Photoshop by @verypiratey

IBG: Let’s get it started


We’re almost there. After eight excruciatingly long months, we’re back in the saddle for another game week. And that means another edition of the Irish Blogger Gathering, a tradition like no other. (Seriously. Who else would do this?)

Our friend the Subway Domer, in between profane tweets and must-purchase t-shirts, has gathered together a collection of Notre Dame bloggers to discuss weekly Irish football topics. This week it was my turn to ask the questions to NDTex of Mike Coffey of NDNation had the pleasure of quizzing me, and then channeling his inner Winnie Cooper as he posted my answers.

For more, check out the following:

Subway Domer
Her Loyal Sons
ND Nation
Strong and True

Feel free to answer the questions yourself in the comments. Let’s take this thing next level:

1. Another season opens with high expectations and more than a few unknowns. What unproven commodity are you most excited to see when the Irish run out of the tunnel this Saturday?

In my mind, I see three major unproven units: the LB corps (especially since Spond is done), the RB corps (especially the freshmen), and punt returns. If I have to pick just one, it would have to be the young running backs. We’ve seen George Atkinson III’s potential as a “home run” hitter, I’m now in year two for waiting to see what Amir Carlisle can do, and of course, you can’t mention Irish running backs without mentioning Greg Bryant who is simply getting rave reviews from everyone it seems.

Those are three great backs and I haven’t even mentioned Cam McDaniel and Terran Folston. I can’t remember the last time there appeared to be so much talent in the Irish backfield. All eyes may be on Tommy Rees, but the Irish rushing attack will be what propels this team to greatness and I can’t wait to see it.

2. Praising Reesus is sweeping the interwebs. There are two sides of this coin: Tommy Rees could very well be bigger, stronger, smarter, and faster come his senior season, and is ready to match his football intellect with corresponding aptitude. Or we are all suckers for one of the most obvious offseason narratives known to man.

Which one is it? And project for me Rees’ stat-line in ’13.

Trying to predict what Rees will do this season seems borderline impossible. For instance, when I took a look at Rees’ numbers, I found out he was the most accurate QB in ND history. Even stranger, his best season in terms of accuracy was 2011, the same season that now causes heart attacks every time he takes a snap.

His only start against BYU in 2012 was one of the worst starts in his career. While he stepped in and led the Irish on some rather clutch drives, you could file quite a good number of his passes in the jump ball category.

What I want to see from Rees is a QB that understands it isn’t all on him. He doesn’t need to force the ball into non-existent windows to make things happen. There’s a lot of talent around him and he needs to utilize it properly. I am hoping that a strong rushing attack will help this as well (see: Kevin Hogan at Stanford).

So why praise Reesus? Because faith and prayers are really the only thing we have to go on here. I don’t think we will truly know how Tommy has progressed until he goes under the lights in Ann Arbor.

As for a stat projection, I’m going to try and stay positive and assume Rees has learned his lessons (and learned how to throw in the red zone): 60% completion percentage, 2400 yards, 24 TD, 8 INT.

3. This isn’t expected to be all that competitive of a football game. But what are you hoping to take away from Saturday that’ll help you decide whether or not the Irish will have another BCS run this season?

I do think this team has a chance at the BCS, but no matter how big the Irish win, I won’t be convinced that they are BCS ready. Temple is that bad. For me, this game will prove that the Irish can take care of business against inferior opponents, but nothing more. For the record, I felt the same way when the Irish blew out Navy.

This week, the only way I can be swayed in the BCS discussion is in a negative fashion. Should the Irish struggle against an inferior opponent, I’m going to be very worried.

I don’t expect that to happen this Saturday in the least, but I don’t think I will be able to point at anything and say “The Irish will go to the BCS because of X” until we face tougher competition.

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.