his holding on to the ball too long is really detrimental to the offense. From a physical standpoint I think he really lacks many of the tools he needs to succeed. Obviously he is tough, but he needs to get stronger and quicker. It shouldn't look like he's straining just to get the ball out on a quick hitch or arrow route and he needs to at least be able to avoid some of the slower defensive lineman running him down. A lot of this could be due to the injury and youth, only time will tell.

Sharpley

Sharpley is a grossly inaccurate passer at times. He puts too much behind his balls and he is much more of an improvising player as opposed to the more polished passer Clausen is. He is only completing about 54% of his passes with very few being balls he threw away. That isn't going to cut it in many cases. That said, Sharpley does a much better job of getting the ball out more quickly. I think it must be the more time he has in the system because he has a slower release than Clausen, albeit a little more velocity on his ball. The bottom line is that he is hit or miss, a kind of big risk, big reward type of quarterback. Against an inferior secondary (e.g. Purdue and Boston College) his play will more often result in big rewards. But against better secondaries it could spell disastser.

But that difference in getting the ball out quickly is huge right now in the offense. It takes pressure off the offensive line, allows us to release more receivers out into routes, and, combined with his mobility, allows the offense to operate more openly. For this reason alone, I think he currently gives us a better chance to win. However, even though he gets the ball out more quickly, if he continues to over-throw receivers and/or make poor decisions better secondaries will make him pay. Boston College isn't exactly a great secondary and other teams with better talent will be able to pressure with four and cover with seven, making accuracy a much more important commodity. As it was Boston College probably could have had a couple of picks in the game Saturday. Many plays I watched I didn't even know if Sharpley was throwing to a person on our team.

I know many will point to plays like the one where he elluded a bunch of pressure to get the ball to Carlson as reason alone for Sharpley to start. To me, that play is downright stupid. I know it ended well but he could have easily fumbled that ball and killed all hope of a comeback. Combine that with the three balls he threw that could have been intercepted and the only reason he didn't give the game away was poor play by Boston College not taking advantage of the gifts we gave them.

Summary

To cut it short, the current shortcomings of Clausen spell disaster for an inexperienced offense whose front five can't block air (and that's exactly what they tried to do on Saturday while letting many defensive linemen run right past them). While I believe Clausen to be the better quarterback as a whole, even right now, the offensive situation we face, whether it be because of poor play calling and/or coaching, is more conducive to a quarterback that has some elusive ability and can orchestrate a short, three step/downfield passing game with some proficiency. Clausen can't do the former due to lacking athletic ability and seemingly can't do the latter due to his lack of experience (hopefully) in the system and weaker arm. I hope my fears concerning Clausen are explained by a lack of experience and injury although the notion that he was surrounded by a ton of talent in high school and played against inferior competition may be more true than not. It's difficult to imagine that Weis (who has an excellent eye for quarterback talent) and every high school recruiting scout was wrong about him. Having said all that, I believe Sharpley will start against USC, play poorly, throw a few picks and/or make some big mental mistakes, and get benched in lieu of Clausen.

Weis

To say that I believe the coaching this year has been disastrous is an understatement. I think Weis should have to reimburse us for his compensation. We desperately needed to win six games this year to be bowl eligible. I don't care if we would have won the bowl game or not, we needed the extra weeks of practice with such a young team. Now that is lost. Let me count the ways he fumbled in this game and over the course of the season.

1) 2 to 1 time of possession: Boston College had the ball nearly twice as long as we did. Why? Because Weis decided it was a good idea to come out in the no huddle offense with a short passing game against a team who averages 36+ points a game and with an offense that can't effectively run his normal offensive package, let alone something more complicated and fast paced. I know he has used this in the past to jump-start the offense, so to speak, but that was with an experienced quarterback. To me this was a disastrous mistake. We should have been huddling to take time off the clock and keep the Boston College offense off the field. Additionally, we should have had a focus on the running game against a team with defensive ends that weigh 235 and 241 lbs and another defensive tackle that weighs 284 lbs. Let me reiterate that Schwapp weighs 261 lbs, Aldridge weighs 222 lbs, and Hughes weighs 238 lbs. On top of that our offensive line averages 305 lbs. So our backs weigh nearly as much as their defensive ends and their defensive line averages 271 lbs meaning our offensive line out-weighed them by 34 lbs a man. We should have been able to lean on them and get a block. The same was true of UCLA and Purdue. It is absolutely and inexplicably inexcusable.

2) We have no semblance of a running game (less than 500 yards through seven games). With the talent we have at the running back and offensive line positions there is no excuse for this. It should have been a huge priority in the off season to make it easier for our inexperienced offensive line to block and to take pressure off a first time starting quarterback. I know our players are young, but that should manifest itself in a lack of consistency, not ineptitude. I believe his repeated changes in the offensive philosophy from installing the spread to working too much on the passing game have delayed this crucial development and left the players scrambling for an identity, something I cover a little more below.

3) Tate/Allen: These two are supposed to be our "gamebreakers" right? How about working on the screen game to give Allen the ball with space and blockers ahead of him? How about some slip/bubble screens to Tate? How about getting the ball into their hands in any way possible in addition to the kickoff return opportunities? Allen has only touched the ball 51 times this year (excluding kickoff returns). If he can take it to the house every time he touches it (as Weis has proclaimed) then why wouldn't we want to give him more opportunities? It seems that Weis would rather be flexible in his offensive strategy via installing the spread zone read for one game rather than working on specific plays designed to get the ball into the hands of our playmakers.

4) Offensively we seem to be trying new things every week until something works rather than discovering what we need to be good at (to take pressure off a young, inexperienced offensive line and quarterback), what we are built to be good at (from a personnel perspective), and working on that. Weis said many times that he needed to wait until he found what our offensive identity was, what we could "hang our hat on." Sometimes this has to be created, but not necessarily in a creative way. He has spent too long waiting for it to happen rather than creating an environment in practice that produces it. The installation of the spread was a disaster in the game and delayed our offensive development, shattering any identity we might have formed in the fall. It seems like Weis is only a good offensive play caller if he has all the tools in his belt. He needs to learn to pick a few, essential tools and sharpen them to make them better.

5) Empty promises: Have you seen a "nasty" offensive football team in his tenure? With the exception of Powers-Neal through the first six games of Weis' first year I don't think we have had any semblance of a power running game. Furthermore, we often times throw the ball rather than run it in short yardage situations. Typically, we don't block well at the wide receiver position and our physical offensive line play has been, at its very best, slightly above average during the 2.5 years Weis has coached. He even went so far as to say that he was impressed by the physicality of our play against Boston College. I don't know if he watched the same game I did but 27 yards on 21 carries doesn't exactly inspire me to believe we played physically. Neither does our inability to convert any short yardage situation with a running play. There seems to be a disconnect between what he sees and what actually occurs on the field. Additionally, I have not seen an offensive guru on our sideline in quite some time. Rather than putting our players in a position to win based on their talents and abilities, he has tried to force-feed his philosophy and offensive play calling to them. Finally, the improvement on special teams Weis spoke of the day he was announced as the Notre Dame football coach hasn't been there with the exception of Zibi's punt return capabilities in his first year.

6) I am very concerned about Weis' notion of developing talent. In the NFL the talent is there, rarely is it developed (I think this article does a good job of summarizing the differences in developing talent between college and the NFL here). Rather, the teaching and coaching is more of instructive as opposed to physical. In college the players are still developing both physically and athletically. You can recruit talent all you want, but unless you develop it into something resembling a football player it will only be talent, it will only be athleticism. This in large part the job of assistant coaches but Weis may not have the experience to be able to determine when the assistant coaches are doing their job and when they aren't, at least from a player development perspective. I can't see how the staff isn't capable of doing this and we certainly have the young talent to develop into great football players, but right now it seems like Notre Dame is the place where good coaches and talent goes to die. Davie recruited well in his first couple of years, but it rarely showed up on the field. Everyone seems to give Weis a pass right now because he is recruiting well. So far, I haven't seen it show up on the field. I know the players are relatively young, but many of them have game experience due to being thrust into roles. This excuse will cease to exist starting next season. Callahan at Nebraska has had a pass on this as well. I don't think he has much time left after bringing in several top recruiting classes and having a great deal of talent on the roster when he came in but not producing consistently on the field.

7) We have not improved at all on offense since the beginning of the season. In fact, we may have regressed. We have no running game, no physical presence, cannot protect the quarterback, can't execute a screen, and do not effectively throw the ball even though it seems like that is all we work on in practice. As the offensive coordinator Weis is ultimately responsible for this.

