Skip to content

Wide receiving corps takes injury hits

Apr 14, 2012, 6:58 PM EDT

Davaris Daniels

[We're going to make this update completely free of a defensive end that's not to be named.]

With over 600 coaches on campus taking in the Notre Dame coaching clinic, the Irish had an open practice for observation. After, Brian Kelly — who was in Chicago the night before for a fundraiser — addressed the assembled media, talking about the challenges of plowing forward and finishing spring strong.

First off, some injury updates of note. Prince Shembo is lost for the spring, with the Irish linebacker having surgery performed on his foot that was supposed to keep him off it a week or two.

“He’s in a cast right now,” Kelly said of Shembo. “I think his prognosis is probably six weeks. They had to put a screw in there. I think, generally speaking, when you get into the bone it’s a six-week procedure.”

The injury has given Ishaq Williams a chance to shine in practice. During yesterday’s impromptu media session, Kelly raised more than a few eyebrows when he discussed the struggles Williams had on campus as well. Kelly revealed that he gave Williams a few extra days off at home over winter break to help him get straight mentally. The time away worked, and thanks to an opportunity, Williams looks to be one of the true risers coming out of spring practice.

Staying with the injuries topic, the already thin wide receiving corp took two hits this weekend, with senior John Goodman suffering a ankle sprain and rising junior Luke Massa suffering an ACL tear. Goodman’s injury may keep him out of the Blue-and-Gold game, but doesn’t seem all that serious. Massa’s is a different case, and the converted quarterback, who was having a nice spring, might be looking at a five-to-six month rehabilitation.

“Massa’s got an ACL injury and it looks like it’s gonna require surgery,” Kelly explained. I think they’re certain it’s an ACL, whether it’s an ACL repair, I think Brian Ratigan is in there now doing another evaluation.”

With a depth chart at outside wide receiver already thin, the Irish now only have TJ Jones, Daniel Smith, and Davaris Daniels as scholarship outside wide receivers on the roster for spring, while they await the arrival of Justin Ferguson and Chris Brown. When asked about developing someone with the options thin, Kelly was brutally honest with his assessment of everybody’s choice to breakout this spring, freshman Davaris Daniels.

“We’re trying to get Davaris to move his game up,” Kelly said. “He’s a good talent. He doesn’t know how to practice yet, he’s learning. He’s just got to learn how to play the game. The way we play the game here is that you’ve got to go through the echo of the whistle. But he’ll learn. He wants to be a good player.”

Kelly’s public challenge likely would’ve been made with or without injuries to Goodman and Massa, as Daniels is the type of athlete the Irish can break loose in this offensive system.

***

Lastly, Kelly was quick to refute some message board fodder that came from the Rockne dinner that had the head coach allegedly aiming for eight wins next season. He was quick to qualify, and stomp out any rumors swirling.

“No, that’s not accurate,” Kelly said of the eight-win goal. “What I said was Notre Dame had not strung together three years in a row of eight wins or more, so if we win eight games next year or more it will be the first time in 16 years. Thank you for getting that accurate. You shoot for eight wins around here you won’t be around very long. Trust me, my boss is up there. He already told me that. Now, we can build towards that. That’s part of what we’re doing. There are building blocks in putting together our football program. You want consistency. The point of that whole statement was you need consistency, you need stability. Consistency is you can’t have a 10-win season then a three-win season. You’ve gotta build consistency and that’s what we’re all shooting for.”

  1. dmac4real - Apr 14, 2012 at 7:30 PM

    Its great to hear how much farther Ishaq is coming. Obviously hes got the potential to be a real stud.

  2. joeschu - Apr 14, 2012 at 7:38 PM

    I heard some former defensive end left because they were going to start “the noodle-armed kid” at QB. Sorry Keith, can’t have a TR/AL free post ;-)

    • nudeman - Apr 14, 2012 at 8:12 PM

      Lynch left?

      • jerseyshorendfan1 - Apr 14, 2012 at 10:25 PM

        Who’s Lynch?

  3. nudeman - Apr 14, 2012 at 8:23 PM

    For Keith and the 2 or 3 others of you out there who think that because Tommy is a rising junior he’ll be a new man, I offer up this from BK’s presser today after practice.

    If you don’t want to read the whole quote, let me give you this excerpt: “They brought some pressure and he threw into the wrong side of the coverage”.

    That’s our boy.
    __________________________________________________________________

    Q: At the beginning of spring ball Chuck Martin said he wanted Tommy’s mentality to be this is my job, you have to come get it. Has he practiced like that?

