Tulsa  v Oklahoma

And in that corner… The Oklahoma Sooners


Oklahoma heads to South Bend for the first time since Bob Stoops’ debut season in Norman this weekend. A year after losing to Notre Dame in the comfy confines of Gaylord Family-Oklahoma Memorial Stadium, the Sooners head to South Bend hoping to return the favor, with a prestige non-conference victory likely bringing some luster back to a program that’s won a lot of football games, but been outside the BCS for the past three years.

With a talented roster that’s yet to leave home or play a team with a winning record, this is the first big test for Stoops’ Sooners. And to get us prepared for the match-up, Oklahoman beat writer Jason Kersey took some time to answer a few questions.


1) Walk us through what is going on at quarterback. From the outside, it seemed like a shocking decision to name Trevor Knight the starting quarterback out of camp, with Blake Bell all but assumed to be the heir apparent to Landry Jones. 

After some uneven appearances by Knight, the job looks to be Bell’s now, especially after passing for 400+ against Tulsa . Is it? After only knowing about the Belldozer, what’s in store for the Irish defense this weekend?

It’s safe to say that Trevor Knight’s rise in the quarterback derby was a pretty big surprise to everyone. Knight earned the job by displaying impressive flashes of athleticism throughout fall camp and the scrimmages, but when it came to game time, it was often apparent that he might not have been quite ready for this stage. He struggled mightily in the passing game, which is obviously really important in Oklahoma ’s offense.

Knight’s knee was injured late in the first half of the Sooners’ second game against West Virginia, but he still played the third quarter and threw two interceptions. So at the beginning of the fourth, they made the switch to Bell .

To answer your question, yes, the job is Bell’s, and unless he plays really, really bad against Notre Dame or gets hurt, there’s no reason to believe it won’t stay Bell’s for the foreseeable future.

I think there’s probably still a place for the Belldozer package in OU’s offense, but I would be shocked if it’s used much. Now that he’s the guy, they don’t want him taking those big hits.

2) The Notre Dame defense has been a different unit than the group that powered the Irish to the BCS National Championship game. Particularly, the secondary has struggled early this season. Is this an area the Sooners can exploit? On paper, this group looks really deep. Jalen Saunders is back after a big game against the Irish last season. Who are the dangerous skill players that the Irish will have to account for?

Judging from the Sooners’ most recent game, I would expect they’ll try to take advantage of a relatively weak Notre Dame secondary with the passing game. But I really expect them to work hard at establishing the run. OU has really been “persistent” — as Bob Stoops said Monday — in the run game, and it’s worked pretty well so far.

The Sooners rushed for 300 yards in their first two games, and they’ve got a strong group of backs that are capable of carrying the load, and the offensive line has beefed up and is playing much more physical than it did a year ago, when Notre Dame held OU to 15 rushing yards.

The skill guys Notre Dame will need to account for are Jalen Saunders, Sterling Shepard, Brennan Clay and Roy Finch.

3) Mike Stoops has installed a 3-3-5 defense. You wrote earlier this week about a leadership void last season. There were worries about the defensive front. What do we know about this group through three games?

The defensive line was a major area of concern entering the season, but that unit has really played well through three games. But OU obviously hasn’t faced a team like Notre Dame yet, so this will be a tremendous challenge for the defensive line.

The linebackers were an area of concern this year because of how badly they were used a year ago. Late in the season against high-powered spread attacks of Baylor, West Virginia , Oklahoma State and Texas A&M, Mike Stoops experimented with linebacker-less schemes to disastrous results.

But this year, the linebackers are a major part of the defense. Corey Nelson and Frank Shannon are among the defense’s best playmakers, which really is striking considering how they were used in 2012.

Nelson talked about a lack of leadership on defense last year, which I thought was a pretty interesting — and somewhat startling — confession. That doesn’t seem to be a problem so far in 2013.

4) Bob Stoops just got a new two-year extension, paying him a tremendous sum of money. After a dominant start in Norman, it’s been three years since the Sooners last BCS appearance. Stoops’ reputation seems to have taken a bit of a hit these past few years, especially since he started losing some of the big games he built his reputation on winning. Is he a victim of his own success? How do Sooner fans feel about their head coach, who will likely become the program’s all-time winningest coach this season?

I’d say Oklahoma fans, on the whole, are still appreciative of the job Bob Stoops has done with the Sooners. Those who aren’t probably need a reminder of the shape OU was in when Stoops arrived.

But it’s also fair to say that many fans are frustrated by some of the big-game struggles of the past few seasons. I think Bob, though, is also pretty frustrated by it, which is why he’s fired four assistant coaches in the past two seasons.

5) Last year, most were shocked when Notre Dame came into Norman and pulled away for a convincing win. Is this a weekend that’s been circled on the calendars for quite some time? Last weekend, we heard from Mark Dantonio how the game was important, but it was a non-conference game. How are the Sooners treating this Saturday?

Among fans and maybe some players, yes, I think the game has probably been circled for a while. Bob Stoops gave a similar answer when asked about the game’s importance, saying that it’s not a conference game and the season won’t be made or broken by Saturday’s result. I don’t necessarily buy that, though. I think this game is critical for a program that many have started to label as overrated. Oklahoma needs this win badly to boost its national reputation.


To read more from Jason, check out his work at The Oklahoman and follow him on Twitter @JasonKersey.

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: