|
|
|
Trust me he faces some stiff competition from teams such as CBHS, McCallie, MUS, and MBA especially. |
|
Good to hear nmulroy. I was largely going off the highlight video where he was heads and shoulders bigger than most of the kids he was facing. If he is playing solid competition, all the better. |
|
Bear Bryant once said "great players make great coaches". Clearly, Weis has now proved he can recruit big league talent. Hopefully, Bear Bryant's axiom will prove to be still true. |
|
Wow, he was suprisingly fast for a big man. |
|
nmulroy, |
|
Excellent Rage reference, Pat. |
|
Pat or whomever: That was a perfect use of a moderators reaction. |
|
Keep 'em rolling in, Charlie. Attaboy! |
|
I'm surprised to hear about our need for younger tackles. Don't we have Romine, Nuss and now Clelland? We could always use a couple more, I suppose. |
|
Sean, I think Nuss is on the DL. Romine was injured last year and held out of the Spring Game. Clelland wrestled and is a bit on the light side as we speak due to his wrestling weight. |
|
I like the kid's size. Too many high school kids are trying to play at 300+ pounds and in doing so they tend solely rely upon their heft rather than developing maximum quickness, strength and athleticism. Of course 275 is just a Thanksgiving meal away fromm 300, but Bullard appears lean in the photo. IMO, linemen should grow and physically mature gradually. When I hear high school coaches or parents of players talking (bragging!) about 300+ pound 16 and 17 year olds, I cringe. Being sloppy fat at that age is ridiculous. The best linemen in the annals of modern football generally weighed about 245 pounds as high school seniors. Size is great, but should never be developed or encouraged in lieu of mobility. I sometimes think that too much emphasis is being placed on how large our line recruits are versus how explosive and athletic they are. And later, as size gets added to an intelligent, superior athlete, there is a potential for greatness. |
|
Echoing Voice's comment above, I love it every time we get a wrestler. They just seem to have the body control that the other brutes lack at times. Either that or I'm still fawning over T-Laws. Either way . . . . |
|
Nuss is on the offensive line, but he has been practicing as a guard. |
|
Great comments Voice, I couldn't have said it better myself. I don't know what it is but I like this kid. Anytime we can steal one feels great to me. |
|
Knoxville Irish, |
|
Anytime the Skunkbears top the list of schools a recruit chooses us over, I'm happy. Especially with the other big names on his list. |
|
jim, Pat |
|
Guys, Brentwood Academy is also the school of the NBA's Brandon Wright. Some pretty good athletes go through there and the competition really isnt bad at all. |
|
Erik '04, |
|
Thinking about some comments from VIW and others I found myself re-visiting the UT Vols offense the past two seasons. After going 5-6 in 2005 with a team that was predicted to finish in the top 5 in the country by some, Phil Fulmer brought in David Cutcliffe as his new OC in 2006. One of Cutcliffe's major points of emphasis the past two seasons was improving the OL play especially in making them quicker, leaner, and more athletic. While still not in the top 5 caliber the difference in line play was very noticeable as QB Erik Ainge had far fewer sacks in both '06 and '07 and the running game, which had two 1,000 yard rushers in 2004, also appeared to be much improved over the dismal '05 season. |
|
Hi Voice, I definitely wasn't saying that *I* think they weren't big enough, just that Charlie and co. seem to think they need to add "bulk." They were plenty big I thought, what they lacked was toughness maybe? I was also noting our impressive results at the combine in terms of the quickness drills and drawing a possible correlation between that and the lack of power runnning game. Don't get me wrong, we need offensive linemen who are the total package, but the glue that might hold that together is the nasty "I'm going to dominate the man in front of me or go down trying" attitude that we haven't seen much of recently. I'm waiting with guarded optimism for it to come soon! |
|
Erik '04, |
|
With the projected right side of the line and the stable of capable backs, the '08 Irish ought to come out running the ball, running the ball some more, then running the ball some more. I'm no expert, but it seems to me that the "nasty" lines I've seen over the years want to get out front and put the hurt on the guy in front of them. Running the ball is a good way to start the ball rolling, as it were. |
|
I agree with David. I'd prefer that the run is used to set up the pass instead of the other way around during the BQ years. |
|
david, you are exactly right. One problem that we have had is Charlie's insistence on scripting so much of the play calling. Hughes would rip a huge gainer on the ground and then we wouldn't see him again for a month. Now that CW has given the keys to the offense to Mike Haywood, I expect we'll run the ball a lot more, and, even more importantly, not give up on the run so damn early in a ball game. The best favor we could ever do for Jimmy Clausen is to get a kick-ass running game established. |
|
So Charlie is giving up the play calling to Haywood, eh Voice. Wanna buy a bridge? The issue is not play calling, it's the offense being run. If that changes, we have a running game, if not...Well, we will soon find out about the "new" Charlie. Of course, unless the kids hit in full pads this fall, hello 2007. |
|
Tell me about that bridge. Is it in good shape? LOL |
|
On the other hand Charlie could script plays from the best of BGS participants. |
|
I'm a bit unfamiliar with the actual workings of the sideline during a game. Who decides which running back is on the field for each play? Is it the offensive coordinator? Does the OC say "Give me Hughes and we're going to run Detroit Regular Blast Right"? Is it the position coach? If Hughes gets tired he'll come off the field, who says "Alright, Armando, get in there"? During the Davie years I didn't know any better so I always blamed Boob for running Julius Jones up the middle and Tony Fisher around the edge when that seemed to be contrary to their individual skill sets. Does the OC call a play and whatever player is on the field gets the ball? |
