Notre Dame continues to search for something on offense. An identity perhaps. A game-breaker for sure. More consistency no doubt. For the third straight week another strong defensive effort began bursting at the seams as the Fighting Irish sweat out a comeback by an opponent that ultimately fell short for the bad guys.
It’s a 3-0 start to the season for the 4th time in 7 years and it’s always better win than to lose. Still, this has been a weird Notre Dame team with many questions remaining and an inability to give fans a ton of confidence for a bright future as we head to the latter three-fourths of the schedule.
Stat Package
| STAT | ND | DORES |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 22 | 17 |
| Yards | 380 | 420 |
| Passing | 135 | 326 |
| Rushing | 245 | 94 |
| 1st Downs | 24 | 23 |
| 3rd/4th Conversions | 6/16 | 5/14 |
| Yards Per Play | 5.1 | 6.0 |
| Turnovers | 0 | 3 |
PASSING OFFENSE
After this game I’m seeing for the most part two schools of thought. On one side, Brandon Wimbush–despite 175 fewer passing yards and 84 fewer total yards than last week–was a lot more in control, calm, and didn’t break the offense with any huge mistakes. In essence, we saw what we’ve come to know as a fairly average Wimbush performance. His legs were a weapon once again but he wasn’t very memorable as a passer.
The other camp is left wondering, “Is this nearly good enough?”
I find myself leaning much more in the latter camp. This is the 13th straight game–effectively a full season–where Wimbush’s completions in a single game have never exceeded 17 passes. Over that stretch he’s averaging 10.8 completions per game. That’s a lot of humbling evidence that you’re offense won’t even get 3 completions per quarter from the quarterback, although to be fair a lot of last year he wasn’t needed to throw very much in order for the offense to move and score. Is the same true this year?
This is why I sympathize with Chip Long and building, implementing, and changing gameplans on the fly during Saturday’s.
Let’s take a look at third down passing, for example. Last year, with a much stronger surrounding cast Wimbush was 47 of 78 (60.2%) for 547 yards, 4 touchdowns, 4 interceptions, and 32 first downs. So far in 2018, Wimbush is 8 of 21 (38.0%) for 101 yards, 0 touchdowns, 1 interception, and 7 first downs when throwing on 3rd down. That’s super discouraging.
I’ve read a lot of “we’re trying to fit Wimbush into an offense he’s not suited for!” and I really question if that’s true. The short passes aren’t working, the deep passes aren’t working (only 1 completion over 17 yards against Vanderbilt, brutal!), and Wimbush’s arm is being utilized (23 attempts) right around where the vast majority of fans think he should be deployed. What’s the answer for Chip Long? Every week you’re gameplanning knowing your passing game is limited, and I might add, there isn’t any sign things are going to get appreciably better.
Yes, subbing in Ian Book in the red zone feels really stupid when Wimbush’s legs are so deadly. At the same time, it’s a small sample size, Book hasn’t exactly imploded, and even while the offense was 2 of 5 for red zone touchdowns against Vanderbilt there’s no guarantee Wimbush would be better or wouldn’t have coughed up a turnover, particularly as the evidence mounts he doesn’t have the same running game around him like last year and thus everything for him will be more difficult this season.
I still want to know why the coaches are using Book this way but it’s also like saying, “We should be averaging 26 points per game instead of 23.3 if we keep Wimbush down in the redzone!” I guess we should take any improvement given we’ve seen 3 straight close games to open the season and yet we have roughly 200 other non-Ian Book snaps featuring more alarming and pressing issues of a passing game that might completely stink bomb out 3 or 4 games in the future.
Good news, though! The offensive line put in a much, much better shift against the Commodores. They allowed no sacks, only 4 pressures, and generally played a clean game in pass protection.
RUSHING OFFENSE
Being able to put up 255* yards on the ground is a huge boost of confidence for the offense and especially the line up front. In nearly every way, this was a 180 degree performance from last week and gives the team some hope that things are going to get better in the future in establishing a consistent rushing attack.
Tony Jones had his best game at Notre Dame with 118 yards rushing and 56 yards receiving, leading the team in both categories! It’s early still, however this was a statement by Jones that he could reclaim the 1A running back position for the near future.
Irish Run Success
Jones – 10 of 17 (58.8%)
Wimbush – 10 of 18 (55.5%)*
Armstrong – 7 of 11 (63.6%)
Book – 0 of 1 (0.0%)
TOTAL – 27 of 47 (57.4%)
*Does not include 10-yard loss to waste clock on final series.
Don’t sleep on Armstrong’s performance, though. He failed on a couple of 3rd down attempts–from which a lot of criticism of poor/conservative play-calling came from but check above the passing game isn’t helping either–but otherwise he had a very quiet and strong game.
It needs to be said that with an average passing game this likely isn’t a close game for Notre Dame. It will probably get lost in the final score frustration that this was the 6th best rushing game against a Power 5 defense since Chip Long took over the offense. It would’ve been the 7th best rushing performance in the 4-year stretch from 2013-16, for reference. Most days, these should be a comfortable 20-point win for the Irish against a team that will likely be under .500 this season.
PASSING DEFENSE
The old-school belief that if you win the running game and turnover game you’ll most likely win easily was put to test against Vanderbilt. The Commodores traded 17 more pass attempts than Notre Dame for 191 more passing yards. This is largely the reason why the Irish were out-gained and lost the YPP battle.
On one hand, I feel for the defense because they are being put in a position where the offense can’t pull away and there’s been precious little time to rest. On the other hand, the defense has to do better than giving up 14 first downs through the air (twice as many as Notre Dame’s offense produced) when a few more stops could do wonders for the entire team.
This is a legitimate gripe. With only one sack, 4 pressures, and a lucky (still amazing) forced fumble at the goal line by Alohi Gilman the defense had moments where Kyle Shurmur was carving them up and the Irish had trouble stopping the bleeding. Not a ton of trouble, but enough to be worried.
A combined 7 break-ups by Love and Pride is quite good, though. They have been tested a lot over the past 2 weeks and have won a lot more battles than they’ve lost which is super hard to do consistently at corner.
RUSHING DEFENSE
Last week was a touch of a disappointing effort and despite only 4 tackles for loss on Saturday against Vanderbilt the defense was back to putting the clamps down on an opponent’s running game. Through 3 games, the Irish are allowing an average of 107 yards per game on the ground which is usually Top 10-ish nationally for most seasons.
Vanderbilt could only muster 5 first downs by running it (they had 4 via penalty a sneaky big statistic in a close game) and their running backs were largely nameless throughout the game.
Commodores Run Succcss
Vaughn – 4 of 10 (40.0%)
Blasingame – 6 of 13 (46.1%)
Wakefield – 1 of 2 (50.0%)
Johnson – 0 of 1 (0.0%)
TOTAL – 11 of 26 (42.3%)
I’ll be interested to see if Clark Lea turns up the run blitzes in the future. With only 18 tackles for loss (6 per game the same as last year) I wonder if the defense will try to put opponents in worse passing situations. Thus far, it appears Lea is pretty content to sit back on non-passing downs and clamp down only when they really, really need it.
SPECIAL TEAMS
Tyler Newsome was awarded the game ball for setting a school-record 59.6 punting average on 5 attempts. When he’s on he’s one of the best in the business.
Did Notre Dame actually win the special teams battle? Both teams traded missed field goals, while Justin Yoon hit 3 of them overall. The return games were a wash while Doerer launched 4 of his 6 kickoffs through the end zone.
TURNING POINT
I have a lot of confidence in the defense so my point of view may be skewed. The 4th down Wimbush quarterback sneak sandwiched between 2 Ian Book completions leading to a touchdown was my turning point. The Irish led by 12 with 11 minutes remaining and I felt like the odds were really high this would be a win after that touchdown drive.
3 STARS
RB Tony Jones – Career day and carried the offense for long stretches of this game.
P Tyler Newsome – He played like a captain today.
S Alohi Gilman – This game is potentially much different (13-7 at halftime perhaps?) without his forced fumble.
FINAL NOTES
Are we getting the sense that Clark Lea is struggling a little bit with adjustments? Vanderbilt’s first 4 series totaled just 1.94 yards per play and zero points. On the next 7 series the Commodores put up 7.75 yards per play. That’s a little concerning even if the ‘Dores only mustered 17 points.
The Irish don’t have much at receiver, unfortunately. Wimbush isn’t helping and they aren’t helping Wimbush. Finke led all wideouts with 5 catches on Saturday (for 6 yards, maybe don’t run those screens as much?) while the leading wideout in yardage was Claypool and his 17 yards on 1 catch. Unlike running back who will benefit from the return of Dexter Williams there isn’t much hope for the receivers. The staff is playing Boykin/Claypool/Finke almost exclusively while Kevin Austin (first career catch on Saturday!) and Michael Young are getting very minimal snaps. The latter, thought to be in line to start if not for some injuries in August, still has no catches this season and is stuck on 4 receptions through 17 career games.
That terrible ghost of fatigue is going to be a story line once again. Through 3 games not much depth has been utilized–even on defense where only the safeties are rotating a bit–and that doesn’t portend great things for the future. Oddly enough, Donte Vaughn was in at corner on a crucial 4th down (he got the holding penalty) after barely playing this year. Also, Tommy Kraemer was replaced at right guard by Trevor Ruhland although I’m not sure if this was for a brief amount of time or much longer. Either way, the team has relied on like 30 players on virtually every snap so far. That’s kind of scary.
In THIS POST from August I predicted the 2018 Irish would average +0.8 yards per play differential. Right now through 3 games they’re sitting at +0.5 overall. So far, the defense is overachieving (without taking into account competition to a great degree) with 4.55 yards per play allowed, a mark that will be tough to uphold but would be the 2nd best since 1997 with only the 2002 defense (4.4) being better. The offense…is struggling. Only 5.09 yards per play which–if we’re not going to be cruel and count 2007–would be the worst since 2004. This simply isn’t sustainable and most likely would mean at least one really bad loss coming up on the schedule somewhere because the offense really lays an egg.
Not to be hard so much on the offense but a lack of big plays is killing them. Tony Jones’ 20-yard scamper was the longest run of the game for Notre Dame which makes it 4 runs of 20+ yards through 3 games. Last year, the Irish averaged 3.2 runs of 20+ yards per game. The passing game wasn’t very explosive last year (16 completions of 30+ yards) and even that has regressed with just 2 completions of 30+ yards in 2018. We’re just not that scary anywhere on offense beyond Wimbush’s legs and we’ll increasingly start to rely on his legs even more.
I’d start Ian Book against Wake Forest. If we’re hoping for 10 wins and then crossing our fingers in a bowl game which could buy some off-season momentum to something bigger in 2019 I think Book has the higher floor than Wimbush. I don’t think we’ll see much improvement passing from Wimbush and averaging 200 yards per game through the air isn’t going to cut it unless the offense can rush for roughly 230 per game, certainly a tall order. Starting Book won’t happen, the staff has to chase 11-1 or better and hope Wimbush hits some form of improvement but we could run into a 8-5 season attempting that unless things turn around quickly. Or, the defense truly is this damn good.
Looking at these first three games and how we have played I ask how good are we really? After Michigan I really thought there is a real chance we can earn our first playoff birth but now I don’t think so. We are 3-0 and when this team absolutely has to make plays it does. That’s the good news. If we play like this versus Stanford they will beat us. Same goes for Va Tech when we go to Blacksburg. We simply can’t continue with these second half collapses. We have been out played in the second half of all three games IMO. I won’t complain to much but we just need to play better moving forward.
Will we, though? How great is Stan? They only got 17 against SC who absolutely sucks. Is our defense orders of magnitude better than SC? If Stan can only muster 17 against them, then only scoring 20 should be good for us in that game. Here’s where I’m not really too worried…we’re moving the ball well most of the games. Its just right at the end when we’re settling for FG instead of getting TDs. I dont understand why Book isnt GETTING us there and BW punches us in. If I had to change something, I’d flip the goalline QB thing. Brandon is deadly on that ZR down there.
I dont know bud, I think you’re a little too sanguine about offense. They no showed for the second half except for like one drive. And they’ve done that 3 games straight now.
Are the passing woes due more to the receivers than the qb? We had at least two bad drops yesterday, Finke and Claypool. I only remember one really bad throw (near interception by safety). We ran that wide receiver screen at least three times too often. That play is a real stat-killer for everyone.
On a positive note, Alizé made three nice catches (don’t recall any drops from him).
Two bad drops, but four bad throws 🙁
I’m not sure the drops were that terrible, they were both crossing routes thrown significantly behind the receiver, one moreso than the other
I don’t recall all the drops, the one to Finke was a little behind him, and thrown pretty hard too but it did hit him in the hands. Could have been thrown a little better for the WR but it’s not unfair to say that one should have been caught. That said, surely Wimbush just makes a lot more misfires/bad throws than WRs drop the ball.
I dont think it matters WHY the play doesnt work. The fact that we cant run it and it always kills drives yet we continue to call it IS the issue
Everybody drops passes, it just happens but the pass to Finke was really basically perfect. When his hands came up to catch the ball they were in front of his face mask. Sure, maybe you would want it a foot further in front, but you can’t call that behind the receiver imo.
The Claypool drop was a quite bad pass, basically in the worst possible place where a guy could get both hands on it given his momentum (so technically a drop, but I would say equal fault between Wimbush and Claypool on that one). The Finke one was an ok pass, but certainly could have been better; that was mostly Finke.
Mack, Jones, Wright, and Austin all caught every target. Finke was 5/8, Claypool and Boykin were each 1/4.
“We ran that wide receiver screen at least three times too often.”
Didn’t they run it to Finke on like 3rd or even 4th down and he had to run for like 8-9 yards when it’s was like 5 to go on the play? Got lucky there and I almost wasn’t happy for the conversion because my immediate thought was “crap, they’re gonna use this play heavily now and it’s not going to work again”.
And Wimbush can’t make that throw either without putting it on the guy’s feet every time. Not sure why they run that play at all considering the low odds of having a good result come out of it. As I said above, it’s sad the starting QB can’t run the basics well after all this time of being in the role.
Another very insightful post, and many thanks for including the highlights and the presser.
A couple of observations:
— I watched it on replay after returning home, so between 2 and 5 am, so maybe I made this up, but didn’t Michael Young actually return a kickoff like to the 50 yard line? Helping us a lot towards the end? In which case, yes, I think we sort of won the ST competition, and I thought BK’s remarks in the presser were telling (“15 min per practice boosted to 22, and we are finally seeing the start of a payoff…”). Of course, it looks like those 7 minutes got taken away from Brandon’s red zone throwing…
— Might that help Michael Young become a more confident receiver? Just sayin’, I know it’s a stretch. In fact, I am wondering if one of the illustrious 18 Stripes Staff could take a deep dive into why the receivers are not producing separation?
— The remark about Lea struggling a bit with adjustments is perhaps more than a slight worry, looking at Ball State as well. It is his first season calling plays, and maybe that open question prior to the season is surfacing. BK’s remarks about the defense being good but not great, and that the issues are technical “and tactical” would seem to fit.
Yes! Forgot about the one solid kick return. Definitely a win for special teams.
I’m actually less concerned about Lea than you and Eric. Or maybe I’m just more willing to assume he’ll get better at the play-calling as he gets experience doing it. I’m overall really happy with the D, the D-line has been monstrous, and I think we’re getting the very best out of the talent on hand. Even the safety position has really improved and made game changing plays two weeks in a row.
