Notre Dame was heavy underdogs in the Cotton Bowl and was supposed to feel disrespected. The game was supposed to be a tight contest turning on a couple breaks for the victors. Nothing of the sort happened as Clemson proved itself thoroughly superior as Notre Dame fell flat on its face again in a big bowl game.
Now, the Irish face an off-season of having to pick themselves up off the ground and prepare for what is lining up to be a very challenging 2019 schedule. Here’s our review of the Cotton Bowl Classic.
Stats Package
| STAT | IRISH | TIGERS |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 3 | 30 |
| Yards | 248 | 538 |
| Passing | 160 | 327 |
| Rushing | 88 | 211 |
| 1st Downs | 17 | 26 |
| 3rd/4th Conversions | 6/19 | 10/19 |
| Yards Per Play | 3.59 | 6.89 |
| Turnovers | 2 | 1 |
PASSING OFFENSE
In my preview, I mentioned Ian Book needed a 400 yard total offense type of effort in this game for Notre Dame to win. That did not happen, nor was Book anywhere close to performing that well. In fact, as he faced the top defense in the country it was perhaps Book’s worst game with the blue and gold.
Absolutely nothing could be established down field. That seemed equal parts by design (not sure why, other than Book’s struggles going deep), Book being too skittish to set his feet even in clean pockets, Clemson playing great coverage, and Notre Dame not having the horses to get open.
It seemed as if Long & Co. were betting on Book being able to move the ball in the short-passing game and that didn’t work. The Irish QB actually started 7 of 9 with completion streaks of 3 and then 4 only to finish the game with back-to-back completions just twice and no streaks of 3 straight completions among Book’s last 24 attempts.
Notre Dame’s offense simply cannot operate efficiently against a great defense when this happens. A quote made the rounds this past week from a former Notre Dame assistant that Clemson DC Brent Venables would eat Chip Long’s lunch, and yup confirmed! Three points and 3.59 YPP (lowest since the Georgia game last year) was as disheartening as it was pathetic.
The pass blocking was probably good enough to keep the Irish in a closer game but was far from good, as well. I’ll have more on Book below but unless he improves on his second and third reads from the pocket while under mild pressure this offense isn’t going to get markedly better next year.
RUSHING OFFENSE
It will get lost in the tide of a blowout loss but the Irish did enough on the ground to make things respectable against Clemson’s defense. This type of performance just couldn’t be paired with a disappearing passing game. Clemson also did a good job making sure Notre Dame didn’t break any long runs, too. Both Dexter and Book had long runs of 11 yards and that was it for explosiveness.
Irish Running Success
Williams – 10 of 16 (62.5%)
Book – 4 of 9 (44.4%)
Armstrong – 0 of 1 (0.0%)
TOTAL – 14 of 26 (53.8%)
At times, it felt like Book wasn’t doing much with his feet. With sacks removed he did finish with 56 yards on 9 attempts which is fine. It’s those 6 sacks given up that kills the offense. Also, it’s pretty telling that this game came down to Dexter and Book carrying the ball only. Not great for any offense to be so reliant on two players.
PASSING DEFENSE
If you’re willing to be lenient toward Notre Dame this game really could be summed up by Clemson having a far better quarterback and wide receiver combination. In today’s game, that can and did go a long way especially when Notre Dame lost the services of Julian Love for the majority of the first half.
Clemson quarterback Trevor Lawrence turned in a near-dominant performance finishing with 327 passing yards, 3 touchdowns, and an important 15 first downs through the air. Unlike his opponent in Book, the Tigers’ Lawrence strung together completion streaks of 6, 4, 7, and 5 throughout the game to keep their offense humming.
Perhaps most of all, Clemson was able to unlock Notre Dame’s penchant for not allowing big plays through the air. With help from his athletic receivers, Lawrence had 4 completions of at least 30 yards with a pair of touchdowns in that mix.
Notre Dame had a perilously thin cornerback depth chart which never really bit them in the ass until today. Watkins transferred (could’ve used you, bro), Crawford was lost for the season, Bracy played a lot as a freshman but couldn’t be trusted, Coleman was limited to nickel only, and that left an extremely cold and untested Donte Vaughn to get abused several times.
RUSHING DEFENSE
If you had told me Travis Etienne would’ve started this game with just 1 successful run on his first 9 carries I would’ve believed the Irish were winning in the second half. Alas, the Irish really bottled up the Clemson run game well into the 3rd quarter but with the passing of Lawrence it didn’t matter.
Tigers Running Success
Etienne – 5 of 14 (35.7%)
Brice – 2 of 2 (100.0%)
Choice – 2 of 2 (100.0%)
Feaster – 2 of 4 (50.0%)
Dixon – 2 of 6 (33.3%)
Law – 2 of 4 (50.0%)
Overton – 0 of 1 (0.0%)
Rencher – 0 of 1 (0.0%)
TOTAL – 15 of 34 (44.1%)
Clemson had a pair of 23-yard gains on the ground in garbage time in the 4th quarter while the 62-yard touchdown run by Etienne was obviously a huge blow. Otherwise, the Tigers weren’t making much hay on the ground (11 yard gain by Lawrence was the 4th longest run) it’s just the Irish couldn’t exploit this enough on defense.
SPECIAL TEAMS
The Irish won the special teams battle but again it didn’t matter. Clemson missed a field goal from 49 yards, Newsome won the punting battle, and Notre Dame forced a fumble that the Tigers were super lucky was ruled out of bounds in a moment that could’ve completely changed the outlook of the game early on.
TURNING POINT
The injury to corner Julian Love is an obvious turning point.
A series of plays and possessions in the second quarter definitely turned the tide away from Notre Dame. With the game tied 3-3 the Irish drove the ball down to the Clemson 34-yard line* and proceeded to throw a pair of incompletions on third and fourth down. Three plays later, Lawrence connects on a 52-yard touchdown.
Three plays later, Book missed Boykin on a 3rd & 2 crucial drive to try and answer. Clemson drives but misses their field goal only to see an odd run call on 3rd & 10 from the Clemson 45-yard line in which Dexter loses 7 yards on the next Irish drive. Clemson then connected on a 42-yard touchdown and took complete control of the game with a 16-3 lead.
*Not being able to rely on Yoon for anything over 45 yards was a sneaky big disadvantage for this offense.
3 STARS
1 Alohi Gilman – Got torched for a touchdown but played hard with 9 solo tackles (19 total), a forced fumble, and 2 break-ups.
2 Jonathan Bonner – Broke up a couple passes early and played one of his best games of his career.
3 Dexter Williams – A really tough 83 total yards in his last game with the Irish.
FINAL NOTES
We’ve had many examples through the years but let’s enter this as the number 838th one that a team dominating a supposed weak schedule usually means that team is dominant. Everything pointed to Clemson being a great team and Notre Dame found that out on Saturday.
Who’s fault is it that Notre Dame isn’t good enough or not on Clemson’s level? The answer to that question is where you should direct your rage.
I’ve always been it’s the “jimmy’s and joe’s before the x’s and o’s” type of commentator. In that light, the Irish need to do better. Most importantly at the offensive skill positions. There’s been nothing about the recruiting on offense for the past several years that suggests Notre Dame is going to be taking the next step with 2 or 3 young “can’t miss” players. Clemson has 3 or 4 of those guys and the Irish have zero. It makes a big difference in a year when Notre Dame’s defense was veteran-laden and good enough to trade hay makers with the nation’s top defense.