    BK: Not at the start because we didn’t give him the opportunity to do that because we really started all over again in a sense. But as we go longer into this our expectations are, Listen, you’ve got more experience than anybody else here, go out and act like that. I think he did today. He still has some work to do. And you know this from last year, once he gets into a little bit of trouble, trouble starts for us. They brought some pressure, he didn’t see it and threw the ball into the wrong side of coverage. I think the thing we need to get from Tom, he’s confident in himself but we’ve got to make sure he;s making good decisions under duress. That’s the next step for him.

    • uawlocal1136 - Apr 14, 2012 at 8:45 PM

      Nude,

      Been gone for quite some time, but seriously amused by Keith’s ongoing need to censure you.

      On a similar note, why is it you cannot skip one completely unrelated story to TR and yet find some way to slam the kid. This obsession really needs to stop. Get a grip and either add something of substance or go elsewhere.

      Bored in Florida

      • irishbornraised - Apr 14, 2012 at 10:36 PM

        not his fault, QB is probably the biggest story, and there was something he wanted to share with us, you don’t have to read it?

        Bored in Hawaii

      • nudeman - Apr 14, 2012 at 11:24 PM

        THIS POST WAS DELETED BECAUSE IT ONLY SERVED TO BE ANTAGONISTIC.

    • gtizzo - Apr 15, 2012 at 1:32 AM

      Boy Nude that well just never gets old does it. Keith I think you should give “Nudeman” his own message board were he can pick on Tommy Rees to his hearts content and we don’t have to read it anymore. Nude I challenge you, find me 3 other QB’s on the Irish roster who have won more games then Tommy Rees? Then go find how many other players have taken more vitriol from fans more then Tommy Rees? People like you are the reason ND fans are considered “fanatical” or “insane” not to mention my personal favorite “delusional”. Do any of those words describe you? If I called you any of those words would you not get offended. If you like being called any of those then feel free to leave your phone number on the board I will personally call you all of them! Let the Rees thing go, all your doing at this point is making yourself look “delusional”.

      • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 10:45 AM

        gtizzo
        I concede I beat the TR drum too frequently. Point taken

        Few things for you:
        1) No QB on any team “wins” games. It’s not like a pitcher. There’s way more to the game of football than a QB.

        2) Exhibit A: I’ve made the point here that he cost ND the UM game last year with his turnovers. Some, including Keith jumped on me and insisted it was the D that lost that game. So I guess the QB gets a “W” when they win, but not necessarily an “L” when they lose. If you want to talk about “delusional”, there you go my friend.

        3) It’s pretty hard for another QB on the roster to have “won a game” when 2 of 3 haven’t taken a snap. BTW, does AH get a “W” vs Air Force? Or an “L” vs Stanford or FSU? I’m just trying to understand this whole “Tommy wins game” thing. It’s new to me.

        4) Tommy Rees is a MAC level talent. Period. Him starting at QB at ND is a sign of AH and EG not being very good, and/or BK just plain being stubborn and nuts. They’ll start the year beating Navy and Purdue and you’ll be telling us “Tommy is 2-0″. Then UM will make him look silly and if ND loses you’ll blame the defense. Again, delusional.

      • gtizzo - Apr 15, 2012 at 5:02 PM

        Ok Nude,

        Thanks the admission,

        1) QB’s do win football games. Look at the Colts with and without Peyton Manning.
        2) The Defense did lose the game. Tommy Rees was made scapegoat by people you.
        3) I’m aware of the QB situation. That same Air Force team gave the top 5 Oklahoma Sooners all they can handle and lost by 3. How much did ND beat them by?
        4) Robert Griffin III was surrounded by “MAC” level talent. Some would say so was Andrew Luck for the better part of his 4 years at Stanford. RGIII is going to play on Sunday. ND starts the year 2-0 Tommy is the guy, Brain Kelly isn’t going to pull the hot QB. ND did beat Michigan. The beat them physically, they beat them statistically, they guy ND can’t stop is Denard Robinson a QB who wins games refer to number 1.

        Go put some clothes on and come back when you have an argument.

      • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 9:53 PM

        gtizzo
        “brain kelly”

        You lost any semblance of credibility when you wrote that

        Go away

    • 1historian - Apr 15, 2012 at 11:50 AM

      “we’ve got to make sure he’s making good decisions under duress”.

      Q: Hasn’t that basically been the problem since day one? If he is STILL not making good decisions under duress after two seasons – is enough not enough?

      • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 11:58 AM

        1histy
        How about BK saying “he’s GETTING there”?
        Q: When exactly will he BE there?

        Rhetorical, since the sane among us know the answer is “never”; or “when he transfers to a MAC school”

      • dmac4real - Apr 15, 2012 at 1:05 PM

        By no means am I on the TR bandwagon, but I’m getting sick of everybody saying he is mac level talent. Thats bullshit. He may not be meant for Notre Dame, but he has won 12 games here in 17 starts. I have no desire for him to start next year, but he is not MAC level. I go to a MAC school, I see the quarterbacks here. They arent bad, but if TR is winning 12 games at Notre Dame, he is a lot better than these guys.

      • fortez100 - Apr 15, 2012 at 4:50 PM

        TR is just not the answer. I can’t point to an obvious stat but if you have watched a majority of Games over the last two seasons you can clearly see a major weakness. I don’t know if he is a MAC level talent but he belongs on a team like wake forest not ND. A this point I think they have to give Hendrix a chance and if he falters the next man in should be golsen. Rees should be an emergency qb at best. I fully believe that Kiel should redshirt and compete next year. TR has had two years to prove himself and he hasn’t (aside from his record as a starter). I’m personally rooting for golsen !!!

      • dmac4real - Apr 15, 2012 at 7:04 PM

        By no means do I think he is the answer. Personally, i beleive Everett Golson still is. However, my point is that Tommy Rees is not the worst QB of all time, and he is better than MAC talent. I think the Wake point you made was good. He could excel at a place like Wake or Boston College. His play at the end of the year was not good at all, but it was still better than a MAC qb. I think its time to give Golson his shot. Hendrix just never impressed me. His shinning moment was stanford, and If you watch the tape, he really was not all that impressive. Keil needs to “RS.” Just give the ball to EG and watch the magic.

  4. 9irish - Apr 14, 2012 at 10:47 PM

    ugh…I’ve been paying attention..but I haven’t been paying attention, if you know what I mean. Just so many variables right now. we’ll see

    I must say Keith, good reporting, as usual…but stop saying “corp”…it’s “corps”….after years in the Marine Corps it drives me crazy

  5. ttirish - Apr 14, 2012 at 11:55 PM

    just got home from the USC Spring game. defense looks very good, of course, but they are beatable. receivers did not help out MB and i didn’t see the blazing speed i was looking for; could be LK is playing possum, wouldn’t surprise me.

    a beautiful day nonetheless in LA with clear blue skies and snow on the mountains, a rarity mid April.
    I’ll be in the Colesium in November; take that to the bank. We will play any team with whoever we have, that’s how we roll. Go IRISH.

  6. getsome99 - Apr 15, 2012 at 12:33 AM

    What Nude fails to understand is that it doesn’t matter if he’s wrong or right about Rees. QB play is not the issue.

    Defense, special teams, and offensive speed are the keys to getting to the next level. ND has a chance to do those things with the players left who have not defected, or so we hope. We really won’t know until we see it on the field, but we still have reason to be optimistic for now.

    Maybe Williams will seize the moment with Lynch transferring. Could be a blessing in disguise.

    • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 12:08 PM

      “QB play is not the issue.”

      You have GOT to be kidding.
      You can say “it’s only one issue”; you can say “CB youth is more important issue”. You can say “I’m sick of Nude beating this to death”. All fair.

      But you just can NOT say “QB play is not an issue”.

      That ignores all the evidence from last year, including a few they won IN SPITE of Rees.

    • dmac4real - Apr 15, 2012 at 1:06 PM

      Yea…This is just plane wrong. Im not sure how you can really say QB is not the problem.

  7. getsome99 - Apr 15, 2012 at 12:43 AM

    Actually, just speed in general in all 3 phases. As long as Kelly gets plenty of touches for Atkinson, Neal, and Wood, it won’t matter who’s playing QB.

  8. fnc111 - Apr 15, 2012 at 1:30 AM

    Crazy how it takes ND five years to build a program and we hear it every time a new coach comes in that we have to be patient. scUM hires a new fat head coach and in less than a year is dominating again when their roster was complete junk compared to what ND had on theirs over the last two seasons. I wish ND could be more like wisconsin or Nebraska where you are fine with recruiting three star players that no one has heard of but still win 10 games a year. Stop recruiting quitters like the Fresno duo and AL.

    • yllibnosredna - Apr 15, 2012 at 12:48 PM

      Gotta disagree with labeling Michigan as dominating last year. They appeared to be not quite as good as their 11-2 record suggested…During the first half of the season, they played Western Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northwestern, and Minnesota. They also played Illinois and Purdue. They did look dominant against Nebraska, but they were the definition of an over-achieving team…Good for them, but I don’t see them winning 9 games this year. I think their ’06 squad was the last excellent team they’ve put on the field. Nonetheless, they are trending upwards with some really solid recruiting hauls…And yes, continue to go after the high 4 and 5 star guys. You’ll always be able to get solid 3 star guys at ND. Why not, as nude stated, “swing for the fences?” By all accounts, it looks like Shepard would’ve stayed at ND if he could…He appeared to really want to be there. And how do you know someone’s gonna “quit” Notre Dame before they actually quit? At this stage, we could label Kiel and Neal potential “quitters” because they’ve (at times) not looked like they’re “all in” at ND. You have to continue to take risks with some of these guys.

  9. ndgoldandblue - Apr 15, 2012 at 9:15 AM

    I just watched the highlights of the most recent practice. I know that BK talks a lot about getting consistency out of his quarterbacks, and it probably drives fans nuts to hear the same talking points all the time, but based on the video I saw, I understand where he’s coming from.

    With all of these quarterbacks, there is no consistency. For every two good plays that a quarterback makes, one bad play follows. Who is going to step up and be the consistent performer? I know that we are all tired of hearing Coach Kelly say “He’s getting there” when he talks about a quarterback. But it’s true, none of them have gotten there. What I mean by that is none of them have proven to be the man. That fact, simply by default, would probably make Rees the starter going forward simply based on his experience and proof that he can “win” games. My definition of win here is rather generous.

    I don’t know, maybe someone will really turn heads in the Blue-Gold game or someone will separate from the pack in the fall. But we have to start accepting the realization that Rees might be the guy against Navy simply because no one else has shown to be a better option. As an aside, what is going on with Kiel’s footwork. If he is really the golden boy that all of his recruiting rankings suggested, then he has to make a quicker adjustment to the college game. Seriously, take a look at the practice video. Even compared to Tommy, Gunner looks like he’s moving in quicksand.

  10. Cindy - Apr 15, 2012 at 11:11 AM

    cant change the wife’s name so here we go…

    Nude is right sorry, anyone have the AF or Stanford game still on DVR? Well watch them
    TR should have improved over the season, playing in blow out games that AH should have played the second halves, TR decreased production…. Now you think he can do the job,
    AH brings toughness and makes the D respect him, not Tammy Reese.. Watch games from last year and you will see that D’s are not concerned about the QB running or making a play..
    AH played very well in AF game and if given more PT, like finishing the 4th in that game, playing the whole 2nd halves in the navy and Maryland games he would be head and shoulders above TR… Might even been able to beat Stanford, watched the 2nd half last night and he had a chance to pull it out, just did not have enough PT….point… Oh and what did the new coach at UM do for his QB….look how it helped that joker. shoelace bla bla..

  11. getsome99 - Apr 15, 2012 at 11:41 AM

    So you want Kelly to be your coach, but you want him on your terms? What do you expect you’re going to get from Kelly with his QB’s? He was hired for his offensive brilliance that he showcased at Cincy and prior with D-list QB’s running it. Either you get behind Kelly and support how he’s handling the offense (QB’s included), or you decide that he’s not the coach you want. Your delusional thoughts are your own because you can’t make up your mind what you want.

    • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 12:03 PM

      Let’s drop the word “delusional”.

      It’s hyperbole and basically code for calling someone an idiot.
      I see a variety of spirited opinions and disagreement. I don’t see anyone who’s delusional.

  12. 1historian - Apr 15, 2012 at 11:58 AM

    A few weeks ago I suggested making Eifert a hybrid tight end/wide receiver – IMO that would create matchup nightmares for opposing defenses. With a few of the present
    WRs down for a while I think it would be an even better idea, if even just to experiment. I could see 3 TEs in at once – hybrid, pass catching tight end and blocking tight end.

    • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 12:10 PM

      I’ve gotten the impression from what I’ve read and heard in interviews that Eifert as a “hybrid” and 3 TE sets are almost a given.

    • ndschwapp - Apr 15, 2012 at 1:06 PM

      What is a hybrid tight end? Last time I checked they do both in any scheme

      • 1historian - Apr 15, 2012 at 1:54 PM

        Here’s how I see it: Tight ends are supposed to be BIG and run over people either with or without the ball.

        Wide receivers (formerly flankers) are supposed to be fast and run away from people if at all possible.

