We were told up and down, probably by you, look at what Kelly did at Cincy, where he started his 4th string QB during one season. It didn't matter who the QB was, it was plug and play and it was going to be glorious.
Those same people are now bitching about the QB depth chart (as if it's really been all that worse than at Cincy). Sure he's been unlucky with several things, but he was dealt a bad hand at Cincy as well. Yet we were told repeatedly that he could win with any variety of QBs.
Now here we are. And for the record, everything you said can be true, but it would still be an excuse, it's not a binary proposition between truth and excuse. It's year 5, it's an excuse, there isn't any way to spin it.
In 2007, Kelly had 3 different QBs throw passes, Mauk, Grutza and Pike.
Grutza played earlier in the year against Miami(OH) and Marshall, throwing 35 and 20 passes respectively when Mauk got hurt.
Pike and Mauk both played the opener with Mauk starting and getting the lion's share of playing time, Mauk was exclusively used in during game 2.
Mauk returned against Marshall, and was relieved late by Pike.
It was mostly Mauk the rest of the way with some mop up duty by Pike.
But let that sink in, during year one, Kelly was forced to play 3 different QBs and start 2 different QBs during the season.
The next year, with Mauk petitioning to get another year, Grutza started again with Pike mopping up. They would play 4 different QBs during the season, none of whom was Mauk
Against OU, Grutza broke his leg and we're onto the third QB again with Pike (assuming that Mauk was the #1 heading into the season pending his appeal).
Pike starts two games, and then during the second, breaks his arm. So here we are. The top QB is out on appeal, the second string breaks his leg, and the third string QB breaks his arm all in the first handful of games. Yet, we hear up and down about our depth issues. Nothing, and I do mean nothing we've seen compares to what Kelly dealt with in 2008. It was insane. Yet we were told time and time again, how great Kelly was because he could win with any QB.
Chazz Anderson picks up after Pike goes down, a two to three star QB who wasn't expected to do much.
Pike returns against Rutgers and begins splitting time with Anderson but getting the majority of the snaps, including after Grudza returns against Louisville. Pike plays the majority of the rest of the season. Grudza sees the field in the season finale against Hawaii to lead them to victory with a late TD to Gilyard.
Pike played the entire bowl game throwing 4 picks and they lost to VaTech.
2008 is interesting, because everyone talks about the 5 QBs who played. And in theory, 5 different QBs threw passes that season, but Huber (the punter threw against OU) and Barnett (a WR also threw against OU) only threw one pass each. But they did have to start their third string QB (who many considered the 4th given Mauk's status question) for a couple of games.
Do you want me to go through 2009, where 4 different players threw passes (but it was mostly Pike, Collaros and Anderson)?
So help me out here. Kelly was great because he won with a variety of QBs and his offense hummed along. Yet we haven't seen that, and now it's because of bad luck, bad karma, bad depth, not the RKG, or whatever excuse you people want to come up with.
Do we really want to compare the QB depth he had to deal with at Cincy versus the material he has at Notre Dame? Really?
We are in year 5, we should expect much much much better, if for no other reason that's what he did at Cincy, which is why we hired him in the first place. So yes, they are unquestionably viewed as excuses given the context of why we hired the guy in the first place.
And with that, I'm going back to lurking and not posting anymore. The entirety of ND fandom have gone plaid, myself included. This isn't fun, this isn't enjoyable. And people jumping on tree stumps to either make excuses, rationalize and point to next year really being the year this time, we mean it, Return to Glory II, ELECTRIC BOOGALOO, or they are trashing the team at every juncture, but it's all insanely old. Who needs it anymore.