As such, I think people have to be far, far, far more skeptical and critical of Notre Dame’s recruiting. Defensively, the program appears to have hit its stride with talent and numbers, for the most part. On offense, there are only 2 quarterback/running back/wide receiver recruits for the 2017-19 classes (Jurkovec & Austin) inside the Top 200 nationally. The best for the incoming class at those positions is No. 379 nationally! Next year, maybe half of the schedule will have equal or better skill position talent. Think about that. This is less than ideal in a college football world where you absolutely have to be able to walk in to any game and score 30 points if necessary. You cannot manufacture offense on this biggest stage, you need game-wrecking recruits.
It’s been quite the wild season for Ian Book who goes from backup to pushing for some Heisman votes to playing pretty poorly down the stretch and having an off-season to think about this terrible performance. The thing about Book is that–as things stand right now–it looks as though the offense hit its ceiling with him pretty quickly once he became the starter and he’s probably not going to get a whole lot better next year. The semi-final winning quarterbacks just finished their games going a combined 51 of 66 for 645 yards and 7 touchdowns with no interceptions. In this day and age the quarterback has to be able to play at that high of a level and no one should quibble with the belief that Book can’t get the Irish there. We’re not likely to see any Tee Higgins or Jerry Jeudy playmakers to make Book’s job easier, either. After this performance, I’d say it became 30% more likely Ian Book doesn’t finish 2019 as the starting quarterback due to production-based decisions.
I predicted Clemson would score 30 points and that was spot on. The Irish offense scored 20 fewer points that I thought, though. Indictment on the coaching? Probably a little bit as the offense didn’t seem to adjust very well. Still, the offense especially was killed by mental errors and bad breaks. Of course, you can pin that on coaching too! The Irish did cross into Clemson territory on 5 occasions although only in to the red zone once. In a replay the offense probably scores 9 to 13 points with a couple breaks and having a stronger kicker. Not much better and still pretty underwhelming.
Bottom line, Notre Dame has largely coached up a bunch of players and gone through 2017-18 living up to their potential with the recruiting…and it’s still not good enough to be an elite team. On the one hand good job by Kelly & Co. re-setting things and taking the program to another level. However, the ceiling still seems concrete reinforced when it comes to these big bowl/playoff games and it would be completely normal to be very frustrated with that reality and nothing on the horizon looking like it’s going to even attempt to crack that roof above the program.
Thanks, Eric. Also thanks to Andy for a very good Instant Reaction and to everyone who posted, all of which I just read through. There are some debatable points and views on different sides, but overall in the depths of our mutual deep frustration (and if I may venture a guess sadness) the level of Instant dialogue is a credit to the site.
As for your take on Book — I concur on his poor level of play, I am just wondering if he had some lingering effects from the rib, aggravated by a couple of early hits, that contributed to his skittishness in the pocket? I would hate to think that you are right and that this is his ceiling.
I think we’re being hard on Book. The line was clearly outclassed, thus the sacks and hurries and lack of a running game. Sorry Eric, 88 yards rushing will never beat a team of Clemson’s caliber. Book seems to lack deep ball arm strength and accuracy, but the loss isn’t on him. Tua would have been affected by the Clemson front 7 performance. Murray probably not so much. Lamar Jackson not so much. Lawrence would have been affected if our guys had been able to get after him like they got after Book.
Clemson beat Alabama in 2016 with 91 yards rushing on 42 carries.
I never said the loss is on Book but let’s call a spade a spade. He played really poorly.
Fair enough, but so did the Oline.
New topic—do you think Vaughn could make the Clemson or Bama football team? Serious question.
Vaughn? Goodness, no. Not unless he can do his career over with fewer injuries.
There are five guys in our entire roster who would get 2/3 of the snaps they got at ND if they were on Bama, and two of them are special teams players (and that includes being generous to Gilman).
The over-excitement about the last couple recruiting classes has been bizarre to me. By objective metrics, the classes are good to very good (basically, a 7 out of 10. A solid B, maybe a B+ if we’re being generous), and people are treating them like it will get us to a new level. I tend to agree with your assessments, Eric. There seems to be too much of a focus on “program fits,” which is a talking point that at least the Irish Illustrated guys have bought hook, line, and sinker. After yesterday, it seems pretty clear that, to the extent that winning a national championship is actually the goal of the football program, the focus should be on going crazy trying to get any top-100 recruit that can get past admissions.
Looks to me like the problem that drives BK towards the “program fit” is that the school is even more disposed to give the football coach and staff a really hard time if admitted players wind up NOT to be a good fit, and cheat, and do misdemeanors, etc. It’s to me like commanding in the military — if you have a chain of command that makes you jump through a bunch of hoops every time a soldier screws up, you are less willing (even unconsciously) to tolerate the gifted ones with a propensity to screw up. This tension has always been the case at ND, since the Rock – certainly under Leahy and Ara and Lou — and with the rise of ND in the rankings of universities, the pressure to have wonderful young men on the squad has increased. BTW I LIKE our players, and they mostly seem like wonderful young men. And very good players. With Balis, more in shape no less. BUT as noted by Eric and others, lacking top-5 program elite status. Which to be honest we have not had since Lou’s golden years with Vinnie Cerrato (who had to leave if you recall because he pushed that envelope too hard).
completely agree. I cant count the number of times I see recruiting alerts about a guy committing to ND and I’m like “well 3 stars are great BUT…” Im kind of getting sick of thinking heaven has blessed us for getting ONE 5 star every 3-4 cycles.
I think the excitement in some past classes were that we were getting more top 100 players. And that those players with at better positions (not just OL or TE) like Griffith, Jurkovec, Allen, Austin. So not 5 stars but top 100 at key positions that we hadn’t been getting.
This years class doesn’t have those top 100 players but is actually quite deep. Currently I have the class at 74% of 4 stars. That’s much higher than the low 50% we have been at.
And maybe a really important step in the right direction. If we know we can’t get the elite players then the other thing we can do is literally have 4 star players littered all over the roster. So e.g. if 60% 4 star or better is the “typical” championship level team, that’s not good enough for us because that usually includes a 5 star or two in most classes (so like 10 on a team).
Ok so the other option, perhaps, is that we need something more like 70-75% 4 stars (in numbers that’s like 9-12 more 4 stars than the 60%) on the team because none of them are elite like Bama/Clemson. That seems to me the only other way to compete with those who have elite talents. It also might be more doable given our constraints.
I think that’s the only hope for real national championship contention, but I suspect it’s not enough without 5-star talent.
Also, FWIW, Allen fell out of the top-100 by the time of final rankings. Based on early reports from practice – or, mostly, the lack thereof – there’s reason to suspect he was overranked.
I think actually with the significant amount more of 4 stars would make up for the lack of 5 stars but it’s just actually really hard to get 70%+ 4 stars every year.
Yea, i hadn’t noticed Allen falling out but I also didn’t notice that Simon and Lamb jumped up so we had 5 top 100 players last year
Elite schools’ top 100 players tend to make an immediate impact as frosh, even at qb. Ours never do, at least as true difference makers. Those really elite guys are much more serious about playing professionally than they are about the specific school degree. Hell, those guys won’t even play in bowl games now, something unheard of just a few years ago, so why risk going to a school where the classroom and disciplinary environment is stacked against you?
I don’t particularly like Kelly, especially how he treats qbs, but I suspect he’s doing about as well as possible given the ND environment. So I agree with you guys that it’s not the x’s and o’s, but I do think you are being unrealistic about the johnnies and joes we can attract and retain.
