Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by NDBadaBing

  1. I don't know that I've ever understood the "Kelly is so arrogant and cocky" comments. Don't all football coaches stand at the podium and field questions from people that know much less about his football team than he does?


    He's actually one of the more affable head coaches to deal with, too. Lends much more insight than most guys. And certainly doesn't come across personally as overly arrogant.


    I just think hardcore fans of teams have a weirdly odd obsession with overly analyzing everything the head coach of the team they live and die with says or does.

  2. You didn't say Please.... So drop dead


    It's funny how you criticize BK for not being a warm and fuzzy person, yet when you are asked a simple request you resort to kind of a F---ed up response.


    You seem like a good dude. And I mean that sincerely.


    I wasn't asking you as an A-hole, I was honestly asking you for some examples of players who spoke poorly about BK. I'd absolutely defer to those examples too.


    Yet your response was to tell me to drop dead.

  3. Agree with all this. Hawaii hit the nail on the head. He is missing the likeability factor that is glaringly absent when all his former and current players speak warmly of him. Oh wait..... They don't.


    I've talked to plenty of former ND players who speak highly of him.


    And by all means, link us all up to the guys who speak poorly about him.

  4. I really like Brian Kelly as a coach. He knows how to put together a solid staff, understands the limitations ND deals with and knows to play to its benefits, and is an outstanding recruiter/ambassador to the program.


    Early on in his career, I didn't like his demeanor on the sidelines, but he has turned that down quite a bit.


    It's really difficult for me to say any other coach would be doing a better job in all honesty.


    Agreed 100 percent

  5. Kelly is ALSO-- NOT a particularly warm and attractive personality , he simply is NOT the most likeable coach or fella that your gonna find


    Having met and dealt with him on a handful of occasions - and plenty others in his exact vocation - I completely disagree with this. As in COMPLETELY.


    So I have to ask you, exactly how have you come to such a specific conclusion about him?


    I'm assuming there has been consistent interaction between you and he?


    Or verifiable supporting proof from people who have met, dealt and worked with him?


    I'm not trying to be a jerk. But you are saying something in such a way that you've had personal interactions with him.

  6. Completely agree. I loved him when he was here. However, hold a gun to my head on draft day and make me pick whether he would have flamed out of the NFL or been a stud in the secondary to this day, I probably would have picked the former. Nothing against the guy and he deserves all the love he's getting to be sure


    Definitely a fair call.

  7. He is wayyyyy up there as one of the biggest surprises at how well his pro career has gone after leaving ND for me. I did not see this coming from him, I must admit


    Great to see he's getting well deserved credit


    He was a stud, and highly productive while basically playing Day 1 (and out of position and with multiple DC's and let's be honest, not a ton of help in front of him)









  8. Well a "pretty sure" from Elder is really all that is needed here. I'm pretty sure that EG wouldve still started had he returned. He transferred to FSU because they needed a QB for a super talented team, it was down south, and he didn't have to work hard for it.


    Just pulling nonsense out of your butt while ignoring the overwhelming data that obliterates your flawed, lazy argument.


    BK has shown zero hesitancy to start the player with less time invested in the program. EG beat out Rees. Malik beat out EG.


    At least be man enough to say: "You know what, I swung and missed on this one."

  9. his comments seemed more focused on in line blocking.


    That's an important part of what we do. And it's important some of these guys improve that skill set.


    I think Jones is a future star. And the more ways they are comfortable lining him up the better. Even if the handful of reps he gets at that spot are out of necessity right now, it could be beneficial when he's used there strategically rather than out of necessity.

  10. It was actually compiled by a writer for CBSSports back in 2013, before 247 became the gold standard and acquired most of rival's staff. Back in that era, Rivals was the best. Now it's 247. :ranger:


    This is kinda silly because it's not that Vandy, Northwestern and Colorado don't produce All-Americans because of some perceived bias...they don't produce All-Americans because they don't produce good players. At all. They are a trash heap of mediocrity. There has literally been not a single productive player put out by those three universities in a decade plus.


    There is no scale to use or to quantify a "productivity" ranking. Look, the facts are the facts. I'm not even really talking about three star kids here. I am talking about walk-ons. Mostly two star kids. And you can almost unequivocally say that if you have a former walk-on starting at a position, it is going to be a weak point on your team. There's not much room for debate here. That's the whole point. A two star kid will in 99.9% of the time be either be undersized or slow.


    JJ Watt was 6'4" 225lbs coming out of HS. He grew 2 inches and put on 65lbs of muscle...That's insane. Exceptions do not make the rule.


    And to your question of:

    "The poster to which this response was posted stated that walk-ons could be quality players, which seems to imply that only All-Americans meet that standard. While purely subjective on my part, I've seen a multitude of players I'd describe as quality, or even great, that have never made an AA team."


    Name the 20 best fighting Irish players of the last 15 years, how many are lower than 3*? How many former walk-ons? ****. Let's do this. Top 10 former walk-ons of the last 20 years in CFB. Go. Queue it up. Let's see that hot list. I'll even let you use college steroid users like Ryan Mathews for you list. Let's see the Jordan Kovacks and Brand Weedons of the world on this list.


    Shoot, I wanna see a list of the greatest NFL players to not play college football. Like Antonio Gates. Let's use Antonio Gates like people use JJ Watt as the rule rather than exception.


    There is so much wrong with all this I'm not even sure where to begin.

  11. So making an All-American team is the standard for being a quality player?


    The reason this argument (the walk-on debate) keeps coming up is that, despite the indignant nature in which the stars mean everything crowd present their case, their data is always flawed and open to interpretation. This chart, for example, is easy enough to pick apart.


    First off, Rivals isn't the be-all, end-all of recruiting ratings, so this chart gives us a very narrow perspective on the issue. Also, since this chart was compiled by Rivals itself, can it really be considered an unbiased source about it's own success rate ranking recruits?


    Then there's the question of how media attention affects All-American rankings. Five-star players have all eyes on them before they even set foot on campus. They're anticipated to earn these type of accolades. A two or three-star player has to put up insane numbers just to get noticed.


    Sticking with the attention theme, one also needs to consider that five-stars are much more likely to end up on an elite team when entering college. Players from Alabama, Ohio State and USC are watched significantly more than their counterparts from Vanderbilt, Northwestern and Colorado. When it comes to postseason honors, how is one supposed to attain them if no one will pay them any mind?


    Also, it should be noted that those five-stars that choose to go to top-flight football schools are likely receiving a higher quality of coaching that the two-star kid who enrolls at a middle of the road Power Five school. I mean, the odds of success for a player are greater if they're getting their instruction from Nick Saban instead of Brett Bielema, right?


    And I'm glad you pointed out the ridiculous number of athletes these sites attempt to rank. 11,904 players in a four year span. It was pointed out that 86.2 percent of said players were ranked three-stars or lower, but the large quantity of athletes in that pool suggests to me that it's impossible for any recruiting service to accurately evaluate that many players. The fact that their rankings fluctuate so much throughout each season reflects this as well.


    Lastly, I'd like to return to my initial question. The poster to which this response was posted stated that walk-ons could be quality players, which seems to imply that only All-Americans meet that standard. While purely subjective on my part, I've seen a multitude of players I'd describe as quality, or even great, that have never made an AA team.


    This post certainly isn't intended to be a personal slight against Piratey by any means, nor am I implying stars are irrelevant. Rather, I'm just tired of seeing posts declaring any praise or hope for a walk-on is stupid, only to have the poster back up the claim with incomplete data deifying the star system.


    So much win here.

  12. However, I just can't get excited about this guy. He may be taking his due diligence in selecting where he wants to go, but he has effectively destroyed the excitement and expectation of being a recruit to whatever university he chooses.


    With all due respect, but he's obviously got bigger concerns about this decision than whatever "excitement and expectation" his addition to a recruiting class will create.


    As long as he shows up Day 1 for practice/classes - at whatever school he chooses - is there really any net negative to him prolonging the decision?

  13. God I hate this. So here's a fun lesson on this. From 2008-2012 there were a total of 13816 kids ranked by Rivals.

    158 5* (1.1% of kids)

    1754 4* (12.7%)

    5939 3*(43%)

    5965 2* (43.2%)

    So of all the kids ranked, 86.2% were 3* or less, a total of 11,904 kids.


    So here's a fun chart that shows what % of their numbers ended up as All-American's at some point:



    Odds of Becoming an All-American, by Recruiting Ranking

    5–Star: 1 in 4.

    Top 100: 1 in 6.

    4–Star: 1 in 16.

    3–Star: 1 in 56.

    2–Star: 1 in 127.

    All FBS Signees: 1 in 45.


    So yes, Teddy Two-Star could become the next JJ Watt. But there is a 99.2% chance he won't.


    This is like spending your last dollar on a goddamn lotto ticket. So while you say, "He could be the next Darqueze Dennard!", odds are he is going to be a practice squad kid and if you're lucky, Joe Schmidt....


    I think the point the poster is making is that JJ and Clay simply prove recruiting is an inexact science, and that argument is bigger and more important than the numbers indicating the percentages of All-Americans that are delivered from the various star rankings.


    Of greater importance is that productive players can emerge from across the board, and it's ludicrous for fans to dismiss the potential of a productive player simply because he's a walk-on. J.J. and Clay are indeed lottery ticket examples. But there are examples on plenty of teams - good teams too - of good, productive players starting out as walk ons or low-end star ranking.

  14. I mean, is us being elite REALLY in our Tradition (since I've been alive)?




    1964 Parseghian



    9-0-1 NC










    1975 Devine



    11-1 NC





    5 years of Faust Bad


    1986 Holtz



    12-0 NC





    11-1 (should've been NC!)





    1997 Davie (lost all Bowl games)










    2002 Willingham

    10-3 (defense made this season, offense bad)




    2005 Weis




    7-6 (Hawaii Bowl, first Bowl win in 15 years! 2008)



    2010 Brian Kelly



    12-1 (lost in NC Game)



    10-2 This year so far!

    BK has 3 Bowl wins and 2 Bowl losses includes the NC game.


    The things that I persoonally take from this? First off, we didn't play as many games back in the 70's.

    In 51 years we have had 4 perfect undefeated regular seasons,,, 4!

    Davie was very mediocre! BUT, if you listen to many fans, they really hate him.

    What do you take from it all?


    As a LONG time fan my take is ND's consistently played a difficult schedule and that's always been reflected in the record. But somewhere along the line - probably after some really super down years of Ty/Dave - some ND fans remembered yesteryear a whole lot different than I did and started thinking it was 12-0 11-1 or you are a dog!!!!!


    I never remembered it being that way.


    I've always been cool with consistently being a top program and being in the NC hunt every few years. But sometimes circumstances (injuries bad luck) getting in the way.


    It's the 5-6 and 6-5 regular seasons in which ND is just outclassed talent wise, program wise, that I won't tolerate. (TY/Charlie/Dave/Jerry)


    The Kelly run has actually been very good/acceptable.

  15. Lots of talk about the importance of winning a conference.


    Think it's a matter of time until our hand is forced...unless they go to an eight team playoff...


    Winning a conference (stanford won't go, TCU and Baylor didn't go last year) or winning a conference championship game?


    It's so lame! Great, you add an extra game, against an opponent you should have played in the regular season - or perhaps did!!!! - and you call it a CHAMPIONSHIP GAME and everybody goes crazy.












    (that you should have played already or maybe already did!!!)

  16. I have noticed it for years.


    My guess is Kelly's offense is better suited for big plays. His running plays are so vanilla it almost looks like he's trying to run out the clock.


    That's why I'm starting to get more and more comfortable with us being behind because that's when BK seems to get things humming.



    eh, there have been a ton of long drives.


    you don't average 220 yards rushing and 267 yards passing simply relying on the big play. That balance is as good as it gets.


    There are a bunch of 6, 8, 10, yard runs and 9, 15, 20 yard pass plays in addition to the big strikes.

  17. Any point? Lou was getting 8-10 guys drafted a year from 89-94.


    Leahy had teams he told backups to go pro because they wouldn't play at ND.


    Kelly has done wonders to increase the talent level and it clearly the best since Lou, but he has a ways until he matches that.


    Little bit deceiving. Lou - if memory is correct - also worked with a 95 scholarship max rather than the current 85.

  18. Careful, someone may call you an idiot for displaying such logic.......


    No worries.


    This has been an remarkably fun team to watch. The program is in an incredibly great place in which outstanding recruiting and development can now make up for injuries attrition etc...etc.


    The head coach is the clear leader for coach of the year. Everyone in college football understands that. The talent from 1 to 85 is as good as its ever been in this program at ANY POINT in its history.


    The people without agendas clearly see and appreciate that.

  19. If they put us 5 after barely beating an inferior Temple team...well, I have zero worries we're in if we win out.


    And aint nobody on that committee who thinks Temple is inferior. Or that the USC team ND beat that crushed Utah and beat Cal on the road isn't ridiculously talented.


    The committee has and will get it.


    Just need to win out

  • Create New...