OT - Sour Brian Kelly Disputes Late Penalty That Cost Irish Game

Submitted by clarkiefromcanada on

Per the World Wide Leader

Brian Kelly indicates his disagreement with the referees at the conclusion of last evening's 31-27 loss to Florida State.

According to Coach Kelly:

"Actually I have less clarity," Kelly said during his Sunday teleconference. "I guess it was actually called on Will Fuller, not C.J. (Prosise). So [it] just adds more uncertainty as to the final play.

"But again, the play itself, in terms of what we ask our kids to do, it was pretty clear what happened on the play: Florida State blew the coverage and they got rewarded for it. It's unfortunate."

As per the play itself; Kelly saw no issue with the ND player but rather the Florida State player initiating the contact (that saw him blocked 4 yards into the end zone):

"All right, so he was on the point, we were in a bunch situation," Kelly began. "First of all, it's my understanding now that Will Fuller was called for the penalty, not C.J. So C.J.'s job is to get into the end zone and turn around and be a big target. He was immediately grabbed at the line of scrimmage. He's trying to get depth into the line of scrimmage, into the end zone so Corey can clear a path. And so as that contact was being made, it was seen, I guess -- I don't know who saw it as interference -- but you've got two guys that are trying to fight for space. We saw it as such.

Brian Kelly: "We don't coach illegal plays"

Never change Brian Kelly, never change.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11728483/brian-kelly-not…

ppToilet

October 20th, 2014 at 4:22 PM ^

ND without Golson is a mediocre team. Without him, they lose to UNC, Stanford and maybe Purdue and are sitting at 4-3 or 3-4. We've won 3 out of the last 5 and 6 out of the last 10 against them.

So, I'd say Michigan and ND are roughly at parity (over the longer term, because this year is a black hole) except that every once in a while a difference-maker comes along in the series that gives one team the edge. ND has that in Golson.

johnthesavage

October 20th, 2014 at 12:01 AM ^

Thing is, this was a game that should have been a point towards dispelling the notion that only the southeast USA can play decent college football. Notre Dame is a team that recruits very similar kids to us, and nationally, the midwest just doesn't get the same level of respect. And the result of this game totally depended on what that ref did with his flag at that moment -- with those results go a lot of the national opinion about college football in different parts of the country. And so that is frustrating. Notre Dame deserved to win that game, despite Jameis throwing darts the entire second half.

ghost

October 20th, 2014 at 4:51 AM ^

ND did not deserve to win that game.  They had numerous tipped passes that in most games would have led to at least 2 INTs.  They had a fumble bounce right back to them.

For some reason you don't understand that by not throwing a flag that would have decided the game for ND.  It was a penalty.  The only people debating it are ND fans who always wine about everything.

pdgoblue25

October 20th, 2014 at 9:26 AM ^

1.9 yards per rush against FSU.  They did it on the road to the defending national champion.

And they didn't deserve to win that game because they had some luck involved on tipped passes and recovering a fumble like every other football game anywhere at any level?

I agree we want ND to lose around here, but if they had won that game in no way can you say they wouldn't have deserved it.

I would kill for Michigan to look like they did saturday night.

 

michmaiku

October 20th, 2014 at 8:29 AM ^

They lost on the last play, on the road, in contested circumstances and played well throughout. 

Don't know about recruits, but some of my fiercest sports allegiances have been built around painful losses.

Here's one example: The Charles White Game.

This doesn't hurt ND's recruiting at all. 

And what signature win has supported Hoke's recruiting the last couple of years.

You're grasping ...

 

JamieH

October 19th, 2014 at 11:37 PM ^

When you have several WR's fire off the ball and do nothing but BLOCK the DBs, well, that is illegal.  Sorry Brian.  It was an OBVIOUSLY illegal play.  Just because you get away with it all of the time doesn't make it any less illegal.  It just means you get away with a blatently illegal play a lot. 

AlbanyBlue

October 19th, 2014 at 11:41 PM ^

Not to mention, he's exposed himself as a total fucking liar.

Those receivers were so into what they were doing -- making sure to "pick" the defenders -- that it seems to be EXACTLY the way they were coached to do it. It's illegal, and they got called for it. Purple Puss is probably used to getting that no-call at home every time.

TESOE

October 19th, 2014 at 11:52 PM ^

you can't complain about the refs.  It's on you to take them out of the game.  Kelly should coach his players on the fine points of what they are doing. He owns it.  So unlike him to deny that. /s.

To me it was a legit call.  Both teams let it come to that.  Both teams had the chance to take the game earlier.  If you let it come down to a judgment call, you stand a chance of losing and should take it as it comes.

SWFLWolverine

October 20th, 2014 at 8:46 AM ^

When watching the game, I thought the call, had it been on #7 was legit. From this angle, it appears the defender is trying to beat him to a spot on the slant (the broadcast angle was form overhead at the opposite sideline). He begins to jump the route and get under it by going over it before contact is made (if that makes sense). The defender on Fuller also initiated contact....he squared up and jammed the receiver and appears to be pulling Fuller down and forward as the ball goes in the air. If refs are going to allow DBs to play physical at the line of scrimmage to disrupt routes, don't they also have to allow the recievers to fight through that pressure?

phork

October 20th, 2014 at 12:47 PM ^

Thanks, hadn't seen that angle before.  Before seeing this I was in the "Meh, it happened, get over it win the next 5 and its playoff time".  Now what I see is FSU#8 Ramsey locking up ND#20 Procise and impeding his route to the endzone.  He clearly has his left arm up on his back and is pushing against Procise and not making an effort to do anything else.

FSU#3 Darby is on Fuller and appears to be either trying to jam Fuller or jump the route when he should have been breaking to cover ND#88 Robinson.  FSU#8 Ramsey then looks at either FSU#3 Darby or FSU#26 and is like "What the fuck?"

The problem is then the no call on #26 for removing his helmet, which is a dead ball personal foul which gives ND a first and goal from the 9.

Doesn't matter, can't be changed.  In the end if ND wins the next 5 they will be in the playoff.

M-Dog

October 19th, 2014 at 11:57 PM ^

It was blatant, just asking to be called.  And so it was.
 
Here's another one that's blatant, just asking to be called, that's going to burn some team big someday:  Assisting the runner.  Everybody does it now, they don't even try to pretend.
 
If ND wants to talk about getting hosed, they can legitimately talk about the "Bush Push" against USC.  That was blatant and should have been called.
 
But last night's call was correct both technically and in the spirit of the rules.  It gave an unfair advantage. Two recievers out of three just flat out bulldozed their defenders.

B-Nut-GoBlue

October 20th, 2014 at 12:04 AM ^

It's such a polarizing call.  Some think they got hosed, some think it the right call and have no beef.  I personally am with the former though I know I'd never change anyone's mind who thinks the opposite.  The refs called it and that's what counts, though my faith and trust in them has dwindled over the past few years, so I still disagree with them. 

People say the FSU DBs were backpedaling but I see them stop that  process and come meet the receivers and so I more or less feel it was just them botching the coverage.  The players even seem to argue with one another after it was initially a touchdown (no, I don't think they were trying to argue with the official(s).)

B-Nut-GoBlue

October 20th, 2014 at 6:24 AM ^

Oop, announcers thought so!...and the officials who I already opined on above thought so. You stating the call was correct as a fact doesn't make it so. One guy jammed at the line and another MET with contact doesn't equate to a pick play in many people's mind. Hell, Golson could have thrown a pass to one of those receivers and it could have been PI, the defenders aided in the contact at the very least and didn't even attempt to go after the true receiver. Again, we won't be changing each other's/anyone's opinion on the matter.

Evil Empire

October 20th, 2014 at 12:13 AM ^

If he had caught it behind the line of scrimmage, would that have made the blockers' actions legal?  If so, then the design of the play was totally flawed, because he could have walltzed into the endzone if he caught it behind the line.  The difference was only about two yards.

Leaders And Best

October 20th, 2014 at 12:33 AM ^

I don't see Brian Kelly giving back victories over Stanford and Pittsburgh in 2012 when the refs blew game deciding calls that gave Notre Dame the win.

Stanford: http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11626627/notre-dame-fighting-irish-stanford-cardinal-remember-goal-line-stand-2012

Pittsburgh: http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/colleges/post/_/id/7521/kelly-on-jersey-gaffe-coaching-mistake

It was a tough call, but ND has usually been the team that benefits from these calls in the past. I know Kelly is probably using this to start laying the seeds toward campaigning for the 4th playoff spot. Notre Dame is a unique position where they will not be playing on Conference Championship Weekend due to their independent status, and that may end up costing them a spot in the playoffs if they are not clearly one of the 4 best teams.

Liggs

October 20th, 2014 at 12:26 AM ^

College football, and definitely the NFL, have been made almost impossible for defensive backs. The rules are so disproportionately slanted toward the offense, so I was quite happy w that call. Don't like either team, but I'm never upset w a loss for ND, and it was the right call. If the DB had initiated that contact, there would have been at least 5 flags on the field, and no one would be debating it.

Swayze Howell Sheen

October 20th, 2014 at 12:36 AM ^

is degenerating to whining about Notre Dame, MSU, OSU, etc.

who cares?

Kelly is a far better coach than ours, and it's not really that crazy to dispute a big call like that. When the committee decides which teams get into the playoffs, Kelly wants people to think back to this loss and remember the Irish could have/should have won. Seems like the smart thing to do.

But I have an idea: Let's keep putting up pics of the time way back when of Kelly turning purple, if that makes everyone feel better.

 

clarkiefromcanada

October 20th, 2014 at 1:11 AM ^

i generally like your commentary but I disagree here only based on the significance/implications of the call and Kelly's pretty evident politicking of the same. he kind of earns the scorn of some given the hypocrisy of his comments post Stanford/Pitt in recent years.

It is a Sunday night, OT topic, relevant to the MNC so why not talk football?

goblue20111

October 20th, 2014 at 8:09 AM ^

What's wrong with politicking? It's his job to get his team in the best position possible to get into the playoff. You think Florida fans care that Meyer lobbied in 2006? No they have a title. This blog needs to get over itself -- he's setting the dialogue around the call like Schiano said. I wish we had a coach whether it was Lloyd back in 2006 or now who would use their position in the media to influence like this. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it.


Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

clarkiefromcanada

October 20th, 2014 at 12:50 PM ^

There is nothing wrong with the politicking but any fan with a memory also realizes the hypocisy of his comments in light of the Stanford and Pitt ref decisions a few years back. If the vast majority of "experts" including Lou Holtz (even) identified it as a penalty and Kelly disputes it that's fine but his credibility certainly suffers. 

I can't imagine committee members are moved  by his politics at all. He's just playing to the angry Irish fanbase. 

I dumped the Dope

October 20th, 2014 at 4:29 AM ^

bent over at the waist, drive blocking, it sort of takes away the ambiguity.  Just running forward into the DB and maybe hand fighting before cutting would have been sufficient.  And as stated, pass behind the line you can drive all you want.

I used to think Kelly was an ass but I think he's reined it in some.  Maybe the earlier purple-facing set the standard for players to do their jobs correctly.  He does seem to be having more appropriate "chats" with certain players when they come off the field after mistakes.

Its also harder to argue with his success.  Good or bad they have recruited quite well and really dominated the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball in the first half.  FSU negated and reversed that, though, in the 2nd half, getting a lot more pressure on Golson.