I think we are doing that, going crazy to get top 100 recruits that get past admissions, but are never going to be as successful as the schools that don’t have that stricture of ND admissions standards, a huge part of “program fits”. Under the current ND program regime, we will never be able to recruit to the level and depth of the football elites.
So I agree with you re the unwarranted excitement about our recent recruiting classes. They’ve been better than most of our recent decade history, but not elite. And I don’t see that changing no matter who the coach is. Fan expectations are not aligned with the reality of today’s CFB and ND’s place in it. We have a lot of on the field data right before our eyes. Decades of it, actually. Very good does not equal great. We are very good, some years. That’s it.
A few reasons IMO.
When things are going well on the field most aren’t ready to be Debbie Downer about recruiting. We haven’t had a class better than 10th since 2013 and unless things get markedly worse most will talk themselves into things being fine.
I do think the ‘switch’ to recruiting defense better and harder gave a lot of people hopes that recruiting overall was turning around. Overall, nothing from the stats says we’re recruiting better now as opposed to a few years ago except we’re filling holes on defense a lot better. Corner being an exception.
No one wants to join me on this boat but offensive linemen and tight ends have never been less important than they are in today’s game. That people think we should cater our entire offense to these positions is INSANE to me. Unless you have a Tyler Eifert or Kyle Rudolph the vast majority of tight ends are roughly the same. Clemson doesn’t need an elite tight end for anything. Irv Smith Jr is a very good one for Bama but they’ll go long stretches without using him much.
3-star offensive linemen are coached up to be really good all over the country. The fact that we sign another Top 200-ish 4-star offensive lineman basically means nothing to me. During the broadcast last night they mentioned one of the Clemson coaches said their program took the next step once their OL became elite, or something to that effect. What utter coach speak. Clemson has hit the lottery with DL/QB/WR for years and they’ve been decent to pretty good recruiting OL. It’s their QB and WR’s who make their offensive linemen look good.
I will die on this hill. Offensive line talent is overrated. Last year should have cemented this in anyone’s minds. A few great offensive linemen cannot do as much as similar talent at quarterback or receiver. We’re actually worse off IMO that we traditionally can recruit OL and TE so well because they artificially boost our class rankings (to a degree) and prevent us from chasing other positions harder. All when we could probably do pretty well with mostly 3-stars at OL and TE.
I’m totally on board with this. And it’s not even like our top OL recruits turn into top 10 picks where we’d even have a serious advantage anyway despite the high end recruits.
I would trade our high end OL/TE recruits for nearly any other position at the same level and I think our team would improve greatly.
Clemson’s lottery means 5 stars at those positions and those guys turn in game breaking plays. We don’t have game breakers like that.
Mots self reply
Your point is also proved Eric by looking at our recruiting apparently being one play below Clemson on average in he past 4 or 5 years. That should mean we are about equal. But if you took out OL/TE players from both teams would anyone imagine we o ly be one place behind or more like top 15-20 (dropping like 7-12 places)?
This exactly.
Wow I did a little more digging into the numbers.
ND 2015-2018 classes (these include players currently on the roster – we lost about 8, 4 stars along the way – mostly in the 2015 class and only 1 OL in that group)
30% of all of our 4*+ are OL/TE.
56% of our top 200 are OL/TE
46% of our top 100 are OL/TE
This is significantly helped by 2018 class which had 7 top 200 players without a OL/TE.
Clemson 2015-2018 – This is all players from recruiting class (no idea who is still on the roster but most must be – see low recruiting number below) minus Hunter Johnson since I know he transferred.
13% of all of their 4*+ are OL/TE.
12% of their top 200 are OL/TE
10% of their top 100 are OL/TE
They signed 1(!) 4 star TE in these 4 years, and 5(!) 4* OL.
Also noteworthy we signed 94 players in those 4 years, Clemson 75! Not to mention Clemson signed 21 (!) (not including Hunter Johnson) top 100 players which is 28% of their roster!!!!!!!!!!!
We signed 13 such players and again almost half are OL/TE.
ND – National Ranking, then Avg. (247)
2015-13; .905
2016 – 15; .89
2017 – 10; .894
2018- 10 ; .9005
Clemson
2015-9; .8912
2016 – 11; .903
2017 – 16; .921
2018- 7 ; .9345
I’m not sure how national rankings are done but I’d rather have Clemson’s 2017 class where they have an avg a top 200 player (but a smaller class) than to have a bigger class with less quality.
Nevertheless, while their freshmen class is an improvement on their recruiting (scary thought), we aren’t far off in average numbers. But they have far more top 100 players and a far higher % of them are non OL/TE.
Wow, these are interesting numbers. They surely explain why Clemson looks so much better in the eye test category.
When Eric was explaining his OL theory, I couldn’t help thinking of BC (try as I might) and how good there OLs have been despite much lower recruiting rankings.
We shouldn’t be turning down OL but, it’s obvious we need better skill guys, especially on offense. Hoping to hit a HR with a 3star or border line 4star (Will Fuller) once in a while, isn’t going to cut it.
One error I noticed:
30% of all of our 4*+ are OL/TE.
It should say 61% of our 4 stars are OL/TE
And of course the solution isn’t to recruit OL/TE worse but to recruit the other positions far better!
It’s maybe why we need more like 70%+ 4 stars to be equal to the Clemson. It’s actually a way we could be better if we have a real advantage with our OL, i.e. if we even came close to Clemson at the other important positions (RB, WR, DL, etc.)
I bet OSU is similar to Clemson with skill position players but it would be interesting to figure how they do with it – another non-Bama team that typically has elite players.
Good point. I’m curious, however: in your opinion is ND NOT recruiting or making room for top 100 QB/DL/WR talent because it prefers OL/TE? Or are the OL/TE recruits the only top 100 recruits that prefer ND? If it’s the former, by all means criticize away. If it’s the latter, however, I’m not sure what else can be done. Assuming that ND isn’t going to break through in the recruiting the top guys in the other positions, does Kelly turn away/not pursue top OL/TE talent to make room for more mid-range other-position talent?
As mentioned above, without developing a great QB it does make it more difficult to attract these difference makers. And yes, I do think it’s very difficult for Notre Dame to recruit the QB/WR/RB positions more so than OL/TE. That seems obvious.
But, I do think the staff has taken the easy way out to a degree with those skill positions. We came off a nice 2017 season, didn’t get any Top 350(!!!) skill recruits this cycle, and 3 out of the 4 we got gave a verbal in early summer, while the fourth gave a verbal in early September. That seems odd that we couldn’t work on any better recruits into this season.
This is also why I’m not a huge proponent of the early Signing Period. It moves the timeline up for the coaches to wrap things up quicker which right now means “settling” in the summer at some positions so we can feel good when nearly everyone signs together in December.
We do need to win consistently more, though. This upcoming 2020 cycle should be fascinating. We *should* be able to attract plenty of great skill players and get verbals early if a 12-1 season gives them a boost.
I don’t know about, “easy way out” or “the early signing period” but it does seem we are either having trouble getting any Stud skill players to take a serious look or the ND coaches think they have a good eye for under valued talent. We did pretty good with a couple high ranked WRs last year not so much RBs and are lacking at both positions this year.
This year we have a 3star RB and 2- 3star WRs..Clemson a 5star and 4star WR and a 4star RB.
This year we struck out at RB and took the easy way out at WR. There was no obvious reason for taking who we got as early as we did at wideout, especially after the good numbers from last year.
Bama can point to a progression of NFL RBs and Julio Jones, Amari Cooper, Calvin Ridley. Clemson can point to Sammy Watkins, DeAndre Hopkins, Mike Williams, and Deshaun Watson.
ND’s got…Will Fuller as the #2 WR next to Hopkins in Houston? Golden Tate, who was at ND when HS kids were still in elementary school? Michael Floyd, also “old,” with his DUIs and barely hanging around in the league? TJ Jones? Josh Adams? Deshone Kizer, backup to the stars?
It takes recruiting great talent to generate successful NFL players that then make it easier to recruit the next batch of great NFL talent. We can get great offensive line recruits to come to ND because we put the Martin brothers, Q Nelson, McGlinchey, etc. in the league. At TE we’ve got Eifert and others. But there’s no reason a 5-star WR or RB with NFL dreams should come to ND that we can point to. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg problem that the staff really needs to figure out.
I think great players at those positions are less likely to have a 4-5 yr. college plan. Some anyways, and there aren’t that many of them.
That’s certainly a factor too.
In 2020 we could start with a couple of verbals from two WRs Henning (national rank = 51) and Johnson (nationral rank = 47). Both seem leaning towards ND (247 has 86% who think Henning will be ND and they have Johnson as 100% – but of course I believe it when I see it).
Though currently there is little going on at RB.
Please, God.
MrTgon, I don’t think the point is to criticize as much as to point out why despite it looking like we should be close on talent (according to recruiting class rankings) that we are actually a big step below in talent (at more important positions). So it just makes sense of why we look out of place when it seems like we should belong, and so where we need to make up ground if we want to belong.
OL is the highest-IQ position on the field, on average, so the Notre Dame offering is perhaps more compelling to those recruits, and it’s easier to get top OL recruits past Notre Dame’s strictures. There’s a push and a pull there.
What baffles me though is that it’s not as if Notre Dame hasn’t recruited well at WR during lean times — look at Michael Floyd, Golden Tate, and of course Will Fuller (a guy who made a difference last time we played Clemson).
Michael Floyd: no. 5 WR, no. 1 MN prospect, 247 composite 5*
Golden Tate: no. 11 WR, no. 2 TN prospect, 247 composite 4*
Will Fuller: no. 40 WR, no. 10 PA prospect, 247 composite 4*
Fuller stands out here as perhaps an exception rather than the rule. He’s a developmental prospect that panned out. Is the staff kind of banking on finding more people like him?
A recent guy that stands out is Braden Lenzy: no. 10 ATH, no. 3 OR prospect, 247 composite 4*
Is the difference more that Notre Dame can’t get a guy like him on the field right away? Or that the staff doesn’t feel a *need* to force him on the field right away because there’s no competitive need to do so when guys like Boykin and Claypool can get the job done against the non-Playoff schedule?
He was 175lbs. tops when he got to ND. That’s part of it.
Floyd and Tate were playing at ND when today’s recruits were 10 or younger. Tate has had a decent NFL career, Floyd has not. Fuller’s a decent NFL player but he’s second fiddle at WR on his team to a player from….Clemson.
Understood and the point is well-taken. Having re-read Eric’s comments, I think you’re dead on. I took it more as a “we’re wasting time on OL/TE and should focus elsewhere” but really he seems to be saying what you’re saying: “stop being so surprised. Our recruiting classes are a bit inflated because we get a lot of top OL/TE talent, which is overrated.”
Totally agree on that point.
Exactly. And it’s also a way to gauge whether our recruiting is getting better and whether next time we should expect a better outcome.
So e.g. the 2018 class then had only 1 OL out of the 14 4 stars. (Less good that we got less 4 star OL, but we got more 4 stars than we have been AND they turned out to be non OL/TE. Only 7% of 4 stars was an OL) and the 2019 class we got a solid 4 4 stars on OL and its only 24% of our 4 stars — MUCH better than 61% of our 4 stars. The 2017 class was particularly bad in that regard where 5 of our top 6 (all top 200) were TE/OL. So moving in the right direction in general and getting better on defense but still missing RB especially (Austin, Keys, Lenzy seems like a good haul at WR in 2018).
Makes sense. Thanks for the stats/info/analysis, man!
But none of these is a true stud or he would have been starting this year. The ones at Bama, Clemson, USC do start, and star.
I wonder how much of that is on BK? I find it hard to believe that some of these 4* freshman can’t step on the field and make SOME immediate impact. What we really lacked this year at WR was a speed freak who could take the top of the D (even if Book couldn’t have hit him). Keys ran a 4.4 40. Just that threat means a lot against a D.
I mostly agree, but the least important position in the modern game (other than fullback; hi NDNation) is linebacker… so of course we have signed a bajillion of them in the last few years.
LB and…RB, particularly when it comes to the NFL.
Eric, I think I agree with the gist of your statement but I do not see how getting highly ranked OL and TEs hurt the recruiting. So should Kelly go tell all the 4 * OL recruits that he does not need them because they are too good.? It seems as though you need to get the best recruits that you can at every position. We definitely need more playmakers though.
That’s true, I didn’t necessarily mean don’t recruit those guys. Only that getting them kind of gives the staff and definitely the fans a sense that our classes are anchored in the strongest possible position. Although, I would advocate maybe a touch fewer OL and TE if it means we can expend more resources to WR/RB/QB/DL. But of course, great recruiting can do it all.
Nah you reallocate some of your recruiting points towards skill players and try to recruit them from your pipeline states more and maybe you try to use the playing time pitch more often at least that works on the old NCAA 2014 game.
I dunno, Eric. Far be it for me to attack you on that hill, you look pretty well entrenched … whoops actually, no, to follow your argument, you are not sitting in the trenches, you have a lot of airpower lined up…
That being said, remember 2012? BK has said repeatedly, and he is far from being the only one, that it was the sheer physicality of the Tide with emphasis on their lines and especially their O-line, that demonstrated we had to up the level of recruiting there included. I mean, it was Fluker and his mates that blew Louis Nix and his comrades of the ball. So BK has paid attention to “the trenches” (where I note Dabo said afterwards that the game was won there).
I take your point to an extent about the inflation of our overall recruiting rankings due to O-line and TE, but I am not sure that BK pays much attention to that. Remember how he divides recruits into categories. What I think the problem boils down to is that O-line and TE are easier for us to recruit but that skill positions are harder. Now so was DE and we seem to have fixed that a bit. And it’s not like we can’t get occasional great WRs and DBs. Just not enough. But I don’t think we should take the foot off the gas on O-Line. Unless one thinks the game has changed that much in six years.
Alabama recruiting is a whole different animal. They get 4-5 stars at every position and lots of them.
When was the last time we recruited a top 50 WR or RB ? (I truly don’t know) That Cross kid, Clemson’s WR, is a true freshman, #47 in the country and #1 from Alabama. He’s a difference maker from day one and will be for the 3 years he’s at Clemson. Amon Ra St. Brown surely would have made a difference this season if he’d chosen ND.
Perhaps why we have a better shot at OL is that they take longer to develop and therefore are more likely to leave with a degree. Why should a 5star WR bust his ass in the classroom when he’s pretty sure he’ll be leaving for the NFL in three years. At least that line of thinking shrinks the field of big time athletes. We recruited some fine prospects at WR last year but, they weren’t first day on campus ready.
I think it’s more QB related and play style for the elite skill players. The Amon Ra recruitment being the perfect example, from the quotes from his dad it seemed like A-RSB liked Notre Dame a lot more than he thought he would, they just weren’t sold that Wimbush was going to get him the ball enough given the failure for his brother to get consistent targets and catchable balls.