        ERGO – A hybrid of the two would be a big guy who can catch passes, block, knock people (in different colored uniforms) either on their ass or just out of the way and at the same time be able to run away from people if that could be arranged. I think of Rudolph’s run in the Michigan game a few years ago.

        With our WR corps a bit short right now and having Eifert and others at TE it seems we are already doing that, but we should do it more often.

  13. getsome99 - Apr 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM

    Won’t disagree with moving Eifert around, but don’t be surprised to see a lot of guys moved around. We need the best athletes on the field as much as possible. That means having Riddick, Wood, Atkinson, and Neal rotating the skill positions with 2 tight end sets with ball catchers like Jones and Eifert still in the mix. We should already be expecting a different look on offense with Niklas moving to TE and we may not even recognize the offense altogether by the time the season starts. Which makes QB talk at this point even less irrelevant. Let’s figure out what our identity is first, and then we can determine who the best QB is going to be in that system.

  14. getsome99 - Apr 15, 2012 at 12:23 PM

    Nude man: that’s what I said. QB play is not THE issue. Meaning it is not the only issue. Where we may be at odds is if it is the main issue. I say no, because when QB wasn’t an issue at all, ND was still very average. Team speed and discipline are the 2 biggest things that need to improve from year’s past.

  15. Keith Arnold - Apr 15, 2012 at 12:54 PM

    With this new commenting rule, I try to read every single thing that’s posted here. Here’s a quick observation:

    Nude — Last I checked, this is my blog. Meaning, it’s my job to give opinions and I try to mix a good blend of objectivity with informed opinion. I get paid money to do it. I spend a ton of time doing it. And I spend hours a day reading, making phone calls, developing relationships, and learning more about ND football and the coaches and players associated with it. I’ll never say I’m the best guy out there doing this, but I’ve reached a level of consistency that obviously has people (like you) coming back to read every day.

    And while I’ve continually said I don’t mind when people don’t agree with some of my opinions, there’s something that I certainly don’t appreciate: You continually putting words into my mouth.

    I write thousands of words a week on this website. I haven’t taken a vacation in the three-plus seasons I’ve been doing this. That’s a lot of reporting, stories, opinions, and observation, at least five days a week for 160-plus weeks. That you continually try to lump my opinions — specifically concerning Tommy Rees’ QB play — into a simple, snarky, one-liner does a ton to try and discredit the work I do. There are new readers coming here every day. If they were to actually read your comments, take them at face value, and not see the tens of thousands of words I’ve written on the quarterbacking play of the past two seasons, well — that would bother me greatly.

    Lastly, the comments on here are designed for interactivity, debate, discussion, etc. They aren’t designed for you to have your own little platform and critique everyone else’s view of ND football and its problems. This isn’t going to turn into a meritocracy. Nobody needs to impress you. If you want to go be part of a board like that, go battle with ACross over at Rocks House. You two would get along great. So before your head gets too big, understand your opinion is as valuable as everyone else’s here. No more, no less.

    I spend a lot of energy on this website and am proud of what its become. It’s clear you do too, and readers like that are a good thing. That said, be careful my man. I’m a good sport, and I don’t mind being challenged or tweaked. But you are continually beating the same dead horse here, and continually painting me and some other valuable readers like fools because we may have different opinions. That’s the kind of thing I’m not going to put up with anymore.

    • ttirish - Apr 15, 2012 at 10:15 PM

      Another note from USC spring game. Not to bring up the archenemy but as I posted yesterday I saw MB and he looks slow of foot. Our QB will have to be mobile and able to run. Remember Tony Pike? We will be a two headed monster with the power running game and a mobile QB.
      Sat in the rain in Row 10 on the play side of the field and watched Hughes pound it in 4 or 5 straight times for the the TD; ND fotball as I remember it.

      Power running with Cierre and company and a QB who can run and throw an accurate 20 yard pass on the move. It’s not your grandfathers ND anymore.

    • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 10:29 PM

      Wow
      You are way too sensitive

      I think the common theme here is TR. When did I put words in your mouth?
      Can you give me an example or two?

      You have written some indefensible things
      1) “If TR improves his deep ball the ND offense will be just fine”
      2) Because he’s a rising junior, he’ll be much improved this year
      3) His march down the field against Navy in garbage time was an indication he is a good QB

      I could add about 8 more things there

      I think you are either a TR relative or you feel you’ve got to be the defender of him because 99.8% of people here think he isn’t the answer.

      Go ahead, run me off this board.
      Cultivate your little colony of yes men. I don’t care.

