Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?


Surrounded by thousands of crazed college students, Pete Carroll gave up trying to find new Washington head coach Steve Sarkisian on the field, settling for a congratulatory embrace in the tunnel below Husky Stadium after Washington toppled USC 16-13 two Saturdays ago.

While Carroll had to be shocked that his Trojans could once again fall to a double-digit underdog in the Pac-10, his thoughts on the player who led the thrilling upset were crystal clear.

“That’s the best quarterback we’ve played in nine years here,” Carroll said. “Jake Locker has ridiculous talent, and had he remained healthy last year, Tyrone would still be coaching there.”

When pressed a few days later to reconsider his comments, Carroll didn’t back away from them, even after he was reminded of the game Texas quarterback Vince Young played in the 2006 Rose Bowl.

“I’m not saying he played the greatest game ever against us,” Carroll said later. “I think the guy from Texas did.

“But I just think he’s one of the really, really fine complete athletes. I don’t know why I’m blowing him up all the time, but I just really like the guy.

“I think this guy is the best quarterback we’ve played against.”

It’s no secret that Locker has been the key to the renaissance at Washington. He’s been praised for his athletic gifts since he arrived on campus in Seattle, a rare blend of power running and passing that had many believing he was the West Coast’s version of Tim Tebow. Now many consider him the class of the Pac-10 at quarterback and a more promising professional prospect than Tebow.

(Football isn’t the only sport where he’s a pro prospect. Even though he’s mostly stopped playing baseball while in college, the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim paid Locker a six-figure signing bonus to control his professional rights for the next six years.)

Taking a closer look at Locker’s numbers presents us a different story. In Sarkisian’s pro style West Coast offense, Locker’s numbers are far from those you’d expect from someone Carroll presents as the best quarterback he’s played against.

Take away his performance against Idaho, where Locker went 17 of 25 for 253 yards and 3 touchdown passes, Jake is completing 55 percent of his throws, for only 6.7 yards per attempt, while tossing 3 touchdowns and 3 interceptions. Even his prodigious rushing talents have been negated in Sark’s new offense. And while anyone who watched the Huskies beat the Trojans know that Locker relied on his legs to keep plays alive, he’s far from the option-running quarterback that Willingham unleashed back in 2007.

The Irish rank a woeful 106th against the pass, allowing opponents to complete 61 percent of their passes while throwing for an average of around 260 yards per game. Locker is the most esteemed quarterback the Irish will face, with all apologies to Colin Kaepernick of Nevada, and I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if Locker put up better numbers than Tate Forcier, Kirk Cousins, or Joey Elliot. But the question still needs to be asked, why is there such universal agreement on Jake Locker?

I think the answer most likely comes from the untapped potential many see in the junior quarterback. He’s the prototype that many coaches and talent evaluators look for: great size, great speed, great arm, great athlete, but a player still rough around the edges. For scouts and coaches, it’s much more exciting to find an unfinished product, and mold him into the player they envision.

Locker presents the Irish’s stiffest test from an opposing quarterback, as he’s shown that he can beat teams in a variety of ways. Yet his past performances point out that the very talented signal-caller still has a ways to go before reaching his potential.

Go for two or not? Both sides of the highly-debated topic

during their game at Clemson Memorial Stadium on October 3, 2015 in Clemson, South Carolina.

Notre Dame’s two failed two-point conversion tries against Clemson have been the source of much debate in the aftermath of the Irish’s 24-22 loss to the Tigers. Brian Kelly’s decision to go for two with just over 14 minutes left in the game forced the Irish into another two-point conversion attempt with just seconds left in regulation, with DeShone Kizer falling short as he attempted to push the game into overtime.

Was Kelly’s decision to go for two the right one at the beginning of the fourth quarter? That depends.

Take away the result—a pass that flew through the fingers of a wide open Corey Robinson. Had the Irish kicked their extra point, Justin Yoon would’ve trotted onto the field with a chance to send the game into overtime. (Then again, had Robinson caught the pass, Notre Dame would’ve been kicking for the win in the final seconds…)

This is the second time a two-point conversion decision has opened Kelly up to second guessing in the past eight games. Last last season, Kelly’s decision to go for two in the fourth-quarter with an 11-point lead against Northwestern, came back to bite the Irish and helped the Wildcats stun Notre Dame in overtime.

That choice was likely fueled by struggles in the kicking game, heightened by Kyle Brindza’s blocked extra-point attempt in the first half, a kick returned by Northwestern that turned a 14-7 game into a 13-9 lead. With a fourth-quarter, 11-point lead, the Irish failed to convert their two-point attempt that would’ve stretched their lead to 13 points. After Northwestern converted their own two-point play, they made a game-tying field goal after Cam McDaniel fumbled the ball as the Irish were running out the clock. Had the Irish gone for (and converted) a PAT, the Wildcats would’ve needed to score a touchdown.

