Camp Talk

[francade]

“Book over the course of a season is a lesser tommy rees.”

I disagree. What did rees do better than book does? He’s not a better athlete by leaps and bounds. Arm strength there’s no comparison. Accuracy and turnovers are similar (even though the sample size is quite different so the fact that we know rees was a turnover waiting to happen, the jury is still out on whether book is as bad in that area). If we had book during the rees years, we win more, imho. Book is not a “lesser rees”.

 

[FriedmanIP]

“Book over the course of a season is a lesser tommy rees.”

I disagree. What did rees do better than book does? He’s not a better athlete by leaps and bounds. Arm strength there’s no comparison. Accuracy and turnovers are similar (even though the sample size is quite different so the fact that we know rees was a turnover waiting to happen, the jury is still out on whether book is as bad in that area). If we had book during the rees years, we win more, imho. Book is not a “lesser rees”.

Agreed.
I really don’t see the “Book to Rees” comparison at all. Book is just so much more athletic and clearly has a much stronger arm, although his arm is still probably average or below average for P5 CFB teams.

I don’t have a problem with Books physical tools in the absolute sense, the way I did with Rees. Rees just limited the offense sooo much.
Book, on the other hand, can do a lot. He can scramble and legitimately make plays with his feet against good comp and run the read option. And he can throw the ball with more zip than Rees did.

Book just can’t hold a candle to Wimbush, so he should be the backup in this situation. But he would have EASILY started over Rees imo.

I see Book as a being closer to Golson (though lesser in terms of arm strength and accuracy) than Rees.

 

[francade]

Way too much is made out of his 4 picks in 75 attempts too. One of them against unc was better than a punt from our own end zone where Finke got raped and had he not, it would’ve been a harmless incompletion. The other looked like he thought smythe would continue up the seam but he stopped and the ball went over his head. Not sure who that’s on. I don’t think he ever saw the dB jumping the route against Miami and that’s on him cuz the wide open receiver was in the middle of the field. Can’t remember the LSU one but I think he tried to squeeze it between safety and crouch corner. I’m not making excuses for the picks, I’m just saying that not all were all on him. It’s yet to be determined if he has a propensity to turn it over, IMO. Is he the physical talent that wimbush is? No way, but I also don’t think we’re screwed if he plays. Here’s hoping that wimbush plays great & book does too if needed.

 

[NDCap]

pressure is on BW . Book is very poised . In fairness to BW his losses were to Georgia, @ Miami and @ Stanford. What other ND QB's not named Tony Rice would have come away 12-0 playing those teams? This is year 2 for BW I personally expect to see vast improvement in his game. IMo the coaching has to be held accountable as well. I'm not a fan of BK when it comes to QB production/ development. His track record is very bad. I hope Long unleashes BW with his feet .

 

[echowaker]

“Book over the course of a season is a lesser tommy rees.”

I disagree. What did rees do better than book does? He’s not a better athlete by leaps and bounds. Arm strength there’s no comparison. Accuracy and turnovers are similar (even though the sample size is quite different so the fact that we know rees was a turnover waiting to happen, the jury is still out on whether book is as bad in that area). If we had book during the rees years, we win more, imho. Book is not a “lesser rees”.

he played the position better. read defenses MUCH better. he has prolific numbers to back him up.

 

[echowaker]

Way too much is made out of his 4 picks in 75 attempts too. One of them against unc was better than a punt from our own end zone where Finke got raped and had he not, it would’ve been a harmless incompletion. The other looked like he thought smythe would continue up the seam but he stopped and the ball went over his head. Not sure who that’s on. I don’t think he ever saw the dB jumping the route against Miami and that’s on him cuz the wide open receiver was in the middle of the field. Can’t remember the LSU one but I think he tried to squeeze it between safety and crouch corner. I’m not making excuses for the picks, I’m just saying that not all were all on him. It’s yet to be determined if he has a propensity to turn it over, IMO. Is he the physical talent that wimbush is? No way, but I also don’t think we’re screwed if he plays. Here’s hoping that wimbush plays great & book does too if needed.

agreed. book is a very competent backup. he will be needed.

 

[Get Nasty]

he played the position better. read defenses MUCH better. he has prolific numbers to back him up.

Rees could destroy an average defense with his mind and accuracy but be destroyed by a good defense because of his lack of mobility. If the o-line wasn't dominating, game over. He pretty much lost every big game he started at ND. Beating MSU (Because of our talent) was his ceiling.

