Seems they just overpowed us on both sides of the ball. Was it conditioning or technique or a combination of both?
Looked to me like they outmuscled and out-techniqued us...
but given that we outmuscled just about every other team on the schedule, it's clear that S&C isn't poor compared to any team but Alabama.
My assumption has been that S&C was very strong.
I don't think anyone has the answer to the Alabama game, but playing the "Motta lifted poorly so our S&C must not be what it should be" game strikes me as, at best, ill-considered guessing.
I was wondering who to credit his numbers to as he is at the top of the TE group. Or possibly, as one commentator says, he's just good at what he does.
Or is this just about Teo and Motta?
Or do you mean that Te'o and Zeke didn't have the ability to continue working with ND's nutritionist after the NC game?
she wanted to stay and everything but we just aren't willing to pay the going rate to be great.
That is the time of mindnumbing, penny-pinching stupidity that's led to two decades of sucking. Good lord.
yes, I was kidding.
"Playing with my money, is like playing with my emotions."
testing Alabama's present and past players three times per day in the 40 and the bench press from the time they sign a letter of intent until the day they die.
whereas we require our kids to go to class.
We simply aren't ready to compete at that level and truth be told Father Nieuwland I would rather our lady's University GIVE UP FOOTBALL than sell out for football glory like that.
Here are some historical strength numbers for comparison purposes.
Chris Zorich bench-pressed 475 lbs.
Only five players were at 405 lbs. or better
Over 40 players bench-pressed over 400 lbs.
The entire starting d-backfield ran sub 4.40's
All of the linebackers benched over 400 lbs.
24 Irish players benched at least 400 lbs.
Tim Ruddy bench-pressed a school record 505 lbs.
Bryant Young and Jim Flanigan bench-pressed 495 lbs. each
Two players could hang clean 300 lbs.
Eight players could squat over 500 lbs.
Two players could bench-press at least 400 lbs.
One player was able to leap at least 35 inches on his vertical jump
25 players could hang clean 300 lbs. with 19 others on the borderline.
34 players could squat 500 lbs. or better with 13 on the borderline.
24 players could bench-press at least 400 lbs. with 18 on the borderline.
23 players were able to leap at least 35 inches on his vertical jump with 11 on the borderline.
Paul Duncan: 475 lbs. bench, 550 squat, 335 hang clean.
Eric Olsen: 485 lbs. bench, 655 squat, 325 hang clean.
Dan Wenger: 405 lbs. bench, 600 squat, 305 hang clean.
Chris Stewart: 485lbs. bench, 585 squat, 300 hang clean.
Sam Young: 425 lbs. bench, 550 squat, 335 hang clean.
I don't doubt the numbers, except I feel that it should be pointed out that despite their prodigious strength the lineman in '08 weren't any good and looked out of shape. Also, I doubt everyone in defensive backfield in both 91 and 92 ran legitimate 40s in the 4.3s.
That is, why is it necessary to mount a defense of the strength coach? If the gap between ourselves and Alabama relates exclusively to strength and conditioning, maybe the discussion is important. But I don't think that was the key to our being humiliated. Alabama has better players, and they are better coached. They were prepared to play; we, on the other hand, spent a month engaging in 12-0 triumphalism.
It's going to take awhile to wash that sour taste out of my mouth. Longo is a sideshow. There are much bigger issues looming.
That's quite a leap
g. I've been quite pleased overall. Alabama could be a red flag, but overall I like our strength and conditioning. I don't think the combine results are reflective of a weak program, nor do I even know if they're bad.
Longo doesn't stress bench and 40s, that could be good or bad, but it's a fact.
I mean, tire flipping will only get you so far; the skill position guys will eventually have to run as fast as they can.
And Eifert did just fine in the sprints.
Trying to pull whatever the fuck they want out of a few combine performances.
One comment that seemed to be made a lot this past season was how ND looked fresher and stronger than past teams as our games wore on. In close games late, we were the more physical, stronger team.
Yeah we got run over by Bama but most teams would have on that night. We weren't prepared, we dug an early hole and the rest is history.
Now two guys have bad combine performances and we are wasting time trying to figure out if Longo is a problem?
People are trying to defend him from imaginary attacks, I suppose.
What about the jorts?
Perhaps in your world, jt, that's all hunky-dory. But in my world, those are some pretty weighty allegations.
I also think guys like Percy Harvin did pretty well at the combine.
and the jorts
But, I don't really have strong opinions on him, his methods, or the S&C topic. I'm sure one of the Corsican brothers can answer definitively.
What I seem to recall is that his methods were seen as hokey (charitable) and that he was something of a character. There were and have been reports of various competition-like drills (i.e., flipping tractor tires) and questionable attire.
I knew some players on that team from a class I was teaching and they seemed to think well of him. As you pointed out, he did well at Florida with Meyer.
my post was just levity
I do recall PN having less than complimentary things to say about him. Something about having the biceps measured at the end of every workout...
he sounds like Mickey Mariotti, who used to do the same type of stuff (strong man competition, olympic lifts, etc).
When you throw out terms like "big issues" it generally suggests some problems in the program. I was pretty humiliated with the performance on the NCG, but LSU suffered a similar fate just one year prior. In fact, LSU was manhandled by an even greater margin but managed to overcome that bad performance.
I am also not so blind to know that ND has some improvement before we are elite. But we just made the national championship 3 years removed from one of the worst eras ND football has experienced. IMHO, it seems a bit exaggerated to think that ND is plagued right now with "big issues." But that's why I asked because despite the handicaps I see substantial improvement, not finished product-type improvement but leaps and bounds nonetheless. I also don't get the impression that the staff is complacent with the status quo either.
I think he is saying, and I agree, that as drastic as the physical mismatch was on the field, the strategic 'chess match' was a mismatch of similar proportions.
Edit: typos (If I'm going to put words in BI's mouth ....)
No doubt there's a lot left to be desired, but it's not as if there's not been any incremental improvement going on.
Alabama was a superior team to ND in the NCG game, but again the Tide was similarly dominant against LSU the year prior but not sure that was symptomatic of big issues looming on the horizon in Baton Rouge.
It seemed like a bit of hyperbole, but it's why I asked BI about the nature of these issues.
these past few years and their head coach is a dope.
Now, that might change moving forward with Cameron on as OC but I think that there have been numerous times these past few years where they have won despite their coaching.
Rather, I just don't see this program being plagued with big issues. The program seems to be improving at an acceptable rate. And Kelly has addressed he sees a gap between a program like ND and Alabama.
let's see how things keep going.
QB development is going to be key.
At least from a program standpoint (2012 > 2011 > 2010). I think Golson progressed nicely but similar to you I also expect a lot more out of him next year.
it is about the time available for ND players to engage in these activities vs the time AL players have available. Even if ND players spend an extra two hours a day going to classes and doing homework/study vs what AL players spend in these activities, that is two extra hours for them to develop their strength or to practice their position play or to study film, etc. It adds up.
Alabama's players used to have to spend the same amount of class time as ND's players.
God, the excuses.
it has never been a level playing field but ND has many advantages.
Notre Dame's academic standards have changed significantly since 1988. Scholarship numbers have been reduced. College football viewership, revenue, and availability has exploded in the television markets. Significant advances have been made in health, nutrition, weight training, conditioning, etc.
Notre Dame still has advantages, but these elements change the landscape and Notre Dame's position in college football.
and believe me, I have stories.
ND has always had to go up against this type of stuff; we have tremendous advantages.
doesn't have now.
The scholarship limitations and ND's failure to manipulate the system as AL does is another factor. Since ND is "stuck" with what they recruit each year from HS, the need to develop that limited talent is extremely important.
ND used to never participate in post season bowls and NCs were determined by season play, not post season play. We have won 1 NC, I believe, since we started participating in bowl games and 0 since the BCS came into existence. If this team had been playing prior to our entry into bowl play, they would have been the NC because they were the only major undefeated team, ranked no. 1 prior to the bowl. The bowl was very revealing, I think.
