robmorren2

January 12th, 2014 at 4:42 PM ^

Rees bailed out Golson in a handful of games last time Golson was a starter (including the Michigan game when Golson was 3-8, 30yds, 2ints).

I think it is a substantial loss. They won't have anywhere to turn if/when Golson loses his composure.

Golson (2012) QB Ratings:

  • QBR Under 62 - 6 Games
  • QBR Over 85 - 2 Games

Rees (2013) QB Ratings:

  • QBR Under 62 - 4 Games
  • QBR Over 85 - 3 Games

I really don't understand why the Golson praise and Rees hate is so high amongst ND fans. Golson is a decent runner, but he isn't anywhere near Denard, or even Gardner in that respect.

Joined: 06/04/2011

MGoPoints: 2486

bacon

January 12th, 2014 at 5:27 PM ^

Golson vs. Michigan in 2012 was 3 for 8 with 30 yards, 2 INTs and had a 19.0 QB ranking.  I know it was bad weather, but still.  

Reese was really good versus Michigan in his career (despite going 1-2). I think you count him as a big loss at least against Michigan.

2011 2011-09-10 Notre Dame @ Michigan L 27 39 69.2 315 3 2 152.2
2012 2012-09-22 Notre Dame   Michigan W 8 11 72.7 115 0 0 160.5
2013 2013-09-07 Notre Dame @ Michigan L 29 51 56.9 314 2 2 113.7

 

Joined: 01/04/2009

MGoPoints: 18646

Danwillhor

January 13th, 2014 at 5:50 AM ^

As soon as they knew he'd be back he/they have done all allowed to get him ready for next year. Don't think of it as a guy completely out of the nd loop but a player that broke both his legs and arms, as far as nd campus/practice goes. He can't be there in person. Basically, he has the playbook and I'm sure many WRs have used their "free time" to work with him as "friends" and through "zero urging" of BK. I'd guarantee he shows zero rust, at least no more than any player at the start of a new season. Kelly wouldn't let his QB just sit blind for that long, IMO. I'm sure a throwing schedule with pals (teammates), a playbook and workout demands "found their way to him" somehow. Or, rather, "came to him on his own accord".

Joined: 12/02/2008

MGoPoints: 8609

Monocle Smile

January 12th, 2014 at 6:23 PM ^

Most of their offense happened in the first half, then they were held to 3 points until the very end. They didn't break 300 yards passing. It was also mostly Lockett in the first half because our corners couldn't keep up with him. The defense wasn't very good, but wasn't nearly as bad in the bowl game as people seem to think.

Joined: 09/17/2009

MGoPoints: 23027

Yeoman

January 12th, 2014 at 6:44 PM ^

  • 4 touchdowns
  • 1 field goal
  • 1 missed field goal
  • 1 fumble
  • 1 punt
  • 2 kneeldowns to end half

That's pretty bad, isn't it? I'm not absolutely certain but I believe the last time Michigan force just one punt in a game was 2010 Wisconsin. It's tied for third-worst all time (there might be a lot of games in that tie though).

I think you can even make an argument that the only reason the score was held down as much as it was is that our offense was able to hold onto the ball in the first half and shorten the game, a process KSU was happy to continue on their own once they got up 15.

Joined: 06/08/2011

MGoPoints: 21390

Wolverine15

January 12th, 2014 at 3:58 PM ^

falls on his feet. This would qualify as such. An added bonus would be watching ND struggle. I have no doubt that Mattison could and would outscheme him in next year's game.

Joined: 04/08/2011

MGoPoints: 2074

bluebyyou

January 12th, 2014 at 6:31 PM ^

Whether he falls or lands on his feet, AB's finances will be strong.  I believe he had one more year left on his Michigan contract.  When he was fired I heard someone say that the amount Michigan owes him will be offset by what he is paid by his next employer, assuming he wishes to work next year.

Joined: 09/07/2009

MGoPoints: 18531

Creedence Tapes

January 12th, 2014 at 5:42 PM ^

People forget that Borges offesnive calling produced the #2 all time yards by a QB in a season, #1 and #2 all time passing yards in a game, #2 all time receptions in a seaons (Gallon), #1 all time receiving yards, and #1 all time receiving yards in a game. For someone who is considered a terrible OC by some of the fanbase, that's mighty impressive. I'm sure we can all agree that this was also with a pretty young and underperforming OL.

 

Joined: 01/23/2011

MGoPoints: 4159

lazyfoot10

January 12th, 2014 at 6:24 PM ^

As offensive coordinator, it is his job to put the offense in the best position possible to gain yards and score points. It is also his job to help coach players to approach their full potential (which should be high, given our recruting classes). 

Not only did our talented players not live up to their potential, but he did not do a great job putting them in positions to succeed, thus resulting in negative rushing yards. 

I adamantly believe that there are better coordinators than Borges who would have done a beter job with this (and thus, you know, actually produced positive rushing yards). 

 

Joined: 03/09/2011

MGoPoints: 2183

Reader71

January 12th, 2014 at 10:50 PM ^

I've defended Penn State. It was an fine game plan that should have gotten us the win despite the awful ground game. Just knock one of 3 FG attempts and we win. We didn't struggle to move the ball or score despite the meme-worthy run game. Nebraska was a stink-bomb of the stinkiest order.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

westwardwolverine

January 13th, 2014 at 12:49 PM ^

The problem: On nearly every important carry at the end of the game, we handed the ball off to Fitz, which was a prospect that had almost zero chance of success. 

Instead of running Gardner on the final three plays of our clock killing drive (you know, the guy who had ripped Penn State up all game), we slammed Fitz into the line three times and lost yards. 

In the first overtime, we rushed twice with Fitz for almost nothing and then had Gardner "center" the ball for the field goal. 

In the third overtime, on third down, we had Fitz slam into the line again. 

Again, there was no indication that this was going to be successful. And while you are right, all we needed was a field goal on one of three occasions or a final defensive stop (which we got twice, in OT), it really felt like the playcalling went away from what you might call typical Hoke. It didn't really make sense to me that the guy who called for a centering of the ball (to attempt what wasn't at all a gimme: a 40-yard field goal on the road) was the same guy in the second half of the Ohio State game going for it on 4th down and calling 2-pt conversions to play for the win. 

 

Joined: 11/26/2013

MGoPoints: 9007

turd ferguson

January 12th, 2014 at 4:18 PM ^

No, but knowing our defensive personnel inside and out could be a thing.  We're bringing back basically the same defense next year.  Borges probably knows the strengths and weaknesses of our guys at a level that no other OC could pick up from film study.  There's an advantage there.  Him knowing Mattison's tendencies and Mattison knowing Borges's tendencies might cancel out, but I'd rather not have opposing coaches with such insane familiarity with our personnel.

Joined: 12/09/2009

MGoPoints: 26493

Mmmm Hmmm

January 12th, 2014 at 4:47 PM ^

I laughed, but (as has been posted my some) one of Charlie Weis's problems was that he tried to install too many gameplans and plays; it worked fine his first two years with more experienced teams but really fell short his next couple of years with younger and less experienced teams.

Joined: 09/12/2010

MGoPoints: 5144