8) I'm sick and tired of hearing how we did enough to be successful on this drive or played well enough to win or played well on defense but not on offense or special teams, etc. From game one Weis has been too satisfied in wins and losses. No matter what, you should demand perfection. Forget picking your poison. You don't shut down the run and give up the pass. You try and be perfect. You don't settle for anything less than perfection. You play well in every facet of the game and you demand that as the head coach. I'm not saying you don't focus on their weaknesses and your strengths to maximize your potential to win. But the head coach should never be pleased with anything less than a perfect game.

9) What is up with all of the personal foul penalties? That is Weis' responsibility and is evident of a lack of control over the team. Need more evidence of this lack of control? How about Jones not showing up on the bus for Michigan (I'm not blaming Weis just saying it is symptomatic) and over ten transfers from when he started. Some of those kids may have not been able to cut a tougher coaching style. If that is the case good riddance. I'm hoping this aspect of our football program is due to players not having their heart into it/not wanting to work rather than a symptom of something larger.

10) Putting the game on Clausen's shoulders: Both before the game and at halftime Weis said he had to put more of the game on Clausen's shoulders. That sounds like a great idea. Why don't we make our banged-up, inexperienced, freshman quarterback who has no running game and an offensive line that blocks only air win us the game. Good call coach, good call.

Brown and the Defense

It seems like Corwin Brown is coming into his own. I say that for two reasons. First, he has developed into a more talented play caller. And second, he gets the most out of his players. If there was one thing I was impressed by on Saturday it was how hard our defense played. For the second straight week in a row we played hard, fast, and aggressive, essentially dictacting what the opposing offense was able to do. I haven't seen our defense play this well since Ty's first season. Even though we are dramatically undersized up front (which is even more of a problem in a 3-4 than a 4-3) we have had admirable defensive line play. If we have more talent and size at this position we would be a very imposing defense. The linebackers have also improved over the last two weeks both in containment and in filling holes.

I thought the plan against Boston College was perfect save two exceptions. Brown wanted to try and pressure Ryan into errant throws. It is too hopeful to expect Ryan to make mistakes and force turnovers but getting pressure on him might have been enough to force his hand early. Our defense took on a blitzing, press man coverage look where we sent six and seven to get to Ryan. While we were unable to sack Ryan, we did force some early and inaccurate throws. There was only two problems with this.

In the first half Boston College had two plays where they exploited the mismatch created by this scheme. Since we were blitzing six and seven players we had one-on-one coverage matching up and inside linebacker (many times Brockington) on Callender. One time Boston College motioned Callender out to the flat, taking Brockington out with him, and ran it right where Brockington was. This resulted in the 50+ yard scamper by Whitworth in the first drive of the game. The second time this was expoited was the second touchdown when Callender went in motion to the left, we sent the house, and Ryan hit him on a slant with Brockington in coverage. Later in the game Brown adjusted and pulled an inside linebacker moving Zibi up to cover Callender and bringing in McCarthy for Zibi at the safety position. This was very good recognition and largely solved the mismatch problem.

The second problem I had was in how we rolled our coverage. When we brought pressure we inevitably played man coverage (with a very few exceptions where we ran zone blitzes) since we were using so many players to put pressure on Ryan. This resulted in us rolling the safeties over to cover someone. Unfortunately for us we faced a very experienced and special quarterback who was able to read this and get the ball out quickly to the receiver before we could roll our coverage over. My problem with this is as follows: Ryan is a good enough quarterback to recognize when we are going to send the blitz and from where it is coming. Why not roll the coverage over pre-snap and try and get the press man coverage there from the snap? It may have allowed us to get more significant pressure on Ryan.

A special shout out to Walls who played more physically, Laws who is still unblockable, and our entire front five who played their butts off on Saturday. Williams impressed me while in at the end of the game. He has surprising quickness for someone his size.

Offense and Special Teams

I've covered many of this above in the Weis section but I had a few more points. Aldridge has got to get quicker off the snap. He takes too long to get back to the line of scrimmage. If he is too deep and if we are calling the wrong plays for his type of running style then I blame Weis as well but most of the time they are isolation plays and/or some stretch plays where we try and seal to the inside. He has to become more explosive out of the blocks or he will continue to have trouble. Of course it isn't too much to ask for the offensive line to create a hole that stays open for more than a fraction of a second.