|
Charlie has said before that Haywood would put in the running backs unless Weis specifically called one out while calling the play. |
|
Voice, what you seem to be missing is the offense that Haywood or anyone else will be running is not designed to run the football. I very much doubt that Weis will change it in any meaningful way. If he does, I will be pleasantly surprised for that will indicate his maturation as a coach and not merely an Off Cord. It is a wonderfufully conceived offense requiring intelligent and gifted people at the skill positions. It requires remarkable timing and perfect coordination. In short, it requires experience. When the experience isn't there as it wasn't last year, it's a handicap. If there is one criticism of Weis is that in two years he prepared no one to step up. As he said himself, "all I care ablout is the 22 guys who start." That works on Sunday when EVERYBODY knows how to play. Developing a running game and a lot of other things at this level requires instruction and reps. It has nothing to do with who is calling plays (with an inadaquate play book which hopefully gets changed) if the basic concept of a killer passing attack is all the head coach cares about. |
|
Amen. |
|
Thanks Mike. '73 knew what it took to win. Ara, Yonto, Pagna, Ray, Kelly, Sefcik and on and on...and those that came with and after them. Maybe the best coaching staff ever. Here's hoping this group can rise to the standards they set. |
|
Too bad Pagna never became the HC. Those of us at ND in the early 70s were rather spoiled [only 6 losses and 1 NC during my years at ND}. |
|
Domerplayer, |
|
Thank you Voice and I agree, better late than never. Be aware of one other thing: S.B is a small town. Weis has made no friends there; NONE. The Charlie of "Pass Right" is not recognized in the S.B. community nor in the N.D. community. He must win from the standpoint of self preservation if nothing else. He has, unfortunately, put himself on an island. Forget about the size of the buy-out, he will have no defenders. It is not a factor. He has to win from the standpoint of his own psychy. And that, of course, may be the best thing we have going for us. Personally, I think he can win: people who know more about this game than me think otherwise. I hope I'm right. Nuff said. |
|
Domerplayer, friends of mine who live in SB say the exact same thing about Weis. It is ridiculous how unpopular he is. Other friends who know him from his NFL days echo a similar tale. |
|
Voice. No, no magic number but a bowl is a must even the Toilet Bowl and that means 7 (technically 6, but will we go?). He lost last year's team...the kids did a wonderful job of covering it up. Look, the pro guys say he was a hell of a off cor., but winning is the only thing that counts there. It counts here as well but as Weis is fond of saying, "this is Notre Dame." When you called to a series of Come to Jesus meetings with everyone who counts beginning with TMH you had BETTER win because you have nothing else going for you. I think he can win; he has shown he can win when he has the players but say what you will about Davieham, those kids were coached and taught the fundamentals of the game, not at all positions but at many. The problems were elsewhere...and there were many. Up until this year Weis taught NO ONE and do not blame the assistants. They do what the head coach tells them to do. I think he will win but do not be surprised if the leadership of this team revolves around the defensive staff and that side of the ball. |
|
Whew! Nobody would EVER say "Where's the meat?" regarding one of your posts!! Great, great thought provoking material from top to bottom. You have Charlie pegged! And you pretty much put me in my place regarding your Davieham comment. YOU ARE ABOLUTELY RIGHT!! They did teach young men the fundamentals and Weis does not. |
|
Voice. OK, I lied about 9/5. Please don't blame the kids. The program is "All about Charlie." It's not that he doesn't want to win he just has not made the adjustment from Sunday's attitude of "You get paid to do this" on the part of his players to another set of motivational tools. The Quinn teams realized they had been given a set of tools with which to win and their motivation was self-induced. The new kids need more help. He now has the talent...big check in his column...hopefully, the rest will follow, but these are KIDS, not pros. |
|
Thus, the apparent crux of the problem is that the rising seniors on the squad have just as much experience with college football as their coach does! And the same thing could have been said about Gerry Faust and his teams that were absolutely brimming over with High School All-American talent year after year. I find it very interesting that both Faust and Weis were mega-successful on the high school and professional levels, respectively, yet neither had one minute of prior college coaching experience before ascending to Head Coach, University of Notre Dame. In Faust's case, he treated his players like fourteen year old Moeller High freshmen, constantly attempting to micromanage their every move, while, conversely, Weis has taken the polar opposite approach by treating his players like wiley, 28 year old NFL veterans who are physically and mentally mature enough to motivate and prepare themselves to become world champions. Hmmm. |
|
Oops. I just remembered that Weis had a cup of coffee with the South Carolina Gamecocks 25 years ago. Nevertheless, I still maintain the premise of my thesis: Neither Gerry Faust nor Charlie Weis was experientially equipped to develop and nurture college football players. |
|
One big difference: Faust blamed everybody else. Charlie, in Joisey parlance is a Stand up Guy. There is hope. |
|
42 Visitors Online |
Commenting by HaloScan.com |
