Quick Hits from Notre Dame-Purdue

This Notre Dame team is missing something... Something really big. I don't exactly know what it is but here is what I see:

• The team isn't very physical. We saw glimpses of it on offense (especially on the drive to start the second half). We saw glimpses on defense. But Notre Dame didn't wear Purdue down. The Irish have the talent to do that.
• The tackling in the secondary is atrocious. I am not sure what happened in between the game at Southern Cal and the national championship game, but ever since the 2012 regular season ended, the Irish can't tackle. A strength has turned into a weakness.
• The Irish can't put teams away. We saw it in the opener against Temple. We saw it again tonight. Three TDs in three and a half minutes had Purdue on the ropes and the Irish couldn't finish them off until they absolutely had to.

Watching this game - a predictable offense, a soft defense, not putting teams away, feels just like the first two Kelly seasons (and a number of seasons before Kelly). I hope it turns around, but it doesn't feel like it will.

The trio of Calabrese, Fox and Grace in the middle of the linebacking corps is embarrassingly slow. They couldn't keep up with some of the Purdue (!) skill players. We are learning by the week how much this team misses Te'o, but his speed is a big one.

Also, let's put out a missing person's alert for Stephon Tuitt. Four tackles in three games.

Before I get to the offense, I want to apologize to Louis Nix. He gets double-teamed a ton and it's hard to notice him unless you watch him.

I called last week for more of a balance in the run-pass ratio and we got that a little bit (24 runs and 34 passes before the last drive) this week. However, this offense seems very predictable. It felt like we saw no more than five run designs all night. That works if you run an option-based attack.  Purdue had Notre Dame very well-scouted but it doesn't seem that difficult. When Notre Dame runs a play, it rarely surprises me (outside of the Daniels TD).

The argument that Alabama, when down 14-0, got back in the game by passing isn't as easy as it seems. That works because of Alabama's traditional success in running. That works because they threw the ball against nine in the box on the flea-flicker. That works because Alabama doesn't go five-wide with an empty backfield to totally give up on the threat of a run.

I can get myself to the point of passing to set up the run. I don't agree with it but Kelly believes in it. I just don't think the offense is very good, especially with an immobile quarterback.

Notre Dame stretched the field twice and found success both times. More of that please. Hint: it will help with opening up the running game.

We heard a lot of hype about Davaris Daniels and he appears to be living up to it. If he keeps developing, Daniels may play on Sundays.

Amir Carlisle may go into the Jonas Gray doghouse.

I thought Purdue did a good job with delaying the blitzes. We know Rees likes to check at the line but the book on him is to show one defensive look and then change it after he adjusts the play.

Thankfully, Notre Dame was playing a team the caliber of Purdue.

Roll through Kyle Field

Understandably so, there's a lot of hype built up over the A&M/Alabama game this weekend.  CBS is going to have one camera designated for Johnny Football - which seems a bit over the top, but on the bright side all of us watching the game will get to see his celebrations in stunning HD.

I'm still not sold on how good A&M is this year - they haven't played anyone yet, but they did look really good doing it (defensively speaking...59 points to Rice and SHSU is a red flag).  Alabama is fitting the model of "reloading not rebuilding" but losing three offensive linemen and a tight end to the NFL draft is hard to reload just a few games into the season.  Alabama didn't look great against VT, and two return touchdowns padded the scoreline.  In terms of matchups/keys for this game, there will be the Alabama rebuilt offensive line against a porous front seven for A&M that gave up 240 yards rushing to SHSU - but the biggest match up to me is Manziel vs. Saban.

With A&M's surprising win in Tuscaloosa last year left Nick Saban looking for answers. Nearly ten months in the making for this rematch I've wondered what a coach of Saban's capabilities with the talent he has on his team can do to game plan for Manziel.  Saban has a 7-1 record against the same opponent following a loss and his margin of victory in those rematch games is almost 21 points. On top of that, Alabama is coming off a bye-week, and I know full well what Saban is capable of with time and planning. 

I hate to admit this, because I don't want to feel like I'm enabling A&M fans, but game plans go out the window when Manziel goes Comanche.  If you watch the Heisman highlight from the Alabama game last year, Alabama had good coverage on the receivers in the end zone until Manziel started creating chaos and distracted the defensive back - allowing his receiver to drift away from coverage.  As distracting as Manziel can be to defenders on the field, it seems like his off the field drama is a distraction to himself and his team.

I'm going to side with history - and first hand experience - over chaos and pick Alabama by seven for the win on Saturday.
. 

Quick hits on the Notre-Dame Michigan game

Devin Gardner was way better than I was expecting. He played exceptionally well until that boneheaded interception in the end zone. He wobbled for a little bit but answered the bell down the stretch. It didn't get much play on the broadcast, but that throw on the last TD pass was very impressive. Gardner had a lot of pressure and put it one the money.

The refusal of the Notre Dame coaching staff to run the ball consistently is maddening. The drive that kept Notre Dame in the game (first drive of the second half) was a great combination of runs and passes. Pick your situation - Down 14 and 3rd-and-3 deep in Michigan territory, the run was never an option (especially when you are gonna go for it on fourth down!). Down 7 with the short field after the shanked punt, Carlisle runs it for 16 yards on the first play and then FOUR STRAIGHT PASSES. Notre Dame showed it could control the middle of the line of scrimmage but had a 18-45 run-pass ratio before the last-ditch drive

Troy Niklas is an absolute beast. His route running needs a little work but he is a good blocker and when he gets in space, watch out.

Man does Amir Carlisle run hard. I thought Theo Riddick ran like a senior last year and maybe he rubbed off on Carlisle, who I think is more talented physically than Riddick.

I am not sure what is wrong with the defense, but it should start with Tuitt and Nix losing 20 pounds apiece. That weight might be good for Nix on Sundays but not in college.

Seriously, if anyone can fix the defense, please call Bob Diaco. The loss of Te'o and Lewis-Moore can't be the only thing wrong.

I would love to see some analytics on 2nd-and-18 vs. 3rd-and-8. Obviously it didn't work out for Notre Dame but I would just like to see the percentages on that decision. Intuition says the 2nd-and-18 would be better for the defense but I am curious.

Tommy Rees played fine. He is what he is - a backup quarterback who has improved in his career and knows the offense very well. He never saw the Michigan defender on that interception. Tommy shouldn't be asked to throw the ball 40 or 50 times a game. No college QB should.

Notre Dame got some awful breaks on three pass interference calls. The early one on Russell and the one on Jackson were very tough. If you can't do that, then you can't play defense. I think the call on Farley was correct.

You see why a team doesn't want to rely on passing. Notre Dame got the break in the first half on the tipped ball and Michigan got the break at the end of the game. There are a lot fewer things that can go wrong when you run the ball.

The next two games should be wins for the Irish. Purdue is miserable and Michigan State's defense has scored more touchdowns than its offense through two games. Then the tests come with Oklahoma, Arizona State and Southern Cal.

At least the Rays are losing. The Indians are six outs away from being one game back in the wild card. 

Guts, Experts or Vegas?

Picking sports games seems like it's more of an art than a science.  Our modern day oracles fill the airwaves and cyberspace try to consistently predict the future for how each game will turn out using stats, insider access and who knows what else.  Given that this is the night of the official kickoff of the NFL season - I think it's fitting to use this as test for art v science.  The NFL is a league built on parity and equality like none other and I wonder if Paul could do as well in this league as European football when it comes to picking winners.  My goal is to track picks each week based on the following four methods:

• My own intuition and experience that has been honed from years of sports dedication
• ESPN Power Rankings for week one where I pick the higher ranked team according to the ESPN "experts"
• Vegas odds for week one games
• My wife's picks - based on her intuition and experience that has been honed from years of watching Law & Order, Gilmore Girls and yelling at Tony Romo

I'm hoping I can do better than the experts - but if Starr wins out this season - I'm taking her to Vegas.  As for week one - games with varying picks are highlighted below in blue.

Game	My Pick	Power Ranking	Odds	Starr
Ravens v Broncos	Broncos	Broncos	Broncos	Broncos
Patriots v Bills	Patriots	Patriots	Patriots	Patriots
Titans v Steelers	Steelers	Steelers	Steelers	Steelers
Falcons v Saints	Saints	Falcons	Saints	Saints
Buccaneers v Jets	Buccaneers	Buccaneers	Buccaneers	Jets
Chiefs v Jaguars	Chiefs	Chiefs	Chiefs	Chiefs
Seahawks v Panthers	Seahawks	Seahawks	Seahawks	Seahawks
Bengals v Bears	Bengals	Bengals	Bears	Bengals
Dolphins v Browns	Dolphins	Dolphins	Dolphins	Browns
Vikings v Lions	Lions	Vikings	Lions	Vikings
Raiders v Colts	Colts	Colts	Colts	Colts
Packers v 49ers	49ers	49ers	49ers	Packers
Cardinals v Rams	Rams	Rams	Rams	Rams
Giants v Cowboys	Cowboys	Giants	Cowboys	Giants
Eagles v Redskins	Redskins	Redskins	Redskins	Redskins
Texans v Chargers	Texans	Texas	Texans	Texans

Why It Appears Like a Rivalry

(courtesy of Matt Lozar) A major topic this week created by the media (thanks to Brian Kelly's comment) has been "Is Notre Dame-Michigan A Rivalry?"

 

To me, it feels like a rivalry. And here's why.

 

Yes, Michigan ducked Notre Dame for decades and did everything it could to keep the Catholics out of the Big Ten. And I agree with Kelly's original comment not his backtracking

 

Since the "Reunion Game" in 1978, ND-UM haven't played six times — 83-84 (South Carolina), 95-96 (Ohio State) and 00-01 (Nebraska). Unlike Mark May and Skip Bayless, I actually watched these teams play while growing up. There have been a number of memorable games:

 

I wasn't born but Harry Oliver in 1980 when fans swear the flags on top of the goal posts stopped for the 51-yard field goal for the left-footed, soccer-style kicker out of Cincinnati, Ohio.

 

Losing 24-23 in Holtz's first season in 1986 and ND becoming the first NCAA team to move into the top 20 after a loss.

 

Four field goals for Reggie Ho in 1988.

 

Kicking to the Rocket in 1989. Good move Bo.

 

The 90s had its fair share - Reggie Brooks getting knocked out when scoring a TD in 92, upsetting the defending champs in 98, poor clock management in 99.

 

The real reason this has felt like a rivalry to me has been the past 11 seasons.

 

Granted, I started as an undergraduate at Notre Dame in 2001, but there is no other series that I can easily tell you every single game between Notre Dame and its opponent in the past dozen seasons. You will have take my word for it but I didn't have to look at all for these quick recaps.

 

• 2002 - the offense finally scores a TD. Students storm the field. The country takes ND for real
• 2003 - Houston's Better - 38-0
• 2004 - Payback Is A... Darius Walker's coming out party. Students storm the field again. I do 38 pushups at midfield and take home a chunk of the turf that lived in a bowl from South Dining Hall for the entire fall semester.
• 2005 - A noon start and a 17-10 win over a top-5 UM team that wasn't that close. Weis gains national attention
• 2006 - An absolute egg after a dominating win over Penn State. There weren't enough beers in Hoboken that afternoon
• 2007 - 38-0 again.
• 2008 - A downpour in Rich Rod's first season and a ton of Michigan turnovers. Let to this photo.
• 2009 - Tate Forcier won the September Heisman
• 2010 - Denard Robinson wins the September Heisman.
• 2011 - An epic fourth quarter collapse at the Big House. Gary Gray's worst game ever. The day I re-evaluated how much I let Notre Dame football affect my life
• 2012 - HeisManti

 

Is Michigan a traditional rival? No. Do Notre Dame fans few Michigan more as a enemy? Yes. Am I disappointed they aren't on the schedule in the future? Kind of.

 

But the rivalry between these teams during the past 30 years ranks at the top of the list for Notre Dame. It doesn't have the tradition of Southern Cal, Navy or Michigan State, (hell, even Purdue), but for the last three-plus decades, it has given us its money's worth.

 

For those of you who read the whole thing, I leave you with this video. Thanks for reading and hopefully you come back in the future as the blog gets rolling.

A love-hate relationship

You love the New York Yankees.

Baseball is America, and the Yankees are baseball. The transitive property therefore tells me that the Yankees are America. The Yankees won independence from the Red Coats four score and seven (plus another seven score and seven) years ago. They defeated the dissenting rebels of the Confederacy. Americans are referred to as Yankees by the rest of the world. We are all Yankees.

You hate the New York Yankees.

They are everywhere. You've got your team, but they are constantly being shouldered aside by the Yankees on field and in the headlines. They are the trendy bandwagon team that everyone claims to have liked for years. Sure, it's easy to like a consistently good team, especially when your team is consistently inconsistent, or just plain mediocre (or downright terrible). The Yankees play in New York City - media capital of the United States, and perhaps all of Planet Earth. It's a viscous cycle with this team: they're so popular and such a big draw that ESPN and their junior varsity counterparts follow them like Brett Favre, but this only feeds the beast. This beast has grown so big that you can't escape the so-called "Evil Empire." Maybe your disdain for the pinstripes has deepened to the point that you've begun to like their archrivals, the Boston Red Sox.

You love the New York Yankees.

Their history and prestige cannot be matched by any team. The ballclub is truly legendary in every sense of the word. No team from even another sport in America has as many championships as have been brought to the Bronx. You know the names: Ruth, Gehrig, DiMaggio, Berra, Ford, Mantle, Maris. Monument Park is a slice of Cooperstown, containing some of the game's greatest legends. You know Lou Gehrig was the luckiest man on the face of the earth, and it gets you every time. You know Don Larsen's World Series perfect game. Babe Ruth seems like a myth, a man whose epic tale could perhaps only be told by Homer. His Ruthian home run hitting gave Webster's a new adjective.

You hate the New York Yankees.

The modern day Yankees buy all of their players. The past is history. The Yankees sign the top available players to preposterous contracts. Players establish themselves elsewhere and then George Steinbrenner (R.I.P.) writes them a blank check or swindles other GMs into swapping them for a slew of "blue chip" prospects: Giambi, Clemens, Sheffield, Mussina, Abreu, Teixeira, Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, Randy Johnson, Kevin Brown. The Yankees also snatch up promising players once they turn the corner in their development - Carl Pavano, Jaret Wright, and Jeff Weaver - and stockpile them at the end of their bench like Real Madrid did with Michael Owen (trust me about that), and they languish until leaving the team. The quality of their farm system is inflated to where their prospects are considered better just because they're with the Yankees (Joba Chamberlain comes to mind).

To most any baseball fan, the subject of the New York Yankees elicits one of these two emotions: love or hate. Fans of a team like their nemesis Red Sox still like to play the pity card on the Yankees, as if Boston hasn't done exactly what has happened in New York by spending top dollar for players. And while they are paying his monstrous salary, it was the Texas Rangers who signed Alex Rodriguez for a quarter of a billion dollars. The Red Sox are in fact the new Yankees: droves have hopped aboard the bandwagon and ESPN shoves them down our throats.

What's also of note is that four players have been a part of each of the Yankees five most recent World Series champion teams (1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2009). Theirs are certainly four numbers that will be immortalized in Monument Park from these teams. They are Derek Jeter, Andy Pettitte, Jorge Posada, and Mariano Rivera - all of whom were drafted, developed, signed, and retained by the New York Yankees.

While it's easy to hate on the Yankees, it's often for the wrong reason. True, the Yankees do spend unfathomable sums of money, and far too much attention seems to be paid to them; but they are no longer alone in this distinction (I'm looking at you, Red Sawx nation). And while they may hand out money like banks gave out mortgages five years ago, the core of their current dynasty has come from within.

Perhaps you don't love to hate the Yankees, but rather you'd hate to love them.

The All-Star Game mockery

Now that Major League Baseball has reached the All-Star break, we're at my least favorite part of baseball's season. And there isn't even any more World Cup to occupy the summer. It's not that I don't like the break in baseball's season, nor do I mind recognizing the players for their first-half accomplishments.