 

[echowaker]

Rees could destroy an average defense with his mind and accuracy but be destroyed by a good defense because of his lack of mobility. If the o-line wasn't dominating, game over. He pretty much lost every big game he started at ND. Beating MSU (Because of our talent) was his ceiling.

If every nd player maximized their abilities the way rees did nd just might have had more than one natty in 30 years.

 

[francade]

“he played the position better. read defenses MUCH better. he has prolific numbers to back him up.”

“He played the position better”? And you’re basing this on what, book’s 75 attempts to 4 years of holding a loaded team back in most cases? You say he read defenses “MUCH better”. Did his reading defenses much better translate into heady decisions resulting in a low number of turnovers? No. (throwing it up for grabs into double coverage in the end zone when all we we needed was a fg to beat Tulsa comes to mind). And the prolific numbers you talk about had more to do w/ having a record setting o-line in terms of protecting the qb and a bevy of nflers to throw to. His numbers illustrate how stats don’t ever tell the whole story. For the most part, his numbers were good against bad defenses and bad versus good defenses. His overall play held that team back and I believe that if we had book, or any other competent qb at that time, we win more. I don’t see how you can compare the two right now as far as “playing the position better” either. One has played 2-3 games, the other had four years of play to dissect. Neither of us can be certain about how book would’ve performed in rees’s stead, but Book is the far better athlete, has a much stronger arm and whether or not he can read defenses is still an unknown, so I’ll stand by my belief that we would’ve been better off w/ book during that time frame. I have never questioned his love for ND and believe he got the most out of his talent, I just don’t believe there was much of it. W/ all that said, I think he will be a good coach.

 

[echowaker]

“he played the position better. read defenses MUCH better. he has prolific numbers to back him up.”

“He played the position better”? And you’re basing this on what, book’s 75 attempts to 4 years of holding a loaded team back in most cases? You say he read defenses “MUCH better”. Did his reading defenses much better translate into heady decisions resulting in a low number of turnovers? No. (throwing it up for grabs into double coverage in the end zone when all we we needed was a fg to beat Tulsa comes to mind). And the prolific numbers you talk about had more to do w/ having a record setting o-line in terms of protecting the qb and a bevy of nflers to throw to. His numbers illustrate how stats don’t ever tell the whole story. For the most part, his numbers were good against bad defenses and bad versus good defenses. His overall play held that team back and I believe that if we had book, or any other competent qb at that time, we win more. I don’t see how you can compare the two right now as far as “playing the position better” either. One has played 2-3 games, the other had four years of play to dissect. Neither of us can be certain about how book would’ve performed in rees’s stead, but Book is the far better athlete, has a much stronger arm and whether or not he can read defenses is still an unknown, so I’ll stand by my belief that we would’ve been better off w/ book during that time frame. I have never questioned his love for ND and believe he got the most out of his talent, I just don’t believe there was much of it. W/ all that said, I think he will be a good coach.

from the sample size. what i saw from rees in his career and what i've seen from book to this point tells me rees played the position better. now book does things with his legs rees could not but thats because they are two entirely different type of players. you would not ask rees to run certain plays and vice versa.

 

[echowaker]

“he played the position better. read defenses MUCH better. he has prolific numbers to back him up.”

“He played the position better”? And you’re basing this on what, book’s 75 attempts to 4 years of holding a loaded team back in most cases? You say he read defenses “MUCH better”. Did his reading defenses much better translate into heady decisions resulting in a low number of turnovers? No. (throwing it up for grabs into double coverage in the end zone when all we we needed was a fg to beat Tulsa comes to mind). And the prolific numbers you talk about had more to do w/ having a record setting o-line in terms of protecting the qb and a bevy of nflers to throw to. His numbers illustrate how stats don’t ever tell the whole story. For the most part, his numbers were good against bad defenses and bad versus good defenses. His overall play held that team back and I believe that if we had book, or any other competent qb at that time, we win more. I don’t see how you can compare the two right now as far as “playing the position better” either. One has played 2-3 games, the other had four years of play to dissect. Neither of us can be certain about how book would’ve performed in rees’s stead, but Book is the far better athlete, has a much stronger arm and whether or not he can read defenses is still an unknown, so I’ll stand by my belief that we would’ve been better off w/ book during that time frame. I have never questioned his love for ND and believe he got the most out of his talent, I just don’t believe there was much of it. W/ all that said, I think he will be a good coach.

i know its a small sample size but book averages an interception every 18 plus passes. rees averaged an interception every 28 plus passes.

 

[francade]

What plays would you ask rees to do but not book?

 

[Get Nasty]

What plays would you ask rees to do but not book?