Clemson didn’t really take off in the recruiting either until they got Tajh Boyd and Deshaun Watson and then all of a sudden all the skill talent is showing up there too. In that regard Weis killed Notre Dame’s momentum from the Quinn/Clausen days, the Michael Floyd’s and Golden Tate’s of the world (one what a top 25 guy, another a top 100) aren’t coming to Notre Dame really from 2010-onward.
I think if Notre Dame ever hits on a star QB again, they’ll get the athletes like Floyd and Tate again on a more consistent basis.
Makes sense.
Boy you could have fooled me about Phil J, I thought he was the anointed one, and would attract all these super star skill guys, there was tons of hype about him, remember?
Ehh, I mean I know it’s a changing landscape but Jurkovec didn’t enroll early (Lawrence did) so I think if there was expectation he would/should be the starting QB as a true frosh that’s a bit too much.
Hopefully Jurkovec can live up to the hype, I don’t think there should be any disappointment in him at all yet given the situation. It would be kind of disappointing though if he doesn’t get to challenge at all for the starting QB job for 2019 and they just push through with Book. As Eric sort of touched on, if this is Book’s ceiling it might be time for another risky changeover to see if the younger player can make for a more explosive offense.
@If Jurk is the back up he will for sure be the ND crowd favorite.@ It’s how we roll.
No doubt about it. A great quarterback solves a lot of problems on offense and rises all boats.
I am entrenched, for sure! A couple points…
Re the 2013 BCS National Championship I think Kelly mostly said they didn’t have the depth on the lines to tackle in practice enough leading up to the game and from the Bama side they knew our tendencies far too well and exploited them. Defensively, one of the underrated things from the game was how we did penetrate the Bama O-line decently but McCarron was deadly on play-action and more importantly we tackled horrendously. Lacy was not human that night.
Offensively, we had Martin-Watt-Cave from left to right on the offensive line. That’s a really good threesome, granted Golic and Lombard left a lot to be desired on the right side.
My question is were we 2 better offensive linemen away from competing in this game? Maybe? A&M beat them earlier in the year with 3 future 1st round picks on their line. But their running backs had a combined 67 rushing yards in the game and the line allowed 4 sacks. The difference was clearly Johnny Manziel who had 250+ passing and 100+ rushing and raced A&M out to a big lead early then they held on for dear life to win.
I feel like you kinda “yadda yadda’d over the best part” (no not the lobster bisque), but by omitting that A&M didn’t just have three 1st round picks but it included a future #2 and also a #6 overall pick on their o-line in Matthews and Jockel. So the overall talent level between them that year and Notre Dame at every other non-Zach Martin spot on the line surely was very high and noticeable and no way ND was just one or two linemen away from beating Bama.
But, the point I think keeps to your theme is that the QB play was the most important thing. Manziel was a dynamic, explosive player that had Bama running around a bit and frantic. Golson fell flat on his face in the NCG and was easy for them to contain. That was the most important difference to me.
The guys at II have said repeatedly over the years, when you saw Bama in warm ups, you knew ND was over matched.
Kelly and Jack Swarbrick have also said this repeatedly.
I didn’t see Golson fall flat on his face, I saw a Bama team that knew our plays before we ran them, dominated our Oline, ran through us on defense when they weren’t passing at will.
That’s what I saw. I honestly think Everett would have been fine with more time. Just like I think Ian would have been.
Well yes but look at the GIF you put on… look at their O-line, they are huge and good and swallowing up our defenders. Granted Lacey makes one of his many explosive bursts, and we can also see Manti begin his series of slightly (and disastrously) off reads, but still… My point was really about the importance of Alabama’s O-line in this game, and I think that holds. As for our O-line that game, maybe with two more really good ones Everett would have made better reads? Yes, Kelly did talk about not being able to tackle in practice because of no depth — but maybe that makes my point as well. (And yes, Bama did read our tendencies on defense, the interviews post-game with their O-line very revealing in this regard) which is where the narrative about Saban being so deadly with time to prepare really got started — but I think that is tangential to the point under discussion, which is about the importance of elite O-lines.
I guess we will see in the final… I am not at all convinced that Clemson’s O-line can hold up against Bama’s D-line. Remember that one of the dominant topics prior to our semi-final was our concern that our O-line was the weakest link. Was that not true?
There is more than one position where we could say ‘If only, things might have been different “. O line, QB, CB, WR. I’m not saying they all need to be better but, some or most do. None can take a step back.
The question starting right now that needs to be figured out is, Do we have the right guys in position that can improve enough to upgrade the team for 2019 ? Obviously 2018 is good, real good but, not good enough. The players have to be on the roster right now. There won’t be any free agent signings. It looks like most of the guys that can come back will come back or so I read. That’s HUGE. Especially Love and the DE’s.
I think the biggest question is can Book up his game? I think so but, If No, then what? He was a pleasant surprise but, he’s not good enough yet to put us over the hump. Then are the pieces in place on the Oline to help him do it ? We’re going to miss Dexter. Can the Oline do a little better job for the guys that step in for him? We need more speed at WR. We have to hope Austin or Lenzy are ready in their second year.
On defense I trust Lea can fill the gaps at linebacker, since he has a boat load of bodies and for Tillery, if only by committee. Again if the guys return then the back end and DE’s should be better.
Even if all this goes right, is it enough? The schedule is daunting. We could be better and still not get through it unscathed. We may find out if an 11-1 ND can get in the playoff, if we were to lose to Georgia on the road but, handle the rest. That’s assuming we avoid injuries.
I actually feel better after writing this. I think we’re going to have a real good team next year. NC good ? I doubt it. Good enough beat ANY team on the schedule? I think so. Good enough to beat EVERY team on the schedule? Less likely.
A very good post because it tees up the challenge for 2019, and in a solid, balanced way. The Book-Jurkovic story should be fascinating.
The Book-Jurkovic story SHOULDN’T be fascinating. Kelly needs to do everything he can to get Jurkovic ready and performing at an acceptable level for his talent and rating. The biggest difference between ND and the “elite” programs has been at QB.
Just for clarification, Maziel didn’t have 100 yards rushing… it was like 992 and 97. They noted during the Bama Oklahoma game that Murray was the first ever 100 yard rushing qb against Saban at Bama. I had go look at Manziels numbers to confirm.
I removed sack yardage.
I’ve felt the same way for a long time Eric. TE’s are pretty interchangeable in the upper quartile of cfb. Elite qbs, receivers, RBs and Dline, especially pass rushers, are not. Oline is important, but can’t be our principal focus, yet with it being so our Oline was our Achilles heel this year.
I remember Lou wondering what could have been achieved if we could have closed and kept Randy Moss. One player, a monster at a key position, can always be the critical difference maker.
I read earlier a story I had never really heard before… Apparently, Reggie Bush really liked ND and wanted to commit. They told him to raise his GPA and he did. THEN he heard about the typical workload as a freshman at ND and decided to go to USC. Could you imagine that offense if they added Bush?
A very deflating game. As you state the skill disparity is so obvious. Let’s keep in mind that Clemson’s QB is a true freshman. (How good will he be next year?) We just had a good class sign up for next year but, if you look at Bama’s class OMG!. They do that every year. Basically they get two great players for every one that ND gets. You can’t compete with that. This isn’t just a ND problem, it’s a CFB problem.
