I am hoping our offense can generate 400 yds a game.

[REMND]

That was basically what we did last year. It is the new benchmark for me.

 

How do we do it? I want 200 yds rushing and 200 passing. That puts a lot of pressure on our run game but not as much on our passing game.

 

200 yds passing a game means around 20 for 30 in completions and attempts. We have 5 potential receivers on every play in the TE, WR, Slot and RB. As long as Rees can read the defense, someone should be open. 240 receptions is what 20 a game comes out to. In my head I am penciling in TJ (50), Daniels (50) and Niklas (36). The other 100 receptions will have to come from others but it seems reasonable.

 

200 yard a game running is the key. 40 run attempts so we have to average 5 yds a carry. I do not know where the yards cone from because the RBs are still competing for who gets what. It is a tall order though. Do people expect that from our run game? We have the OL I think.

 

Maybe 350 to 380 yds a game is a more reasonable number. More runs and less passes might be a more realistic allocation of the approximate 70 plays a game you get.

[Franco]

Ummm, we actually averaged 411 yards per game last year....the problem was red zone offense and converting those yards to 7 points...

 

If there's one offensive goal, is to have a Red Zone % matching 'Bama last year; it was ridiculously high, something like scoring 90% of the time and scoring a TD 76% of the time which will then correlate to another offensive stat I'd want this year....at least 35 ppg

[hawaiiirish]

I afraid 400 yards per game is very problematic if we run the expected REES offense.

 

Lots of third downs--Lots of punts--likely 5 or 6 games before the RUN game jells--

 

I have offered several alternatives to spice up our offense and give it some punch----but I admit its unlikely we will be very bold at all or very creative---

Its going to be what most expect, protect REES , play slow, play field position , rely on defense----WE ALL KNOW THAT SCHEME____

 

400 yards a game is possible against the lower half of the schedule BUT NOT against the top 6 teams--we have all seen this movie before.

 

I will say, if we can average 400 yards plus a game, through either REES playing way above expectations or the STAFF making some creative adjustments , if that happens we should CRUISE to 10 wins.

 

aloha's

[corysold]

I afraid 400 yards per game is very problematic if we run the expected REES offense.

 

Lots of third downs--Lots of punts--likely 5 or 6 games before the RUN game jells--

 

I have offered several alternatives to spice up our offense and give it some punch----but I admit its unlikely we will be very bold at all or very creative---

Its going to be what most expect, protect REES , play slow, play field position , rely on defense----WE ALL KNOW THAT SCHEME____

 

400 yards a game is possible against the lower half of the schedule BUT NOT against the top 6 teams--we have all seen this movie before.

 

I will say, if we can average 400 yards plus a game, through either REES playing way above expectations or the STAFF making some creative adjustments , if that happens we should CRUISE to 10 wins.

 

aloha's

 

It is pretty clear by now that Tommy will go 27-34 for 335 and 3 TDs vs Temple.

 

Then be 17-31 foe 169 and 2 INTs against theorist good D ND plays.

 

That has more or less been the pattern for three seasons.

[REMND]

Okay. A more realistic goal would be:

 

1 350 or more a game.

 

2. Use the clock and play field position. Rely on the defense.

 

3. Focus on the red zone improvement which is more valuable than total yards.

 

4. Low TOs

 

It is boring but with all the skill position question marks it is probably a better approach to plan for unless Rees and the RBs show they can do more early on.

 

Planning for a more high octane offense sounds more exciting but maybe we will just have to play conservative until our offensive players give the coaches confidence to open it up more.

[WeaverIrish]

Okay. A more realistic goal would be:

 

1 350 or more a game.

 

2. Use the clock and play field position. Rely on the defense.

 

3. Focus on the red zone improvement which is more valuable than total yards.

 

4. Low TOs

 

It is boring but with all the skill position question marks it is probably a better approach to plan for unless Rees and the RBs show they can do more early on.

 

Planning for a more high octane offense sounds more exciting but maybe we will just have to play conservative until our offensive players give the coaches confidence to open it up more.

 

I think it's more likely for the Running Backs to show that they can do more rather than Rees we all know very well what Rees can do and sadly it's unlikely we can get much more

Besides that I mostly agree with want you say.

[Franco]

I afraid 400 yards per game is very problematic if we run the expected REES offense.

 

Lots of third downs--Lots of punts--likely 5 or 6 games before the RUN game jells--

 

I have offered several alternatives to spice up our offense and give it some punch----but I admit its unlikely we will be very bold at all or very creative---

Its going to be what most expect, protect REES , play slow, play field position , rely on defense----WE ALL KNOW THAT SCHEME____

 

400 yards a game is possible against the lower half of the schedule BUT NOT against the top 6 teams--we have all seen this movie before.

 

I will say, if we can average 400 yards plus a game, through either REES playing way above expectations or the STAFF making some creative adjustments , if that happens we should CRUISE to 10 wins.

 

aloha's

 

Okay. A more realistic goal would be:

 

1 350 or more a game.

 

2. Use the clock and play field position. Rely on the defense.

 

3. Focus on the red zone improvement which is more valuable than total yards.

 

4. Low TOs

 

It is boring but with all the skill position question marks it is probably a better approach to plan for unless Rees and the RBs show they can do more early on.

 

Planning for a more high octane offense sounds more exciting but maybe we will just have to play conservative until our offensive players give the coaches confidence to open it up more.

 

I also want to point out that with Tommy in 2011, we averaged 411 total yards per game

 

I believe 2013 Tommy is light-years ahead of 2011 Tommy, so I believe our offense will be fine in gaining yardage. Like it has been pointed out before, Red Zone efficiency and TOs will be the major stats that I will be looking at

[piratey]

Dunno about yards, but if we average at least 20ppg next season, with this defense, we'll win a lot of games

[REMND]

I also want to point out that with Tommy in 2011, we averaged 411 total yards per game

 

I believe 2013 Tommy is light-years ahead of 2011 Tommy, so I believe our offense will be fine in gaining yardage. Like it has been pointed out before, Red Zone efficiency and TOs will be the major stats that I will be looking at

 

I saw that you mentioned that earlier but my mind read 2012. I did not know it was 2011.

 

Hmmm. He did have Eifert, Riddick, Wood, Floyd and Gray in 2011. We have an improved Rees for 2013 but we are relying on untested but talented skilled players this year. Conversely, I think the OL is better.

[hawaiiirish]

Tommy is IMHO NOT light years ahead of where he was in 2011----and remember despite his 411 yards per game he ended up being PULLED in both of his last two outings in 2011 and REPLACED by Golson in 2012.

 

In 2011 Tommy hit 65%

In 2012 Tommy hit 57%

 

In 2011 Tommy threw 1 pick for every 29 att

In 2012 Tommy threw 1 pick for every 29 att

 

His QB rating was 133 in 2011

His QB rating was 124 in 2012

 

Tommy has not and will not be a different QB--that is simply based on hopes and wishes IMO.

 

And to top it all off REES will not have any of his go to receivers of the past---no Eifert--no Floyd--no Theo---

 

Tommy has no chemistry with his WR corps all that will have to be DEVELOPED during the fall and during the first half of the season---trial and error .

 

Its a conundrum--we have a WONDERFUL defense but will most likely have a very ANEMIC offense--and there will be PLENTY of INTs.--I have seen a lot of SEC teams though win games with NOT MUCH offensive output--that's our best hope. Close games that mostly fall our way due to depth and making the most out of what offensive opportunities we do get. And God help us keeping the turnovers to a manageable level.

 

But I do think you guys should keep your EXPECTATIONS low for the 2013 offense--its going to be rocky.

 

aloha's go irish

[piratey]

Tommy is IMHO NOT light years ahead of where he was in 2011----and remember despite his 411 yards per game he ended up being PULLED in both of his last two outings in 2011 and REPLACED by Golson in 2012.

 

In 2011 Tommy hit 65%

In 2012 Tommy hit 57%

 

In 2011 Tommy threw 1 pick for every 29 att

In 2012 Tommy threw 1 pick for every 29 att

 

His QB rating was 133 in 2011

His QB rating was 124 in 2012

 

Tommy has not and will not be a different QB--that is simply based on hopes and wishes IMO.

 

And to top it all off REES will not have any of his go to receivers of the past---no Eifert--no Floyd--no Theo---

 

Tommy has no chemistry with his WR corps all that will have to be DEVELOPED during the fall and during the first half of the season---trial and error .

 

Its a conundrum--we have a WONDERFUL defense but will most likely have a very ANEMIC offense--and there will be PLENTY of INTs.--I have seen a lot of SEC teams though win games with NOT MUCH offensive output--that's our best hope. Close games that mostly fall our way due to depth and making the most out of what offensive opportunities we do get. And God help us keeping the turnovers to a manageable level.

 

But I do think you guys should keep your EXPECTATIONS low for the 2013 offense--its going to be rocky.

 

aloha's go irish

 

Notre Dame was 112th in Red Zone conversions for a TD last year at a paltry 48.33%.

 

In 2011, ND was 28th at 66.67%.

 

Offensively, every single stat was better in 2011 than 2012, other than turnovers. The biggest difference between the two squads was defense.

 

Tommy Rees is a chump. But let's not kid ourselves, last years offense was the worst we've had since 2007

[hawaiiirish]

The offense in 2011 that showed up in the last two make or break games--Stanford & FSU was horrible---and TOMMY was lifted in both those games Piratey. And was not much better on the BIG RECRUITING weekend home game against USC---Tommy racked up some stats against the MUSH teams but did not show up consistently. And did not prosper once defenses adjusted to him.

 

In 2012 the offense struggled in the REDZONE no doubt, personally I hated the play calling inside the 15---but we were very good on 3rd downs---we kept the ball longer--we moved the ball well between the 20s---we had MUCH Lower turnover rates --and we had several hundred yards rushing out of the QB spot that almost all turned into FIRST DOWNS. -- We had some excellent offensive showings in BIG AWAY VENUES---Oklahoma/Soldiers field/USC---I really doubt Tommy would have been up to any of that.

 

Remember Tommy was NOT replaced in 2012 by a freshman after 16 or so starts, because he was improving so dramatically as an upperclassman-.

 

We will know more after we see how Tommy holds up in ANN ARBOR---not against hapless temple, where we could let Piratey QB and still win!--

 

I think though the tone of the Tommy's going to be improved, tommy's going to be fine type posts will likely EVAPORATE quickly after that michigan game.

 

Hopefully I am just TOO HARD on Rees but honestly I don't think that's the case.

 

aloha's go irish!

[piratey]

The offense in 2011 that showed up in the last two make or break games--Stanford & FSU was horrible---and TOMMY was lifted in both those games Piratey. And was not much better on the BIG RECRUITING weekend home game against USC---Tommy racked up some stats against the MUSH teams but did not show up consistently. And did not prosper once defenses adjusted to him.

 

In 2012 the offense struggled in the REDZONE no doubt, personally I hated the play calling inside the 15---but we were very good on 3rd downs---we kept the ball longer--we moved the ball well between the 20s---we had MUCH Lower turnover rates --and we had several hundred yards rushing out of the QB spot that almost all turned into FIRST DOWNS. -- We had some excellent offensive showings in BIG AWAY VENUES---Oklahoma/Soldiers field/USC---I really doubt Tommy would have been up to any of that.

 

Remember Tommy was NOT replaced in 2012 by a freshman after 16 or so starts, because he was improving so dramatically as an upperclassman-.

 

We will know more after we see how Tommy holds up in ANN ARBOR---not against hapless temple, where we could let Piratey QB and still win!--

 

I think though the tone of the Tommy's going to be improved, tommy's going to be fine type posts will likely EVAPORATE quickly after that michigan game.

 

Hopefully I am just TOO HARD on Rees but honestly I don't think that's the case.

 

aloha's go irish!

 

Tommy Rees is a bum who can't throw the a spiral

http://i.imgur.com/WNzfU.gif

 

No one is going to gameplan around Tommy and frankly, no one needs to because he's that unremarkable.

 

But you got your stats confused!

 

2012 3rd down Conversion rate

46.33%

 

2011 3rd down Conversion rate

46.55% (Which is hurt by the 5 for 14 USF game, which I don't care to look at Rees/Crist split)

 

And you're pretending like we made hay against good defenses with 3rd down conversion last year...

1 for 14 against MSU

5 for 14 against USC

2 for 8 against Alabama

[hawaiiirish]

All that may be true Piratey , but if we had all the players back from last season I think we win 11 games and are in title contention again---

 

With the offense we bring this season--I think 9 games is more like it.

 

I had confidence in the offense last year when golson was playing, stats not withstanding---and we went 12-0 too justify that feeling.

 

I have no confidence in the REES offense in 2013, nor did I have it at the end of 2011---and simply I DO NOT expect much success offensively.

 

As I said , we won't have to wait long to find out--if tommy plays well AWAY against Michigan and we win that game----then maybe we can go 10-2, maybe.

 

If Tommy IMPLODES in the Big house , I expect to be the CALM ONE on this board-----trying to build up the spirits of the disappointed.

 

aloha's go irish!

[coltssb]

Last years team was no different than 2011 team except for its turnovers. Sure, everybody likes to point the finger at Tommy, but I seem to remember Gray's fumble on the 1(returned for a TD), Crist's fumble on the 1(returned for a TD), Cierre fumble off his own O-linemen, TJ's interception off his helmet(TJ's fault, not Tommy's when they were about to score), and i'm sure I've missed a few more. That team could had easily went 10-2 or 2-10 that year, just like last year's team could had went 5-8. The difference was we lucked out on some wins and kept the momentum coming. That, and a 10.0 pts against D. Either way, turnovers was key. I don't see Tommy having the ball slip out of his hands on the 5 again or some goofy fumbled snap. Sure he'll throw some int's like any qb does, but he and the TEAM won't be as unlucky as the 2011 team. 10 wins for this team this year. Book it!

 

Oh, 411 yds we average