If we have even an average offense I think we beat Penn State, Michigan State, Purdue, UCLA, and Boston College based on how we played on those given days. Instead of one and six we are looking at five and two. Now I'm doubting we can even beat the last four teams on our schedule including Navy who has looked very good the times I've watched them this season. I am baffled given the talent on our roster.

Three of the Boston College drives were 41, 11, and 44 yards. This was mostly due to offense with the last drive coming as a result of the celebration penalty. That's three scoring drives combining for 96 yards. We can't win giving them a short field like that and we continue to put our defense in terrible position.

It can't be said enough. We have the worst offensive line in the history of college football. On more than a handful of plays a defensive lineman went unblocked. It's one thing to let a blitzing linebacker or safety go by. It's entirely different to watch the guy lining up in front of you come right across your face (the golden rule of an offensive lineman is to pick up anyone who crosses your face) and go untouched. It is absolutely pathetic. It looks like we are playing with one or two linemen as opposed to five. I have no explanation for this and watching it makes me want to vomit. Rather than the quarterback taking his offensive line out for dinner, our offensive linemen need to be buying the quarterbacks presents for not getting killed.

I have to give a shout out to Armando. He looked tough before, during, and after contact on Saturday.

Going Forward

I don't know if I've ever been so frustrated with our football team. We are completely inept on offense leaving our defense in terrible positions and negating excellent effort on their part. We need dramatic changes in our program both in terms of leadership at the top and in the direction we are moving as a team. I only hope that the recruiting doesn't fade, that we continue to bring in talent which we then develop, and that Weis can adapt and learn from his mistakes, adjusting to the college game. Weis is coming up the head coaching learning curve in a very difficult situation right now. It isn't that the schedule is tough, it isn't that we are young, it isn't that Weis has made poor coaching decisions, it isn't that we have no leadership and a dearth of talent in the upper classes, and it isn't that our schedule is tough through the first eight games. It is that all of those things are happening at the same time. Weis has never had this in the NFL, he always had "upper classmen" so to speak. Right now, due to the lack of talent and numbers in our upper classes, he doesn't have it. If he keeps bringing in talent and developing it he may never face this type of problem again, adjusting and adapting to it becomes a moot point. The article here does a very good job of summarizing it.

I will never stop supporting our team and I hope you continue to do the same. From the noise I heard in the stadium Saturday (when the team gave something to cheer about), the fans are still very much supporting the team.

ESP Week Seven

It's week seven of the season, otherwise known as week two of the ESP. Following in the footsteps of the previous ESP post (link here) I will show the ESP ranking, the playoff bracket, the 1-25 AV ranking, and the different portions of the AV ranking: SOS (Strength of Schedule), QWL (Quality Win/Loss), AWP (Adjusted Win Percentage), and MOV (Margin of Victory).

I'd like to point out that the accuracy of the ESP will be tested this year. With so many upsets, evident of no great teams and few good teams, games will be more of "toss ups" rather than the more traditional pitting of more evenly matched teams. For reference, to compare the ESP to the BCS, you can find the BCS standings here. Also for reference, if you want to compare the AV rankings the Sagarin (rather popular in the computer ranking world) you can find it here.

OSU is number 1 in the BCS only because their computer rankings place less emphasis on strength of schedule than the AV does. If you note below they currently have the 108th toughest schedule in the country. Until more emphasis is placed on strength of schedule teams will continue to play weak non-conference schedules to achieve entrance into BCS games.

The ESP ranking:

The 8 team ESP playoff bracket:

The AV ranking1-25:

The strength of schedule (SOS) , adjusted win percentage (AWP), quality win/loss (QWL), and margin of victory (MOV) rankings:

Our First Victory

The eternal pessimist in me wants to point out all of the things wrong with the UCLA game. This part of me is struggling with the sometimes optimistic portion of my brain that occasionally rears its head and currently wants to focus on our win. I'm going to give way to the optimist, at least for the moment. Nota bene, without the capability of DVR for this game I'm going to speak very broadly, i.e. I will not be getting into many specifics about game strategy. Be sure to scroll down below to check out the first release of the ESP (or go to here).

