Rockne's Roundtable

Good read as always Lou. Golson should be getting all the attention & first team rep's from here on out he clearly distanced himself from the pack & has a ton of upside & very little to correct. Just get him ready for sept 1st.

Great read, Lou. For those still bashing Kelly on the QB situation, his comments give me confidence that he sees and appreciates all that we "armchair qb coaches" do, plus a lot more that we can't possibly know.

For me, I'll take the "trick or treat" highs and lows of a Golson-run offense. After two years of the Tommy Rees "Honda Civic" offense, I want the "wow" factor, even if it means hitting a few mailboxes along the road.

put the ball in the hands of e.g.,and we will see you in dublin!!!!!!

Put me down also for Golson,his upside far out weighs any negatives,and the only way he is going to continue to improve is by PLAYING IN GAMES,you can only go so far in practice.Hendrix should be #2 and TR #3 the emergency QB but I'm sorry,he is not the guy to take us to the promise land(BCS),if the goal is the Champs Bowl,then he is your guy!!!!!!

Agreed. To the extent one can go by a scrimmage, which is quite limited, Golson looks superior. In the best of all worlds, however, starting him shouldn't even be a consideration. This should be one more year in his development wearing a red cap. Unfortunately, Kelly and Martin probably don't have that luxury. If he's the guy, then be prepared for delay of game penalties and struggles reading complex defenses, and other problems related to that which "we can't possibly know" stuff, and there is plenty of that. All of these pro-Golson votes we're seeing right now could change on a dime to "Where's Andrew" and "Is Gunner ready?" unless we're ready to live with the issues of playing a quarterback near the front end of the learning curve.

Thats a great example of TR,he is a great kid,represents ND admirably,but at best he's a Grand Vally St. starting QB!!!!!!!!

If Golson is struggling to assimilate coach's sideline play calling, I wonder if BK will consider implementing the picture method that Oregon uses?

I recall that BK tried that for a little bit (early last year maybe?) but that seemed to fade away. I'm guessing it's because they didn't need to use it with Tommy under center.

Great recap Lou. It will be interesting to see how this battle turns out.

Great read, Lou,

The case against Tommy isn't good right now. Lou speaks about the called draw, but on the INT play, he had the left DE sealed inside by Martin, and didn't run it. Even he could've picked up 2-3 yards. That play was a "zero is ok on 3rd down play" and Tommy didn't pull the trigger on the run. That speaks to the "art" of the position, IMO.

Actually, what really has me down on Rees was the sequence Lou mentioned. Daniels beat his guy off the line, and Rees UNDERthrew it. Then, Smith doesn't beat his guy, Tommy OVERhrows it, while Eifert beats his man and is wide open for the touchdown.

I have to give Kelly alot of credit though; he knew what the kids struggled with and didn't sugarcoat it in spring ball. Dropped 8, blitzed, stunted and did everything he could to test the QBs abilities to handle the team.

What I saw was 3 flawed QB's and a 4th heading for a red shirt.

If Rees hasn't maxed out, he's certainly close. His physical skills aren't likely to improve much, and they, as much as anything, are what drive his mental and execution errors.

I was high on Hendrix after last year's Stanford game, but Lou is right that something is missing. Of the 3 upperclassmen, he clearly looks like the guy and has the best blend of strengths, but nothing about him, at least on the basis of yesterday, screams "difference maker."

Golson is the best athlete, but Kelly not having confidence in his managing the game and running the offense smoothly enough, is a huge red flag. It's one thing to be Charlie Ward-like; another, to be Charlie Ward.

I'm also still concerned with Golson's size and what seems to be the schoolyard nature of his game. What happens when your offense is all play-extension? Grab-bagging is, I think, what Holtz called it.

Kiehl, though imposing and promising looking, played like an early entrant freshman. This kid's the future, or at least a part of it, but he won't be servicable this year.

Bottom line: I didn't see a QB out there with whom I was comfortable enough with to persuade me that -- at least at this stage -- ND will have, out of the gate, an exceptional offense. Again, it will be a work in progress.

I don't say this lightly, as I watched some of the highlights of the other spring games and saw at least a half dozen QB's making plays that impressed me more.

What is it about Kelly ball that makes our kids look so unequal to the task? Is his offense too cerebral, while, at the same time, crucially dependent on players with exceptional physical gifts?

To me, they would all do better running different offenses: Rees, as a backup, in a pro set; Hendrix in a pro set, with a little option a la Rick Mirer; Golson, straight option or the package Holtz used for Kevin McDougal; and Kiehl, pro set along the lines Weis will probably use with Crist at Kansas.

I sure hope one of these kids emerges enough to make this team a BCS contender, but, at the moment, I just don't see it. I had no idea that, in year 3, installing Kelly's offense would still require as much effort as in building an atomic weapon.

Yes, folks, this does appear to be rocket science. But why?