That said, I felt like last night’s tOSU-TCU game was a CLINIC in aggressive defense, particularly TCU’s DBs. So there’s a mark on the wall I’d like to see us move towards. If you didn’t see the game, don’t be fooled by the final score–tOSU had a 4 minute stretch where they scored 20 points through two just darn good contested plays made on offense, a freak turnover and score by the D, and boom all of a sudden a game that I felt TCU was dominating turned around on them, but tOSU needed every bit of its freakish talent to get ANYTHING for the first 2/3 of the game before they took over, and their only TD prior to that point was a defensive fumble recovery in the endzone that should have been ruled a safety.
Agree with your assessment of that game. Watched almost all of it and TCU’s defense was everywhere. I’d like to see us move a bit that way, but I also think that TCU played out of their minds and was a bit fortunate that OSU didn’t hit on a couple of big plays that would have turned the game earlier. But, overall, yes I think you are right that if we turned up the aggression level a bit we could get more 3 and outs which might really help our offense right now.
Don’t forget the trick kickoff return TCU called that should have been a crazy easy TD except the receiver screwed up and threw the ball forward rather than back. Very cool play, with the other receiver lying flat on his belly in the endzone until the kick was caught…OSU never saw him until he caught the pass and was gone. If the ball had been thrown 3 yards shorter the TD would have counted.
This review is a real bummer. Just hope the dam doesn’t burst open too soon. I think our defense can go super sayain at critical times but we ask an awful lot of them. Why is it that the offense starts better than it finishes? I haven’t heard it suggested that it’s a conditioning problem. According to Kelly we don’t script plays. Seems like it may be an energy problem. We come out ready to play, build a lead in all three games and then relax. That’s a gross simplification of course but we have to account for this pattern.
BK said maybe they need to “repeat more successful plays”. Hence a hint that maybe he is putting the finger a bit on the OC — and there may be something to that. Adjustments have not always been a BK specialty, but when calling plays himself as I recall he had his moments. In the case of this year, could be both coordinators are not at their best making adjustments — which goes far to explain the patterns we have seen emerge.
IMO, it’s because we’re still the more talented team and we do start with confidence. But, opponents adjust, we lean on our defense and get a little conservative on offense trying to have the run game carry it, while simaltaneously still using a play action passing game that can’t keep defenses on their heels because not much is being completed especially down field.
This is why I think the offense will look out of sorts most of the year. We want this side piece passing game that isn’t going to happen with Wimbush, and when the defense is good enough to protect solid leads, they think we can lean more on the run game.
So Derek mason looks like Brother Mouzon, he should just embrace it and dress like it on GameDay. Would easily be worth 2 wins a year.
But I seem to mostly share your thoughts on the game. OLine played a pretty good game and did their job. The offense lacks any explosive playmakers and is clunky enough it will cost them a game or two. I don’t know it Book is the answer, but the current set up is weird too. I hope they give him full possessions this week
You think it would be worth 2 wins to dress like the worst Wire character?
I go back and forth on Book. I’m curious to see the advanced stats, but it seems we struggle both with efficiency and explosiveness. I could see Book boosting the efficiency (assuming his turnover problem has been fixed) but probably wouldn’t improve explosiveness, and I’m not sure how to weigh those.
On the other hand, Wimbush looks slower as a runner lately, and it makes me wonder if he’s injured. If that’s the case, the explosiveness argument for Wimbush seems weaker.
Yesterday was just an odd game. I have no idea how to fix the O.
It’s a tough decision. I just don’t see much hope for better explosiveness with either QB. It’s either more incompletions while trying more down field with Wimbush or more completions but a reliance on shorter passes with Book.
To me, this particular team is screaming out for more efficiency and getting comfortable in their skin that they won’t be very explosive. I don’t think the coaches will see it that way. But I do think the best version of this team is with an offense that is comfortable mucking it up, running pretty well, and moving the chains modestly with more of a ball control passing game.
Am i wrong in thinking that Wimbush looks more tentative as a runner lately? Like he doesn’t want to get hit? The offense was dynamic last year because he was running with confidence and fearless. For whatever reason, that is not the case.
Couple other notes:
That WR screen call needs to go. Now. Wimbush can’t throw it accurate enough to make it work, and I don’t see the WRs blocking it well enough.
WImbush–to my untrained 43 year old eyes–doesn’t seem to be making good reads on the Read/Option calls. He often seems to leave the ball in the belly of the RB when he should pull it.
I do think he’s running “safer” with more sliding and more attempts to get outside and have the sideline protect him from more hits. I don’t know if I see him being more tentative when he does choose to run. I don’t want to take for granted that he almost always gets away from the first or second defender chasing him, that’s hard to do!
BK in the presser agreed wholeheartedly with the observation that BW didn’t look comfortable sliding, and added that BW would be better off “completing the run” (which he did on the first TD btw.
I am thinking that maybe a combo of knowing he needs to throw better and the sheer amount of hits he took last year and this year, has made him at times a more tentative runner? And indeed, maybe he is also hurt just a little as someone speculated.
I agree that moving to more of a ball control, long efficient drives sure on offense is the best way forward. That probably (possibly?) entails giving Book a look at starter. The staff will not do that, and we’ll continue to struggle with Wimbush and his poor passing
The reason that I’m still on the Wimbush train is that I feel like we can still be a pretty good running (with OL play like last night) team this year with him as QB. If we take Wimbush away and insert Book then are we a good running team? Probably not. So then we are an average to below average running team with an average passing game….
I guess what I’m saying is I feel like this is the year to go for the playoffs. Perhaps we can’t win it all but there is no share in getting into the last 4 and then you see what happens. Our schedule has its tough spots but overall is not looking terribly difficult, we look to have a very good defense, and if we can continue to run the ball and get a little bit better passing offense and improve in the red zone then the playoffs are in reach. I just don’t see that happening with Book. We wouldn’t be a good running team with him because we depend on Wimbush to help us in that area and the slight extra we get from more efficient passing just might even happen when teams don’t key on the run game as much.
I think with Book many are sleeping on his running. I think he can be a 40-50 yard per game type of runner and in his small amount of playing time he’s shown he’s much better with the read option.
So to me, the question is are you willing to have 20-30 fewer rushing yards from the QB position each game if it means the passing game moves from a D+/C- to something better. I kind of think Book can give us a nice, safe B- passing game and I’m wondering if that’s the best course given the defense looks like it’s going to be very good.
If Book was capable of being a B- passer, he should be the starting QB.
However, given seeing him in the UNC/LSU games, I don’t think he’s consistently as good as we hope/project that he could be. When Book throws the ball downfield, it’s often dangerous. Overall you’ll lose the rushing aspect and probably not be THAT much better in the passing game.
Maybe, I just see a quarterback who in a smaller sample is just a far more accurate quarterback and it’s hard for me to think his weaknesses wouldn’t get better with more experience. Our writers were arguing about this, but Wimbush is a really, really poor passer IMO and I have a hard time believing Book wouldn’t be a pretty sizable upgrade.
I think that you are giving up too early on wimbush. I think he looked much better this week, at least in the first half, and will likely improve. He is inconsistent, but did make some very nice throws. He didn’t hit many long downfield throws, but much of that was due to excellent coverage by the VU DBs. He did much better with those throws in the first two games, if I recall. I think people are overestimating Book’s passing skills. As bad as BW was last year, Book’s passers rating was even worse. There is no guarantee that book would be an improvement in the passing game and (IMHO) he definitely would be a downgrade in the running game. I don’t think BW is ever going to be a great passer, but I think that he does still have room for improvement and can be OK.
I’m not necessarily giving up on Wimbush, just think giving Book a shot at Wake could be a good call.
I do disagree that Wimbush is going to improve much. He has one game since the start of last season where he was over 56.7% completions and he’s still visibly not accurate.
It’s certainly an interesting debate. I’m unsold that Book would actually be that consistently sizeable of an upgrade.
Wimbush is great at avoiding pressure and extending plays. His legs are a weapon that needs to be accounted for. He has his limitations but it’s good that Wimbush doesn’t turn it over too much and can create a little from sure losses on sacks a less mobile QB probably takes.
They had 4 scoring drives in the first half! (Granted, 3 field goals hurts). Though frustrating, Wimbush is still driving the offense up and down the field consistently. You mention a “higher floor” for Book, but I see it a bit differently. Wimbush has gotten off to good starts of games and put the team out in front in all 3 times. In terms of the overall operation of the offense while they are a work in progress, they’re not spinning their wheels too much, just need to clean up some items and execute a little better. Possibly call better plays in the 3rd quarters too when they seem to drop off.
The coaches see a larger sample, though.
I think you’ve nicely summaryized the key issue: “We ran great but still struggled on offense!” However, I see it as, “We did pretty well on offense but fell apart in the red zone.”
I’m not sure how to fix that, and I agree that we need more offensive efficiency. So I hear where you’re coming from with Book! But given the little we’ve seen of book, and the great deal the coaches have seen, I’m not sold on him as the savior.
Maybe I just feel horribly burned by being on the Andrew Hendrix train during the Rees screamfest of 2013, only to see how awful he played when Rees got knocked out against USC.
I don’t see a savior. Actually, I feel like I’m calling for exactly the opposite. Book is the less sexy pick, but may be the better quarterback for THIS team on an offense that isn’t likely to be that great no matter what they do.
I actually completely agree with you about Book and his running. He is average to maybe even slightly above average. I think where we disagree a bit is that Wimbush is such a great runner that other teams actually account for it in their game plan. Therefore, the running backs get a bit more of an advantage on zone read, the opposing pass rush has to worry about it, and there are chances for easier throws against man coverage because teams start to stack the box.
With Book in the game I don’t see opposing defenses actually accounting for his running in the game plan. They would allow him to gain 40 yards on 8 rushes b/c they don’t view him as a home run threat. Instead teams key more on the backs, they no longer have to stack the box to stop the run, and then the efficient passes that everyone sees Wimbush miss are not longer as open because there is not an extra man sneaking down into the box.
Obviously this is just conjecture, but if I was an opposing coach that is how I would play it.
To me, you’re describing what is going to be the struggle. Namely, teams stacking the box and eventually it will slow the run game down in big moments. Not sure what we’ll be turning to when that happens (like the 2nd half against UM).
Yep. Totally agree there. I just tend to think that the same would apply to Book. Teams would still be able to slow down the run game in big moments but wouldn’t have to stack the box to do it and as a result we don’t get any better in the passing game as well.
Wondering about your thoughts on this: if we make a QB switch do we go to Book (win now potential) or do we go to Jurkovec (maybe win now, but really about next year and the future)? I suppose it would matter somewhat if we have already lost this year and therefore are probably out of the running for the playoff (since one loss against our schedule would doom us in the committee’s eyes).
Definitely if there’s a switch go to Book. Phil isn’t ready for this quite yet.
Oh I completely agree. I should have specified that we would only go to him if we had gone to Book and lost a second or third game and have say 2 games to go in the season. Then do we see what Jurkovec can do?
I’m not calling for him as QB and I really hope that we don’t have to see a change at QB but that Wimbush will improve even just a little bit more (he is up from 49% to 55% completions, so maybe he could get to 58%) and hits the easier throws to keep the chains moving.
He was 61% yesterday, which isn’t terrible. If you give him one of the drops it’s 65%, and if you give him both of the drops it’s 69%. Not to mention that if you gave him both of those drops we could have kept the chains moving and potentially added more points.
So obviously, if my aunt had balls she’d be my uncle, but two dropped passes could have made a marked improvement in our perception of wimbush’s performance yesterday
Box score says 13/23 = 57%.
But, your point still holds since w/o those drops it jumps to 65%.
That said, every QB’s stats go up if you take out drops, so at that point is 65% still “good”?
Huh. I read 16/26 in an article.
Book was 3/3
I don’t know how good the D really is. None of our wins were against teams with strong offenses, and we were lucky not to give up 2 more offensive scores to Vandy. I get that the offense doesn’t help our D, and at some point guys are going to break down playing every snap.
If he’s better at the read option, technically those additional 20-30 yards from the qb position, should easily be made up by the RBs on those options.
Yeah Book may be less explosive, but if he makes better decisions on the zone read and RPOs than Wimbush (how could he not), wouldn’t that probably more than offset his less explosiveness?
I think there is zero chance we get to the playoff. Every elite team has a great QB, and neither of ours could start at Bama, OSU, Okla, or the other real contenders.
I think it rather unlikely that we make the playoff, but I can’t call it impossible. If we go 12-0 we are of course in. If we go 11-1 then who knows but just to say that you must have an elite QB to win 11 games is kind of silly. Of course it really helps, but since we don’t have to beat Okla, Bama, OSU to get in the playoffs, all we have to do is win the games on the schedule regardless of who other teams have as their QB
If the offense doesn’t improve VASTLY, I’d rather not make the playoffs. There is NO WAY we can hang with OSU, Bama, or Georgia and will likely get embarrassed. No thanks!
I understand not wanting to get embarrassed but wanting to not make the playoffs is like the 16 seed UMBC saying, “Oh man we made the NCAA tournament as a 16 seed, we may as well not go b/c we are likely to get embarrassed”. Look how that turned out.
You play the game, give it your best shot, and see what happens. Of course I also understand that we have the big bowl game losing streak that would continue if we lose but in my mind you shoot for the playoffs and see what happens.
Careful getting too attached to Oklahoma. They’ve beaten a winless UCLA team, a winless IA St team, and Florida Atlantic, who to their credit has since beaten Bethune-Cookman (?).
Oklahoma won’t play a P5 team that will have a winning record this year until either October 13th or 20th depending on how you think Texas will do.
What about when Dex comes back? If you put in book THEN, you have an ultra elite RB to account for the Wimbush dropoff
Decent point but we have never seen Dex get actual major carries in a game let alone a season. I think he is a great runner but I’ll believe it when I see it that he is given 15+ touches a game and when he does it w/o getting dinged up.
Book isn’t going to be able to throw a high percentage to a bunch of receivers who get no separation. I don’t see the efficiency improving much with any QB. And Book can’t run like Wimbush. No thanks.
I’d like to see a QB be able to throw slants, digs, and hitches with competency while not trying to break receivers ankles on quick screens. Maybe Book can’t do that but I do know jump balls down the sideline to Boykin and Claypool finishing games with 1 reception isn’t much of a winning recipe.
The one upside to switching to Book would be seeing NDNation melt down again. Kelly finally builds up a RTDB offense for them (after years of begging) with Wimbush, then immediately benches him after a 250 yard rushing day.
(Also this recipe has gotten us an .800 record under Wimbush, for what it’s worth)
It is really sad you can’t trust your starting QB to make the throw Book made – a simple common PA and putting a little touch on a short pass to a tight end to the flat.
Wisconsin and LSU seem to have similar QB issues right now. ND is much more in their tier of teams of talent/production than the playoff level. And I mean it really doesn’t even seem to matter with the way Bama is playing anyways.
“Survive and advance” is good enough for now. Just get through Wake and we’ll see what we have with a top-10 game against Stanford. If ND can raise up like they did against UM and win, it’ll be great. I can get why no one is too enthusiastic about how they’re playing but they’re still undefeated and still ticking.