The Good

The best thing about this game was that we won. It didn't matter how ugly it was, and it was ugly, we were able to come away with a victory. That will help these kids confidence and psyche immensely. It's tough to keep working, week in and week out, to attain a goal (even one as simple as winning a football game) when the deck seems stacked against you. This team persevered, they didn't give up, and, if nothing else, they played their hearts out on Saturday. While I don't think we should have ever been at 0-5, a large part of which has been coaching, I have to give credit to the staff. They kept the kids focused and had them prepared to play in this one from the early going.

Winning is good but only slightly behind winning was the play of our defense. For the first time in as long as I can remember our defense played fast, aggressive, and with an attitude. The defense dictated the tempo of the game for the duration of their time on the field. We were seemingly able to pressure the quarterback at will which was largely responsible for the four interceptions we generated. I know it was their third string walk-on quarterback playing but depth is part of the game. We had the advantage, we knew it, and we took it. I don't know if we would have won with Olsen playing the whole game but I think the outcome would have been close either way. I was very proud of how our defense played.

I also thought, for the most part, our special teams played well. We had pretty decent field position on our kickoff's. Our punt coverage was tremendous (mostly thanks to Bruton who is one of the best gunners I've ever seen and could earn his way on a NFL roster solely for this skill) and we kicked the ball well on our field goals and PAT's. This was a significant concern coming out of last week that Weis and company addressed. Let's just hope it can continue.

The Bad

Despite being aggressive, fast, and determined, the defense tackled poorly at many times during this game. To me the difference between a great defensive performance (which this wasn't) and a good defensive performance (which this certainly was) is the word stifling. We were fast, we were aggressive, we played hard and physical. But many times we played ourselves out of position to make the play. I think some of this was playing so fast and aggressive. I'll take that over the alternative. But a truly great defense doesn't miss those tackles, give up the extra yards, and allow the offense the occasional first down.

The penalties were still present in this game. I think we gave them a handful of first downs off of penalties. And how can we not set up a punt return without committing a hold or a block in the back?

Our running game was non-existent against a team who fielded a defensive line averaging 30 lbs lighter per man. This is on top of the fact that their defensive ends weigh in the 240-250 lbs range, just a shade over the weight of Hughes and slightly under the weight of Schwapp. In both this game and against Purdue I thought we would utilize wham blocking techniques to get Schwapp paired up with their smaller defensive ends and allow our tackles to get to the next level. You should be able to consistently run the ball against under-sized defensive lines like we have faced the past two weeks.

This game was more of the "keep seven in and release three" type of offense we run. It can't work against teams with a good front four and it certainly won't work against teams with a good front seven. Give UCLA credit, they are a very good defense. But we played right into their hand much of the time.

The Ugly

This game was one of the worst displays of offensive play-calling I've ever seen. About half way through the third quarter I actually called for Weis' head and wanted him fired. I know we won, but I'm even more leery about his abilities as a coach now than I was before this game (and I was skeptical before this one started). First and goal on their one yard line and we throw three straight passes? That's asinine. We can't score at all, they gift wrap us a touchdown, and we throw three passes? Never mind the fact that Carlson should have caught the second one for a touchdown, if you can't score, you have the ball on the one, and it's first down, you run four straight plays and take the will of the opposition. I've said it a million times, if you can't make a yard you don't deserve to win. If you can't make a yard in four straight running plays you don't deserve to be a D-I college football team.

That's only the beginning of my worries. I know we got ahead in the second half, I know Weis was probably playing conservative to not turn the ball over and allow the defense to win the game for us, but 6 turnovers (I don't count the return for a touchdown) and only 13 points (I don't count the seven from the return for a touchdown) when two of those turnovers came inside the opponents five yard line. That's insanely ludicrous! How can we only score three times having six possessions gift wrapped for us?

It was almost as if Weis had said we were going to try and get Tate matched up on the outside and go deep to him. The problem was that UCLA watched the Purdue game, we didn't have any threat opposite Tate (we always used two tight end, two back or three tight end, one back packages when we tried to isolate him) to keep the safeties honest, and we tried the same thing 4-5 times when it wasn't open the first 2. I understand we needed to try it, if we hadn't I'd be sitting here complaining about why we didn't try to go deep to Tate after his performance in the Purdue game, but when it doesn't work get away from it.