What I mind is the game itself, and pretty much everything about it. From the means by which players are selected to the conundrum of how to make the game meaningful and competitive, the entire spectacle is an absolute farce. Rather than detail why I feel this way, I'll provide a Cliffs notes version and direct you to last year's All-Star scathing:

• By being given the privilege to vote for the starters, fans turn the game into a popularity contest, electing players who have no business being in the game (see Yadier Molina)
• The "Last Man In" vote is a shameless ploy to get even more fan voting, and turns players into spineless politicians - campaigning to be selected (see Nick Swisher) and to get the monetary bonus that comes with it

I'm here to offer my 2010 All-Star team. There are 35 players from each league (22 batters, 13 pitchers), and each team is represented. I've selected the players most deserving at each position, taking into account where their team is in the standings when needed. The players are listed by position in order of their performance (the first player listed being most deserving to start).

National League

C - Miguel Olivo, Colorado; Brian McCann, Atlanta.

1B - Joey Votto, Cincinnati; Albert Pujols, Saint Louis; Adrian Gonzalez, San Diego; Ryan Howard, Philadelphia.

2B - Martin Prado, Atlanta; Brandon Phillips, Cincinnati.

3B - David Wright, New York; Scott Rolen, Cincinnati; Ryan Zimmerman, Washington.

SS - Hanley Ramirez, Florida; Troy Tulowitzki, Colorado.

OF - Andre Ethier, Los Angeles; Ryan Braun, Milwaukee; Carlos Gonzalez, Colorado; Angel Pagan, New York; Corey Hart, Milwaukee; Marlon Byrd, Chicago; Matt Holliday, Saint Louis;

Andrew McCutcheon, Pittsburgh; Chris Young, Arizona.

SP - Ubaldo Jimenez, Colorado; Adam Wainwright, Saint Louis; Josh Johnson, Florida; Roy Halladay, Philadelphia; Tim Hudson, Atlanta; Mike Pelfry, New York; Chris Carpenter, Saint Louis; Mat Latos, San Diego.

RP - Heath Bell, San Diego; Brian Wilson, San Francisco; Billy Wagner, Atlanta; Jonathan Broxton, Los Angeles; Matt Lindstrom, Houston.

American League

C - Joe Mauer, Minnesota; Victor Martinez, Boston.

1B - Miguel Cabrera, Detroit; Justin Morneau, Minnesota; Paul Konerko, Chicago.

2B - Robinson Cano, New York; Dustin Pedroia, Boston.

3B - Adrian Beltre, Boston; Evan Longoria, Tampa Bay; Alex Rodriguez, New York.

SS - Derek Jeter, New York; Elvis Andrus, Texas.

OF - Josh Hamilton, Texas; Vernon Wells, Toronto; Ichiro Suzuki, Seattle; Carl Crawford, Tampa Bay; Alex Rios, Chicago; Torii Hunter, Anaheim; Brennan Boesch, Detroit; Shin-Soo Choo, Cleveland; Nick Markakis, Baltimore.

DH - Vladimir Guerrero, Texas.

SP - David Price, Tampa Bay; Jon Lester, Boston; Clay Buccholz, Boston; Andy Pettitte, New York; Cliff Lee, Seattle/Texas; C.C. Sabathia, New York; Jered Weaver, Anaheim; Trevor Cahill, Oakland.

RP - Jose Valverde, Detroit; Joakim Soria, Kansas City; Mariano Rivera, New York; Rafael Soriano, Tampa Bay; Andrew Bailey, Oakland.

So there you have it, the worthy 2010 MLB All-Stars. The only teams who didn't have a truly deserving All-Star were Arizona and Houston, whilst Baltimore, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh barely had a respectable selection.

With this team, years from now Chase Utley won't have an undeserved All-Star selection to be praised for. As good as he is, he should not be an All-Star. If popularity determines the all-stars, don't tell me it should be a meaningful game (listen up, Selig). Boasting about how many All-Star selections a player has should not be an accolade bestowed upon him.

I'm not going to watch the game, because it pains me to see how it's been mismanaged and driven into the abysmal state it's in (and partly because I don't have television).