FSU and USC are struggling mightily and the back-half of the schedule doesn’t seem as daunting as it might have a month ago. Those teams look like trash and are losing games too.Much better to be winning, at least, so I’m trying to stay positive despite some ugly warts.
To be fair, Book’s TD was poorly thrown. It took quite the catch to reel it in. So maybe it’s said that neither QB1 nor QB2 can reliably execute it.
Yeah, that’s a good point. I was mainly thinking of the Brock Wright pass which was fine but that TD was probably more difficult for Weishar than it should have been. I do feel like in the “backup is always popular mode” we might think Book can be very accurate but his skiil-set and attributes don’t really scream above average college QB.
And, though I hate appeal to authority arguments, the coaches have a lot of data and time to watch Book/Wimbush in practice. If they feel like the offense is going to be better with Wimbush, I’m inclined to believe it. And, like I said, 4 scoring drives in the first half shows some evidence that while still not perfect, Wimbush is steering the offense well early in games. I feel like if Book was, say Tommy Rees+, he would be the starter. We don’t really know what he is but I don’t get the feeling they have a consistent, solid ready to go backup that would outperform the starter.
I’m not sure the argument to authority holds water. Now obviously, BK and his staff both know more and have access to more data than any of us (except maybe Larz).
However, we can’t fairly assume that they are using 100% pure logic in making their decisions. Maybe they feel that they owe something to Wimbush. Maybe they can’t overcome their confirmation bias of seeing how well Wimbush does in practice and they “just know he can put it all together this time”. Maybe there’s even just a little credence to the “BK is an egomaniac who can’t admit he was wrong” trope. Haven’t we all been guilty of making bad choices and then doubling down on them for whatever reason? Or worked for managers who did?
After all, we all have our blind spots…
All of that is true. It’s clear Kelly hasn’t batted 1.000 with QB decisions and management in the past.
I doubt this has to do with ego or admitting a mistake, though. Wimbush has his issues but overall and all-around he’s got a better pedigree than Book, better skills and attributes. The coaches are obviously betting on some hope that Wimbush can execute fundamentals (not a strong point or automatic) yet I could still see the argument as realistic that they’re playing the adjudged best overall player at the position.
And, my theory is less “Wimbush is good” as it is “we fans don’t really know about Book so we’re inflating hopes and dreams and envisioning a polished, good QB that doesn’t actually exist”.
Really not sure what I said there that deserves a downvote, but ok…
If you’ve learned anything about voting in the past 2 years, you should know voting doesn’t always make sense
Downvoted this comment for complaining. I didn’t downvote your original comment though.
I don’t think Costello is a top tier QB at Stanford, and the USC QB is awful. LSU’s QB is somewhere in between those 2, but closer to the USC guy than to the Stanford guy.
Actually if we had Vandy’s QB I’d be a happy camper.
JT Daniels at USC has not been good but USC has much bigger problems than QB play. Their defense is not very good, their offensive line can’t run or pass block…
That can’t be true, ESPN et al told me JT Daniels is the greatest thing since Sam Darnold and did you know he reclassified and should be at prom and
I did actually know that, thanks to ESPN and it repeating it 1,209,482 times during USC games.
Also, BSU’s QB is 6-6, and Kyle Shurmur’s dad is an NFL coach.
Wait, I’ve heard of Kyle Shurmur, but what is the NFL?
I think Costello and Shurmer are about the same. Don’t forget Costello shredded us last year.
14-22 for 176 and 4 TD. Costello was opportunistic and the end of that game totally fell apart (Wimbush INT, Sanders fumble) but it was a ND 20-17 lead going into the 4th quarter. End result was lopsided more due to mistakes than excellent QB play, even though to his credit Costello did play well later on. For most of that game the defense had him in check.
As of now, I feel like I trust ND defense vs. Costello a lot more than Wimbush vs. Stanford defense.
Yeah, I buy that…
I know that I’m disappointed with the outlook a bit right now but really the way that everyone feels now is very similar to the way we felt after Purdue 2012. Both years started with big wins (2012: blowout against Navy) and this win with a win (albeit ugly) against Michigan.
Then, things looked like the tires were falling off. I was at the 2012 Purdue game and while it was exciting and I loved the experience, I remember thinking after the game that we were in trouble. We couldn’t run the ball at all (52 yards, for 1.4 ypc) and Golson looked sloppy and turnover prone. Never thought leaving that game that we would end up undefeated.
Just saying, that while things could be better they could also be much worse. I’m not trying to compare the two teams necessarily, but wanted to remind everyone that its OK to be disappointed but still hopeful that things can improve and that we can still make a run.
Agree. But it’s ‘Ghoulson’
Goldstein. Ahem.
This was a very well-written article. Not sure I’m completely ready to bail on Wimbush, though. For appearances/team chemistry sake, I think it should take an (inevitable) loss to pull that trigger, as it will mean that the Wimbush Era is effectively over. He has been very not-good, but given the record and given that it’s not like he’s holding back a bunch of great offensive skill talent I don’t quite think he has been affirmatively bad enough to lose the job. Yet.
Totally fair, no way they pull him without a loss. I’m not screaming for a change but kind of envisioning the future and wondering!
I guess I felt like they would be using more like Golson/Rees, based on my interpretation of BKs preseason comments. And I feel like that would be ok. I feel like last week was the perfect time for Book to get a couple series to start the second half, just to see if he could get something going. I’m not saying to pull Wimbush permanently by any means, but if Book is a change of pace guy, let him have a couple series to see how the offense works with him
It’s puzzling the usage of Book only for short yards/red zone plays as it is, but I’m guessing using him for full drives and making a #1 and #1A situation gets us dangerously close to a dreaded quarterback controversy. Which has got to be the last thing to introduce to this team so early in the season still.
I’d stick with one guy and keep it riding. Though I do agree that your point stands that there’s definitely evidence perhaps Wimbush could/should have gotten the hook. The staff has been pretty patient with him, felt like treated Kizer a lot worse – which is kinda ironic since he’s a far superior QB to Wimbush!. Anyways, surely losing compounded the pressure on everyone. Easier to stay the course when the team has been leading for the entire game.
BUT HE’S GOING TO GET BETTER NEXT GAME, JUST YOU WAIT.
I mean, maybe? There’s so much that’s not even remotely cut and dried here. I wanted to make a joke about BRING ON JURKOVEC but I won’t because I’m sure there are some people who are actually serious. I was hoping we’d see him in a game by this point, but hell. in preseason people were talking about his weird release, so I can’t help but be skeptical about him, too. What’s the use of calling for the BACKUP TO THE BACKUP as the answer if he’s just going to sidearm interceptions and be just as bad or worse.
Wasn’t Wimbush supposed to be the top rated QB when he was recruited?
According to 247 he was the #46 overall recruit in his class and the #3 dual threat QB, so not top rated but still very highly rated.
I wonder where the “dual” part of that came from? Or maybe they meant run left, run right? 🙂
We knew the offense was going to struggle this year (or at least any realist who looked at what we lost on the O Line plus the fact we have 0 team speed). So my concern is the lack of pass rush. We still don’t have anybody who can get home, and that’s really frustrating. I had higher hopes for our DEs this year, but it’s been more of the same of what we’ve seen since the 2013 season; tantalizing potential, but no realization of that talent.
As long as the D Line keeps shutting down the run, that should be good enough against most teams. But we really could use 1 stud pass rusher to take this defense from potentially Top 10ish to Top 3.
P.S. stop moving Tillery to the outside. I know it worked once vs Michigan, but it hasn’t worked since.
I haven’t gone back to check, but I think Bandy was on max protect a fair amount yesterday, with a TE and a back. When you rush 4 against 7,it is hard to get to the QB, no matter how studly your pass rush. I would have liked to have seen our DBs make more plays as a result. When they were not in max protect, their QB got rid of the ball very quickly.