And could someone, anyone, for the love of God please explain to me why we insist on wasting time running play action when we can't actually run the ball? It delays Clausen's ability to make the reads, it makes our offensive line hold blocks longer, and it inhibits our ability to get multiple receivers and tight ends out into routes. Why don't we spread it out and make them defend the whole field instead of trying to fool them by making our passing game look like our completely inept running game? If you were a defensive back would you bite on play action when playing us?

ESP Week Six

It's week six and that means the release of the ESP. For those of you who don't know how this works go here. Each week I will release an updated version of the ranking system based on the previous week results. This week has all of the games played through October 7th. For your reference, our beloved Fighting Irish come it at 98 out of 120 Division-I teams in the AV Ranking.

As a reference point and as I pointed out earlier (link here), the AV ranking successfully predicted four of the five BCS winners last year missing only the USC, Michigan game which the ranking essentially predicted to be a toss-up based on an extremely narrow points margin.

The ESP ranking:

The 8 team ESP playoff braket:

The AV ranking 1-25:

The strength of schedule (SOS) , adjusted win percentage (AWP), quality win/loss (QWL), and margin of victory (MOV) rankings:

Purdue Recap And Some Other Thoughts

After a good, safe trip back from Sweden I was able to watch the MSU and Purdue games in (at times) excruciating detail. I'm not really going to comment directly on the MSU game (Dave already did that here) with one major exception. As for the Purdue game, I have quite a bit to say.

Michigan State

The one thing I tried to pinpoint when watching this game was why we were successful running the ball at some points during the game while not being successful at others. I devoted my entire viewing experience to this one item and found some pretty interesting things that seemed to carry over into the Purdue game.

First, against MSU we seemed to only run the ball successfully using zone toss plays to the weak side of the offensive formation. A large part of this success was due to slow reaction by the defense primarily caused by them over-playing our strong side and the blocking of Schwapp. He played pretty well in this game when asked to block a linebacker one-on-one. Additionally, the blocking of our wide receivers was improved, particularly West. When we tried to run it up the middle, no matter which back or what type of blocking scheme we used, we didn't have much success. In fact, I would argue that the only positive yardage we gained on these plays was almost all due to the effort of our running backs.

Then I took a closer look. It makes no sense to me that we can't convert ANY third and fourth down short yardage situations on the ground. Normally I would blame Weis for poor play calling but I think he is trying to prove a point and make our team tougher. It's hard for me to argue against this giving that I believe you don't deserve to win when you can't pick up a yard on the ground. What I did notice, however, is that the defensive line seemed to nearly always get off the ball before and quicker than we did. So I started watching our running plays in slow motion and came to the following conclusion: we are going on the same quarterback cadence on ever play.

I think that, due to early false start penalties against Georgia Tech and Penn State and to give the offensive line less to remember, Weis has gone to a pretty consistent snap count in order to "dumb things down." We have gotten far fewer false start penalties but the defenses have started to pick up on this and are using it to their advantage. For an offense, knowing the snap count is a huge advantage. Most often this advantage comes into play as the offensive line can get push by obtaining a superior position of leverage on the defensive line. For us, it seems that this has been reversed. We don't get push on running plays because we don't get off the ball quicker than our defensive counterparts and can't get into a position of leverage.

Let me say that I cannot definitively prove this. I can't hear the snap count and trying to measure the time it takes to get to the line of scrimmage and execute a play isn't a good judge of the quarterback cadence. Too much is going on at the line of scrimmage to tell. In the Purdue game I saw more of this, especially with our guards on inside running plays. The way in which we have been unable to protect our quarterbacks in the passing game also supports this conjecture.

The advantage of the defense knowing the snap count really only allows them to get penetration. It is primarily an advantage on the outside, coming off the edge, although it is also advantageous when trying to stack the line on short yardage plays, particularly at the goal line. So it makes sense that most of our sacks have come from outside pressure when the defensive lineman is getting a head start, so to speak, on our offensive tackles.

A few other things I saw in the MSU game was the physicality of MSU's secondary and lack of physical play of our secondary. Ringer had many good runs on the outside where Walls et. al. were getting blocked seven to eight yards down the field. I also think we played a lot of man coverage in this game (and in all our games) because we need to be able to keep seven in the box to have any chance of stopping the run especially since we only have one good defensive lineman.