I'm not saying that ND did not deserve previous NCs, but I am saying that the overall picture of college football isn't what it was 20 yrs ago. ND is closing the gap by taking away some of the problems, like now allowing early enrollment, but there are still some major barriers which cause our team to be at a severe disadvantage vs other teams, and this is one of them.
Another related problem is that it is harder for ND to recruit a top coach because it is easier to win at other places. Why did Meyer not come to ND when he had the chance? "It is easier to win at FL." That is a quote from Meyer, not me.
ND wouldn't have been NC under any circumstances this year if they chose not to play in a bowl.
In fact, just like Kelly is definitely in the top 3 of all college coaches, I think it's safe to say, after this past year, that Longo is top 3 as well.
And I don't know if it's a positive or a negative. There is no editorial along with the quotes.
Overall, I like the results so far, but Bama may shown something amiss or... it may have been one game.
The point of the the post is this: "If anyone's looking for a connection to low combine numbers (not game performance) there may be a hint in how he prioritizes."
I don't even know that ND has performed poor in combines overall.
What is the purpose of your posting these selected quotes?
Do you want Manit and Motta's agents to distribute them to the GMs of the NFL teams?
Again? The quotes were "selected" because they apply to the points in question. What do you suppose is the motive?
Longo, in my opinion, is just another mediocre college-level strength coach. That doesn't mean I blame him for anything. 99% of college strength coaches are mediocre. But we should not expect to gain any sort of competitive advantage over other programs based on dramatic player development under Longo.
(And in case it needs to be said, I'm not implying I could do a better job than Longo. But I've worked and talked with guys who could.)
Or an extremely binary view of the world.
I would guess somewhere around 68% of S&C coaches are mediocre. Approximately 13.6% poor, approximately 13.6 % good. About 2% very poor, and about 2% very good. With about .1% extremely good and about .1% extremely poor.
I'm just spitballing those numbers.
I said 99% of division 1 strength coaches are mediocre. There are a lot of strength coaches who dont coach d1 fb.
repeating, of course
My guess is the former.
That was a joke. But, that's surprising to me that you view 99% of college S&C coaches as mediocre. With as much money as schools are spending on coaches, I would think there would be a more efficient market.
On another note, I'm not sure any level of coaching is going to improve one's 40 time demonstrably (at least not at the speed these guys are already at).
I remember reading an anecdote concerning Deion Sanders and how, after a year in FSU's S&C programming, he actually got slower in the 40.
Would you consider yourself qualified to run a major DI football S&C program.
And what overarching objectives would you have in place and why?
I respect your opinion, and have sought it out before, but do not know your background/CV. Then when I read "mediocre" I have to guess you see areas where you would make structural changes.
Again, I hope you read this post as sincere. It is.
I'll try to give more detail later, but I only have a moment.
No, I'm not even close to qualified to run a major D1 S&C program. But what I lack is experience with large-scale logistical considerations, especially as they pertain to the college ranks. That is, I feel very well qualified to design and implement an ideal performance development program for a single football player. But not for 100 football players. And not within the context of working as a cog in a much larger program scheme.
I'll get into overarching objectives when I have more time. But Longo's fascination with uphill running and "strongman" exercises are classic examples of imprecise and unscientific groupthink that dominates the field. And in addition to what he specifically mentions, it's what he leaves out that is even more telling. He doesn't talk about (or implement, from what I've seen) anything pertaining to improving metabolic considerations of performance.
to the uphill running. Something about the development of the quadriceps in comparison to the hamstrings?
s good or bad.
I only offered insight into what he prioritizes.
I never said it's good.
Pretty funny that he thought you thought he was asking.
is absurd. That would mean I thought I had some expertise.
I have no need, ability nor want to judge Longo's methods.
I read your post to mean "don't worry about the poor combine results, Longo's methods show up on the field, not in the combine workouts." Granted, the middle clause was implied, but I think my reading is fair.
1. I don't know if they're bad over three years. 2. I don't think they're that meaningful from an NFL perspective and I don't know if they say anything about team performance.
I do know, and now everyone else does, that Longo doesn't stress these things. I have no idea if that's a positive or negative.
Now everyone has information they didn't have.
To name a handful of S&C coaches at the collegiate level (football) that you consider elite?