Tommy Rees

Game Day: No. 5 Notre Dame vs. BYU


With No. 5 Notre Dame preparing to take on BYU in a few hours, let’s empty the notebook and discuss a few last minute thoughts and questions I still have.

At this point, I’d be shocked if Tommy Rees doesn’t start. I’m not calling my shot, but I expect No. 11 to be behind center when the game starts. It’s as much because of Everett Golson’s concussion as it is BYU’s defense and Oklahoma around the corner. Does that mean he’ll play the entire game? Who knows. But I do think it’s time, especially with the Irish in rarefied air right now, to figure out how to use the team’s most effective quarterback each week, instead of just saving him for high-pressure, high-leverage situations.

While I just missed ESPN’s segment on Rees, Notre Dame’s “closer,” I’ve taken a lot of heat for supporting Rees as a quarterback. Do I think he’s the most talented QB on this roster? No. Do I think he’s got the highest ceiling of the quarterbacks on this roster? No. But is he the best guy Brian Kelly has right now? Absolutely. And I don’t think it’s all that close.

Bronco Mendenhall’s 3-4 defense is predicated on confusion, pressure, and making it tough on offenses. While they haven’t played the best competition, they have put up strong statistics, they’re stingy with first downs, and while they don’t force a ton of turnovers, they get after the quarterback.

I heard countless times that a mobile quarterback is the best thing against a blitzing team. Far from true. A quarterback that can process and make quick decisions and beat the blitz with quick throws can keep the Cougars off balance. Golson has already taken ten sacks this year, and really struggled pulling the trigger against Stanford.

Don’t expect the offensive fireworks to start early and often with Rees. Notre Dame will still do its fair share of punting. But with Golson slow to recover from a concussion and not get as much time with the game plan as Tommy, it only makes sense that the offense would lean on Rees to get through this weekend.

Even in success, recruiting is a roller coaster ride. You’d think the opportunity to wear No. 5 after Manti Te’o, and the opportunity to play in a defense that should be even better next year would be enough for a linebacking prospect. But Pennsylvania native Alex Anzalone, a four-star prospect and one of the top 100 players in the country, is struggling to keep his commitment to Notre Dame.

Per multiple reports, Anzalone cancelled his visit to South Bend this weekend, with his Wyomissing high school schedule making things logistically challenging with Saturday games. But his recent trip to Florida, where he has family and his father graduated from college, has complicated things for Anzalone.

The recruiting process hasn’t been easy for Anzalone. He made an early commitment to Ohio State and Urban Meyer in the spring. He flipped that commitment to Notre Dame after picking the Irish over his childhood favorite Gators. But Anzalone’s trip to Gainesville with his family last weekend, and the resurgent season under Will Muschamp has got him thinking, and it’s anybody’s guess what happens from here.

Notre Dame has back-up plans, with Stanford commit Isaac Savaiinaea, a rugged Hawaiian linebacker from Manti Te’o’s Punahou high school, taking an official visit to South Bend and enjoying himself. The Irish coaching staff won’t stop recruiting either player, and will have the ability to take Savaiinaea because Anzalone is early enrolling at the college of his choice.

It’s not all bad news for the Irish, with their No. 1 remaining offensive target visiting South Bend this weekend in Florida’s Tarean Folston. Folston is one of the few offensive recruits whose commitment Notre Dame would take right now, and getting him to campus was an important first step.

Will the Irish do a better job blocking off the edge? It wasn’t a banner Saturday for the Irish, as Stanford’s edge pressure created havoc all game with Chase Thomas and Trent Murphy impacting the game. Murphy had 10 tackles against Notre Dame and 1.5 sacks. Enter another dangerous edge player this weekend in BYU’s Kyle Van Noy, who already has 11.5 tackles-for-loss and 7.5 sacks. It’ll be up to Van Noy to get after the quarterback and make plays in the backfield, like he’s done all season.

Can the Irish offensive line dominate the line of scrimmage? I’d bet you that Harry Hiestand thinks they can. While the Cougars defense has been stout, they’re also undersized. A week after the Irish actually did a nice job running against a Stanford front that not many teams have run on, there’s every reason to think that the Irish should be able to succeed on the ground, especially if the weather plays a factor for the second consecutive week.

Looking for one blueprint to beat Bronco Mendenhall’s BYU team? Take a walk down memory lane. Back in 2005, a 4-2 Notre Dame team took on the Cougars in Notre Dame Stadium and faced a blitzing, attacking BYU defense. It was far from one of Mendenhall’s better teams, but Charlie Weis and the Irish put together a staggering offensive performance, throwing for 467 yards and gaining 27 first downs on the way to a 49-23 win.

Brady Quinn threw six touchdown passes on the afternoon, and while the Irish only ran for 64 yards on 23 carries, Weis, in vintage form, didn’t seem to mind.

“If they want to bring seven or eight on every play, we’ll throw it on every play,” Weis told NBC’s Lewis Johnson at halftime.

This Irish team doesn’t have the playmakers that the ’05 team had, and doesn’t have Brady Quinn, but it’s a good reminder on how to beat pressure with a quick passing game.

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: