Notre Dame Preview

Well first let me apologize for slacking on this blog so far this year.  To be honest I haven't had a whole lot to write.  I expected us to beat Tulane badly.  Duke beat them 37-7 and Tulane's offense looked inept, and I still have a sneaking suspicion that Duke isn't that good this year, and especially that their defense isn't all that great.  Meaning that Tulane must be truly awful.  So beating them 65-10 is what we were supposed to do, and it doesn't tell us much.  (Also noteworthy, Tulane didn't appear to be real well coached.  For those that didn't notice, Matt Jordan's long touchdown run was scored against a defense fielding 9 players.  In a 4-2-3 formation.  In my last blog post I was just joking that UNC played with a 4-3-0 defense last year, because their pass defense was so bad it was like they didn't even have a secondary out there.  Little did I know I was foreshadowing Tulane's defense against us.)

I still think we don't know a whole lot about this team.  We've done nothing so far to change my mind that we might be really good.  So that's the good news.  I still think we might be a playoff contender.  Depends on two things.  Is the defense for real (which really hinges on whether the D-Line is as good as it could be).  And can the new WR's and A-backs play against major college talent.  I think the answer to the second issue is yes.  The jury is still out on the first issue, the defense, but we'll find out a lot about it tomorrow afternoon.

Apparently Notre Dame has hired an option stopping "consultant" to help scheme for our game.  Well I guess our game and the Navy game.  But they play Navy every year and don't normally hire a consultant, so really its for our game.  This guy isn't really a consultant, but the Linebackers coach for Notre Dame last year who was apparently replaced, but they kept him on to scour the country consulting with other coaches and put together a scheme to stop us.  I'm not sure exactly what Brian Kelly thinks his job is, but apparently he is delegating large portions of it to coaches he recently fired but still wants to "consult" with on important matters.

Anyway I'm amused by this new concept, and the fact that it illustrates just exactly how much our offense is in our opponents heads.  Coaches have done this before, consulting in the offseason with LSU and Iowa back when everybody thought they had the "blueprint" to stop us.  (well, and they both did have it I guess - get a defense with 10+ future NFL players on it - its just not one they can share with other coaches).  UGA scheduled Georgia Southern the week before our game a couple times.  If Georgia Southern keeps changing their offense, then UGA may have to stop pretending its a coincidence, just admit they are practicing for our game, and start scheduling Navy in that slot.  Coaches also admit to spending extra time preparing for us.  Lots of coaches have admitted they devote a couple of weeks in spring practice.  Bud Foster at Virginia Tech spent most of August in 2012 putting in a whole new defense just for our Labor Day game.  UGA admitted last year they spent some extra time during both of their bye weeks working on our offense.  And I'm glad they did, since those were the only two games they lost, other than us.  If they had spent more time preparing for South Carolina during South Carolina week, and Florida during Florida week, they might have been 11-1 and playing Bama for a spot in the playoff.  Despite having beaten us 5 years in a row (at that time), we are apparently so far in their heads that we effectively beat them 3 times last year.  Well, I'm taking credit for all three anyway.  

So its not exactly new for a team to do extra stuff to prep for our offense, but calling it a third party consultant is interesting.  Not sure what effect it'll have.  When teams have success against us its usually a personnel issue.  And Notre Dame has some good personnel.  Kelly has stockpiled plenty of talent.  Hard to know what to make of Notre Dame though.  Are they really good, and maybe Texas is ok and UVA is better than people think?  Or are they more mediocre and Texas is just awful?

That the Irish are playing a backup quarterback doesn't make the game any more predictable.  He looked good in making the clutch throw to avoid a disastrous upset in Charlottesville.  But I'm afraid I don't have any significant insights into the game this week.  I can offer my prediction (ie - my guess).  I think we win a close, hard fought game.  But I wouldn't be surprised by much.  Poor offensive execution by us would surprise me.  That's about it.  I expect us, with Thomas and this experienced O-line, to execute the offense well.  Notre Dame still might slow us down if they win their 1 on 1 matchups, and defeat blocks.  But I don't think we'll beat ourselves offensively.  Other than that, most anything could happen.  Here is to hoping that our defense really is improved and we win easily.

The computers generally think we are good.  We rank about 10th in most and Notre Dame is in the 15-20 range.  Phil Steele's power ratings have Notre Dame in the 15-20 range and have Georgia Tech 3rd.  Most computers seem to favor us, but ESPN's index says Notre Dame has a 68% chance to win.  Of course all that stuff is based on trying to compare Alcorn St. and Tulane to Texas and Virginia.  Which is difficult at best, and a fool's errand at worst.  Computer information at this stage of the season is based on such little data that its close to useless anyway.  So we'll just have to wait until gametime to know much of anything.  Can't get here soon enough for me.

Go Jackets!