BoBo24

July 24th, 2010 at 9:07 PM ^

If it is not a big deal, he should have said so. Or said nothing. But to say he told them they were on a short leash like that is supposed to mean something?

Of course, because it is BK (media darling right now) and ND, no one will call him out on it. Can you imagine if RR said this about a group of arrested players? FWIW, the summer has about 5 weeks left.

Robbie Moore

July 24th, 2010 at 9:10 PM ^

but it will get play all over the media.  A new sheriff in town.  Brian Kelly means business!  Kelly is a salesman and a politician, he knows exactly what he is doing.  One of these kids will take a false step and get tossed and tough guy Kelly's legend will grow.

BoBo24

July 24th, 2010 at 9:18 PM ^

That is exactly what this reminds me of, when politicians react to some crisis or respond to some issue and claim that something will be done but everyone (including the politicians themselves) know these are meaningless statements and nothing will be done as always.

psychomatt

July 24th, 2010 at 11:44 PM ^

BK is already being credited with turning around CW's apparently subpar recruiting:

"Coach Kelly and the entire Notre Dame staff has been very aggressive in recruiting," said Mike Frank, the publisher of IrishSportsDaily.com. "They are getting the offers quickly out the door. They are organized and they grind it and work very hard. This staff is much more aggressive than the previous one."

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/football/news/story?id=5379049

Irish

July 25th, 2010 at 12:58 AM ^

Its the truth.  Kelly has gotten more offers out the door to quality players in a much shorter time span than it would have taken the previous staff.  There were over 100 official offers by April from Kelly, Charlie's staff never put out more than 100 offers in an entire recruiting year.

As for the agressiveness of the staff, ND hasn't had an Oline class like this for 6-7 years at least.  Thats both quantity and quality and was basically completed by the end of april, thats a whole 5 months after kelly accepted the job.  If you need a more, read a few of DeVaris Daniels's interviews, he was a recruit for both staffs and he says the same things your quote does.

Rockne

July 29th, 2010 at 12:50 AM ^

Weis' recruiting track record actually is a little more complex than most people assume it to be.  He did have some great success getting guys like Clausen, Floyd, Te'o, Ethan Johnson, Rudolph, and the other guys we know about.  He also had some major misses and basically struck out at positions often. 

His entire 2006 recruiting class was in large part a disappointment especially the defense.  Between 2007-2009 he only recruited 3 corners and 7 DBs total.  He missed on taking a QB in 2009 and we are a Dayne Crist injury away from this season being a disaster as a result.  He underrecruited the defensive line and got burned a number of times with d-linemen switching their "commitments" (see Gerald McCoy, Justin Trattou, Omar Hunter, Chris Martin...).  He missed out on DEs in the 2009 recruiting class forcing Kelly to take a guy with no other D-1 offers (Heggie) last year.

Overall he improved the quality of the program from a talent perspective (although that isn't saying much considering the mess Ty left him).  However, his recruiting misses did hurt him in the end and are an obstacle for Kelly to overcome (especially DB recruiting).

BoBo24

July 24th, 2010 at 9:10 PM ^

Most of these players are not even going to play the first game anyway and it would have been a perfect chance to set the tone for BK's program by suspending them all for one game. I am glad he didn't. Looks like BK is not a tough disciplinarian and that is fine with me.

BoBo24

July 25th, 2010 at 5:52 PM ^

Sorry if you misunderstood my original post. I wasn't complaining, I was mocking. I was mocking ND for, well, pretty standard ND stuff. In this case, for saying this is a serious matter and that it is being handled accordingly when, in fact, ND does not believe that and has not disciplined these guys at all. I have to say that I am looking forward to the BK era more with each passing day!

WashUBlue

July 24th, 2010 at 9:11 PM ^

I guess I don't understand why this is that big of an issue.  Do you think Brian Kelly should have suspended them for a game? They were drinking alcohol.  99.9% of the adult population drank alcohol before they were 21.

The season can't get here soon enough.

Mr. Robot

July 24th, 2010 at 10:24 PM ^

For starters, they weren't JUST drinking. They were drinking underage at a party that, so the police reports say, had gotten way out of control. I'm inclined to believe this if they felt it necessary to arrest all of them.

And regardless of whether or not 99.9% of people do it, its still illegal and its still not something that, as a coach, you want all your underclassmen doing. Why? Because they might do something stupid at a party and get themselves in either really deep trouble or seriously hurt, depending on how stupid they were.

I think its a farce that he didn't suspend them. Obviously there wasn't a realistic chance that they'd miss their date with us, but considering their first opponent is Purdue, I think a one-game would have been apporpriate. Then again, who knows. Even I have to admit I'm a bit scared of what Kelly is capable of, but he's also trying to do EXACTLY what we did in 2008. They might just need all the help they can get, even against a Purdue team that, last I recall, is replacing a lot of people this year.

psychomatt

July 24th, 2010 at 11:13 PM ^

Regardless of whether it was the right thing to do to arrest all the people at the party, it is classic doublespeak. ND is playing it both ways. BK said how disappointed he is with this sort of conduct and that it was not up to ND standards and suggests that they have taken action. But what action did they take? No, seriously, what? Please, someone tell me? Wtf is a short leash?

Irish

July 25th, 2010 at 1:48 AM ^

Are you just as concerned about what is happening to Stonum?  Has RR even commented on that at all?  ND is a private school you should feel privlieged Kelly said anything at all.  He was at a fundraiser for his charity, what did you want a special on courtTV? a press conference denouncing these players as heathens? 

HAIL-YEA

July 25th, 2010 at 12:31 PM ^

I think Carr had Arrington sit out 5 plays when he was busted for this..then played him sparingly for the rest of 1 game. BK is doing the right think IMO. But as far as us being "privlieged" he said anything, thats just..dumb(sorry I dont have a better word for it) When positive things are reported are we "privlieged" to be able to read about them? If that's the way the school feels, maybe they should not be signing national tv deals with NBC.

Mr. Robot

July 25th, 2010 at 9:34 PM ^

Stonum actually was suspended for his DUI. He missed the Illinois game last year. This latest incident is a matter of probation that we know very few of the details on, but either way that isn't as significant as the infraction that got him the probation in the first place. A suspension for the DUI was appropriate, just as stadium steps and a good old fashion chewing out is appropriate for this latest incident.

maizenbluenc

July 25th, 2010 at 8:42 AM ^

I'll give you this Irish: Kelly says "short leash" but does not say he isn't disciplining them. (He must have done something.)

I am wondering if Montana and crew now know exactly how many steps are in the stadium at Notre Dame just (like Adrian Arrington or Brian Greise do for Michigan Stadium). Do they have their own little breakfast club?

I may be the only person out there, but I have always thought 21 is too old, and it causes young adults learning to live on their own to break laws rather than learn to responsibly follow them.

MrWoodson

July 25th, 2010 at 3:33 PM ^

You cannot exceed the mandatory practice time allowed per day in the off-season -- period. That includes disciplinary actions involving workouts. It has nothing to do with whether the discipline is for on or off the field issues. UofM was specifically held to have violated this stupid NCAA rule:

Allegation 2
“It is alleged that from January 2008 through at least September 2009, the institution’s football program violated NCAA legislation governing playing and practice season when it  ... required football student-athletes to participate in summer conditioning activities for disciplinary purposes, and exceeded time limits for countable athletically related activities during and outside of the playing season.”

BoBo24

July 25th, 2010 at 4:59 PM ^

Suicides might be less pleasant than laps, but it is not exactly what most people think of when they hear a player has been disciplined. It is like going to the gym and having to do legs instead of arms. I hate working legs, but it is not exactly a punishment.

Blue in Yarmouth

July 26th, 2010 at 9:43 AM ^

I think you are wrong there. First, lets say the coaches set aside 30min- 1 hour of running (I just picked that number out of the air, but indulge me). Most of the team spends that time running laps while the "disciplined" are running steps......in the Big House.....and you don't think that is discipline? Have you ever run steps before? I can tell you it is not like working legs instead of arms, that is a minor inconvenience, steps are definitely discipline.

My second point is, for getting caught underage drinking, I think that and a short leash are absolutely appropriate. You can't let them get away with it, but it is hardly worth a suspension if it is a first offense.

Maize and Blue…

July 25th, 2010 at 8:09 AM ^

ND lost a five star recruit because of underage drinking and this is how BK handles the situation.

Irish- Stonum was punished for the offense when it happened.  Is there really a need for RR to speak publicly about him not following through on the requirements of his probation?  I would think the steps at the Big House may be calling his name (if that is not a practice time violation).  FWIW,  I don't recall RR making a public statement after Grady's probation violation either.