By the way, their QB looked very good. Was that another case of ND making the opposing QB a Heisman candidate who will flop next week, or was he really pretty good?
The “ND makes them look good” will always be a legitimate theory. However, I can honestly say that Shurmur was making tight throws fast. There was one play where he put the ball about a yard to the left of our DB who was all over the receiver. I haven’t seen a lot of that.
Not top 3 even with a pass rusher. Just think about Bama, OSU, Georgia, TCU even in losing looked great on defense, haven’t seen Oklahoma D, Stanford’s looked good vs USC, but USC really stinks this year.
OSU gave up 33 to Oregon State. Haskins picked TCU apart while Dobbins ran all over them. Georgia gave up 17 in its one game against a Power 5 team. Oklahoma gave up 27 to an Iowa State team that got shut down by Iowa. ND, without a pass rusher, has given up more than 17 points once in its last 6 games. I stand by my assertion that this defense would be elite with 1 great pass rusher.
so by that logic you think we can hold OSU, TCU, Georgia nd Oklahoma to 17 points are less?
By the way, Haskins didn’t “pick TCU apart and Dobbins ran all over them”–OSU’s defense scored 14 points, and while Haskins and Dobbins had their moments, TCU led most of the way and did damn well against talent unlike anything we’ve met on the field this year. Each of the teams you mention (the winning ones) would blow us up if we play like we’ve been playing.
I’m not sure why you mention our last 6 games–we’ve only played three games thus far. Last years games aren’t relevant.
Haskins threw 38 passes for 344 yards, 2 TDs, 0 INTs, 63%. Dobbins carried 18 times for 7 yards per carry. Does a guy have to average 10 yards per carry to impress you?
I watched the game—much of that came after the game got out of hand with a shovel pass interception for 6 by a OSU dlineman and a touchdown called back on TCU.
Both teams ran hugely uptempo offenses, especially TCU, that would totally gas our D.
I also wonder if it would help the offense to try one of the speedy freshmen, especially Braden Lenzy on some plays. Maybe he just is not even close to ready, but it seems like we could really benefit from some more speed at WR. Boykin and Claypool have done fine, but neither are getting tons of separation and aren’t true threats for much YAC. They are both valuable WR but they are a bit redundant in terms of their skill set. Not that Lenzy would be a starter but could he get 10 to 15 snaps to threaten the D?
In psychology there is a term “learned helplessness “. Usually results from a failure to succeed and causes lack of effort. The offense seems to suffer from it. I don’t know if it’s Long, Wimbush or the entire group. Especially on third down, they seem to expect failure. Maybe it’s just a conformation bias.
Never heard that term before but like it and it makes sense— I mean in terms of its usage. Possibly also explains why we “know” we’ll get blown up by the Bama and OSUs.
(Also Bama and OSU have way better players than we do)
Yeah, that’s what I would say too. There’s a very clear talent discrepancy from top 5 teams to Notre Dame, especially in offensive skill positions. That’s pretty important factor in which team will win a ballgame, and I doubt it’s psychological.
At the same time, I don’t think we can use talent as an excuse. Oklahoma may have better players than us, but Oklahoma State (who just killed Boise State, my normal example of “it’s not all recruiting stars”) doesn’t. tOSU has higher ranked recruits, but TCU does not. And many of our guys are supposedly given offers by the Bamas, the Georgias, the tOSUs, etc. Wisconsin (yes, they lost, but…) doesn’t out-recruit us.
I definitely agree that what I saw last night from tOSU and Bama, they just have better players and talent. But they ALSO have better coaching. Maybe when you know you’re 50 points better than the other team just walking on the field, it’s easy to avoid “learned helplessness” but I think there’s a lot to on all sides.
TCU has never done anything to prove to me that they could hang in the playoffs though either. Never outright won the Big 12. Only 6 wins 2 years ago and 4 wins 5 years ago. Talent matters.
And Oklahoma State is even less likely to be a playoff contender than TCU.
After watching last night’s game? I feel that all of this is just academic. The season is one long contest to see who loses to Bama.
I still think Clemson could give them a game if their D Line could spend a ton of time the backfield. But yeah, with Tua that team is just unfair.
When Ole Miss scored on their first play from scrimmage, I said, “oh no, you’ve made him mad. They’re going to lose 70-7” Missed by one score…
Playoffs?!? Playoffs???!?!? /Jim Mora Sr.
We’re nowhere near talking about playoffs, man–you completely miss the point. We wouldn’t beat either of those teams RIGHT NOW. If you take the way we played yesterday and the way TCU played last night, on a neutral field, they beat us by 21 at least. You’re talking historically, I’m talking Week 3, 2018 season. TCU was vicious on defense for 3 quarters until the yes–talent–of tOSU took over (and some luck). It took perfect throws from Haskins and crazy athletic plays from his WR’s to make simple completions. No way Wimbush, Book, Jurkovec, or TFR in a wig are making those throws, and no way are Boykin and Claypool making those catches consistently.
Why bag TCU or Okie Lite for not being “playoff” contenders? They’re demonstrably playing way better this season, right now, than we are. And they don’t have better recruits than we do. So it ain’t solely a talent problem.
Got it. I thought we were talking about the strength of the program (in regards to this “learned helplessness” idea) over the long-run, while you were talking Today, September 2018. My bad.
I don’t think we have the recruits to hang with Bama/Clemson/Ohio State, but you’re absolutely right that we should have the players to hang with TCU, and I don’t think we would this season. I want to see more Oklahoma State before I make the same assessment.
I think last year’s team would have easily been in position to win against either of those teams, which makes the playcalling/coaching this year so curious to me. Miami was the only game last year where I felt we got manhandled in the coaching department. This year, it feels like both BSU and Vandy both owned our coaches and our overwhelming talent advantage saved us. Hope that gets cleaned up.
Well, there’s that too 😉
I still think we should stick with Wimbush! He probably won’t ever improve as a passer like we want, but with his running I think he gives us the best chance. I think Book would be exposed if he was full time QB1. If there comes a point where we have 3 losses and we can still save Jurkovec’s RS, I think he should take over. We all know BK doesn’t think like that though especially if he’s on his way out.
1. Alabama – zero top tier wins, one second tier win (Ole Miss)
2. Georgia – zero top tier wins, one second tier win (South Carolina)
3. Clemson – one top tier win (TA&M), zero second tier wins
4. Ohio State – one top tier win (TCU), zero second tier wins
5. Oklahoma – zero top tier wins, zero second tier wins
6. LSU – two top tier wins (Miami and Auburn), zero second tier wins
7. Stanford – zero top tier wins, zero second tier wins
8. Notre Dame – one top tier win (Michigan), one second tier win (Vanderbilt)
9. Penn State – zero top tier wins, one second tier win (Pitt)
10. Virginia Tech – zero top tier wins, zero second tier wins
We can all see the warts in our team’s performances, but if you look at what other teams are doing instead of just what ND is not doing it’s tough to buy into the popular sky-is-falling line that some ND fans are trying to sell. We’re winning and beating better teams than others are playing doing it even if we aren’t winning as easily as we’d like.
Vanderbilt hasn’t finished .500 since 2013. I won’t believe they’re a quality win until I see at least 4 or 5 more weeks of evidence.
Down the stretch of the season this might change a lot. VT isn’t getting credit for FSU and Standford isn’t getting credit for USC right now, however the Vandy QB and Oline have a combined 150 college starts between them and their defense has been pretty good in all of their games. There’s a very real chance they have a couple valuable scalps by the end of the season.
Also both S&P+ and the Coaches polls have Vandy above Ole Miss and Pitt right now, so excluding those three would make the second tier of wins only like 10 teams long.