Rees had the ability to go 5 wide with all 5 being options and make that correct read and or audible out of it. So when other defenses were average or worse he pretty much could always put ND in a good spot.

His trouble came when there was an ounce of pressure, or he had to make tight window throws more than 10 yards down the field.

 

[francade]

If he had the ability to go five wide and have all five options available and make the right read, why did he turn it over at an alarming rate? Go back and look at the turnovers. They run the gamut as far as reasons why? Some are just simply dropping the ball in his windup to making bad reads to not having enough arm strength. We didn’t really have the run pass option that is a staple of the spread because defenses didn’t have to worry about his feet at all. I just don’t see how some can look at him and call him prolific. He was average at best, imo.

 

[Get Nasty]

If he had the ability to go five wide and have all five options available and make the right read, why did he turn it over at an alarming rate? Go back and look at the turnovers. They run the gamut as far as reasons why? Some are just simply dropping the ball in his windup to making bad reads to not having enough arm strength. We didn’t really have the run pass option that is a staple of the spread because defenses didn’t have to worry about his feet at all. I just don’t see how some can look at him and call him prolific. He was average at best, imo.

I agree that he was an average QB. I'm just showing his strengths. His weaknesses greatly outweighed his strengths and why ND struggled offensively against a team with any sort of D under Tommy. He had solid stats because of his mind and talent around him. From what we've seen of book so far, he would give us a better chance than Tommy against a good D. If wimbush isn't improved we'll see book. My hope is we only see him in some tiny occasions this year because Wimbush is our chance at a title.

 

[Telx1]

I agree that he was an average QB. I'm just showing his strengths. His weaknesses greatly outweighed his strengths and why ND struggled offensively against a team with any sort of D under Tommy. He had solid stats because of his mind and talent around him. From what we've seen of book so far, he would give us a better chance than Tommy against a good D. If wimbush isn't improved we'll see book. My hope is we only see him in some tiny occasions this year because Wimbush is our chance at a title.

I still cringe when visualizing Tommy making those fifteen yard down and out passes to the wide side. Ball took forever to get there and seemed like a pick six in the making. Yet, his understanding of the offense and ability to read the defense were great strengths. I saw Book play in HS and thought he was a smaller more athletic version of Tommy with a better arm. Not sure this was fair to either. Book is a good back up QB who can throw short and mid range passes with accuracy and run the read run option. Two areas where Wimbush has struggled. Our collective hope is Wimbush gives us no reason to root for Book to enter the games, other than mop up duty.

 

[NDIRISH53]

Something about wimbush, don’t care if he throws some picks down field in practice, especially with the amount of times he’ll throw each day. But the short accuracy is concerning. Need to be able to run screens and backfield swings

 

[echowaker]

If he had the ability to go five wide and have all five options available and make the right read, why did he turn it over at an alarming rate? Go back and look at the turnovers. They run the gamut as far as reasons why? Some are just simply dropping the ball in his windup to making bad reads to not having enough arm strength. We didn’t really have the run pass option that is a staple of the spread because defenses didn’t have to worry about his feet at all. I just don’t see how some can look at him and call him prolific. He was average at best, imo.

alarming rate ? book averages a pick in ten less attempts than rees did. the numbers indicate rees was more than average. not great for sure.

 

[Telx1]

Something about wimbush, don’t care if he throws some picks down field in practice, especially with the amount of times he’ll throw each day. But the short accuracy is concerning. Need to be able to run screens and backfield swings

Yea, I agree. It’s like a golpher who gets the yips and can’t make the 3-5 ft putts. Mostly a mental thing, and we won’t know if he has overcome this until he plays in a high pressure game, which Michigan surely represents. Frankly, I’m more concerned about his running, and whether we see a return of the pre hand injury Wimbush, or whether we see the hesitant post hand injury runner that he showed in his last four games.

 

[francade]

Echo, your using book’s 75 attempts to rees’s 1000 attempts to compare int ratio is totally unfair and holds no water whatsoever. And the “alarming rate” takes into account rees’s fumbles too. And that propensity to turn it over was cemented by the fact that he played so much. W/ book, we don’t definitively know that he’d turn it over at the rate rees did. Maybe, maybe not. Rees’s completion % actually went down his last two years too. You’re right, he wasn’t great. Far from it. Average at best, imo.

 

[echowaker]

Echo, your using book’s 75 attempts to rees’s 1000 attempts to compare int ratio is totally unfair and holds no water whatsoever. And the “alarming rate” takes into account rees’s fumbles too. And that propensity to turn it over was cemented by the fact that he played so much. W/ book, we don’t definitively know that he’d turn it over at the rate rees did. Maybe, maybe not. Rees’s completion % actually went down his last two years too. You’re right, he wasn’t great. Far from it. Average at best, imo.

i clearly stated that it was a small sample size for Book but thats all the numbers we have. agreed we don't know what the numbers would be if Book had the same amount of PT. Rees completed 60% of his passes with 61 tds. he's 3rd all time in passing yards and 2nd all time in td passes in nd history. average ? i think not.

 

[mirer03]

I still cringe when visualizing Tommy making those fifteen yard down and out passes to the wide side. Ball took forever to get there and seemed like a pick six in the making. Yet, his understanding of the offense and ability to read the defense were great strengths. I saw Book play in HS and thought he was a smaller more athletic version of Tommy with a better arm. Not sure this was fair to either. Book is a good back up QB who can throw short and mid range passes with accuracy and run the read run option. Two areas where Wimbush has struggled. Our collective hope is Wimbush gives us no reason to root for Book to enter the games, other than mop up duty.

If book comes off the bench occassionally to spark a drive, i have no issues. He is feerless and drives the ball, but his decision making is not great, he forces some throws that he shouldnt, and he occasionally makes the wrong read. Rees made the right reads, didnt force the ball, and knew when to throw it away. That being said book has a stronger arm and is more of an athlete. Book gives me the same feeling as rees, nd can be successful, but not top tier .

 

[Buguit]

If every nd player maximized their abilities the way rees did nd just might have had more than one natty in 30 years.

Not every player was ... or any player for that mattter .... given a leash as long as Rees had ... if he was held to the same standard as other qb's ... turining the ball over ... he never would've been higher than 3rd string ... maximizing potential is directly linked to opportunities given

 

[francade]

Stating it was a small sample size doesn’t change the fact that using that small sample size tells us virtually nothing in terms of whether book turns it over a lot, and that’s what you were implying. We know for a fact that rees did, we don’t know (and may never find out) if book does too. You can continue to cite stats all you want, they don’t tell the whole story, and in the end, that’s all rees had, stats. And those stats were bolstered by a loaded team surrounding him that he weighed down when going against tougher competition.

 

[francade]

“Rees made the right reads, didnt force the ball, and knew when to throw it away”

And yet, he still turned it over like crazy and rarely played well against a good defense.

 

[echowaker]

Stating it was a small sample size doesn’t change the fact that using that small sample size tells us virtually nothing in terms of whether book turns it over a lot, and that’s what you were implying. We know for a fact that rees did, we don’t know (and may never find out) if book does too. You can continue to cite stats all you want, they don’t tell the whole story, and in the end, that’s all rees had, stats. And those stats were bolstered by a loaded team surrounding him that he weighed down when going against tougher competition.

whatever. i think he was above average in performance given his skill set. the guy had way better numbers than guys who were way superior to him physically.

 

[mirer03]

“Rees made the right reads, didnt force the ball, and knew when to throw it away”

And yet, he still turned it over like crazy and rarely played well against a good defense.

And you just described ian book my friend. Minus two long balls his performances are mediocre and his ball security is highly questionable.

 

[echowaker]

“Rees made the right reads, didnt force the ball, and knew when to throw it away”

And yet, he still turned it over like crazy and rarely played well against a good defense.

i don't think tommy rees was a great player by any stretch of the imagination. i do think he gets a bad rap here by a lot of fans though. 2012 never happens without him.

 

[francade]

“And you just described ian book my friend. Minus two long balls his performances are mediocre and his ball security is highly questionable.”

You’re relying on 4 INTs in 75 attempts in his redshirt freshman year to describe a qb that turns it over like crazy? Look at book’s INTs again. The only force was at Miami. The others were normal in the sense that he either didn’t see the dB jumping the route at Miami (happens to the best of them), or him throwing what looked to be a seam and smythe broke the route off. Not sure whose fault that was. One was a long bomb out of his own end zone when Finke was held late and the other against LSU he tried to squeeze it between the corner and safety and the squat corner made a good play. Bottom line, you can’t say that his ball security is questionable yet. I can say that about rees though.

 

[francade]

2012 never happens w/ him as the starter either.

 

[echowaker]

2012 never happens w/ him as the starter either.

who knows ? we KNOW how many Games he saved as the backup.

 

[francade]

How many did he save and what were his stats in those games and how did the offense move w/ him in there? A circus catch by Goodman on a wounded duck kept one of his saves alive. A couple PI calls and a 5 yard delay to Toma come to mind. And tj jones’s great catch on the slant that was thrown well behind him saved the day on another. We also know that when rees was the full time starter we never got close to an undefeated season. We know that.

 

[NDAFArly]

Open practice today.

Dexter did not play much....

 

[FriedmanIP]

i clearly stated that it was a small sample size for Book but thats all the numbers we have. agreed we don't know what the numbers would be if Book had the same amount of PT. Rees completed 60% of his passes with 61 tds. he's 3rd all time in passing yards and 2nd all time in td passes in nd history. average ? i think not.

Rees was average, at absolute best. Honestly, calling of averages generous.

But due to all kinds of issues at the position, he started tons of games, something that’s pretty uncommon for Notre Dame at that position. So he accumulated lots of career stats as a result.

Slowly accumulating career stats over time isn’t much of a commentary on his ability though, certainly not as a relates to being better than average.

Book is a significantly, significantly more talented a QB then Rees was that about and almost certainly would be more productive (and potentially also more efficient) if given a similar opportunity.

 

[FriedmanIP]

“Rees made the right reads, didnt force the ball, and knew when to throw it away”

And yet, he still turned it over like crazy and rarely played well against a good defense.

Correct.

Rees Was not fantastic at making the right reads are making great decisions, in fact he was frequently a turnover machine, in addition to being a handicap on the offense due to his lack of physical abilities.

The reality is, he wasn’t a very good quarterback, but he got to play a ton because our roster was an absolute disaster at that position.

Hopefully he’ll be a much better coach than he was an actual player, which I think is very possible.

Book is on a completely different talent level than Reese was, even though he is nowhere near the talent level of Wimbush.

 

[FriedmanIP]

who knows ? we KNOW how many Games he saved as the backup.

By this logic, we don’t know that he was needed in those games, because will never know how Golson would have performed if left in the game.

In reality, we know that Reese helped a couple of times, but would have lost several games that season if he was the starter.

 

[Buguit]

whatever. i think he was above average in performance given his skill set. the guy had way better numbers than guys who were way superior to him physically.

LOL!!!! .. what a joke

 

[mirer03]

“And you just described ian book my friend. Minus two long balls his performances are mediocre and his ball security is highly questionable.”

You’re relying on 4 INTs in 75 attempts in his redshirt freshman year to describe a qb that turns it over like crazy? Look at book’s INTs again. The only force was at Miami. The others were normal in the sense that he either didn’t see the dB jumping the route at Miami (happens to the best of them), or him throwing what looked to be a seam and smythe broke the route off. Not sure whose fault that was. One was a long bomb out of his own end zone when Finke was held late and the other against LSU he tried to squeeze it between the corner and safety and the squat corner made a good play. Bottom line, you can’t say that his ball security is questionable yet. I can say that about rees though.

Im relying on his limited game performances because he cannot beat out wimbush when they practice so you cant go by that. Basically your making an argument on the same 75 passes that i am. You are just ignoring the negatives and stating the obvious that he is a better completion percentage in 75 passes than wimbush while igniring his int rate. And you continually state that his ints dont matter... Wimbush had 6. 6 total. And not all his were bad either. Its silly to pick and choose. His stats are what they are...hes a back up.

 

[francade]

When did I say anything about beating out wimbush? And when did I say his INTs don’t matter? Do you think an INT that goes over a wr’s head and is picked off is the same as an INT where the wr was held or it would’ve been a meaningless incompletion? Or if the wr cuts off his route when he maybe shouldn’t have as opposed to an errant throw? There’s a difference and just looking at stats never tells the whole story. I was comparing him to rees and explained why calling him a qb that turns it over like crazy is stupid based on his first 75 attempts during his redshirt freshman year. Someone said he was a turnover machine and his ball security was highly questionable and I responded by saying that was too small a sample size. As I said before, I don’t know if he’s a turnover machine or not because he hasn’t played enough. We know rees was. Yet you spouted off about how heady rees was and how book had ball security issues as if rees didn’t. You’re wrong about rees not having similar turnover issues and rees’s is based on a boatload of playing time so it’s not a question, and you could be wrong about book, based on the fact that he hasn’t played nearly enough football to brand him a turnover machine the likes of rees.

“His stats are what they are...he’s a backup”

Don’t know if he’ll be a good qb for ND or not but this is a dumbass opinion based on only 75 attempts.

 

[mrwigglesby21]

Kelly coaching well
Wimbush playing well
Explosion from the RB position

Those three happen, we have a good season.
PJ looks good for the future, albeit a Bernie Kosar disciple