The offense is limited with Book at QB

Why do you believe that Kelly won't pollute Jurkovec?

The reality is that Kelly's offense is custom built to cause any QB to fail miserably and crater his career.

I do believe Kelly would pollute Jurkovec

I said in my first sentence that Kelly is the bigger problem.

It probably doesn't matter who plays QB with Kelly as HC--but I was just stating that I don't think Book has skill set needed to lead ND to a playoff win or more.

If you look at the 4 teams in the playoffs last year--the other 3 had superior QB's(and Coaches). I don't think Saban,Swiney or Riley would recruit or even play a QB like Book who could not threaten the back end of a defense.
It is a shame that ND will waste some fine Sophomore speed at WR because the QB can't get the ball downfield. Last year, I think ND had only 1 pass play of over 50 yards. No matter how much Book practices the deep ball--he will never be a real threat with it.

Book is a better version of Rees but really quite similar..

He is quicker but no home run ball. I was disappointed in his
performance against Clemson and USC.

We need to let Kelly 2.0 play out.

Fr. John said BK has corrected his mistakes and Savvy knows more than the rest of us.

This is probably the correct answer

Book will never be great against elite teams.

Nor will anybody else under Kelly.

We might as well root for Ian to be as
good as he can.

Its not the offense, the national champions run the same

offense.

My take is that he expects too much out of his QB in the offense in a college system that only allows for 20 hrs per week of practice.

Does Clemson get 100 hours per week? *

No, which is the point.

Dabo does appear to ask his QBs to do too much within the offense. That of course is dependent on how well he coaches the QBs to start with.

Then it's not the same offense *

It’s the same offense. Two teams can run the same

Offense with different emphasis, gameplans.

By your definition, no two offenses are the same - Clemson “changed offenses” from year to year (Even though they ran the same offense). Continuing, if you use your definition then no team would run the same offense week to week.

Good holy grief *

When the 'emphasis' is more than game-to-game...

...then it isn't the same offense.

If it were the same offense, then Swinney, overall, would put as much responsibility on his QB that Kelly does. He does not, so it is not.

I think you need to define your definition of offense. Base

scheme is how it’s usually defined. We have the same base scheme as Clemson.

All enlightenment starts with a definition of terms.

Do you mean that both teams utilize the shotgun?

What makes you think that they have the same base offense besides that both teams run most of their plays with the QB in shotgun?

How do you define the "base scheme" in question? *

I must be misunderstanding you.

Is your position that all spread offenses are the same?

what a load of utter crap *

You are good, you *

Kelly's offense is a unique, mutant, ugly beast

His system's design and approach is not the same as any other design and approach

Can you eschew the Trumpian ine-liners and tell us how

Specifically?

This will be like Donald explaining the circles of healthcare.

We need more fullbacks and student body right.

How cool was it when Shaw got stuffed for the 100th time in a row on 4th and 1 but used 7 offensive lineman? His offense ranked 123rd in the country, but his kids play tough, power football like we used to under Holtz.

Or that time Harbaugh lined up in a 10-man I-formation? Manball. BK could take a page out of Jim's book, right?

Great point, smithwick!

The two of you together - a real brain trust. 10 total watts.

So Trumpian, its scary. I await a little marco reference *

Ha you're such a dork. *

whereas you hip hop dance at the Linebacker *

It's a matter of developed record discussed for about 9 year

You can make believe the discussions never happened, or that the games and seasons were never played, or watched, or dissected, and that the aroma has wafted away. We know the differences between the offenses.

Thats actually a worse answer than the circles. Embarrassing

Begging of the question. Whom does this work on?

Across has been right about Kelly's offense from Day 1.

Whereas you have been wildly inconsistent, and claiming you're right while simultaneously changing your mind on everything. I'd understand if you had a jt level of knowledge of the game, but you are wrong about nearly everything when you make predictions.

That swings both ways. People also said we would be lucky

to win 8 games the last two years

And those people would be right *

Good grief *

Clemson has 5-star players. Notre Dame doesn't. *

The frosh WR that killed us (and 'Bama) was a 4*. *

A 5* is defined as someone ready to play and star as a

freshman.

He's a 5-star.

Several Clemson offensive players are 5-star... *

Lawrence, most notably.

I'm just saying that 4-stars can perform too if they're coached well.

I would love a couple of Top 50 backs/wideouts.....

That seems out of our reach with The 3-Star General.

And a 5-star coach. *

He focuses very little on the running game and it shows

Clemson can get 2 yards on the ground when it needs to, we can’t and have rarely ever been able to under Kelly’s stewardship.

So, you might be right that Clemson runs the same offense, but somehow they get the running game going just fine, and we struggle annually do the same.

Jurkovec is an athlete extraordinaire.

You'd think that would count for something, but I guess he needs a couple more years in the system or something.

not nearly as accurate on the shorter passes *

He should be good his first year

Kelly QBs only get worse the longer they are in the system

System uber talent

It didn't work out so well for Germany either.

We're a long way from Kelly's Plug&Play QB offense at Cinci.

I agree with you, but that's not how Kelly plays it here at ND.

Remember, Jurkovec only saw very brief mop-up action in two games in a year when he could have played in four with no eligibility penalty. We have a doofus running the show.