It seems the longer Bama dominates, the bigger the gap gets. There are really only a handful of programs that can even rise up to challenge Bama once every few seasons. Clemson being one this year, obviously. But, I won’t be surprised if Bama wins comfortably next week. I know this, if Bama’s starting CB goes down, they won’t even flinch. Will you be surprised if Bama’s D actually makes Lawrence look like a freshman? Maybe Clemson can stay or even beat Bama. If so, that just means there are two teams that are so far above everybody else. I think this was ND’s best team in years and yet ND is still so far behind but, so is 99% of CFB.
They should let Trevor Lawrence go pro this year. He’d be the first pick in the draft.
Eh, that may be a TAAAAAADDDD overreacting. I mean if Kyler Murray announces that he’s going to play football and not baseball, I cant imagine he’s not #1 and given a HUUUUUUUUGE number to sign.
I’d take Lawrence over Murray right now for the NFL.
Kyler Murray is a fringe first-rounder because he is 5’10”. He will almost certainly not be a top-10 pick, even with a very bad quarterback class this year.
And maaaaybe 5’9″???
Is he even going to participate in the Combine?
Murray would be insane to turn down the MLB. No salary cap, plus you don’t have 300lb men trying to flatten you on every play?
Depends, I guess. If he was bigger I’d probably play football. He’d be cashing a check 4 to 5 times larger than what he’s receiving from the A’s at 22 years old and would sign a huge second deal if he’s pretty good.
Basing this off the fact that he’s apparently an okay hitter with a big arm and athleticism at baseball, though.
I think you’re correct, and don’t see ND or all but a very small handful of teams being able to contend at the elite level.
I’m not sure if Clemson can beat Bama, but I didn’t see any weaknesses in their team either. Hopefully it will be a great game.
S&P+ showed Clemson with Lawrence as their starter was basically Alabama and that seems to be true. I think there is just a clear hierarchy in college football that is BAMA, Clemson and everyone else. The issue for us is Georgia is the only program on the precipice of breaking that ceiling and we play them week two.
Completely agree with the sentiment we are not good enough at offensive skill positions to compete at the highest level. And after yesterday maybe I’m resigned to that overall, we can hope to be the best of the Michigan, Stanford, non Clemson acc but not more and that’s ok I guess
But next year is the year Claypool will put it all together and break out! I just know it!!!
(sigh)
/drops pass
but he drops it with such potential!
Thanks for everything this season to all. In terms of overall talent, there seems to be a pretty sizable difference that I can only assume comes down to recruiting better. I also believe the hierarchy in CFB is clearly Bama, Clemson, maybe OU, UGA, OSU(? Who knows without Urban) and then everyone else which is frustrating.
I didn’t go to ND so I have no real personal investment like most(?) of you all here. Genuine question though – is it even feasible to think that elite recruits are going to go to a school where they have to take 15+ credits a semester and have to graduate in 3.5 years? For elite recruits, I feel like college is just a layover on the way to the NFL. Why bother going somewhere you actually have to achieve academic success? I get that you can do both as ND has put some good guys into the league, and if I was a high level recruit, I’d choose ND for both academic and football reasons (unfortunately I’m not an elite athlete lol). I just don’t see many elite players doing that and it seems obvious that to actually compete (not just get there) in high level games, you need those guys.
Is Jurkovec really any better? I seem to remember once the media finally got to see him throw in August, his release was funky and looked all sorts of awful. Seems like even our “great” recruits end up having some weird flaw and don’t pan out like we hope. Yes, this is the hangover talking, but it’s hard to be optimistic about anything today.
That Jurkovec (composite #83) is considered a great recruit by our standards is emblematic of the problem. If we want to legitimately compete for titles, we need to sign at least 3 guys more highly ranked than that every year.
Is it now also ok to vent my fear that Kliff Kingsbury turns all of USC’s skill talent loose and we’re going to lose to them for the foreseeable future? I was hoping he’d go to the enneffell.
Yeah, our so called elite qb’s have been average at best on the field, or complete busts like Gunnar Kiel (sp?).
If Jurkovec were elite, it would have been him, not Book, beating out Wimbush, who himself was supposed to be the Second Coming.
If Jurkovec was elite………. he would have gone somewhere else lol
I’d give the Jurky Boy a pass on not competing this year. He’s a true freshman, that’s a huge task to adjust to major CFB AND beat out the starter and backup qbs. I know Lawrence, Murray, and Fromm were elite qbs as true freshman, but they’re the exception to the rule.
Murray? He wasn’t exactly “elite” as a true freshman at Texas A&M. Decent, but not the Kyler Murray we saw this year at all.
I think in his case it really was the coaching at A&M
Don’t get me wrong because I really like Book and think he’s got the most out of his talent, but he’s not close to an elite talent. Jurkovec might be, and I hope Jurkovec is giving every opportunity to win the job in the spring/summer and be named QB1 for the 1st game next year. Not be handed the job, but be given a fair opportunity to take it. In no way am I putting all the blame on Book, as you outlined how it was the fault of any and our skill talent isn’t elite, and Long didn’t do a good job at all yesterday.
At what point do we start to hear that “Notre Dameing” is the new “Clemsoning”?
Because seriously–what’s different?
0-whatever the last NY6 bowl games.
Miami last year.
Stanford at the end of seasons before.
Please downvote this horrible thought. Imma do it myself, but I couldn’t keep it from coming out.
Edit: apparently you can’t downvote your own comments. So do it for me.
Any time, KG!
Well, the one good thought there is that, those kinds of cycles can come to an end…
Boy Noise, I love your heart, and the fact that we’re contemporaries (not many of us make it this far 😉), but this cycle has been about 30 years, making it semi-biblical.
Well, yes… a long damn time. Though since we are contemporaries you will appreciate that I give us credit for the one we should have had in ’93 — but even the weight of a mere quarter century was too almost too heavy to bear last night as it became evident that we were not going to break the drought. But being a positive guy, let’s for instance remember Clemson’s down cycle took 32 years!
Hey, the Cubbies and Redsox both eventually won titles.
Clemsoning was never what you are calling “Notre Dameing”. It referred to talented teams with expectations laying inexplicable eggs against teams they ought to beat. This is a simple issue of ceiling.
Whoa. Mark Richt just retired. I know they had a bad year but didn’t see that coming.
Important note for the off-season…..
If anyone is interested in writing for us email 18stripes.nd at gmail .com
We’re most comfortable selecting readers from our community, so holla at ya boy if interested.
I am going to be a complete insufferable wretch for the next 8 months. I would not make a good choice.
I know another site where you’d fit right in
How to win a National Championship in the 21st Century:
Be in the southeast.
Do anything you can to recruit the most talented players even if they’re highly unlikely to graduate,
Pay your coaches and assistants mind boggling salaries.
Or be Ohio State with Urban Meyer which is close enough to sneak in there once in a while.
ND is not built to win championships anymore.
If ND (or really any top program outside the Southeast, but especially ND) could find the next stud coach, they’d have a chance. But yeah, I think you’re probably more right than not.
Why do you think that? Saban at ND could attract but not be able to get approval from admissions for most of the studs he can routinely bring into Bama. And those that do get in would have a tendency to run afoul of a disciplinary regime with teeth in it……no more domestic abuse, guns fired, robberies, batteries, cheating allowed, so many wouldn’t last at ND, which doesn’t look the other way.
Is this fair? Alabama has a decent, mid-80’s graduation success rate. Can’t recall many stories about gun-toting football players at Bama. I think Saban runs a pretty tight ship.
Believe me I’m not knocking Saban, but the academic regime for football players at Bama is far less rigorous than at ND. And no school I know of is as deadly on disciplinary issues.
I think Saban is a genius at what he does. If he wins next week he will have earned the best ever title.