After its 4 TD beat down of Ball State, I believe the only good team outside of Alabama is IU. So this checks out.
Dude, I love the data you bring. Keep bringing actual information to the discussion. Thank you.
Yeah, I feel like Notre Dame is a like a smart kid that doesn’t really study too hard for an easy quiz and gets a B on it, because they already know they got an A on the first test (Michigan). You can whine and moan they should apply themselves more and do better, and you’re not wrong…But it really only matters how they do with the next two tests coming up with Stanford and Tech.
Saw that ESPN has this stat(?)/opinion which coincides with what Gambit is suggesting: “The 10 teams that have accomplished the most so far this college football season. An average top-25 team would have had a 19% chance to go 3-0 with LSU’s schedule.” (Clemson is #2 with 37% and ND #3 with 40%) They also have ND at down to a 14% chance of making the playoffs.
I think they’ve got to go with Wimbush. Maybe if the RB corps was better Book could work, but with the current group it’d feel like trotting out the 2013 offense.
The nice thing about not really knowing how good this team is, they’re at least still 3-0 and ranked in the top 10. At least it’s not that tough of a schedule, they could fraud their way into the playoffs (and a likely blowout first round exit). Which is still better than not making the playoffs. A 10 win season would mean three of the past four seasons of hitting the 10 win mark for the first time since 1993.
But I’ll just never stop being perplexed by the Kelly era streak of quarterbacks not reaching their potential. In his 9th season here and such a long list of disappointing QB’s careers – I can’t imagine how they still keep landing top QB recruits like Jurkovec and Pyne. Y’all, don’t do it, it’s a trap.
This isn’t a Kelly issue, the majority of top QB recruits don’t make it to their full potential. Those that do are pretty much the exception to the rule. I just looked at 2012 and 2013 and pretty much forgot or never heard of most these names. There’s only really Jameis Winston from those classes as top QB recruits who made it to the NFL, besides a few guys like Hackenberg, Dobbs, Kelly hanging on tenuously to backup spots. The majority of the list didn’t even have decent college careers, let alone maximize their potential as top 5-10 high school recruits.
It’s far from unique to Notre Dame to not be some QB development factory of late. Probably falls a lot more on the specific player, plus after the Quinn/Clausen era I guess ND fans just started assuming it was easy to get a 1st/2nd round QB drafted. And thinking Kelly can’t get a QB drafted high even while mismanaging him ignores Kizer, conveniently enough most of the time.
https://247sports.com/Season/2012-Football/CompositeRecruitRankings/?InstitutionGroup=HighSchool&Position=DUAL
It’s not about making it to the NFL – it’s about avoiding being liabilities at the position. Kelly went from a Midas touch at Cincinnati with Pike, Collaros, and Mauk to the feather in his cap being a guy who never broke 3000 passing yards and led the team to a 4-8 record. I’m not saying this is a Kelly issue – I don’t know what the cause is – simply that the list of guys with talent who have fizzled is getting really lengthy.
The list of guys with talent who have fizzle everywhere is really lengthy.
Kelly hasn’t been able to smoothly develop QBs but the list of progression isn’t a smooth line. It also seems guys like Kizer would have been a star just about no matter who his coach was. Guys like Zaire and Golson wouldn’t have performed a ton better regardless of their coaching (see their respective lackluster UF and FSU stints as direct evidence).
ND is able to attract top recruits because being QB of this team still carries prestige and has some glamorous upside to it. Despite most not taking off, it’s obviously tough to play high level QB, most are going to fail.
Montgomery Van Gorder has 7 TD passes already this year after having 0 during his entire 4 years playing under Kelly.
Bo Pelini > Brian Kelly
When you have the best placeholder in D1 you don’t waste his time and efforts on trivial things like playing QB!
thisisfine.jpeg
I wasn’t able to pay close attention to the game so I’d have to go back and watch, but I feel like at the beginning of games, we come out aggressive and fast. Then the offense sort of looks like they just… slow down. Maybe it’s defensive adjustments being made and ND not making any counter adjustments. I’m not sure. But towards the end of the Vandy game (I think on the drive with the missed FG), they put a nice drive together to get into scoring position pretty nicely. I’m probably just oversimplifying things but to me it looks like they CAN play faster and more aggressive when there’s some urgency (beginning, close games, late in the game, etc). Just not sure why there’s this middle of the game slog fest. Also, and I think maybe Eric mentioned it somewhere in the comments, but I feel like there’s a lot of just “throw it up in the air towards the sidelines” routes. Anybody who knows more about football (so everyone here) or has been watching closer would have a better idea than me, I’m just thinking out loud. Great write up as usual.
We had an at-times heated discussion in the 18S writers’ room Saturday night about the Wimbush/Book question. No need to rehash the play-by-play of that as the comment thread here has pretty much done it. I’ll just throw my two cents in, or rather, a smarter guy’s two cents.
What it boils down to for me is that I’m not sold Book can move this offense any more effectively than Wimbush can. The receivers who don’t get separation for 7 aren’t going to suddenly get separation for 12. And despite the perception that many fans have through the first few games, Wimbush has definitely shown some improvement from last year. Here’s where the smarter guy comes in – quoting from Jamie Uyeyama’s post-game write-ups:
Michigan: “I can’t say enough how great Wimbush’s awareness in the pocket was, though. He got rid of the ball at the appropriate time often and and took a couple of big hits to make some important throws… I actually felt that mechanically Wimbush had a couple of throws that were not great early in the game, but didn’t see as many issues as the game progressed… [There were some] mistakes, but his decision making was so strong for the majority of the game that overall it seems like nitpicking to point those out… I thought it was the best game Wimbush has played at Notre Dame considering the circumstances.”
Ball State: “I didn’t feel it was as bad for Brandon Wimbush as I initially felt, though. The first reason is because the game was not called in a way that suited his strengths. The second reason is that the offensive line did not do a good job of protecting him. That definitely seemed to get in his head later on even when he had protection… If everything is going smoothly, then you roll with Wimbush. But if a team is playing in a way that suits having the other guy in the game, then maybe a change can be necessary even if it’s only temporary.”
Vandy: “Wimbush was really sharp to start this game. It was a night and day difference [from Ball State] with his feel for escaping the pocket. If not for a couple of drops by Chris Finke and Chase Claypool, his day would have looked better. He ran the ball like the Wimbush we’ve seen him be too.” (Also implied we should ditch the WR screen, which, YES PLEASE.)
He’s far from perfect, but if he’s not crapping the bed (which he hasn’t this season) he’s a much more dangerous all-around player than Book. It’s not as simple as waving away his 900 rushing yards and 14 TDs last season and assuming we’ll make it up elsewhere. I’m with Shinons, I think we would look like a slightly better version of the 2013 offense with Book as the full-time starter. That’s a big meh from me.
I think keeping BW as the started makes the most sense to give the team the best chance to win. Playing QB requires the most perceptual processing and decision making expertise of any position in any sport I can think of. It requires reading a defense pre-snap, sensing a pass rush, making split second reads on who’s open and then getting the ball out in a very narrow window. Even the “simple” wide receiver screen takes impeccable timing and ball placement to work.
Given the above demands, experience helps a lot. Last year Wake Forest’s QB showed the progression that can be made with experience. There are very few Tua’s in the world who can win with minimal experience. Most mortal QB’s benefit from experience and repetition to develop their expertise. While practice helps, there is no substitute for the pressure and stress of a game.
Give BW a chance to smooth the rough edges out. It hasn’t fully “clicked” yet for him, but he’s shown moments of getting it. If you bench him, you shatter his confidence and we end up praying IB somehow blossoms with 2-3 games of experience. I see that as very unlikely and wishful thinking.
