Stanford v Notre Dame

The good, the bad, the ugly: Notre Dame vs. Stanford


The polls and rankings are out. For the first time in a long time, Notre Dame is in the country’s top five teams, checking in at No. 5 in the BCS rankings, the AP Poll, and the USA Today Coaches’ Poll.

With their third victory against a top 25 opponents, the Irish now shift their focus to one of the country’s top defensive units in BYU. But before we get there, let’s take a run through Saturday evening’s good, bad, and ugly.


The Secondary. Let’s start with the unsung heroes of the evening. Anchored by Zeke Motta’s nine tackles, and Matthias Farley’s eight, the back-end of the Irish defense played  rock solid football again, taking the ball away twice thanks to Bennett Jackson and Matthias Farley’s interceptions, and limiting Josh Nunes to just 12 of 25 passing for 125 yards.

It’s amazing to see the progress this group has made, and through half the season, the Irish rank an astonishing No. 5 in pass efficiency defense, a tremendous accomplishment for a group of players that are all learning on the fly.

The front seven. At this point, it’s starting to feel like a broken record. Manti Te’o had eleven tackles, playing at his usually elite level. Stephon Tuitt was a man possessed, racking up seven stops, and sharing a sack with Kapron Lewis-Moore. Louis Nix played up to the level that David Shaw praised. Prince Shembo was a load off the edge, getting consistent pressure, while just missing a few sacks. And the trio of Danny Spond, Dan Fox, and Carlo Calabrese all had productive nights on the stat sheet.

The Irish held Stanford to just 13 first downs, one courtesy of a penalty. They also held the Cardinal to just 272 total yards, another opponent staying below the 300 yard total. The goal line stand at the end of the game is stuff of legend, and while Stepfan Taylor ran for 102 yards, he needed 28 carries to get there, and most importantly for the Irish, they held him to zero yards on his final two touches.

Tommy Rees. Not much you can say about one of the most maligned players in recent memory. Rees might not embrace the role of a closer, but he certainly thrives in it. He was 4 of 4 passing, and his three overtime completions were incredibly clutch, especially after a sack on first down backed up the Irish to second and very long.

With Stanford bringing heat all afternoon on the quarterback, Rees and the Irish finally completed a slant patterned — a great tonic for a blitzing defense — and TJ Jones made a nice catch on a tough throw for the win.

TJ Jones. Clutch catch and nice afternoon for the junior, who has elevated his game this season and ascended into a pivotal role for the wideouts.

The running backs. The numbers won’t wow you, but it was a productive day for the Irish runners, playing against a defense that has all but shutdown the Irish ground game the past few years.

Cierre Wood did what Cierre Wood does. He ran for 66 yards on 12 carries, a healthy 5.5 yards per carry. Once again, Theo Riddick didn’t break four-yards a carry, but he made three catches in the pass game, the most crucial being in overtime. It was hard to get George Atkinson on track, and he had just four touches, but he still averaged seven yards a carry.

The offensive line didn’t play their best game, but the Irish netted 150 yards on the ground, a number just about everybody would’ve said was enough to win the game, and beat Stanford’s total of 147.

Kyle Brindza. Nice day for the kid. Four kickoffs, four touchbacks. Two for two on field goals.

Tyler Eifert. The four catches are a move in the right direction, and that touchdown catch should be on every highlight reel this season. He also had perhaps the best quote to encapsulate the victory.

“We went in and we took the game,” Eifert said. “We won the game for ourselves. We didn’t wait for them to make a mistake. I think that’s huge.”


Turnovers. It was a bad day at the office for Everett Golson on Saturday. Before he was knocked out of the game with what Brian Kelly diagnosed as a concussion, Golson had given the ball to Stanford three times on fumbles. In his sophomore season (although freshman eligibility wise), Golson has now accounted for all the Irish turnovers on the season, something Brian Kelly knows is problematic.

“It’s something that obviously we cannot continue to have.  He’s got to take better care of the football, and he’s got to do it in practice, and he’s got to be smarter,” Kelly said. “I think if you look at the first turnover, we’re talking about mishandling a direct snap, something that we do every day, totally unacceptable. The other turnover was holding onto the ball.  It was the sack fumble against the three‑man rush.  Again, maybe we could have put him in better situation there. And then the third one, it’s easy for him to just step out of bounds and avoid contact.  So all of them are coachable, all of them are correctable, and we’ll continue to work on it with him so we can eliminate these mistakes.”

In wet conditions against a team that makes a ton of plays behind the line of scrimmage, Golson’s primary job was the hold onto the football. That didn’t happen. Against another stingy defense this weekend, Golson will likely face the same recipe of pressure and confusion.

Penalties and Mistakes: Not a great day at the office from an execution perspective. Notre Dame had nine penalties for 70 yards, and senior Mike Golic was hearing his name called for all the wrong reasons on Saturday. Stephon Tuitt’s roughing the passer call kept the Irish defense on the field, too.

When asked about Golic’s play, Kelly did a nice job putting things into perspective, and also hinting at some other issues along the line and in communication with Golson.

“I don’t know that Mike Golic had a lot to do with those false starts. You know, there’s a lot of other things going on out there that I’m not going to get into right now,” Kelly said. “Mike has made progress.  Mike is‑‑ he played against a very, very good defense, and they won some, Mike won some.  The thing with Mike, he’s such a dedicated player.  I mean, he comes to practice every day; he’s purposeful.  He’s not going to be First Team All‑American at that position, but here at Notre Dame, he doesn’t need to be; he needs to just be Mike Golic.  And we’re proud of the steps that he’s made to help our offense.”

End zone play calling. After playing to the team’s strengths for much of the first six games, the Irish got burned playing aggressively out of their own end zone, with Golson stripped, sacked, and Stanford scoring its only touchdown. It was a rare blip in the radar for the Irish, and a head-scratching time to play aggressively, especially with Golson narrowly escaping harm the play before.

To his credit, Kelly addressed the situation in his post game comments and again yesterday, acknowledging that he’d maybe like those calls back. In a game like that one, giving away seven points nearly killed the Irish.


This section stays empty thanks to the Irish pulling out a victory on a day that had the makings of a very ugly one. Pounding rains. Difficult playing conditions. Far from alluring weather from a recruiting perspective. But a win cures all.

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: