How do we measure up to the playoff teams....

[chaseball]

Need more speed at RB and great corners. The next 2 recruiting classes are getting there . They are getting legit playmakers on Offense that can compete at the championship level. Need great corners.

I hate this type of analysis .. and it's everywhere among the ND fan base and the ND media. I call it the glass half full story at the expense of the truth.

You mention offensive recruiting improving in this 2020 class but no mention of the obvious fact that it has come at the cost of the defensive recruiting (which has gone way down this class compared to the last 3)? Why only tell half of the story?

 

[88ND]

Golson was a better player than Zaire and played over him.

Kizer was going through a lot personally and really struggled in practice. He didn't deserve to play over Zaire at that point.

He made a mistake early in the next season playing Zaire and Kizer. Kizer should have started full time. Mistake.

Book is a better qb than Phil is right now.

I see one mistake. The bigger problem is assessing QBs in recruiting. He hasn't been good at that.

He finally got an elite one in Buchner

I've no idea how you can defend BK and the QB position.

Golson was so good he needed to be relieved how many times in 2012? If not for Rees...(the trendy at present board's whipping boy as a player)...we don't go undefeated during the regular season.

When BK finally gave Zaire the start against LSU we were immediately harder to defend. Funny though because Golson had to platoon with Zaire in that game otherwise we don't win that.

Kizer? The best QB BK has had wasn't seeing the field unless the injury came.

Wimbush...17 starts of inaccuracy until the light bulb goes off? COME ON!!!

Hell we even seen our receivers get excited in a rainy game against Carolina because Book was starting. Why? They will finally get a catchable ball. St. Brown...that was the most excited he was all year to that point.
Still not enough to start Book.
LSU bowl game? Wimbush is stuck in mud. Can't do anything. Book comes in and what do you know...we score. We win.
Still not enough for good ol BK. Wimbush starts three more games until the switch.

Here we are now....

Book beats bad opponents. Better said he doesn't lose games against bad teams. He also doesn't win against good opponents.

Standing on the sideline is a much better QB. Not playing. Why? It's the BK way. Take the wrong QB and play him.

It's been a decade of disaster at the QB position under Brian Kelly and that happens to be the most important position of them all.

I don't see A problem either.

I see MANY!

 

[Golson5]

I've no idea how you can defend BK and the QB position.

Golson was so good he needed to be relieved how many times in 2012? If not for Rees...(the trendy at present board's whipping boy as a player)...we don't go undefeated during the regular season.

When BK finally gave Zaire the start against LSU we were immediately harder to defend. Funny though because Golson had to platoon with Zaire in that game otherwise we don't win that.

Kizer? The best QB BK has had wasn't seeing the field unless the injury came.

Wimbush...17 starts of inaccuracy until the light bulb goes off? COME ON!!!

Hell we even seen our receivers get excited in a rainy game against Carolina because Book was starting. Why? They will finally get a catchable ball. St. Brown...that was the most excited he was all year to that point.
Still not enough to start Book.
LSU bowl game? Wimbush is stuck in mud. Can't do anything. Book comes in and what do you know...we score. We win.
Still not enough for good ol BK. Wimbush starts three more games until the switch.

Here we are now....

Book beats bad opponents. Better said he doesn't lose games against bad teams. He also doesn't win against good opponents.

Standing on the sideline is a much better QB. Not playing. Why? It's the BK way. Take the wrong QB and play him.

It's been a decade of disaster at the QB position under Brian Kelly and that happens to be the most important position of them all.

I don't see A problem either.

I see MANY!

Golson was better than Zaire was.

Zaire deserved to start before he got hurt because of how Kizer was handling his situation.

Kizer should have played full time the next year. Mistake

Ian is better than Phil is right now.

You can write your long diatribes but this is the truth.

All you do is b*tch and complain. Im numb to it. I'll just point out your wrongs and move on

 

[NDinNJ]

Golson was a better player than Zaire and played over him.

Kizer was going through a lot personally and really struggled in practice. He didn't deserve to play over Zaire at that point.


He made a mistake early in the next season playing Zaire and Kizer. Kizer should have started full time. Mistake.

Book is a better qb than Phil is right now.

I see one mistake. The bigger problem is assessing QBs in recruiting. He hasn't been good at that.

He finally got an elite one in Buchner

BK also has issues with development of the QB position. Every QB under his tenure has REGRESSED year over year. QB’s should be making major strides as they get familiar with the offense, and their talent is developed. Something is definitely amiss with QB recruiting and development.

 

[Golson5]

BK also has issues with development of the QB position. Every QB under his tenure has REGRESSED year over year. QB’s should be making major strides as they get familiar with the offense, and their talent is developed. Something is definitely amiss with QB recruiting and development.

Book has been developed.

Wimbush couldnt beat out a freshman at UCF. We got a lot out of his lack of talent

Kizer was not developed properly.

Zaire couldn't play at Florida and they desperately needed a QB.

We got more out of Golson than Jimbo did

The problem is assessing the QB more than development imo

 

[88ND]

Im numb to it.

W
R
O
N
G

You can't help yourself.

The most important position is the QB. Present day more than ever.

For the entire tenure of Brian Kelly who is the HC of Notre Dame...the QB position has been a quagmire to say the least.

We will continue to beat the bad and lose against the good. That's the legacy of Brian Kelly. How in the hell hasn't he beat an elite team at least once. Not even by way of accident to win just one in a decade.

That's pathetic.

 

[IrishHerb]

Not sure about all that.

We may not be up to the level of LSU, OSU or Clemson.
But Oklahoma? I think we could possibly beat Oklahoma ... they only beat ISU 42-41 and at home. Oklahoma doesn't play defense, their offense may be good, but I didn't see it against LSU and apparently they scored more against ISU than we did ... so I see a 45-43 type of game, with possibly ND out on top.

 

[Irish Grandeur]

I say ND would match up well with either LSU or Clemson. ND knocked off LSU two years ago and there's a lot of players left on both teams today. ND was one game away from the NC last year and the game was closer with Clemson than the score. One of Clemson's players even stated ND played them better than Bama.

 

[88ND]

Not sure about all that.

We may not be up to the level of LSU, OSU or Clemson.
But Oklahoma? I think we could possibly beat Oklahoma ... they only beat ISU 42-41 and at home. Oklahoma doesn't play defense, their offense may be good, but I didn't see it against LSU and apparently they scored more against ISU than we did ... so I see a 45-43 type of game, with possibly ND out on top.

Well...notice I said offense. Oklahoma still plays porous defense so collectively as a team they're not on the other three team's level.

Offensively we're in a different universe and no matter what in college football today you MUST score points. A tough defensive game today is 27-24. But you still need to score points and quickly at certain times.

Sometimes you must score a ton to win a 45-42 game.


Our offense is sleepwalking and until we start playing with urgency ALMOST will continue.

 

[W8LNXYR]

I say ND would match up well with either LSU or Clemson. ND knocked off LSU two years ago and there's a lot of players left on both teams today. ND was one game away from the NC last year and the game was closer with Clemson than the score. One of Clemson's players even stated ND played them better than Bama.

Is this for real?

 

[amazingreis]

I say ND would match up well with either LSU or Clemson. ND knocked off LSU two years ago and there's a lot of players left on both teams today. ND was one game away from the NC last year and the game was closer with Clemson than the score. One of Clemson's players even stated ND played them better than Bama.

You should change your handle to “delusions of grandeur.”

 

[Bumpdaddy]

Wimbush couldnt play at UCf. Got beat out by a freshman. We got a lot out of him. More of a rb than QB

Wimbush, Zaire, and Golson all played 3+ years under BK. It was BK's responsibility to develop them, not some coach that was going to have them for only one year. The fact that each didn't play much better when they transferred to play out their final year doesn't prove they didn't have talent to begin with. Any school that accepts a 5th year QB transfer is hoping they are receiving someone who has already been developed and maybe needs a little tweaking here or there. If they show up on the new campus and it turns out they need more than a little tweak, what coach would want to put in the time to try to develop a one-and-done player?

I've said this many times, overall, BK is a very good coach, but one area where he has consistently struggled at ND is developing QB's. Right now, Book might be his best chance to show he can develop one QB, but even with Book, the jury is still out until we see him play at a high level against a highly ranked team and top-rated defense. If Book finally passes that test and continues to do well against the rest of the teams on the schedule, and I certainly hope he does, he will go down as the first QB who actually improved under BK while at ND. That will be fantastic if it happens. But our expectations for BK and the QB position shouldn't end there. BK will need to prove that Book isn't a fluke. He will need to prove he can consistently develop QB's by developing the next QB in the line whether it's PJ, BC, DP, or TB.

 

[Golson5]

Wimbush, Zaire, and Golson all played 3+ years under BK. It was BK's responsibility to develop them, not some coach that was going to have them for only one year. The fact that each didn't play much better when they transferred to play out their final year doesn't prove they didn't have talent to begin with. Any school that accepts a 5th year QB transfer is hoping they are receiving someone who has already been developed and maybe needs a little tweaking here or there. If they show up on the new campus and it turns out they need more than a little tweak, what coach would want to put in the time to try to develop a one-and-done player?

I've said this many times, overall, BK is a very good coach, but one area where he has consistently struggled at ND is developing QB's. Right now, Book might be his best chance to show he can develop one QB, but even with Book, the jury is still out until we see him play at a high level against a highly ranked team and top-rated defense. If Book finally passes that test and continues to do well against the rest of the teams on the schedule, and I certainly hope he does, he will go down as the first QB who actually improved under BK while at ND. That will be fantastic if it happens. But our expectations for BK and the QB position shouldn't end there. BK will need to prove that Book isn't a fluke. He will need to prove he can consistently develop QB's by developing the next QB in the line whether it's PJ, BC, DP, or TB.

They were actually better at ND than their new place so.....The fact we got we did out of them when other coaches couldnt....

Recruiting the right player is the bigger problem than development.

 

[NDinNJ]

They were actually better at ND than their new place so.....The fact we got we did out of them when other coaches couldnt....

Recruiting the right player is the bigger problem than development.

You just proved my point. They were better, because they regressed from year 1 to year 3/4 with BK. As soon as the regression reached a boiling point and another QB was comfortable enough with the offense BK makes the switch.

Guarantee if Book struggles/regresses early on next year, BK will give him the hook and throw the next guy in. That’s been the pattern his entire tenure.,

 

[Golson5]

You just proved my point. They were better, because they regressed from year 1 to year 3/4 with BK. As soon as the regression reached a boiling point and another QB was comfortable enough with the offense BK makes the switch.

Guarantee if Book struggles/regresses early on next year, BK will give him the hook and throw the next guy in. That’s been the pattern his entire tenure.,

That was weak

 

[Irish Grandeur]

Is this for real?

Yes, what I stated is true.

 

[W8LNXYR]

Yes, what I stated is true.

Then you are an idiot.

 

[deadirishpoet]

Wimbush, Zaire, and Golson all played 3+ years under BK. It was BK's responsibility to develop them, not some coach that was going to have them for only one year. The fact that each didn't play much better when they transferred to play out their final year doesn't prove they didn't have talent to begin with. Any school that accepts a 5th year QB transfer is hoping they are receiving someone who has already been developed and maybe needs a little tweaking here or there. If they show up on the new campus and it turns out they need more than a little tweak, what coach would want to put in the time to try to develop a one-and-done player?

I've said this many times, overall, BK is a very good coach, but one area where he has consistently struggled at ND is developing QB's. Right now, Book might be his best chance to show he can develop one QB, but even with Book, the jury is still out until we see him play at a high level against a highly ranked team and top-rated defense. If Book finally passes that test and continues to do well against the rest of the teams on the schedule, and I certainly hope he does, he will go down as the first QB who actually improved under BK while at ND. That will be fantastic if it happens. But our expectations for BK and the QB position shouldn't end there. BK will need to prove that Book isn't a fluke. He will need to prove he can consistently develop QB's by developing the next QB in the line whether it's PJ, BC, DP, or TB.

Did you know how many transfer QBs were in the playoffs this year ?
3

 

[amazingreis]

Then you are an idiot.

Lol

 

[88ND]

You just proved my point. They were better, because they regressed from year 1 to year 3/4 with BK. As soon as the regression reached a boiling point and another QB was comfortable enough with the offense BK makes the switch.

Guarantee if Book struggles/regresses early on next year, BK will give him the hook and throw the next guy in. That’s been the pattern his entire tenure.,

He won't bench Book and that's the problem....

Book plays ultra safe and literally takes zero chances. He's steady in that BK knows Book isn't risky. He'll be good enough to beat the teams he should beat but not good enough to beat the better teams. Given our schedule has been really soft as of late and this new found 10 win season rallying cry...well shit things are just fine in BK land.

Wimbush made beating an average team adventurous.

Book is the safe selection. He won't make mistakes hurting the team against the weak yet he won't make any key plays helping us defeat the strong.

Oh well...another season watching an offense terrified to fail.

 

[Bumpdaddy]

They were actually better at ND than their new place so.....

No, you are being extremely misleading here. They actually regressed while at ND. So they were actually better at ND their 1st year as starter than their 2nd year. And what happened to them after they left ND should have nothing to do with whether or not BK was properly developing them. UCF wasn't responsible for developing Wimbush, BK was. Mcelwain wasn't responsible for developing Zaire, BK was. Jimbo wasn't responsible for developing Golson, BK was. It would have been a different story if any of those players had transferred with multiple years of eligibility left. And even if we take your claim at face value, it's wrong. Malik Zaire was extremely ineffectual while competing for the starting job at ND in 2016 and as the backup once BK finally made the decision to name Kizer the starter. It would have been pretty difficult for him to be worse after he transferred to UF and he wasn't. He actually started 2 games for UF. He would not have been in line to start any games for ND. Did he do a good job while at UF? No, but he wasn't worse than when he left ND, and again, no coach is going to spend extra time to try to develop a one-and-done player, so if MZ showed up at UF as an underdeveloped QB, and I think it's fairly obvious he did, he was likely going to remain that way.

Wimbush left ND as a backup with no path to starting barring injury. He at least started the first game for UCF. His stats at UCF were no different than his stats at ND. The regression had already happened at ND and UCF had no incentive to try to develop him after it became obvious he needed a lot of work to remain the starting QB.

Recruiting the right player is the bigger problem than development.

No, it's not. This isn't a zero-sum game. I don't care if BK has been recruiting QB's with an average position ranking of 50. His responsibility is to pursue the guys he thinks he can develop to run his system and then actually develop them. QBs, as with all position groups, are supposed to get better the longer they stay in a system. They aren't supposed to stay the same. They aren't supposed to regress. They are supposed to become better versions of themselves the longer they stay in the system no matter their overall talent level. An outlier here or there is understandable, but that's not the issue.

I've done this before and it appears I need to do this again. This is the summary of ND QBs under BK:

• Crist regressed his 2nd year as the starter, got 1 half as the starter in his 2nd year then got yanked.
• Rees got a 2nd year as starter but it was only after Golson got suspended. Golson was likely going to replace him as the starter in 2012 even if Rees hadn't been suspended for the first game. And no, Rees wasn't notably better in 2013. He just didn't regress. That's not the same thing. There were no signs that Rees was being developed into a better version of himself.
• Golson started off strong during his 2nd year as starter in 2014 before imploding and finally getting yanked before the bowl game. Many were calling for him to be replaced well before then (I wasn't one of them). There were no signs that EG was being developed into a better version of himself.
• Kizer had a phenomenal year in 2015 and yet still wasn't named the starter for 2016. He was eventually named the starter right before the 2nd game. After the entire team struggled in 2016, BK still thought it was a good idea to yank Kizer during the Stanford game only to find out that Zaire had regressed even more and was forced to put DK right back in the game. There were no signs DK was being developed into a better version of himself.
• Wimbush, who was considered to have the most overall QB talent of any BK recruit to that point and was thought to be immune to the previous QB trend, had a solid first several games as a starter in 2017 but then had notable deficiencies that limited his effectiveness down the stretch. BK assured everyone those issues were fixable and gave assurances they would be fixed in the offseason. He even gave a guarantee to St. Brown's dad they would be fixed, but in 2018 it was obvious right away those problems weren't fixed at all prompting BK to yank him in favor of Book.
• Book - the jury is still out but he did, in fact, regress early on in 2019. If anyone has a doubt that is true they should look at what happened after the Michigan game. Book went to BK after the game to find out why he wasn't performing up to his own standards, so Book himself knew he wasn't performing the way he should. Still, he bounced back during the 2nd half of the season against a fairly weak schedule. We likely won't know if he's turned a corner until he faces tougher competition next year.

ND QBs are not progressively getting better under BK. They are not being developed properly. The data is really clear on this point. An outlier here or there is understandable but right now the only consistency is that ND QBs are not becoming better versions of themselves the longer they stay in the program.

And people forget - this issue extends to the notable backups as well:

• Crist was a shell of his former self during his 2nd year. He got benched early on and mentally didn't have it for the rest of the season. We all remember what happened when he came in against USC. And for those who might say he didn't fit BK's system, why the hell did BK name him the starter in 2010 and 2011 if that was the case? (Side note: BK has since said his handling of Crist is one of his biggest regrets)
• Andrew Hendrix showed flashes of high-level QB play in his limited time as 3rd stringer in 2011 and 2012 but then looked like he had no idea how to play the position as the number 2 guy in 2013. He transferred to Miami of OH and had a pretty good final season away from BK.
• Zaire looked really good at the end of 2014 and early 2015. He looked inept in 2016 during his playing opportunities against UT and Stan.
• Phil J - Jury is still out (but people are worried).

Speaking of Andrew Hendrix, he wasn't mentioned in your "They were actually better at ND than their new place" comment and I can see why. Even with that statement being extremely misleading and wrong on its face, he didn't fit the bill at all because he was decidedly better at his new place. He started all 12 games at his new school and had impressive stats along the way even if it was for a struggling program.

Getting high-end QB talent at ND would be great, but BK will still have to prove he can develop that talent and do so consistently. He made a significant change in coaching philosophy in 2017 and for the better. Maybe Book will end up being proof that that improvement extends to his ability to develop QBs. I certainly hope so, but I won't assume anything until I actually see it.

 

[88ND]

Did you know how many transfer QBs were in the playoffs this year ?
3

Look within that.
Hurts...with Tua playing so well it appears Bama has good coaching, no?
Burrows was in an upside down situation within himself
Fields...he was the odd man out in Georgia who had a really good one in Fromm..but again it appears they have good coaching.

Their new destination...
OU gets real good production from the QB spot.
Sincerely,
Mayfield and Murray

OSU has been on point with the QB play
Haskins 50 TD tosses last year says so

Coach O caught lightning in a bottle with Burrows.

Either way the rule here is these players left good coaching and transferred to good coaching.

BK is not that.

 

[NDgreatestofalltime!]

The bottom line is that ND can compete with virtually any team but OSU, Clemson, or LSU. I’m not saying “win” but could have a legitimate chance.

Those three above mentioned are on another level though.

Their QBs are all way above the rest of the signal callers with the exception of Tua. If Tua isn’t injured Bama would likely be in the playoff.

 

[Golson5]

No, you are being extremely misleading here. They actually regressed while at ND. So they were actually better at ND their 1st year as starter than their 2nd year. And what happened to them after they left ND should have nothing to do with whether or not BK was properly developing them. UCF wasn't responsible for developing Wimbush, BK was. Mcelwain wasn't responsible for developing Zaire, BK was. Jimbo wasn't responsible for developing Golson, BK was. It would have been a different story if any of those players had transferred with multiple years of eligibility left. And even if we take your claim at face value, it's wrong. Malik Zaire was extremely ineffectual while competing for the starting job at ND in 2016 and as the backup once BK finally made the decision to name Kizer the starter. It would have been pretty difficult for him to be worse after he transferred to UF and he wasn't. He actually started 2 games for UF. He would not have been in line to start any games for ND. Did he do a good job while at UF? No, but he wasn't worse than when he left ND, and again, no coach is going to spend extra time to try to develop a one-and-done player, so if MZ showed up at UF as an underdeveloped QB, and I think it's fairly obvious he did, he was likely going to remain that way.

Wimbush left ND as a backup with no path to starting barring injury. He at least started the first game for UCF. His stats at UCF were no different than his stats at ND. The regression had already happened at ND and UCF had no incentive to try to develop him after it became obvious he needed a lot of work to remain the starting QB.

No, it's not. This isn't a zero-sum game. I don't care if BK has been recruiting QB's with an average position ranking of 50. His responsibility is to pursue the guys he thinks he can develop to run his system and then actually develop them. QBs, as with all position groups, are supposed to get better the longer they stay in a system. They aren't supposed to stay the same. They aren't supposed to regress. They are supposed to become better versions of themselves the longer they stay in the system no matter their overall talent level. An outlier here or there is understandable, but that's not the issue.

I've done this before and it appears I need to do this again. This is the summary of ND QBs under BK:

• Crist regressed his 2nd year as the starter, got 1 half as the starter in his 2nd year then got yanked.
• Rees got a 2nd year as starter but it was only after Golson got suspended. Golson was likely going to replace him as the starter in 2012 even if Rees hadn't been suspended for the first game. And no, Rees wasn't notably better in 2013. He just didn't regress. That's not the same thing. There were no signs that Rees was being developed into a better version of himself.
• Golson started off strong during his 2nd year as starter in 2014 before imploding and finally getting yanked before the bowl game. Many were calling for him to be replaced well before then (I wasn't one of them). There were no signs that EG was being developed into a better version of himself.
• Kizer had a phenomenal year in 2015 and yet still wasn't named the starter for 2016. He was eventually named the starter right before the 2nd game. After the entire team struggled in 2016, BK still thought it was a good idea to yank Kizer during the Stanford game only to find out that Zaire had regressed even more and was forced to put DK right back in the game. There were no signs DK was being developed into a better version of himself.
• Wimbush, who was considered to have the most overall QB talent of any BK recruit to that point and was thought to be immune to the previous QB trend, had a solid first several games as a starter in 2017 but then had notable deficiencies that limited his effectiveness down the stretch. BK assured everyone those issues were fixable and gave assurances they would be fixed in the offseason. He even gave a guarantee to St. Brown's dad they would be fixed, but in 2018 it was obvious right away those problems weren't fixed at all prompting BK to yank him in favor of Book.
• Book - the jury is still out but he did, in fact, regress early on in 2019. If anyone has a doubt that is true they should look at what happened after the Michigan game. Book went to BK after the game to find out why he wasn't performing up to his own standards, so Book himself knew he wasn't performing the way he should. Still, he bounced back during the 2nd half of the season against a fairly weak schedule. We likely won't know if he's turned a corner until he faces tougher competition next year.

ND QBs are not progressively getting better under BK. They are not being developed properly. The data is really clear on this point. An outlier here or there is understandable but right now the only consistency is that ND QBs are not becoming better versions of themselves the longer they stay in the program.

And people forget - this issue extends to the notable backups as well:

• Crist was a shell of his former self during his 2nd year. He got benched early on and mentally didn't have it for the rest of the season. We all remember what happened when he came in against USC. And for those who might say he didn't fit BK's system, why the hell did BK name him the starter in 2010 and 2011 if that was the case? (Side note: BK has since said his handling of Crist is one of his biggest regrets)
• Andrew Hendrix showed flashes of high-level QB play in his limited time as 3rd stringer in 2011 and 2012 but then looked like he had no idea how to play the position as the number 2 guy in 2013. He transferred to Miami of OH and had a pretty good final season away from BK.
• Zaire looked really good at the end of 2014 and early 2015. He looked inept in 2016 during his playing opportunities against UT and Stan.
• Phil J - Jury is still out (but people are worried).

Speaking of Andrew Hendrix, he wasn't mentioned in your "They were actually better at ND than their new place" comment and I can see why. Even with that statement being extremely misleading and wrong on its face, he didn't fit the bill at all because he was decidedly better at his new place. He started all 12 games at his new school and had impressive stats along the way even if it was for a struggling program.

Getting high-end QB talent at ND would be great, but BK will still have to prove he can develop that talent and do so consistently. He made a significant change in coaching philosophy in 2017 and for the better. Maybe Book will end up being proof that that improvement extends to his ability to develop QBs. I certainly hope so, but I won't assume anything until I actually see it.

I read some, way too long. I disagreed with a lot and stopped reading.

 

[Golson5]

The bottom line is that ND can compete with virtually any team but OSU, Clemson, or LSU. I’m not saying “win” but could have a legitimate chance.

Those three above mentioned are on another level though.

Their QBs are all way above the rest of the signal callers with the exception of Tua. If Tua isn’t injured Bama would likely be in the playoff.

Add Alabama to your list. We can compete with anyone after those 4

 

[88ND]

No, you are being extremely misleading here. They actually regressed while at ND. So they were actually better at ND their 1st year as starter than their 2nd year. And what happened to them after they left ND should have nothing to do with whether or not BK was properly developing them. UCF wasn't responsible for developing Wimbush, BK was. Mcelwain wasn't responsible for developing Zaire, BK was. Jimbo wasn't responsible for developing Golson, BK was. It would have been a different story if any of those players had transferred with multiple years of eligibility left. And even if we take your claim at face value, it's wrong. Malik Zaire was extremely ineffectual while competing for the starting job at ND in 2016 and as the backup once BK finally made the decision to name Kizer the starter. It would have been pretty difficult for him to be worse after he transferred to UF and he wasn't. He actually started 2 games for UF. He would not have been in line to start any games for ND. Did he do a good job while at UF? No, but he wasn't worse than when he left ND, and again, no coach is going to spend extra time to try to develop a one-and-done player, so if MZ showed up at UF as an underdeveloped QB, and I think it's fairly obvious he did, he was likely going to remain that way.

Wimbush left ND as a backup with no path to starting barring injury. He at least started the first game for UCF. His stats at UCF were no different than his stats at ND. The regression had already happened at ND and UCF had no incentive to try to develop him after it became obvious he needed a lot of work to remain the starting QB.

No, it's not. This isn't a zero-sum game. I don't care if BK has been recruiting QB's with an average position ranking of 50. His responsibility is to pursue the guys he thinks he can develop to run his system and then actually develop them. QBs, as with all position groups, are supposed to get better the longer they stay in a system. They aren't supposed to stay the same. They aren't supposed to regress. They are supposed to become better versions of themselves the longer they stay in the system no matter their overall talent level. An outlier here or there is understandable, but that's not the issue.

I've done this before and it appears I need to do this again. This is the summary of ND QBs under BK:

• Crist regressed his 2nd year as the starter, got 1 half as the starter in his 2nd year then got yanked.
• Rees got a 2nd year as starter but it was only after Golson got suspended. Golson was likely going to replace him as the starter in 2012 even if Rees hadn't been suspended for the first game. And no, Rees wasn't notably better in 2013. He just didn't regress. That's not the same thing. There were no signs that Rees was being developed into a better version of himself.
• Golson started off strong during his 2nd year as starter in 2014 before imploding and finally getting yanked before the bowl game. Many were calling for him to be replaced well before then (I wasn't one of them). There were no signs that EG was being developed into a better version of himself.
• Kizer had a phenomenal year in 2015 and yet still wasn't named the starter for 2016. He was eventually named the starter right before the 2nd game. After the entire team struggled in 2016, BK still thought it was a good idea to yank Kizer during the Stanford game only to find out that Zaire had regressed even more and was forced to put DK right back in the game. There were no signs DK was being developed into a better version of himself.
• Wimbush, who was considered to have the most overall QB talent of any BK recruit to that point and was thought to be immune to the previous QB trend, had a solid first several games as a starter in 2017 but then had notable deficiencies that limited his effectiveness down the stretch. BK assured everyone those issues were fixable and gave assurances they would be fixed in the offseason. He even gave a guarantee to St. Brown's dad they would be fixed, but in 2018 it was obvious right away those problems weren't fixed at all prompting BK to yank him in favor of Book.
• Book - the jury is still out but he did, in fact, regress early on in 2019. If anyone has a doubt that is true they should look at what happened after the Michigan game. Book went to BK after the game to find out why he wasn't performing up to his own standards, so Book himself knew he wasn't performing the way he should. Still, he bounced back during the 2nd half of the season against a fairly weak schedule. We likely won't know if he's turned a corner until he faces tougher competition next year.

ND QBs are not progressively getting better under BK. They are not being developed properly. The data is really clear on this point. An outlier here or there is understandable but right now the only consistency is that ND QBs are not becoming better versions of themselves the longer they stay in the program.

And people forget - this issue extends to the notable backups as well:

• Crist was a shell of his former self during his 2nd year. He got benched early on and mentally didn't have it for the rest of the season. We all remember what happened when he came in against USC. And for those who might say he didn't fit BK's system, why the hell did BK name him the starter in 2010 and 2011 if that was the case? (Side note: BK has since said his handling of Crist is one of his biggest regrets)
• Andrew Hendrix showed flashes of high-level QB play in his limited time as 3rd stringer in 2011 and 2012 but then looked like he had no idea how to play the position as the number 2 guy in 2013. He transferred to Miami of OH and had a pretty good final season away from BK.
• Zaire looked really good at the end of 2014 and early 2015. He looked inept in 2016 during his playing opportunities against UT and Stan.
• Phil J - Jury is still out (but people are worried).

Speaking of Andrew Hendrix, he wasn't mentioned in your "They were actually better at ND than their new place" comment and I can see why. Even with that statement being extremely misleading and wrong on its face, he didn't fit the bill at all because he was decidedly better at his new place. He started all 12 games at his new school and had impressive stats along the way even if it was for a struggling program.

Getting high-end QB talent at ND would be great, but BK will still have to prove he can develop that talent and do so consistently. He made a significant change in coaching philosophy in 2017 and for the better. Maybe Book will end up being proof that that improvement extends to his ability to develop QBs. I certainly hope so, but I won't assume anything until I actually see it.

Extraordinarily spot on.

I've been saying since last year every single QB under BK regresses or is stagnant.

Every single one.
One or two ...ok....shit happens.
In a decade not once has any of the players at the most important position progressed. An entire decade?

It's really one of two things...
BK is actually trying to coach poorly to have every QB regress
or............
He's just sheer lousy at it and refuse to acknowledge such therefore won't put the right staff together correcting the problem.

Either way it's wrong and until BK gets 100 miles from the QB position this will continue to hold us back.

 

[NDgreatestofalltime!]

I’ve said the same thing every ND QB has regressed from year one to year two, with Book now being the exception. His completion percentage is down but many of his other numbers are way up.

Hopefully, he has another outstanding season next year and we see an end to this particular cycle.

 

[88ND]

I’ve said the same thing every ND QB has regressed from year one to year two, with Book now being the exception. His completion percentage is down but many of his other numbers are way up.

Hopefully, he has another outstanding season next year and we see an end to this particular cycle.

If he has an outstanding season it will be his first.

How many tight window throws is he making? None.
How many needles is he threading for a huge 3rd and long completion? None.
How many pockets is he navigating within buying that little bit of extra time for a long completion? None.

Those things haven't changed whatsoever in his 22 starts and in college football of today Book is a long way from outstanding.

 

[Golson5]

Book did not regress in year 2. He improved.

Golson did not regress in year 2. He improved.

Malik Zaire didnt regress. He just didnt get playing time.

Kizer was better in some areas and worse in some areas in year 2. Without Fuller. Record wasnt good but individually very similar.

Wimbush regressed. No accuracy. Teams figured him out. Went to UCF, they couldnt do anything about it either. Just not an accurate QB.

The fact the coaching staff got the numbers they did out of Rees is a miracle. He had no talent and as a senior threw 27 tds to 13 ints. Hell of a job by the staff there

2 got better
1 was similar
1 regressed
1 was a coaching miracle

Doesnt fit your narratives but the truth

 

[deadirishpoet]

He won't bench Book and that's the problem....

Book plays ultra safe and literally takes zero chances. He's steady in that BK knows Book isn't risky. He'll be good enough to beat the teams he should beat but not good enough to beat the better teams. Given our schedule has been really soft as of late and this new found 10 win season rallying cry...well shit things are just fine in BK land.

Wimbush made beating an average team adventurous.

Book is the safe selection. He won't make mistakes hurting the team against the weak yet he won't make any key plays helping us defeat the strong.

Oh well...another season watching an offense terrified to fail.

Who do you bench Book for?

He lead the team 2 straight years to 10 win seasons [23-3] record. 57 TDs to 17 ints

 

[Extirpate 6951]

Who do you bench Book for?

He lead the team 2 straight years to 10 win seasons [23-3] record. 57 TDs to 17 ints

Nobody else can apparently throw spirals so he is the only one capable of starting at ND.

 

[mbd11]

Is this for real?

One thing I'd agree with him on is that our defense probably would match up a lot better with LSU, than OU's defense did. It would be strength vs strength (their passing attack vs our passing D). Our passing D is ranked 3rd in the country. Brock Purdy threw for 5 TDs vs OU (they scored 41), and we held them to 3 FGs. So we'd probably give LSU a much better game than OU did. They'd probably beat us something like 31-21.

As far as Clemson, I think our D could do pretty well against them again, but again, our offense would probably get shut down. Would probably be a 27-10 type of game, in their favor.

 

[Bumpdaddy]

I read some, way too long. I disagreed with a lot and stopped reading.

Of course, you did. You don't like to be challenged. If you did you wouldn't have written this:

Book did not regress in year 2. He improved.

Golson did not regress in year 2. He improved.

Malik Zaire didnt regress. He just didnt get playing time.

Kizer was better in some areas and worse in some areas in year 2. Without Fuller. Record wasnt good but individually very similar.

Wimbush regressed. No accuracy. Teams figured him out. Went to UCF, they couldnt do anything about it either. Just not an accurate QB.

The fact the coaching staff got the numbers they did out of Rees is a miracle. He had no talent and as a senior threw 27 tds to 13 ints. Hell of a job by the staff there

2 got better
1 was similar
1 regressed
1 was a coaching miracle

Doesnt fit your narratives but the truth

The only way you could feel comfortable writing that is by not reading what I wrote. Almost all of your points are wrong.

Book did regress in year 2 by his own admission and then got better later in the year but the jury is still out overall because he got better against some very weak teams. We still need to see what he can do against top teams with good defenses. That has been a big question mark since last year and it remains so.

Golson most definitely did NOT improve in year two. As you are reading that sentence I'm sure you are thinking, "Aha, you are full of it because I can prove it by bringing up his 2014 statistics and compare them to 2012." Only a sophist would think that way. Statistically, Golson was doing well in the first half of 2014 and then he epically fell apart in the 2nd half. His regression was actually a really big story. Looking only at his year-end statistics is the equivalent of burying your head in the sand. And to sum up his 2nd year as "he improved" means you either don't know what happened to Golson in 2014 or that you want to play a sophist's game with statistics while ignoring what actually happened as the year progressed.

Zaire most definitely did regress. He was a very effective QB in 2014 and early 2015 and became extremely ineffectual in 2016. When he had his opportunities against UT - and he had plenty of opportunities in that game - and against Stanford, he didn't look like his former self in any way.

You are close to being right about Kizer. He was similar statistically but, ultimately, I believe he regressed. He wasn't the same cool, calm, and collected QB we saw in 2015 that could mount a game-winning drive to close out a close game. Some of that had to do with the personnel that he lost from the year before but most of it was because of BK's team-wide failure to prepare his team for 2016. DK regressed in 2016 along with almost everyone else on the team. If you think he was somehow immune from the team's overall regression no one else seems to see it that way. His slide from being considered a surefire 1st round pick to an iffy 2nd round pick has everything to do with what people saw in 2016.

Saying the staff got the most out of Rees doesn't say anything about his overall development, but I have always said Rees was the one guy who didn't regress. He didn't improve either and, again, that is supposed to be what development is all about.

And, of course, you didn't mention anything about the notable backups along the way because that wouldn't support your argument either but the backups are a big part of BK's history with QBs too.

Look, this really isn't a controversial topic. The data for ND QBs under BK paints a clear picture that QBs haven't been improving as they progress through the system. It's no longer debatable. The sports media this year has made this an open topic including bringing it up with BK directly. This was Eric Hansen after the UM game:

...the narrative that Kelly quarterbacks regress in their second season as a starter is something the coach must get to the bottom of.

“We’re all accountable,” Kelly said of Book’s performance. “I’ve got watch the film really and figure out, ‘Did he get flushed on the play? Can he spend more time in the pocket?’ There’s a myriad of different scenarios that we’re going to have to vet out and find out where can we get better?

“Because we have to get better (at the QB position) — clearly — after tonight. So can Ian get better? No doubt he can get better.”

The link to that quote is right here. The other ND sites and media sources have talked about this topic as well and have also brought it up to BK in press conferences.

As I said before but, of course, you claim to have not read, I hope what we have seen in Ian Book in the last several games are signs of true development and not a reflection of the competition he has faced. BK said the coaches would be accountable after the UM game and hopefully the proof will be in the form of Ian playing lights out against a top defense next year.

 

[NDgreatestofalltime!]

If he has an outstanding season it will be his first.

How many tight window throws is he making? None.
How many needles is he threading for a huge 3rd and long completion? None.
How many pockets is he navigating within buying that little bit of extra time for a long completion? None.

Those things haven't changed whatsoever in his 22 starts and in college football of today Book is a long way from outstanding.

We get it bro, you don’t like the kid (Book), but ND ended 11-2 and he had a TD to INT ration of 35-6, that’s pretty damn good.

We’ve all beaten his deficiencies to death, arm strength, reading through his progressions, happy feet, but he’s done a lot of good things to. He is a gamer, not a QB phenom, but he plays hard, and never gives up.

I’m curious as to what all of you Anti-Book guys would have BK do at the position?

 

[88ND]

I’m curious as to what all of you Anti-Book guys would have BK do at the position?

#1
When the QB"s are having their meeting BK needs to be doing something else. Anything else...just be disappeared. Work on recruiting.

#2
When the QB's are having practice be somewhere else. Work on recruiting.

#3
When the offense is going over plays, design and scheme be somewhere else. Work on recruiting.

#4
When going over the depth chart for the offense be somewhere else. Yep...work on recruiting.

#5
Repeat the above the very next week.

 

[88ND]

Of course, you did. You don't like to be challenged. If you did you wouldn't have written this:


The only way you could feel comfortable writing that is by not reading what I wrote. Almost all of your points are wrong.

Book did regress in year 2 by his own admission and then got better later in the year but the jury is still out overall because he got better against some very weak teams. We still need to see what he can do against top teams with good defenses. That has been a big question mark since last year and it remains so.

Golson most definitely did NOT improve in year two. As you are reading that sentence I'm sure you are thinking, "Aha, you are full of it because I can prove it by bringing up his 2014 statistics and compare them to 2012." Only a sophist would think that way. Statistically, Golson was doing well in the first half of 2014 and then he epically fell apart in the 2nd half. His regression was actually a really big story. Looking only at his year-end statistics is the equivalent of burying your head in the sand. And to sum up his 2nd year as "he improved" means you either don't know what happened to Golson in 2014 or that you want to play a sophist's game with statistics while ignoring what actually happened as the year progressed.

Zaire most definitely did regress. He was a very effective QB in 2014 and early 2015 and became extremely ineffectual in 2016. When he had his opportunities against UT - and he had plenty of opportunities in that game - and against Stanford, he didn't look like his former self in any way.

You are close to being right about Kizer. He was similar statistically but, ultimately, I believe he regressed. He wasn't the same cool, calm, and collected QB we saw in 2015 that could mount a game-winning drive to close out a close game. Some of that had to do with the personnel that he lost from the year before but most of it was because of BK's team-wide failure to prepare his team for 2016. DK regressed in 2016 along with almost everyone else on the team. If you think he was somehow immune from the team's overall regression no one else seems to see it that way. His slide from being considered a surefire 1st round pick to an iffy 2nd round pick has everything to do with what people saw in 2016.

Saying the staff got the most out of Rees doesn't say anything about his overall development, but I have always said Rees was the one guy who didn't regress. He didn't improve either and, again, that is supposed to be what development is all about.

And, of course, you didn't mention anything about the notable backups along the way because that wouldn't support your argument either but the backups are a big part of BK's history with QBs too.

Look, this really isn't a controversial topic. The data for ND QBs under BK paints a clear picture that QBs haven't been improving as they progress through the system. It's no longer debatable. The sports media this year has made this an open topic including bringing it up with BK directly. This was Eric Hansen after the UM game:

​

The link to that quote is right here. The other ND sites and media sources have talked about this topic as well and have also brought it up to BK in press conferences.

As I said before but, of course, you claim to have not read, I hope what we have seen in Ian Book in the last several games are signs of true development and not a reflection of the competition he has faced. BK said the coaches would be accountable after the UM game and hopefully the proof will be in the form of Ian playing lights out against a top defense next year.

What's bizarre to me is how the Brian Kelly apologists can defend this.

In other words during year 10 @ND why is this even a topic of discussion amid the media? This is Notre Dame and in year 10 he's mystified why there is a big problem with the QB position.

This isn't a place to be learning on the job, no?

Good lord almighty the apologists will say something like BK will do the right thing....he's in the meetings. He's at practice. He knows more than the posters do.

Actually HE DOESN'T KNOW...in year 10...why the wheels keep falling off the QB position.

That's extremely telling!!!

 

[chitown sot]

W
R
O
N
G

You can't help yourself.

The most important position is the QB. Present day more than ever.

For the entire tenure of Brian Kelly who is the HC of Notre Dame...the QB position has been a quagmire to say the least.

We will continue to beat the bad and lose against the good. That's the legacy of Brian Kelly. How in the hell hasn't he beat an elite team at least once. Not even by way of accident to win just one in a decade.

That's pathetic.

Yeah well.....hes going to start recruiting better. Ten fricking years and hes finally concluded maybe they should recruit better.

 

[Golson5]

Of course, you did. You don't like to be challenged. If you did you wouldn't have written this:


The only way you could feel comfortable writing that is by not reading what I wrote. Almost all of your points are wrong.

Book did regress in year 2 by his own admission and then got better later in the year but the jury is still out overall because he got better against some very weak teams. We still need to see what he can do against top teams with good defenses. That has been a big question mark since last year and it remains so.

Golson most definitely did NOT improve in year two. As you are reading that sentence I'm sure you are thinking, "Aha, you are full of it because I can prove it by bringing up his 2014 statistics and compare them to 2012." Only a sophist would think that way. Statistically, Golson was doing well in the first half of 2014 and then he epically fell apart in the 2nd half. His regression was actually a really big story. Looking only at his year-end statistics is the equivalent of burying your head in the sand. And to sum up his 2nd year as "he improved" means you either don't know what happened to Golson in 2014 or that you want to play a sophist's game with statistics while ignoring what actually happened as the year progressed.

Zaire most definitely did regress. He was a very effective QB in 2014 and early 2015 and became extremely ineffectual in 2016. When he had his opportunities against UT - and he had plenty of opportunities in that game - and against Stanford, he didn't look like his former self in any way.

You are close to being right about Kizer. He was similar statistically but, ultimately, I believe he regressed. He wasn't the same cool, calm, and collected QB we saw in 2015 that could mount a game-winning drive to close out a close game. Some of that had to do with the personnel that he lost from the year before but most of it was because of BK's team-wide failure to prepare his team for 2016. DK regressed in 2016 along with almost everyone else on the team. If you think he was somehow immune from the team's overall regression no one else seems to see it that way. His slide from being considered a surefire 1st round pick to an iffy 2nd round pick has everything to do with what people saw in 2016.

Saying the staff got the most out of Rees doesn't say anything about his overall development, but I have always said Rees was the one guy who didn't regress. He didn't improve either and, again, that is supposed to be what development is all about.

And, of course, you didn't mention anything about the notable backups along the way because that wouldn't support your argument either but the backups are a big part of BK's history with QBs too.

Look, this really isn't a controversial topic. The data for ND QBs under BK paints a clear picture that QBs haven't been improving as they progress through the system. It's no longer debatable. The sports media this year has made this an open topic including bringing it up with BK directly. This was Eric Hansen after the UM game:

​

The link to that quote is right here. The other ND sites and media sources have talked about this topic as well and have also brought it up to BK in press conferences.

As I said before but, of course, you claim to have not read, I hope what we have seen in Ian Book in the last several games are signs of true development and not a reflection of the competition he has faced. BK said the coaches would be accountable after the UM game and hopefully the proof will be in the form of Ian playing lights out against a top defense next year.

Your points are wrong. Why am I going to read all that nonsense over and over and waste my time. I dont agree with your points at all

 

[Bumpdaddy]

Your points are wrong. Why am I going to read all that nonsense over and over and waste my time. I dont agree with your points at all

Good to know. You aren't a serious poster.

"You are wrong."

Who can argue with that?

 

[Golson5]

Good to know. You aren't a serious poster.

"You are wrong."

Who can argue with that?

Do you really think I care if you think I'm a "serious poster" or not....LOL

I'll sleep just fine without your approval. Your points are wrong and I'm tired of arguing the same things over and over.