Jacob Matuska

Freshman Focus: Jacob Matuska


One of the earliest members of the ’13 recruiting class, Jacob Matuska fits the profile that Brian Kelly and his staff target perfectly. Recruited by some schools as a tight end, Matuska instead will start on the defensive side of the ball, capable of growing into a 3-4 defensive end quickly as he begins to put weight on his impressive 6-foot-5, 250-pound frame.

Targeted early by the Irish coaching staff, Matuska will get the opportunity to watch and learn from an elite defensive front. Under the tutelage of Mike Elston, Matuska should develop into another point-of-attack player that’s got plenty of athleticism for a defensive end.

Let’s take a closer look at the Columbus native.


Matuska isn’t among the most heralded members of the Irish recruiting class, falling outside both Rivals and 247’s top 250. At the time of his commitment, Matuska had mostly regional offers, though Big Ten programs Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Nebraska all offered.

There’s plenty to like about the player the Irish are getting, a product of an elite football program at Bishop Hartley in Columbus, Ohio. Described as a “street-fight football player” by his high school coach, it’s clear that the Irish staff quickly saw something they liked in Matuska.

“He’s going to physically get bigger and stronger,” Kelly said on Signing Day. “We just like his work ethic. We’re really excited about him as a person.  He’s going to fit in well here at Notre Dame, and another young man that really adds to the depth that we’re looking for in our program.”


While the depth chart still isn’t as deep as the coaching staff wants on the defensive line, it’s difficult to picture Matuska playing too much as a true freshman. While we’ll figure out where he is physically when camp opens in August, the rotation up front behind Sheldon Day and Stephon Tuitt will likely include guys like Tony Springmann and Justin Utupo, with Jarron Jones hopefully ready to contribute after spending his freshman season drinking from the fire hose.

Where things get interesting up front is next season. While Tuitt has talked about staying for his senior season and getting his degree, his pro potential might make that decision much tougher. Add into the mix the uncertainty of Chase Hounshell’s recovery from another devastating shoulder surgery, and there’s going to be a fierce competition at defensive end in the coming seasons, with some unproven players needing to step up.

Realistically, a redshirt season might be the best thing for Matuska, learning the ropes from an All-American like Tuitt and diving into the technical aspects of line play, a requirement for Mike Elston’s troops.


There’s no reason to mistake Matuska as just a big body that’ll eat space up front. That’s not giving his athleticism enough credit. Take listed 40 times with a really, really big grain of salt, but most websites list Matuska in the 4.7 range. Even if that’s a pipe dream, running a sub-5.0 time along the defensive line is impressive.

What remains to be seen is if Matuska can take that athleticism and use it to develop as a pass rusher. Finding linemen that can both hold up at the point of attack and get pressure on the quarterback is key in this system and will ultimately determine whether or not Matuska becomes a prime contributor.

Life after Nix and Tuitt should be interesting for the Irish on defense. Nobody expected to see the front seven of the Irish transform so quickly during Kelly’s three seasons in South Bend, so there’s every reason to believe that this coaching staff saw and identified something they liked in Matuska quickly.

Playing at a program that dominated Jaylon Smith’s Bishop Luers team 40-7, Matuska should have the developmental tools and mindset to mix it up in the trenches. Add in a big frame and some nice athleticism, and he’s got a good future.

Only focus after Clemson loss is winning on Saturday

SOUTH BEND, IN - SEPTEMBER 19: Head coach Brian Kelly of the Notre Dame Fighting Irish looks on against the Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets in the second quarter at Notre Dame Stadium on September 19, 2015 in South Bend, Indiana. Notre Dame defeated Georgia Tech 30-22. (Photo by Joe Robbins/Getty Images)

The 2015 college football season has yet to showcase a truly great football team. With early title contenders like Ohio State and Michigan State looking less than stellar, Alabama losing a game already and the Pac-12 beating itself up, the chance that a one-loss Notre Dame team could still make it into the College Football Playoff is certainly a possibility.

But don’t expect Brian Kelly and his football team to start worrying about that now.

We saw a similar situation unfold last season, after the Irish lost a heartbreaker in the final seconds against Florida State. With many fans worried that Notre Dame wasn’t given credit for their performance in Tallahassee, the Irish’s playoff resume mattered very little as the team fell apart down the stretch.

As Notre Dame looks forward, their focus only extends to Saturday. That’s when Navy will test the Irish with their triple-option attack and better-than-usual defense, a team that Brian Kelly voted into his Top 25 this week.

Can this team make it to the Playoff? Kelly isn’t sure. But he knows what his team has to do.

“I don’t know,” Kelly said when asked about a one-loss entrance. “But we do know what we can control, and that is winning each week. So what we really talked about is we have no margin for error, and we have to pay attention to every detail.

“Each game is the biggest and most important game we play and really focusing on that. It isn’t concern yourself with big picture. You really have to focus on one week at a time.”

Kelly spread that message to his five captains after the game on Saturday night. He’s optimistic that message has set in over the weekend, and he’ll see how the team practices as they begin their on-field preparations for Navy this afternoon.

But when asked what type of response he wants to see from his team this week, it wasn’t about the minutiae of the week or a company line about daily improvement.

“The response is to win. That’s the response that we’re looking for,” Kelly said, before detailing four major factors to victory. “To win football games, you have to start fast, which we did not. There has to be an attention to detail, which certainly we were missing that at times. We got great effort, and we finished strong. So we were missing two of the four real key components that I’ll be looking for for this weekend. As long as we have those four key components, I’ll take a win by one. That would be fine with me. We need those four key components. That’s what I’ll be looking for.”

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.