Man this is so true and so sad at the same time 🙁
OK, I will unburden myself of a heartfelt observation, based on all those many decades of love and devotion to the ND football program and its deep attachment to Our Lady’s school, and all our fans, graduates or no… ND can still do it.
Like Andy has just said, it will take finding the next stud coach. And for me, that will boil down to having the extreme (I say again, EXTREME) good fortune / good luck to happen into the next stud coach.
They are really truly very very hard to find, and like a hit movie, impossible to predict ahead of time.
Right now there are what, two for sure: Saban, and Dabo. Urban was one but he is gone bye-bye. Burned out, like Leahy, Ara, Lou… If you look at Saban’s record, prior to Alabama, who could have truly predicted he would turn into Emperor Palatine and build a genuine Death Star? And note what mediocre shape Alabama’s program was in before him. One can say exactly that for Dabo. (Urban was an exception in that he won big at Florida first.)
I say all of this as an unabashed BK admirer in many respects. He is a very good football coach, who seems to have gotten it about Notre Dame, and who has shown remarkable and laudatory growth. I like his teams, as a group of high quality and high performing young men. But I am forced to admit that we have found his ceiling and it is 12 and 1.
Which might be plenty good enough…or is it?
I realize that this is way premature and we will be having a debate on this very topic. But I wanted to push back at the idea that Notre Dame can never compete for a Natty again. But finding those stud coaches is really hard.
I want to believe that a championship is possible. barring lucking upon the next great one, what should be done? Others here have mentioned ND needs to pay up coaching wise if it really wants to play with the big boys. aside from that I want to see a period of sustained success, for Kelly to focus on building a culture of winning and a consistency of performance program wide, game to game and year to year. The back and forth I think is one of the things that keeps even the willing and eligible five star guys away year to year. I get things are different at ND, but five stars that could excel at ND go to Stanford, OSU, and Michigan, which share at least one of ND’s characteristics that are listed as negatives to getting five stars (academics, weather, out of the way town – I don’t care what anyone says Ann Arbor is not cool!). Looking at the recruiting this year and last, four stars, linemen, focusing on Georgia i stead of florida, I’m hoping that is what Kelly and Jack are doing, trying to build a program that can live past their time. if that’s not it and its just a retreat from competing for five stars all together, that would be disappointing.
Example Christian Wilkins from Clemson. Graduated in two and half years and from the northeast (Massachusetts), reported to be all around great person. Notre Dame man no? I’d be interested to know what led him to Clemson and not ND, but I would guess the biggest factor was the winning and stability.
Well I mean he got recruited in the BVG days. So that vs.Venables is what led him to Clemson. Also though Wilkins had an ND offer per Rivals, looks like he just wasn’t that interested. Did visit Stanford though.
Ideally though ND does have to make bigger pushes for non-southern 5-stars. This really isn’t breaking any news to the staff, surely they know to try and collect the best players possible but it’s not like they can force it into existence. Understandably there’s just frustration now since ND is clearly not as talented as the Bama/Clemson tier of teams.
Though even with UM, PSU and depending on how post-Urban tOSU goes, it’s no slam dunk that ND will and should get any and every such player. Pretty sure Bama can recruit out of their area for obvious reasons that they’re the power. Believe it or not some people just don’t really want to go to Notre Dame.
Truth. I guess what i wanted to point to him as an example as one of the likely many unicorn types that ND fans lament don’t exist (academic minded five stars who dont already have a reason to go to the southern juggernauts by living close by and not having to leave the warm. Minkah Fitzpatrick would be another. Northeast (NJ), good student, was sorta interested in ND with his buddy Wimbush, but had his focus on sure winners (at the time) FSU and Bama. ND gotta give those guys a reason to consider South Bend. Being a 10 win program all the time might go far toward that.
I mean, I wouldn’t think it unfair to say a 5-star that doesn’t default go to a football factory basically is a unicorn. Even Fitzpatrick jumped after 3 seasons (aka as soon as possible).
Per Sampson at The Athletic, there were 29 5* this year. All of them stayed in their state or region except three- tOSU signed a OC from Georiga, Michigan got a safety from Oklahoma and Bama got a DL from Jersey.
I do agree with you that being a 10+ win team will help ND get on the radar more, but the reality is that almost all the 5* kids are in the southeast and they almost all stay in the region and go to football factories these days.
Basic geography says that Notre Dame is never going to get such a high % of Bama/Clemson/UGA level elite, elite talent. They probably can still do a bit better, but development and luck is going to have to be more key than just raking in 8-10 top 100 players every year like the true modern blue bloods.
8-10 sure that’s not happening, but better quality depth, with one or two unicorns makes a difference in the Cotton bowl. Over matched sure, but it keeps it a game they could realistically win even when you lose a Julian Love. What is that game like with St. Brown and Stepherson still around, maybe a Nelson who wants to take another year, and a healthy Bars, and a QB like Kizer with a deep ball? Most not top 100 beyond Nelson and St. Brown?. I’m just daydreaming now.
I don’t think our St. Brown was elite, certainly not like his brother at USC, nor, say, Cross at Clemson or Jeudy and the other receivers at Bama. Stepherson was fast enough but a head case who couldn’t stay in good standing, caught up in the discipline regime at ND. Kizer…..good but no unicorn.
We have to have more unicorns in skill positions who can gain entrance and avoid getting blown up for infractions that, rightly or wrongly, would be swept under the rug at other schools.
We don’t really know why Dexter was suspended for 4 games. It cost him a 1000+ yard season, not likely to be a selling point to unicorns with their sights on the NFL.
I think we all know what Dex’s issue was.
/inhales
I’d like to see info on the next 70 (Top 30-100). If we can’t get the 5 stars we need to get a 3-5 in the top 30-100 every year.
My guess is what’s true of 5 stars are true of players in general; in general players don’t go as far from home. Of course the outliers are often the ones that come to ND, but it’s always harder to recruit when you have to recruit outside your region for top players.
Totally agree. Unicorns indeed. I’m gonna guess that the vast majority of 5 star/stud players don’t care about the 40 year decision or whatever you guys call it. They don’t even really care that much about the 4 year decision. Their elite talent means the potential for a natty and NFL dreams and big houses and nice cars etc. That’s what they’re thinking about (at least in part). That doesn’t make them bad kids or even stupid kids. It makes them kids……maybe just human.
If I was a 5 star athlete in HS, I’d be thinking about the same things – where can I go that’s fun and awesome, where I have a chance to play (maybe in front of my home town), where I have a chance to win a natty, and where I have a chance to get drafted high. Academics would be a consideration for sure, but I’d also know (rationalize) that the choice between a degree and an elite football program isn’t mutually exclusive, only the choice between an elite degree and an elite football program is. They all give degrees. So, the decision to go to those schools over ND wouldn’t necessarily mean the difference between a 40 year decision and no-year decision and working at McDonalds if my NFL dreams didn’t pan out. And remember, in this fantasy, I’d be getting constant NATIONAL recognition because of my football skills, not my academic abilities. Reason wouldn’t stand a chance.
18 year olds with both elite talent and the maturity to see the wisdom (and wise it is) of choosing the 40 year decision over the relatively instant gratification of 3 years of partying in the sun near home, playing for an elite team, and winning a natty come around about as often as ND gets them, I think.
I think you have the correct insight into today’s elite unicorn, Mr Tgon
Just to add some background on Wilkins….
We recruited him but Ohio State and Penn State were his early leaders. Always talked about visiting South Bend and never did. Took a late visit to Clemson and decided to verbal there to a bit of a surprise to some.