      But you have defined yourself as in-objective when it comes to QB issues at ND.

      Maybe you’ll ultimately be proven right. Maybe TR will exhibit incredible escapability, a strong arm and great decision making this year.

      I’m betting against it, unless the opponent is Navy, Purdue, Wake and a bunch of other bottom feeders.

      What is YOUR agenda?

    • irish4006 - Apr 15, 2012 at 11:40 PM

      Keith, TR is a hot button issue for me too. I never thought of him being anything but an interim QB, while we continue to look for DC to get healthy, AH to get better, EG to learn the system, GK to become a college QB; the list goes on. To my disappointment, he has held on to the job way longer than I expected, for whatever reason. He is yet to impress me with his QB play, I watched every single game he played and every single snap he took. When people continued to say, “Look at his record, he is 10 – 2″, it really surprised me since people who watched him play would not bring the team’s record to justify why we should continue to play him. Case in point, Quinn never beat USC; does it make him a bad QB? Claussen, in his freshman year, went 3-9, does it make him bad? It’s a team game and you may end up celebrating a win with your team-mates even if you yourself had a horrible game. TR could be 1,000,000 – 2, but he hasn’t impresse me with his play. I too, questioned the comments you made about ‘ND being fine’ or ‘perfectly thrown pass’ (which was, by the way, under-thrown). Has he made a few good throws here and there? Sure, he did. But to label him as a QB worthy of starting for a team that plays a deadly schedule and aspires to win 10+ games in the process, can only come from one of the 2 places – low expectation or limited understanding of football in general. There is also the possiblity of being biased, due to “personal” (friendship/family relationship) reasons. :-)

      That said, I do appreciate all the work you do for us (fans/alumni) and use this blog as my primary source of ND football news. I may not agree with everything you say, I have no problem respecting yours (or, anyone else’s) opinion.

      Nude does get carried away at times, but in general, I like the passion he brings. It would be a big loss to not have him here. Tone it down a notch, Nudeman, we don’t want to lose you. :-)

    • nudeman - Apr 16, 2012 at 10:36 AM

      Keith
      I re-read your post and my reply this a.m., curious if maybe I overreacted.
      Here’s what I see:

      1) Your comment about “last I checked this is my blog” is unusual. When/where did I claim it as my own? Is leaving a bunch of comments and debating with others an indication that I’m staging a coup?

      2) irish4006 raises an interesting point: The possibility of there being some sort of personal relationship with you and the Rees family. I don’t know if that was in jest, but I’ve wondered about that myself. IF that’s the case, or if there is something else in play, then you should disclose it. I won’t re-recite the litany of things you’ve written, but some of your stuff in defending Tommy has not been credible.

      3) The other possibility is that the sentiment against Rees here and elsewhere is so strong you feel a need to balance things out by defending him. If so, I understand it but not sure it’s editorially appropriate.

      4) I will always react strongly to anyone who cites a win/loss record for a QB. Football isn’t baseball. If someone has to do that in a QB’s defense, then that there is an indication that he’s average, at best. Like saying “Well, she has a pretty good personality” about someone’s girlfriend. Re: TR always, he’s always given credit for any win, regardless of the ugliness, but blame someone/something else for a loss.

  16. getsome99 - Apr 15, 2012 at 1:30 PM

    Yeah, Nude. Show the man some respect for what he does for us. I’m a Dolphins fan also. The cone of silence around that franchise during the offseason makes me appreciate any bit of insight guys like Keith provides us. When I called you narcissistic, this is what I meant. You have a condescending tone in many of your posts and even stoop to the level of correcting spelling errors. This is an Internet blog, not the New York Times. Try not to be such a dick and bring some other things to the table other than QB talk and how much better you think you can do Keith’s job.

    • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 10:36 PM

      If you don’t like correcting spelling errors, please speak with 1historian too

  17. 1historian - Apr 15, 2012 at 1:58 PM

    Nude – start your own blog and see how many readers you get.

    • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 10:34 PM

      OK, I’ll be a yes man going forward
      Go Tommy!!!!!

      Rising Junior

      Should automatically have a All American year

      Ridiculous

      • gtizzo - Apr 15, 2012 at 11:40 PM

        My entire post all you can come up with is a tiny mistake. I will take that as victory…I win.

  18. getsome99 - Apr 15, 2012 at 2:12 PM

    Dmac: all I’m saying is when we had Brady Quinn, we still got run off the field by Ohio State and LSU. The lack of athletic talent has been exposed and I would rather hear more about how the defense is coming along under Diaco than which QB will be lucky enough to carry the burden of all of this team’s deficiency’s. It sucks we’re losing Lynch, but does this mean Niklas goes back to D or is Ishaq going to step up and be the man? I’d like to think Diaco has already brought in enough depth to be able to execute his scheme to perfection, but could I be underestimating the impact of losing guys like Lynch and Sheppard?

    The QB issue we know won’t be solved until August. Until then, there are a lot of other intriguing topics we could be discussing. I’m fine with the updates on Golson and Kiel’s progress, but am more curious about what’s happening on the defensive side of the ball.

    • dmac4real - Apr 15, 2012 at 7:14 PM

      The problem i still have with this is that you are comparing two very different teams. Last year, the defense carried us to 8 wins. What clearly held us back was the quarterback. Im not really sure how u can disagree with that. Charlie Weis teams were dictated by offense, offense and more offense ALA BQ and JC. Im not saying the defense is going to be great, but they will atleast be good, something Weis teams never made. If we can get the right QB in place, we have an oppurtunity to go to the BCS, but right now thats a BIG if. You can worry about the team being like Weis teams, they have almost become complete opposites.

      Whats happening on the defensive side of the ball? Well I am no insider, and I do not subscribe to any sites but this is all ive heard. The DLine was stacked until the lost of Lynch. It sucks, but it should still be good. Kona Schwenke has had a great spring by all accounts. Ishaq Williams is progressing along. It will be exciting to see if he can make an impact. Ben Councell and Danny Spond are still battling it out for the Dog position, and thats a good thing for the future. Te’o is doing his thing. Fox and Carlo will be the 1a 1b starters again. Jarrett Grace is having a real nice spring. Kendall Moore has looked good. Austin Collinsworth has been great this spring, so much so they might trust him to start and have Slaughter play some CB. Bennet Jackson has looked great and could be real special. Problems: The other CB position. It could be a struggle with the Lo Wood/Josh Atkinson team. Zeke Motta still takes horrible routes to the football. I do not trust him. The LB pass coverage will probably still be average at best. The DE spot is weaker now.

      Theres ur defense report. All is alright with Bobby D.

      • dmac4real - Apr 15, 2012 at 7:16 PM

        *cant worry about the team….”

  19. getsome99 - Apr 15, 2012 at 8:23 PM

    Last year’s defense was not good enough to beat the really good teams. We couldn’t stop Michigan with only 30 seconds left on the clock.

    • dmac4real - Apr 15, 2012 at 8:43 PM

      Im pretty sure everybody is willing to admit that was a fluke game. They played great for 3 quarters, then just blew it. Besides that, they played quite well. They played the Stanford offense better than anyone all year.

      • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 10:32 PM

        Question: Does Tommy get the “L” for the Stanford game?

      • dmac4real - Apr 15, 2012 at 10:50 PM

        Im not sure Tommy gets the “L.” He played absolutely terrible from what i recall, but i never expected to win that game so i saw it coming. But i do remember the o-line giving him absolutely no time, and its a lame excsue, but the field KILLED us. Literrally every cutback by CW and Theo resulted in a slip and fall, not to mention the screens to TJ Jones which just ended up with him slipping. Its hard to hand out a “L” for the game, but I’d say TR was a big reason we lost, and I put very little blame on the defense.

      • irish4006 - Apr 15, 2012 at 11:57 PM

        dmac, we didn’t play great for 3 quarters despite outplaying them on O and D. We failed to capitalize on the dominance and put more points on the board. I had a very bad feeling going into the 4th because of that. The loss was not much of a shock, just a huge disappointment. I still don’t know if the USF loss or the UM loss was more gut wrenching (or the goal line fumble against USC, which also killed any possibility of DC to become our starter for the next few games).

        The only loss where we lost to a better team was to Stanford. We already knew that we would have to play out of our skins to win that one, which we couldn’t do. We didn’t play horribly, just not well enough to compete with a really good, solid team.

      • dmac4real - Apr 16, 2012 at 12:45 AM

        Irish4

        I never said the offense played great, but the defense was real solid for the first three quarters. We held Denard (While we may all hate him, we have to admit he is probably the most dynamic player in the nation) in check for the most part until the 4th quarter. Honestly though, there is no point in arguing about that game anymore. I just found it oblivious (i could not think of a better word) to say that the problem is the defense above the QB, because that seems far from the truth to me and most other Irish fans/ analysts.

      • irish4006 - Apr 16, 2012 at 3:10 AM

        Ah, “they” meant defense; I thought ND.