BW’s body language is better this year. He is passing for >50% in an offense that lacks a major breakaway threat in the backfield. There is no way to know when, or if, the full picture will click for BW. If it doesn’t click, this is a 9-3 ball team. If it does, this team becomes a playoff contender because BW has the legs and arm to compete at a very high level and elevate the entire offense.
Very nicely put; merci!
There is no breakaway threat in the backfield, and there is also not one at WR. As dependable as Finke has been, the time has come to move Claypool to slot and put Young out wide. The lack of high end speed at WR is really noticeable.
“this team becomes a playoff contender because BW has [the arm] to compete at a very high level and elevate the entire offense.”
This is my quibble. I can’t remember a player in recent memory who was consistently not competing at a high level and people thought it would begin clicking soon. I can’t guarantee it won’t but he’s currently outside the Top 100 in passer rating for 2018 and evidence is piling up.
For reference sake…
2013 Offense
PPG: 27.2 (74th)
YPP: 6.07 (37th)
YPG: 405.8 (68th)
S&P Rank: 27th
2018 Offense
PPG: 23.3 (104th)
YPP: 5.10 (103rd)
YPG: 365.3 (100th)
S&P Rank: Coming Soon
This is probably the biggest disconnect for me. The impending S&P ranking for 2018 thus far probably isn’t going to break into the 40’s, I’d imagine? At any rate, we’re a couple tiers away from being as good as the 2013 offense and yet being a slightly better version than 2013 isn’t exciting anyone. We might go 12-0 with that offense!
Based on this, the 2013 offense wouldn’t be so bad. With the 27th ranked offense, this defense and the quality of our opponents, we could run the table. All that said, I would stick with Wimbush until I see indications his confidence is gone. If anything, the opposite seems true.
Kelly talking about the Ian Book substitutions near the goal line during his Sunday teleconference defined the following:
Blue zone: inside the five
White zone: 14-6 yard lines
Red to high red: 25-15
He said that Ian Book’s RPO and play action abilities excel in the blue zone in multi-TE sets and that it makes reps during the week more focused on the packages that he’s likely to run. We’ll probably continue to see Book substitute in for some of these situations.
Unrelated to the above, but he confirmed no new injuries on Saturday that will have anyone out of Tuesday practice, which is good since Kareem was banged up a bit coming out of the game.
Too. Many. Colors.
What are the odds of Armstrong moving back to wideout once Williams returns? Or using some 2-back sets and motioning into the slot? Or lining up as WR, then running some jet sweeps?
I feel having more than 2 healthy backs will create several better options for stretching a defense than the dreaded WR screen they’ve been running. It’s hard for Chip Long to get too creative with the RB position group, given the incredibly thin depth chart.
Also, I’m with Clearwall. I’d love to see Wimbush be the punch-in specialist, with Book running the offense between the 20’s. Wimbush could probably be very effective in an old-school, service academy style run-only option offense. Think early Tim Tebow.
Or maybe Book is the Obvious Passing Situation (OPS) guy. The whole stadium knows Wimbush’s arm isn’t an OPS threat; might as well give yourselves a chance with Book. While he isn’t the same caliber of runner, he is certainly capable of using his legs – more than enough to keep defenses honest.
Some things to call out. BW’s completion % is up, and has been basically right at 55% every game (he only went over 50% three times all last year). His Y/A is also up a full yard from 6.8 to 7.8. If you had told me he would be throwing 55% at 7.8 y/a, I would have been ecstatic and thought we’d be rolling.
The two problems are TDs and apparently 3rd down passing.
I think the overall lack of explosiveness is a big reason for the TD issues (big plays lead to more opportunities near the end zone). No idea why 3rd down passing would be so bad, given the overall comp% is up. Would have blamed the running game putting us in longer 3rd downs, but we killed it against Vandy.
Attempts/per interception is way up from 45.8 to 19.0 (the latter the same as Ian Book last year in the same sample size) and adjusted yards per attempt is way down from 7.0 to 5.6.
He’s had 5 first down/touchdowns on 21 attempts (23.8%) inside the opponent 40 this year compared to 26/92 (28.2%) last year.
Wimbush has 7 first downs on 21 3rd down attempts (33.3%) compared to 32/78 (41.0%). Without drilling down deeply into pass/run splits he’s throwing 0.5 more 3rd down passes per game in 2018.
Gun to my head he’s probably a little more accurate this year but I think a 5.8% jump has to be taken with a grain of salt when as we saw on Saturday at least 4 completions from 13 overall were really ugly screens that were clearly inaccurate.
Adjusted yards per attempt is just yards per attempt but it adds yards for TDs and subtracts for INTs. There is really no point in using that stat when you are already comparing others.
Yeah, meant to say TD/INTs. I didn’t see Ball State, recorded it, but saw no reason to re-watch. So didn’t really have any thoughts towards the INTs.
As far as bad screens adding to his comp %. He threw them last year as well. I think both visually and statistically, he is more accurate. Doesn’t mean he is accurate.
I don’t really understand what you are trying to show with the stats from the second 2 paragraphs. Didn’t your article say his comp% was 60% on 3rd down, compared to 33% this year?
My point is that he improved the two things I would have most wanted him to improve. And yet, he still isn’t much (or any) better overall. I find it very weird, but it seems to be a very specific area of shortcoming. It at least gives hope that the other areas could fall back in line with last season.
Completing passes doesn’t necessarily mean converting on 3rd down. Against Vandy, he completed 3 of 6 passes on 3rd down but for just 2 first downs.
I get what you’re saying but I was never on the train that a 5-6% completion percentage increase would mean a whole lot for Wimbush and in a small-ish sample size so far it’s obvious (surrounding teammates included) why he’s not really “better.”
I think a 5% gain has made him a lot better. The problem is that he’s getting less help from the skill and o-line positions. If teams had to defend Josh Adams and that O-line again, 5% would seem like a big deal.
And Eric, regarding first downs – Wimbush doesn’t throw for them often. He runs for them. I know you know that, it just makes it hard to use traditional stats, like if we were comparing the completely immobile Rees to the equally (I think?) immobile Clausen.
We really need a WR to step up. I’m about to jump off the Claypool train. Boykin has looked more at par with his (lower, but still somewhat high) expectations.
This is a fair point. It’s hard to say Wimbush is noticeably better than last year, especially when he is throwing horizontal passes in the dirt and it still feels like a minor miracle when he hits a receiver in stride. But, it’s also remarkable that he does not look noticeably worse, given the losses of two top-ten picks replacing his blind side, his #1 RB, and his #1 WR.
This offense is subpar for a Power 5 team, and one of the worst (if not the worst) among top 25, but it’s hard to pin that mostly on Wimbush. It’s the coaching staff’s for not recruiting and/or developing any particularly good offensive players from 2015-2017 (jury’s still out on Lugg and Kmet, I suppose… but that really seems to be the only folks who might be NFL picks one day).
You didn’t think that a 5% completion improvement would mean much? What would?
And I still don’t get your point about 3rd downs. He is awful on 3rd down this year. I don’t think there is anything pointing to something different. That was one of the things I called out that he is far and away worse on than last year. I’m confused what your stats are trying to say beyond the one in the article.
No, I didn’t. It’s like saying a running back averaging 2.9 yards per carry just needed to increase it to 4.1 ypc and it’ll be fine. The II podcast repeatedly this endlessly during the offseason (that Wimbush just needed to get 5-7% better) and it turns out completion percentage as the be all end all thru 3 games isn’t that important when it’s still quite low.
I was pointing out he’s a little worse on 3rd down from last year.
Well yeah, it’s not the be all end all. But can you think of another area he needed to improve more than comp%?
If everything from last year remained the same, sure in a vacuum a 5% increase in completions was near the top. I’d still probably take the under on the 5% improvement for the full season, FWIW.