He attended one of the more jock-y prep schools and I’m not sure if graduating in 2.5 years with a Communications degree at Clemson says more about Clemson or Wilkins to be honest.
He also graduated with a 3.33, which, like, solid, but maybe don’t give that guy academic awards.
Great quarterbacks, best defensive coordinator in the biz we’re probably huge factors leading Wilkins to Clemson. Got his degree in 2.5 years in sports management if I recall what the announcers claimed. Not exactly a crunch major.
OSU football players face much less educational rigor than do players at Stanford and Michigan. And both those schools place less educational rigor on players than does ND. OSU has won titles, but Stanford hasn’t won one since Pop Warner was coaching in the 1930’s. I don’t recall when, if ever, Michigan has won it all. Certainly not recently.
Kiwi, in answer to your Michigan question, they won half a title in 1997 (and may well not have done so if they’d been made to play Nebraska in a bowl), and their last consensus title was 70 years ago this year.
Noise, I’ve lived ND like you, and just don’t think the next stud coach would change much, assuming we could identify and attract one. The first part, spotting a sure thing, is low probability, the second part, landing him, even lower probability.
Joe Stud wants to make jillion’s and win big titles. Given the overall environment at ND that football has to contend with, as his agent, I’d strongly advise him that there are much more attractive targets at which to make his mark.
A 12-1 ceiling is incredibly hard, especially without playing Citadel and Sanford types. Single digit teams get there in any given season. Firing somebody producing at that level periodically isn’t going to make Joe Stud any more likely to jump in the boat.
Thanks, Kiwifan. I am learning a ton from all these posts, including you, Eric (e.g., thanks for the info on Wilkins, Eric), and really everybody. And the discussion is helping deal with the pain. Saturday really hurt, after 30 (or 25) years it was truly time, and I thought we could do it… but not to be. Hence my handwringing about the 12-1 ceiling. All your points are good. Yeah, honestly… I think BK is as good as it gets.
So, I’ll flip to Alohi Gilman mode (I LIKE that kid’s attitude) and say, OK, let’s get back there and do it better. Hopefully Phil J indeed has a higher ceiling, and the three wideouts from last year mature and flash speed, and the O-line learns and matures, and … and… sheesh. Happy New Year from Paris, everyone… where we have our own problems but at least the champagne is great! All the best for 2019 t each of you.
Appreciate everyone’s input on this thread. I’m on mobile so I dont know where in the thread this is going to post but I just looked up the national champs going back to 2000. It’s not a real surprise but here it is – Bama, Clemson, Bama, OSU, FSU, Bama, Bama, Auburn, Bama, Florida, Texas, USC, LSU/USC (BCS/AP I believe), OSU, Miami, Oklahoma. Lots of big time programs haven’t won in a long time, not just ND. It’s just unfortunate that we’ve laid so many eggs on the big stage though. Like NDoneill said above, I hate that the narrative is we “don’t even belong on the field” with these teams/in these games. People just love to hate ND.
Something I did read (from E Hansen I think) that I thought was a good perspective was about the narrative following the blowout in Miami last year. Following that, it was how overrated ND is and they don’t belong etc and how The U was BACK BABY! Since that game, ND is 14-2 and made the CFB playoff and Miami is 8-9 and their coach left (although I read that Diaz now bailed on temple to come back to Miami). Trying to stay positive.
Happy New Year all.
https://twitter.com/EMMurtaugh/status/1079805729207390208
Am I crazy to think we played pretty well in the trenches?
Nah, I don’t think you’re crazy for that. Trench game was fine in the first half. My biggest fear was Etinne would run away with it and ND couldn’t stop them on the ground but that didn’t happen until the 4th when it was over anyways. Defense did well there to be stout and keep it a 9-3 game until late in the 1st half and the bottom dropped out.
Offense was decent enough. To your points made, Book did look overly antsy as if he knew they had a great DL and he might need to leave the pocket to extend plays. Not a bad assumption on his part but he didn’t play well in doing it.
I’ve seen ND fans get bashed for always dumping on the playcalling but it’s tough not to. Venables outschemed Long, IMO.
Also, this:
“Trevor Lawrence with Julian Love sidelined: 15-of-18 for 244 yards and 3 TDs. Lawrence with Love on the field: 12-of-21 for 83 yards.”
That’s really the major difference in the game. Of course, surely some cause/correlation there since Lawrence picked on the middle of the field too and Love wouldn’t have stopped that, so he was probably always bound to throw enough on what was a solid pass defense. But that’s got to be the #1 problem area the Clemson pass offense vs the non-Love defense, which isn’t surprising to anyone.
Actually, i think Love would have stopped some of those middle of the field throws…indirectly. Lea had Gilman helping Vaughn out leaving a gap in the middle of the field that wouldn’t have been there if Love was in the game.
This exactly.
“Trevor Lawrence with Julian Love sidelined: 15-of-18 for 244 yards and 3 TDs. Lawrence with Love on the field: 12-of-21 for 83 yards.”
And this
“Actually, i think Love would have stopped some of those middle of the field throws…indirectly. Lea had Gilman helping Vaughn out leaving a gap in the middle of the field that wouldn’t have been there if Love was in the game.”
No doubt that the rest of our defense was compromised once we had to send extra help to Love’s side (or not when Vaughn got beat). Having Love take care of his own man by himself sets up the rest of the D.
And that’s so easy to see, it would have been criminal for Clemson to not take advantage of it.
I’m still digesting the recruiting observations, but I also felt we played well in the trenches. Thanks for the data!
What sucks it that the national narrative coming out of this game will be that Notre Dame, once again, didn’t belong on the same field as their opponent.
I was at the game and watching it live, and that’s not how it appeared at all. Clemson struggled to move the ball for long stretches. They scored three times from outside the red zone, once on a nearly-perfectly-defended ball and again on poorly-defended run. Otherwise we tackled well. It wasn’t like Eddie Lacy bowling over people.
I think the defense played well enough to win, barring some of the flukey stuff that happened. It’s our offense that just shriveled, and it was disappointing. We needed to be nearly perfect, and we weren’t. And that was frustrating, too, because it’s not like we were going 3-and-out. It’s not like moving the ball was impossible. We’d just go 6-and-out, or 9-and-out after losing yards on the last set of downs and falling out of FG range.
There was the big third-down drop when there was no one near our receiver. There was the other long catch and fumble that our WR recovered that they ruled “incomplete” on replay despite taking 2-3 steps up-field after catching it. Converting those wouldn’t have been enough, but those mistake killed us.
On the field, it looked closer. Clemson hit three home-run plays from deep and that made the score lopsided. If felt like it could’ve been as close as a 23-17 loss if Notre Dame cleans up it’s offense and Love doesn’t get hurt. But that’s still a loss — it was clear Clemson was the better team. I just hate that the final score will leave everyone with the impression that they were many miles better.
I agree with you about the game actually being ‘closer’ than the score. Few big plays we gave up inflated the score. I actually thought the D looked pretty good most of the time. Unfortunate the O just couldn’t get any points.
Great post, thanks for the in-person perspective. I wish I coulda honored my tickets for the final, was all set to fly to SF… glad you were there, and all our fans.
Kirk Herbstreit here. See, I told you that Georgia should be in the playoff ahead of Notre Dame!!!
(Pay no attention to the fact that they’re now down 28-7 to Texas in the 4th Q of the Sugar Bowl)
Ho ho!
So, a good early goal for our team — Athens (GA) in September. Let’s strap it on — good motivation for us!