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.