Moving back to Saturday night, Kelly’s decision needs to be put into context. After being held to just three points for the first 45 minutes of the game, C.J. Prosise broke a long catch and run for a touchdown in the opening minute of the fourth quarter. Clemson would be doing their best to kill the clock. Notre Dame’s first touchdown of the game brought the score within 12 points when Kelly decided to try and push the score within 10—likely remembering the very way Northwestern forced overtime.

After the game, Kelly said it was the right decision, citing his two-point conversion card and the time left in the game. On his Sunday afternoon teleconference, he said the same, giving a bit more rationale for his decision.

“We were down and we got the chance to put that game into a two-score with a field goal. I don’t chase the points until the fourth quarter, and our mathematical chart, which I have on the sideline with me and we have a senior adviser who concurred with me, and we said go for two. It says on our chart to go for two.

“We usually don’t use the chart until the fourth quarter because, again, we don’t chase the points. We went for two to make it a 10-point game. So we felt we had the wind with us so we would have to score a touchdown and a field goal because we felt like we probably only had three more possessions.

“The way they were running the clock, we’d probably get three possessions maximum and we’re going to have to score in two out of the three. So it was the smart decision to make, it was the right one to make. Obviously, you know, if we catch the two-point conversion, which was wide open, then we just kick the extra point and we’ve got a different outcome.”

That logic and rationale is why I had no problem with the decision when it happened in real time. But not everybody agrees.

Perhaps the strongest rebuke of the decision came from Irish Illustrated’s Tim Prister, who had this to say about the decision in his (somewhat appropriately-titled) weekly Point After column:

Hire another analyst or at least assign someone to the task of deciphering the Beautiful Mind-level math problem that seems to be vexing the Notre Dame brain-trust when a dweeb with half-inch thick glasses and a pocket protector full of pens could tell you that in the game of football, you can’t chase points before it is time… (moving ahead)

…The more astonishing thing is that no one in the ever-growing football organization that now adds analysts and advisors on a regular basis will offer the much-needed advice. Making such decisions in the heat of battle is not easy. What one thinks of in front of the TV or in a press box does not come as clearly when you’re the one pulling the trigger for millions to digest.

And yet with this ever-expanding entourage, Notre Dame still does not have anyone who can scream through the headphones to the head coach, “Coach, don’t go for two!”

If someone, anyone within the organization had the common sense and then the courage to do so, the Irish wouldn’t have lost every game in November of 2014 and would have had a chance to win in overtime against Clemson Saturday night.

My biggest gripe about the decision was the indecision that came along with the choice. Scoring on a big-play tends to stress your team as special teams players shuffle onto the field and the offense comes off. But Notre Dame’s use of a timeout was a painful one, and certainly should’ve been spared considering the replay review that gave Notre Dame’s coaching staff more time to make a decision.

For what it’s worth, Kelly’s decision was probably similar to the one many head coaches would make. And it stems from the original two-point conversion chart that Dick Vermeil developed back in the 1970s.

The original chart didn’t account for success rate or time left in the game. As Kelly mentioned before, Notre Dame uses one once it’s the fourth quarter.

It’s a debate that won’t end any time soon. And certainly one that will have hindsight on the side of the “kick the football” argument.



Navy, Notre Dame will display mutual respect with uniforms

Keenan Reynolds, Isaac Rochell

The storied and important history of Notre Dame and Navy’s long-running rivalry will be on display this weekend, with the undefeated Midshipmen coming to South Bend this weekend.

On NBCSN, a half-hour documentary presentation will take a closer look, with “Onward Notre Dame: Mutual Respect” talking about everything from Notre Dame’s 43-year winning streak, to Navy’s revival, triggered by their victory in 2007. The episode will also talk about the rivalries ties to World War II, and how the Navy helped keep Notre Dame alive during wartime.

You can catch it on tonight at 6:30 p.m. ET on NBCSN or online in the same viewing window.

On the field, perhaps an even more unique gesture of respect is planned. With Under Armour the apparel partner for both Notre Dame and Navy, both teams will take the field wearing the same cleats, gloves and baselayers. Each team’s coaching staff will also be outfitted in the same sideline gear.

More from Monday’s press release:

For the first time in college football, two opponents take the field with the exact same Under Armour baselayer, gloves and cleats to pay homage to the storied history and brotherhood between their two schools. The baselayer features both Universities’ alma maters on the sleeves and glove palms with the words “respect, honor, tradition” as a reminder of their connection to each other. Both sidelines and coaches also will wear the same sideline gear as a sign of mutual admiration.​

Navy and Notre Dame will meet for the 89th time on Saturday, a rivalry that dates back to 1927. After the Midshipmen won three of four games starting in 2007, Notre Dame hopes to extend their current winning streak to five games on Saturday.

Here’s an early look at some of the gear: