IBG: Stanford Week

This week's IBG hosted by Keith Arnold over at Inside the Irish. This is only my second IBG, and hoo boy--what a way to get started.

1. Obviously, Saturday night's game is massive. Win, and the Irish get to nine wins after starting 0-2, and you can make a really persuasive argument that they're deserving of a BCS berth. Lose, and ND only makes incremental progress over last year's 8-5 record. Three potential outcomes: Win, close loss, ten-point loss. How does your takeaway for the season change?

Hmm. You know, unless the the Irish knock the Cardinal completely colorblind, I'm not sure my opinion of the season's going to change much. This might sound kind of defeatist, but it's not. It's the last game of the season--we kind of know who our team is by now. ND's been good this season, but they're not great. They're probably better than a number of teams ranked above them, but they don't have enough control yet to be ranked among the elite. Against USF and Michigan they lost when it was in their power to win; against Wake Forest and BC it felt like they were just scraping by. Not that I'm knocking those wins, because I really appreciated Rees's quote after the BC game: "Winning's hard, and I don't think people give the guys enough credit when games are won late in the season."

Absolutely. And a couple years ago, I think a tough close game like Wake or BC might have been a game that we lost.

But overall, I think the problems that have plagued us from game one haven't really disappeared. If we play a perfect game on Saturday, perhaps my opinion will change. More likely, though, we're going to have to wait until next season to see whether our team's going to bump up into the category of the truly spectacular.



2. Right now the Irish have 15 prospects committed to the 2012 recruiting class. Let's assume every starter with a year left is coming back (Cave, KLM, Cwynar and Slaughter) and the Irish end up signing 20 recruits. That'll make 93 players technically available for the 85-man roster (With Mike Ragone potentially being No. 94). Assuming Te'o and Eifert are back next season, what reserves do you invite back for a fifth year? Why?

Fifth-year candidates:
Crist
Goodman
Walker
Golic
Clelland
Hafis Williams
Brandon Newman
McDonald
Posluszny
McCarthy
Ragone* (Sixth Year)


All of them. Anyone who's busted his butt for the team this long and wants to come back should come back. I realize this is kind of negating the point of the question, but if these guys are dedicated and they exude the kind of character you want on and off the field, then it's worth it. Having that kind of experience and commitment around your program is invaluable. It's not just about the roster--it's about creating the team culture you want, too.


3. If you ran the website NDNation, what would you do with it? It's the most prominent Notre
Dame hub on all of the internet, but it's got a very vocal faction of readers/fans that seem to control the agenda -- most often with a significantly negative point-of-view. What would you do if that was your website?

Oh, man. So I have to confess that here NDNation kind of scares me--mostly for the reason you mentioned. Message boards do tend give voice to the passionate and pungent minority, but I'd like to think most fans actually prefer the kind of reasonable discourse championed by blogs like Blue-Gray Sky.

If NDNation's your place to rant and rave, then fine--but if I were brave enough to open this can of worms, I think I'd try to remind the angry message-board-posters (when they're talking about the team and not, for example, field turf) that these are 18-to-22-year-old kids you're talking about, and you're putting an awful lot of pressure on people who are working very hard to do exactly what you want them to do: win. If you can't manage to tear your myopic eyes away from all the things that have gone wrong and work in some respect for all the hard work these kids are putting in, then maybe don't say anything at all.

I know a lot of the heat gets lumped on the coaches, but based on the exponential increase of gray hairs on Brian Kelly's head in the past year, I'd say you need to lay off him a little bit, too. Not that I haven't done my fair share of ranting and raving over (for example) clock management this season--but it's only the coach's second year, and what he's managed to do with the defense alone in such a short time is remarkable. If we're not exactly hitting the BCS mark this season, we're still not that far off. As for any faux pas--I'd argue that Kelly knows how to be a head coach in college football, but there's still a bit of a learning curve when it comes to being the head coach at Notre Dame. And even when he's made a gaffe, I think he responds pretty well to the backlash.

I don't have any idea how I would change the website, but I beg--I plead--I implore you, NDNation, to consider that if you are the main hub of ND fans on the internet, then you are the heart from which the greater college football world takes its pulse of the ND fan base. And it has been my experience that the greater college football world thinks ND fans are delusional.

Why do you think that is, NDNation?

I appreciate a little tough love every now and again--but you gotta remember to include the love. That's the most important part of the alma mater, right? Love thee Notre Dame. Whether you're a graduate of the university or not, this should still hold true.

And whether you're completely satisfied with the season or not, let's just try not to give the coach any more gray hairs than necessary. Eh?

Clearly you've opened a little bit of a vein here, Keith--thanks for posing the question.



4. You're Brian Kelly. You spent last recruiting class successfully upgrading the front seven of the defense. Over the next two recruiting classes, what position groups do you absolutely need to upgrade to get the Irish over the BCS hump?

1. SPECIAL TEAMS. Okay, so maybe Kelly's not going to go out and recruit for special teams per se, but we need a good punt returner like a turkey needs basting. BC roasted us in the field position battle last week. We had six drives that started inside our own 15, and every single one resulted in a punt. There were other factors besides our poor return game, obviously (like who is BC's punter and how can we get Kyle Brindza to start kicking like that?!), but I can't see us winning a BCS game if we're getting bagged and cooked in the field position battle. Coach Kelly has already acknowledged the need for a punt returner, and basically indicated that the problem is being shelved until next season. I just hope one of the all-around athletes he's recruiting ends up being the next Devin Hester. Or whoever. Really any player who would rather punch people than fair catch the ball is all right with me.

2. Linemen. I'm cheating here and lumping defense and offense together, even though based on Kelly's recruiting so far it looks like D-line is getting pretty well covered. Admittedly I have not been keeping close tabs on this year's recruiting class (not that it matters much before national signing day anyway), but we're not very deep at the Center position at the moment, and personally I would rather see us focus on ensuring our line is stacked than worry about whether we've got the next Michael Floyd lined up at wideout. Also, I harbor a crazed dream that we will one day have the sickest two-deep at D-line in all of college football; a six-headed beast that will out-man the Hydra in a staring contest and shame Cerberus into life as a pink-collared lap dog.


5. I've seen dozens of analogies used to describe the current state of the quarterbacking position at Notre Dame. What's your favorite, or the one you think is the most appropriate?

This would be an excellent question if I'd seen any of these analogies myself. (Though having already expressed my fear of the NDN message boards, perhaps this pronouncement does not shock you.) Last week I compared Tommy to a peanut butter cup in my rant, but that doesn't seem very original, so let's rule that out. I think I'll leave this question to everyone else and try to read around the blogosphere a bit more so I'm not flummoxed the next time a question like this arises.


6. Get out the crystal ball. Even after an unimpressive weekend, the Irish are right around a seven-point underdog to Stanford. Do the Irish leave Palo Alto victorious?

I fail at making predictions. However, this is a team that beat Utah and USC last season after losing to Tulsa and having most of the fanbase declare them dead in the water, so I think we're capable of making a strong finish this season, too.

We're a good team. We're finding ways to win even when the performance seems lackluster, and our biggest enemy this season has been ourselves. I'd like to see us come out hot in Palo Alto, but I'd be all right watching a tough, slogging nail-biter so long as a couple lucky bounces come our way.

I think Stanford's beatable. So let's beat 'em.

Go Irish!

Irish Blogger Gathering: Boston College Week

Hosted this week by Poot over at Her Loyal Sons.

1. Having actually seen the uniforms in the wild on Saturday night, what are your final thoughts regarding them? Does Ronald Darby stating that he liked them change your views on trying out the different uniforms for the “Shamrock Series”?

THEY WORE DIFFERENT UNIFORMS?

Oh right, sorry, I think I'm still recovering from my shamrock-helmet-induced hypnosis. I'm not sure I even noticed the players were wearing different-colored uniforms because I couldn't tear my eyes away from their heads. Maryland's helmets were practically austere by comparison. But then I started noticing them, too, and spent a fair amount of time pondering how the Maryland state flag could easily double as the pennant of a deeply confused religious order steeped in the tenets of NASCAR.

And then I remembered there was football on and decided not to care.

Overall, I don't think there's really any point to the uniform switch-up for the Shamrock Series, other than it gives Adidas a chance to throw some new swag in our direction. The whole change-up uniform thing does seem to be taking hold across the country, and part of me wonders whether this obsession isn't somehow linked to the fact that college football games can now be viewed on TV almost every night of the week. Everyone's getting TV time now, so everyone wants to stand out, right?

As for the recruits commenting on the uniforms: if they like them, great. If they don't, whatever. If a recruit's basing his decision to come to Notre Dame on whether or not he likes the uniforms, then I think I'd care. There are so many other much more important factors for the recruits to consider that I'd like to think the uniforms aren't going to be the tipping point.

Mostly I'll just be glad to see the boys back in the traditional blue & gold on Saturday. Gosh, you know, especially since they finally got the paint color right.

2. Manti is clearly hobbled right now. Re-watching the game on Sunday, I barely noticed him on the field and I rarely remember Mayock or Hammonds calling his name. I believe Kelly stated in his Sunday teleconference that Manti was did not play most of the 3^rd or 4^th quarters. If you are BK, do you sit Manti on Saturday?

Well, in his Tuesday presser, Kelly commented that Manti was running around and the rest seemed to have done him some good. Based on Manti's own comments earlier in the season that he can still feel the sting of that '09 UConn loss on Senior Day, I think he really wants to be out there on the field to send out the seniors with a win. Although it's certainly more important for him to be alive and well for the Stanford game next week, you gotta give the guy a chance to play for his teammates on Senior Day. Even if it's just for a quarter or two.

3. We’ve seen Tommy Rees play deep into blowouts against Navy, Air Force and Maryland with Hendrix only getting a significant number of snaps in the Air Force game. Rees is only a sophomore but it seems most Irish fans take it as a foregone conclusion that Golson or Hendrix will pass Tommy going into the 2012 season. So do you agree with the use, or lack thereof, of Hendrix so far this season? Do you accept the thought that this is Rees’ last year as starter?

Hm. Well, every time I try to predict something like this I'm terribly wrong, so let's just assume I'm incorrect when I say: I'd be very surprised to see Rees benched at the start of next season. As I noted in my rant after the Wake Forest game last week, I don't think a sophomore-year Andrew Hendrix (or Everett Golson) is going to be any less prone to throwing interceptions than a junior-year Tommy Rees.

Further, I think Rees is much more likely to have a breakout season next year than either of the younger QB's. He's been in Kelly's system for two years now--and if you recall, both Brady Quinn and Jimmy Clausen looked a whole lot better as juniors than they did as sophomores. Obviously this occurred for different reasons in each case (Weis showed up and whipped Quinn into a better-than-50%-passer; Jimmy finally had GOLDEN TATE and an O-line that would block for him--plus he learned how to throw the ball away), but overall I think the biggest change between a sophomore and a junior starting QB is in the mind. It's knowing the playbook. It's knowing your teammates. It's knowing how to thwart opposing defenses even when they're showing you looks they haven't shown all season.

I haven't seen enough of the younger QB's in action to make fair judgment, of course, but it doesn't seem likely that they'll be more mentally ready with the playbook than Rees, or more prepped to take on a leadership role and pick apart opposing defenses.

More likely than seeing Rees totally ousted, I think, is that we'll see more of Andrew Hendrix (or Golson, maybe) as the switch-up quarterback. I can't see Hendrix being totally ready for the starting spot next season, and as long as Tommy's around it seems foolish to completely yank him for someone with so much less experience. I'd much prefer to have just one starting QB, of course, but if Kelly can work in Hendrix effectively in certain situations and keep Rees in there as more of a stabilizing force (assuming, you know, he doesn't keep throwing INT's), then...well, maybe that's what we need to do. But I guess we'll see.

4. Tommy Rees needs 608 yards for 3000 passing yards on the season. Cierre Wood is 93 yards short while Jonas Gray is 270 yards short of 1000 rushing yards. Michael Floyd is 78 yards shy of 1000 receiving yards for the season. Despite SubwayDomer’s insistence that bowl stats count, predict final numbers for all 4 players before the bowl. Do they all hit the milestones?

I say yes. Why not? Let's contemplate how.

It's unlikely Rees will pull out a 300+ yard game against Stanford, so he needs a 400+ yard effort against BC. Let's say 444 yards by the end of the third quarter. At least 200 of those will need to be to Floyd, because it's Senior Day.

Speaking of which--it being Senior Day and all, Jonas Gray will rush for 270 yards in the first half alone.

Cierre may have to hold off until later in the game, but I say as long as Gray has the yardage covered in the first half, might as well have him scamper for the century mark in the second. Or, you know, there's always the Stanford Game.

1. Notre Dame opens up as a 24.5 favorite for Saturday’s game and this is clearly the worst Boston College team in recent memory. That said, BC absolutely loves to play spoiler when it comes to Notre Dame and this game will be the last chance for something good to happen this season. Given those two thoughts, does the margin of victory matter to you on Saturday?

We will score over sixty points. Every single senior will play for the entirety of the fourth quarter. Boston College will score field goals and only field goals, and they will not know the glory of our endzone.

GO IRISH BEAT EAGLES!

Leftover Halloween Candy

Notre Dame 45, Maryland 21

So if you're anything like me, you pounced on the discount Halloween candy during the first week of November, and now you have a little stash tucked away somewhere that you've been enjoying--even though you had more than enough candy leading up to Halloween and you're perfectly well aware that Thanksgiving's just around the corner.

That's kind of what the end of this season feels like to me: leftover Halloween candy. It still tastes good, and you still love it (because hey, it's candy, right?), but you know the holiday's over. And probably you should wait til next year to eat more of those pumpkin-shaped Reese's, because they'll taste even sweeter if you do; but hey, as long as they're here, might as well enjoy them, right?

So maybe the USC game smashed any hopes of a BCS Bowl. But we're still winning, and that's sweet. We're still going to a bowl, and that's sweet too.

Plus, we're now officially RANKED again in the AP (#24) and USA Today (#25) polls. Looks like being favored in every game so far this season is finally starting to pull some leverage, despite the unfortunate mishaps that leave our record at 7-3. I severely doubt that even with a win over Stanford we'll be able to crack the Top 14 (particularly since the BCS poll hasn't yet deigned to acknowledge our presence among the ranked), but I'd still love to see our boys pull out a whomping pumpkin pie of a victory over Thanksgiving weekend (as opposed to, say, a bunch of cherry turnovers).

Before we get to the awesome stuff, however, let's just take a minute to ponder a few of the troublesome items that may rear their flaky little heads in Palo Alto.

Give me a break, giiiiive me a break, break me off a piece of that....

Oh, O-line. WHAT are you doing to me?

Let's assume it was dry blend of factors: two cups missing Braxston Cave, one cup throwing the ball 38 times, three tablespoons Mike Golic's inexperience, one teaspoon missed RB blocks, and a dash of defensive chutzpah. Sift it all together, and suddenly you've got enough for three sacks.

Not my favorite mixture, especially since I'm not convinced that the allspice of Maryland's defense is exactly the strongest flavor in the world. And if we're giving up three sacks against the bland ol' Terps, we'd better steel ourselves for the comparatively curry-spiced BC defense--particularly one with the giant zest of Luke Kuechly at linebacker. Kuechly's even been compared to the human habanero himself, Manti Te'o. I realize BC's 3-7 and all, but if we're giving up sacks against Maryland, we'd better be a tad bit concerned over BC.

Overall, the offense played quite well, but part of me wonders if the extra-fast tempo we saw on Saturday was as much of an effort to amp up our game as it was to disguise some of the extra-large gaps in our offensive colander, as it were, caused by the personnel changes. Braxston Cave is out for the season, so hopefully another week with Golic at center will give the O-line a chance to knead together a little better, and rise evenly and effectively come game time against BC. Perhaps the three-sack warning is the push they need to improve before the end of the season. Let's hope so.

Also, as long as we're in nit-picking mode, I'm going to whine for a second about how we gave up another rushing touchdown. What's with that? We have the third-best stats against rushing touchdowns in the FBS (right behind LSU and TCU)--and we surrender one on the ground to the Terps? USC is one thing, but Maryland? Really? It's like a tray of cinnamon buns that are all burnt on the bottom. Still gooey and warm and delicious and satisfying--but when you've peeled all the way through the top layers, there's still this burnt little canker sticking to the bottom of the pan. It's not perfect. You've got to scrape off the bottom, clean the pan and try again.

And I guess that's the way it always is, with football. I'm not sure there's such a thing as a perfect game. But if we can at least get the tray to bake so no smoke billows out of the oven and no excessive charred parts are left at the bottom, I'll be satisfied. And I think we're getting there. Certainly things are much improved from a couple seasons ago, when in nearly every game you felt the urge to throw out half the tray because they got burnt on more than just the bottom. Certainly not the kind of thing you want to lay out and serve to your guests on Game Day.

I'm just sayin'.

Reese's Pieces

So let's talk about all the tasty little candy-coated tidbits that went down on offense--which shouldn't be hard to do, because there were a lot of them, despite the sacks. The up-tempo offense served us well, particularly early in the game; our first two scoring drives were completed in 2:35 or less.

The run game went as smooth as creamy peanut butter, with both Jonas Gray and Cierre Wood eclipsing the century mark in all-purpose yards for the first time all season (I believe). (Gray officially had 138 net yards rushing, and Wood was just one yard shy of 100). Not that I expected to see anything less, but I'm glad the commitment to the run game has returned. As long as we keep this identity all the way through the end of the season, I'll be happy. No more abandoning the run like we did against USC. We seemed to stay steady against Wake Forest, even when we were down early, and it paid off. Let's hope we'll be stalwart against Stanford, too, if it comes down to it.

Michael Floyd, Tyler Eifert, and Robby Toma were the Three Musketeers of the pass game, with 9, 8, and 7 catches respectively, racking up individual totals of 90, 83, and 73 yards--including a touchdown apiece for Floyd and Eifert.

There were moments I thought Floyd looked like the Michael Floyd of olde--but it's possible he's spent too much time focusing on his blocking or just straight-up being double-teamed this season, because there were at least two occasions during the game when Rees found him, on what looked like a good throw, and he miffed the catch. Very un-Floyd like. Even the announcers said so, and normally they're too busy poring over their random bits of human interest trivia to be overly concerned with what's going on in the actual game. But Floyd's the kind of nougat so smooth everyone takes notice, so it's not overly surprising they'd have him on their radar.

More surprising is one announcer's personal fan club for Robby Toma, who up until this point hasn't gotten much playing time. But in the couple games he's made it onto the field this season (which will continue, as Riddick's out til next year), he's made a real impact. Teams tend to overlook him early due to his bite-size appearance, but after this game I think it would be unwise for defenses to spend too much time on king-sized Floyd at the expense of covering Toma. He may look like a little fun-sized bar, but he's got a whole party bag's worth of energy, and Coach Kelly acknowledged his effort and his leadership by asking him to lead the fight song in the locker room after the game. I'd look out for some nice grabs by the junior receiver on Saturday.

Also, can I just say that Tyler Eifert is basically a whole crunchity Heath bar of goodness (and if you don't think this is a compliment than you have no idea how much I enjoy toffee), and I look forward to another season of him abusing teams over the middle. We've had at least four pro-caliber, All-American tight ends in a row now (Fasano, Carlson, Rudolph, Eifert). Can we please continue this trend forever and ever until the end of time? Lifetime supply of Heath Bars. Let's go.

Lastly, let us commend Tommy Rees for his smooth, sugary, ruffled-around-the-edges-but-always-smooth-on-the-inside peanut-buttery-cup goodness. Despite the three sacks and the two inexplicable drops by Floyd, he still went 30-for-38 passing with 2 TD's and nearly 300 yards. That's a 78.9% completion percentage. And the best part of all--NO INTERCEPTIONS. Maryland's defense is not exactly the creme de la creme of the FBS, of course--but neither is Wake Forest's or Navy's, and I'm pretty sure he threw interceptions against both of them. So. Improvement?

Let's hope so, because I'm really tired of this wishy-washy, namby-pamby, back-and-forth inconsistent nonsense of having turnovers for three games and then no turnovers for two games and then inexplicable turnovers for three more games... All I'm saying is Rees better achieve consistency, or he's gonna get tossed like a sauce that won't set right. And I don't want that to happen. I'd much rather watch him stick around for a while and see the pot thicken.

Take Five

*Despite giving up our first sack in 5 games and 195 passing attempts, the offense accumulated 508 yards of offense during the advent of our 5th night game of the season, giving us our 5th 500-yard mark of the year for the first time since 2005.

*David Ruffer completed a spectacular 52-yard field goal, making him only the second player in Irish history with three field goals of 50 yards or more (the first was Harry Oliver). After missing three field goals at the start of the season, Ruffer has now kicked 5 in a row dating back to the Purdue game.

*Tyler Eifert's TD catch was his 5th of the season, hauled in at the 5:31 mark of the fourth quarter to give the Irish a 45-14 lead. Eifert now has 51 catches for 589 yards on the year. He holds 5th place in the Notre Dame record books for both total tight end receptions (78) and yards (941).

*With his TD toss to Eifert, Rees tied himself for 5th in the ND record books for most touchdown passes in a single season (he currently has 19--along with Ron Powlus).

*Lo Wood iced the offense's layer of 5 touchdowns with a TD grab of his own, intercepting the ball and running it back 57 yards for the first pick-six by the Irish since their game against Army in Yankee Stadium last year.

Hungry? Grab a Snickers

Right, so normally at this point I'd spew some lovely defensive statistics at you. And I'm still going to, only the defensive statistics aren't quite what they've been for most of the season. No double-digit tackles for anyone; no man-beast that is Manti Te'o, since he was out for most of the second half (though he should be in good shape for this week, we hear); no sacks; not even very many tackles for loss. In fact, if you look at Maryland's defensive stats, straight-up, they look quite a bit zippier: three sacks, nine tackles for loss, FOUR different players with twelve tackles or more.

But these stats are but tiny peanuts stuck in with the caramely, nougaty, chocolate-coated game as a whole. The reason Maryland made so many more tackles is because Notre Dame was a much bigger threat on offense. We held the ball on offense ten minutes longer than the Terps, accumulated ten more first downs, scored three more times, and ran the score up enough to rotate twenty-five different defensive players into the game.

I like having lots of fun stats to pore over on defense, but I think I could get to liking this even more. This having-an-offense-so-productive-the-defense-doesn't-have-to-put-up-flashy-stats thing. Because stats can be misleading, as we well know. You can rack up over five hundred yards of offense and still lose the game. Sometimes it's only a handful of stats that are significant. Like the fact that we made 10 of 16 third down conversions, and Maryland only got 3 of 12. That's a huge defensive statistic right there. And maybe we didn't get any sacks or tackles for loss; but we did have one forced fumble and a huge pick-six, and I'll take a possession change over loss of yards any day.

Whatever's going on with our team these days, I'm hungry for more.

Milky Way

So let us look upward and outward, and ruminate over what sugary goodness may foretold in the movements of the stars. Or at least in the subtle hints of Coach Kelly's press conference comments.

The most important thing I thought Coach Kelly said this week was during his post-game speech in the locker room (he may have made these comments in his post-game presser, too, but I didn't get a chance to watch all of that this week): "Don't change anything about the way you prepare," he told the players. Hell yes, I say. He's right.

Basically, caoch is warning them against getting lazy or sloppy just because the team's started to win on a consistent basis. (You know, just like I ranted about last week, about how teams like Ohio State tend to overlook their opponents just because they're 3-7.) You can't ease up on your preparation once you've found a way to win. It's because you prepare that you're able to win at all. So you have to be consistent with your approach. You have to keep doing exactly what you're doing.

aka DON'T SLACK OFF because that's how good teams end up losing to mediocre ones, and you don't want that to happen at the end of this season, especially not when you've worked so hard to get where you are, and furthermore YOU DO NOT WANT TO LOSE ON SENIOR DAY TO BOSTON COLLEGE. Trust me. You just don't.

I don't think the upperclassmen are going to need any prodding to know how important it is to win on Senior Day. Harrison Smith, for example, will most certainly remember the freezing agony of Syracuse '08. Manti Te'o has already commented on how awful it felt not being able to send the seniors out with a win for UConn '09. The sophomores can just carry over the jubilation from toppling 14th-ranked Utah last year, and the whole team can happily boot BC out of the stadium and pave their way to Palo Alto with some vim.

As Coach Kelly put it, when asked if there was a message he'd like to leave the seniors: "Win. You'll remember this a whole lot better if you win."

Let us go forth and do so. (And don't forget to brush the bits of caramel and nougat off your teeth before you hit the stadium.)

GO IRISH BEAT EAGLES!

42 is definitely not the answer

Notre Dame 24, Wake Forest 17

So guys...bowl eligible!!!

Just...maybe not the way we envisioned.

Sometimes when I look at the rankings these days I get really annoyed, because Michigan and Michigan State and USC are all ranked, and seeing as we whomped Michigan State and had no business losing to Michigan and forgot how to play after a bye week and manage the clock against USC, we should...

Okay, so maybe we shouldn't be ranked, but in my head it feels like we should be ranked. Why AREN'T we ranked? Why didn't we win those two games at the beginning of the season? Why did we appear lackluster against Pittsburgh and Wake Forest? Why did we come out flat against USC? And why for the love of all that is baby-faced and gold-plated does Tommy Rees keep throwing interceptions???????

I've got a head full of questions and a pocket full of ellipses. And no answers.

I guess I could go with "42" as an answer, but that doesn't help very much because I don't know the question, so I'm just going to do my usual thing and waffle for a bit like I know what's going on.

Wakey!Wakey!

This game is hard to write about because it was so...meh. It doesn't inspire a lot of vim and fervor, thinking how you only won by a touchdown even though your opponent didn't score for the entire second half. Granted, Wake was up at halftime 17-10; there's no point complaining about a win; and it would just be wrong to undermine the stellar defensive effort in the second half--yada yada yada. Coach Kelly described this win as "Tough. Gritty." The kind of play we haven't really seen from this team before. And granted, I suppose it was. It's just as important--if not more important--for teams to win those tough, gritty games as it is for them to win high-flying, high-scoring spectacles. Win when it's a showdown. Win when it's an ugly mess. Win when everything goes down to the wire. Just find a way to win. And good teams do--period.

But good teams also do a lot of other things, such as play consistently, and anytime you've got a pair of touchdowns bookended by interceptions, you're not exactly playing your way to the top of the heap. I have to keep reminding myself not to get all bent out of shape about these things, though, because hey--at least we won. Games like this aren't going to make you leap out of your chair and jump for joy, but we won. It's nothing to sneeze at.

I would imagine that wins like this are more valuable for the team than they are for the fans. Of course we'd always like to see things flashy and exciting, but the season is long, and for the players, most of what they do to win isn't flashy or exciting at all. Like Coach Kelly's always saying: they try to go to work the same way every day. And yeah, Saturday should be different--Saturday's GAME DAY!--Saturday should be fun; but sometimes it's a slog-fest. Sometimes it's just gritty. And you have to know that even in November--even on the road at night--even when you're coming from behind, playing with two of your starting defensive linemen down and turning the ball over twice--that you can tough it out.

You don't always have to be dynamite with a laser beam. Sometimes you just have to be that brick wall your opponent can't quite knock down.

Third Eye Blind

However, since our general trajectory seems to be trending upward (even as our hopes and expectations for the season keep sliding down), games like this make people antsy. Forward-thinking eyes are flashing too far ahead to next season, wondering--Will Tommy keep the starting job? I personally would argue yes.

Based on the stats of both Brady Quinn and Jimmy Clausen, I think there's a quantum leap between sophomore and junior year. Mostly I think it's a mental leap--something to do with confidence, comfort level, ability to read the defense. Plus there's that intangible shift from being an underclassman to an upperclassman; really bumps up your ethos and your ability to lead.

I make no predictions, of course, because everything I try to predict anything regarding quarterbacks I'm horribly wrong. However, Brian Kelly has alluded more than once to Tommy's need for improvement. I fear that if Tommy's plate isn't free of turnovers by the end of the season, he may have to start looking over his shoulder for Andrew Hendrix (who will probably be busy running wind sprints up and down the field).

Keep in mind, though, that Tommy still has less experience as a starter than either Brady or Jimmy had at this point in their careers. He's fourteen games in as a starter, if you include the bowl game last year and South Florida this year--that's a little more than one seasons' worth of actual game-time decision making. I'm sure BK would like a signalcaller with better ball control and perhaps a little more flair on the ground (which may or may not be crucial, depending on the size of the gap left by Jonas Gray), but I don't think a sophomore-year Andrew Hendrix is likely to be less turnover-prone than a junior-year Tommy Rees. Although I guess you never know.

Killer Queen

Speaking of dynamite with a laser beam (like six paragraphs ago), how about that second-half defense? On Wake Forest's first two possessions in the third quarter, they ran six offensive plays for six yards. Five of those yards came on their second possession.

Not bad for a D-line with two starters down.

The D was on its heels a little bit in the first half; we gave up points early and didn't get any real pressure on the quarterback. But the halftime adjustments were good, as they've been for most of this season, and our players performed much better as a unit in the second half. In fact, the first defensive play of the third quarter resulted in a sack by freshman Aaron Lynch for -6 yards, which helps explain Wake's abysmal yardage total on the first series). Stephon Tuitt and Prince Shembo also recorded sacks, both in the fourth quarter; Harrison Smith forced a fumble in the third (which unfortunately the offense was unable to capitalize on); and Wake didn't get another scoring chance until the very last drive of the game, when they missed a 42-yard FG.

The game could have very easily gotten away from us, but thanks to the defense, it was not so. See? Tough. Gritty. We have things to be grateful for.

Hootie & the Blowfish

(The above moniker obviously referring to BK and all the beloved reporters at his press conferences. ...Obviously.)

Another thing to keep in mind is something we fans like to cite to ourselves quite often, but then conveniently forget when we have a lackluster game against a team like Wake Forest:

I think we saw last week you've got to really play well when you go on the road. Teams are going to play their very best. Maryland will play their very best against us, as has every team we've gone against; they've played their absolute best game of the year. Maybe you don't get that, but I get that from the coaches after the game.

So maybe Wake Forest is traditionally a Temple-caliber team when it comes to football--but, like Temple, they've become shockingly good in recent years (keeping in mind that Temple seems to be on the downward slope a bit since their head coach got hired away by Miami). They had the same record as ND coming into this game; they beat Florida State; and as we saw they have some quite talented players, particularly on offense. (No interceptions, you may have noticed.)

And although I think it is likely we will kick the patooey out of a 2-7 Maryland team (they've beaten Towson and Miami in their season opener if you can believe it), I like coach's comments on the matchup this week:

Again, we're going to be confronted with a similar situation. Everybody looks at Maryland's record and asks about them. I can tell you this from watching film and studying them offensively: They can put some points on the board. [...] It's the first year for Randy Edsall. I know Randy Edsall. He's a darn good football coach, and he'll have the memories of coming in here and beating Notre Dame and playing physical. That's what his teams will do.

So we have to be prepared and worry about ourselves.

(In case you were wondering, that win Randy Edsall has against Notre Dame--that would be the Senior Day game vs. UConn.)

I like this quote because A) BK is not overlooking a 2-7 Maryland team even though they are a 2-7 Maryland team, and B) he's not gonna let his players come out flat against a friggin' 2-7 Maryland team.

My biggest beef with college teams--most especially when they are good and appear to be having stellar seasons--is that they will completely overlook opponents they don't consider real threats. I don't want to point any fingers or anything, but Ohio State does this ALL THE TIME. In fact Ohio State might be the worst. Or maybe Michigan. Michigan vs. Appalachian State sounds like a reasonable example.

Anyway, point is, you shouldn't overlook any opponent ever, because A) that's disrespectful, B) that shows lack of discipline, and C) that team will probably play their best game of the season against you and your lack of focus might come back to bite you in the ass, and if it does then you completely deserve it, you great overgrown wafflehead--get your mind in the game, why don't you?

The Fray

So, brief player/injury update before I quit my somewhat colorless commentary for the week--

Center Braxston Cave is out for the season, so he'll be replaced by Mike Golic, Jr. for the rest of the season, and Andrew Nuss will move into the #2 spot at center.

WR Theo Riddick is out for the week with a hamstring injury, but he should be back for the last two games (or the Stanford game, if nothing else). Robby Toma will move up into the starting spot, and rotate out of the X position with TJ Jones and John Goodman.

Ethan Johnson's back on D-line! This'll take some of the pressure off the freshmen on D-line and most likely we'll come out looking much sharper against the Terps than we did against the Demon Deacons. (Seriously, who picked a turtle for a mascot?) Although one would hope we'd look sharper against Maryland anyway.

Manti Te'o and Aaron Lynch are both still dealing with ankle injuries, but both are cleared to play.

Also, just in cased you missed it, senior captain Harrison Smith's been invited to the Senior Bowl. Hell yes. He deserves it.

Let's go knock the shells off some diamond-backed turtles, shall we? And wear some severely shamrock-studded uniforms while we're at it. (For the record, the players seem to like the rad new uniforms, so as long as it doesn't distract them from their playing--whatever. Although it totally kills me that they spent over a year trying to get the color of the helmets right and now they're wearing these tacky-looking shamrock things.... Oh well. It's just for one week.)

GO IRISH BEAT TERPS!