Purdue

The Purdue game is one of those games where you have to ask the question(s) are we improved or are they just not any good. I think the true answer is somewhere in between both ends of the spectrum but I would like to say (and have before) that Brock Spack has no business being a Division I defensive coordinator and that Purdue's secondary is terrible. I believe they will lose 3-5 games in the Big Ten portion of their schedule this year because their secondary is awful, they can't get pressure on the quarterback with their front four, and they won't be able to protect Painter with only five against the more athletic defensive lines they face. Additionally, I didn't think Painter looked particularly good. The numbers were good but he made a lot of poor throws.

The Quarterback Controversy

First things first, I don't think Sharpley played better than Clausen. I thought both played well. There's a pretty good comparison of their play here. But the biggest difference to me in this game versus the past four was in our ability to protect the quarterback. I don't know if we improved quite a bit, if it was because they weren't blitzing all that often, or because we seemed to do a better job with our running backs protecting in the backfield, but we really gave our quarterbacks a lot more time. It was likely a combination of the three things listed that led to our success.

I thought Clausen showed more zip on his balls than in the past. He continues to impress me with his ability to throw to a spot, not to a receiver. He has tremendous accuracy and is very tough. He does stare down receivers, occasionally forces some balls, and has some coverage recognition problems. But those are mostly problems associated with youth and inexperience, not talent. He is also inconsistent with his timing on throws. Sometimes he puts the ball right where it needs to be, before the receiver comes out of his break. Other times he waits too long giving the defender time to come back to the ball. Most of this should be worked out with repetition and getting used to his receivers.

My biggest concern with Clausen is his ability to throw down the field. I haven't seen him throw it further than 45 yards and when I have he seems to put a lot of air under it. A good quarterback can throw it 55-60 yards down the field on the outside with pretty good velocity.

I thought Sharpley played much better than he did against Georgia Tech, particularly when pressured. He had more poise in the pocket, moved around better, and was able to get rid of the ball or turn potential negative gains into positive gains or no losses quite a few times. I think Sharpley has a stronger arm than Clausen but often times he throws to a man, not to a spot. This results in him not leading his receivers, losing precious RAC (Run After the Catch) yards. Like Clausen, he locks onto receivers and forces some passes. But again, this can be corrected. Ware's assertion that the team responded more to Sharpley didn't seem to be the case to me.

General Comments

We can't win kicking the ball off to their fifteen yard line, giving the opposition good field position, getting stupid penalties, not sustaining drives, or missing two extra points (really three) and having a field goal blocked. Take those five points plus the seven we left on the field when Sharpley threw his interception and the game is completely different. While we had good field position this game, Purdue started many drives on their own 40-ish yard line. That's too short of a field. We gave them six first downs via penalties. On one of Purdue's scoring drives in the second half we gave up 35 yards in penalties on a short field. We should have just given them the seven points and saved our energy. That's just unacceptable. They ran 40+ plays in the first half. That's nearly as many as some teams run in a game. We have to be more consistent in getting first downs and keeping our defense off the field. When we sustained drives in the second half the game started to turn our way. The defense was fresher, they fed on the offense's improved play, and we played better as a team. And we can't give up third and a mile, it's just unacceptable.

Offensive Standouts

Dave was right all along. Our receivers are quickly becoming a strength. And I'm not just talking about Golden Tate. I know everyone is in love with him right now but it's been one game. He is far from becoming a complete player and he will hit some bumps along the way. Obviously he has tremendous speed and athleticism, including a surprising ability to go up for the ball. But being a great receiver is far more than this. It is about precision, running routes in a consistent manner, and being able to make three different routes look identical until the cut.

Kamara is really coming into his own. He is learning how to use his body to shield defenders. With his big frame this is invaluable. West is superb on comeback routes and out in the open field with the ball. Parris has excellent hands and a great feel for how to sit down in the zone. About the only receiver I wasn't pleased with was Carlson. His blocking was poor again and he dropped a few catchable balls.

The offensive line played much better in terms of pass protection but this may be a result of Purdue's lack of quality defensive linemen. I was very disappointed in our inability to run the ball especially considering we significantly outweighed them up front. When we face a team with defensive ends that weigh in the 240 lbs range we should be able to run it right at them. We can't block away from the play on any type of stretch and Sullivan's play on short yardage downs was particularly disappointing. I thought he was supposed to be our fifth year senior leader. I still can't believe we aren't stronger, more physical, and quicker off the ball. Someone needs to light a fire in these guys.

I thought Jabbie played well but he was really the only back who had room to work due to our improved passing game opening up the run. Allen looked much faster in this game than in the past making some pretty unbelievable cuts. I wish we could open up some more holes for him.

One thing that particularly concerns me about our running game is that it seems to take too long to develop. I don't know if this is due to Aldridge and Hughes being slower, more bruising type of backs, if the plays are designed to take too long, if we can't sustain blocks, or if we are lining up too deep in the backfield, but something has to give. We need to get back to the line of scrimmage with the ball much more quickly.

Defensive Standouts

There were two things on defense that stood out to me more than anything else. First, when we were able to get pressure on Painter with our front four we were largely successful. When we couldn't he had a lot of time and we didn't cover well down the field. It's tough to ask our secondary to do that. This is the primary reason we allowed third and a mile to be converted.

Second, our inside linebacker play is absolutely atrocious. They don't know the meaning of words/phrases like "scrape," "pursue down the line of scrimmage," "fill the hole," or "attack downhill." Crum and Brockington take too long to read the play, don't step up to meet blocks at the point of attack, take terrible angles to the ball, and do not pursue at a shallow angle to the line of scrimmage. They both played extremely poor football. The 3-4 defense is predicated on being able to free up your inside linebackers letting them run to the ball. In this game they were free for a good amount of time but they hesitated, didn't read/react quickly, and then allowed an offensive lineman to get to them 3-4 yards down the field. It's just pathetic.

Mendoza needs to get our defense stronger and bigger without sacrificing speed. Particular attention needs to be paid to McNeil and Walls but it won't hurt Ryan and the rest of our linebacking corps. Kerry Neal cannot play defensive end in a four man front. He was owned most of the day.

We didn't tackle particularly well in the open field at times. If I were an opposing team I would run right at Deon Sanders, er Darrin Walls. The kid just can't fight off a block and make a play on a running back.

About the only bright spots I saw on defense was the play of Kyle McCarthy and Trevor Laws. Laws just can't be blocked by one person. Additionally, I thought we played with renewed passion in the second half.

Motivated Vs. Inconsistent

Speaking of passion I wanted to make a distinction about something I saw in the game prompted by a comment from a friend. Call it what you want (passionate, inspired, or determined), playing tough, hard, fast, football is largely about the attitude of motivated individuals. Sometimes I think this is confused with inconsistent play. In the first half we played largely unmotivated and inconsistent, in the second, we played inconsistently but with motivation. Not playing with motivation is disastrous for a young or under-manned team. We are currently the former and at times this year will also be the latter.

Inconsistent play is dropping passes, protecting your quarterback at times while not at others, not being able to pick up positive yardage every time you run the ball, and stupid penalties. That is expected of young teams and corrected by repetitions in practice. I don't blame this much on the coaching staff except for when it pertains to our more veteran players, or if these inconsistencies continue as our young players become more experienced. I expected inconsistent play from this team and was one of the reasons I thought we would struggle to win some of our more winnable games.

Motivation, on the other hand, has two parts. Part of being a motivated team comes from the coaching staff, particularly the head coach. I would use the term "prepared" but it is basically having the team in the right mindset, properly motivated to play the game. It is different from X's and O's preparation. Being poorly prepared in terms of offensive and defensive strategies shows up in the game as not putting your players in positions to make plays and win the game. That wasn't (and isn't) the problem. Being prepared from a motivation perspective is all about the team's attitude, no fear, expecting to win, being pumped up and ready to play. This is the area I believe Weis has struggled.

But motivation also comes from the players themselves, especially from the leaders. And I'm not sure I've ever seen a more poorly led team than the one we have fielded this year. I know some people lead by example, but there seems to be a huge disconnect between how Sullivan, Laws, Zibi, Thomas, and Crum lead and what the team needs.

Conclusions

I think it is a huge testament to the amount of talent we have on our team that we were even in the game against Purdue. We played error football, had three turnovers, gave the opposition excellent field position, and couldn't sustain drives for an entire half, yet we were still in the game. I don't believe it should have taken this long (or a defensive team this poor) to see an offense capable of scoring but it is what it is. I hope this game serves as a confidence builder for our future. My only question is how many of our games this year would we have won had we played them like we played in the second half against Purdue? I would wager Purdue, MSU, and Penn State.

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.