        Yes, I Completely agree with your assessment. I was proud of the D (in that game until the meltdown as well as most other games), if only GG would turn around to see where the ball was. All those passes were underthrown and GG got beaten, how many times, 4?

        Again, a price we paid for not being able to put points on the board, should have been a comfortable win even with GG miscues. Defense can’t hold a team up for ever, nor they should have to.

      • nudeman - Apr 16, 2012 at 2:24 PM

        dmac4real

        “Im not sure Tommy gets the “L.” He played absolutely terrible from what i recall, but i never expected to win that game so i saw it coming. But i do remember the o-line giving him absolutely no time, and its a lame excsue, but the field KILLED us. ”

        So this proves my point about quoting Win/Loss records for a QB as if they are pitchers.
        I don’t know if you do that or not, but for argument sake, let’s assume you do.

        1) Here, you prove my point. “Tommy is 14-0″ as a starter, because he doesn’t get an “L” when they lose. Someone else does. Kelly, Diaco, the D, etc.

        2) The “Tommy is 14-0 as a starter” group can’t have it both ways. If a starting pitcher throws 7 innings of 4 hit ball, but leaves trailing 1-0, he gets the “L” if they lose. If Rees throws for 486 yards and 5 TDs and they lose 56-47, he gets the “L”. That’s why this makes no sense in football

        3) Football is NOT baseball. QBs aren’t pitchers.

    • nudeman - Apr 15, 2012 at 10:38 PM

      And imagine if Rees hadn’t turned it over 3 times

      • ndgrad2000 - Apr 16, 2012 at 1:01 PM

        Slightly off topic but BK has talked about TR and AH still learning the offense and even the qb’s themselves have talked about it….my question is how long does it freakin take to learn an offense?? They’ve been in the program for almost 3 years now and they still don’t know everything? If that’s true then maybe we need to simplify the offense or cut a few pages out. I mean they’re halfway thru their eligibility and they are still learning the basics of the offense?? I know we have a new coordinator but the offense is BK’s so I’m a little confused…

    • irish4006 - Apr 16, 2012 at 2:02 PM

      “Last year’s defense was not good enough to beat the really good teams. We couldn’t stop Michigan with only 30 seconds left on the clock.”…

      I can agree with the first part of the comment, not the second (as I already talked about it in a couple of other posts). What we saw last year was a ‘pretty good’ defense – we were very good at the line and played well against the run while secondary, although marginally improved from prior years, continued to show weakness against good offensive teams. That said, it still was the best we have seen in… err… lost count… in this millenium? It was good to see that the improvements were real as they consistently played well since the second half of 2010 season. I hope we can continue the good work at the line and see some improvement in the secondary this year.

  20. craiggawel - Apr 16, 2012 at 3:06 PM

    Brian Ratigan MD seems to be the linbacker who played at notre Dame and spent 1 year with the Colts.

    http://www.stalbertsportsfan.com/football/index.php?page=articles&id=3156

  21. getsome99 - Apr 16, 2012 at 10:08 PM

    Nude still doesn’t get it. I have not heard one word for Keith or anyone else that Tommy Rees is the man or should be the man. He’s just the only guy out of the 4 that we’ve seen extensively. But can we really judge his performance in the past 2 years based on how mediocre the rest of the team has been? The chances of success for a young QB are greatly reduced when the entire weight of the program is on his shoulders. Rees is not the gunslinger that Clausen and Quinn were, but at the same time, he shouldn’t have to be. As good as those guys were, they weren’t good enough to beat the elite teams.

    • nudeman - Apr 17, 2012 at 10:07 AM

      He just isn’t very good. And that’s pretty much all there is to it

  22. getsome99 - Apr 18, 2012 at 9:00 AM

    Ok. I have not heard anyone say that he is. What is your obsession with this? ND has a diverse group of promising prospects at QB. Although the position is unsettled at this point, I hardly think it’s going to be the program’s main weakness for at least the next 4 years, as it has not been for the past 7.

    • irish4006 - Apr 18, 2012 at 12:11 PM

      You bring up an interesting point gs99. What, according to you, were the major weaknesses in the last couple of years? Let’s take 2011 for example, defense was vastly improved; good enough to hold some serious offenses to 30-ish points, despite our offense coughing up the ball a number of times inside 2 minutes of getting posession, leaving hardly any time for D to catch their breath. On offense, run game was way better than what we saw in the last few years, we had a stud at WR, another at TE. What made us lose 5 games?

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!