Weis is a Terrible Situational Coach
Weis is a terrible coach when it comes to calling the game from a situational basis:
4th and 10 at the 41 with your backup quarterback in the game, 99.9% of coaches would punt. Not Charlie. He’s too smart.
4th and 6 with the best tight end in the country. 99.9% of coaches would call a play looking to eke out 6.5 yards. Not Charlie. He calls for a 35 yard go route down the sideline.
Up late in the game by one score trying to run out the clock. 99.9% of coaches would either run the ball or attempt to throw a quick hitter to a TE or RB. Not Charlie. He throws a bomb on second down and an out to a freshman on third. Both incomplete and both failing to run down the clock.
The list of these transgressions is long and goes back to when Weis started his first head coaching job five years ago. He is unconventional. He is also stupid.
Most of the problem stems for the “take what the defense gives you” approach Weis has built his offense around. I don’t care if the defense is “giving you the long ball,” if you need 6 yards, call a play that has a higher chance of success. ND doesn’t need 40 yards, it needs 6.
Weis is on the hot seat and needs to be more conventional. He shouldn’t give people more reasons to question his head coaching acumen.
September 28th, 2009 at 11:16 am
I disagree somewhat. Charlie plays the probabilities. It’s not that he wants the full 40 yards (as per your example above) but that he probably thinks that the higher chance of success *is* the long ball given the situation and defensive alignment on the field. Now, when these bets don’t pay off, he looks double stupid (as per the point of your article). When they *do* pay off, we’re usually 1st and 10 and too focused on the new series to consider them. Some argue that the reason the NFL is a “copycat” league is precisely because O-coordinators are incented to play things as vanilla as possible so that a loss is blamed on “execution” as opposed to voodoo playcalling. Whatcha think?
September 28th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Can you name a few instances where he went the unconventional approach and things turned out ok? I would argue that his unconventional approach works less than 50% of the time.
Remember the Navy game. In regulation, fourth down in fg territory and he went for it. If he just kicked the field goal, ND doesn’t lose for the fist time in 40+ years.
September 28th, 2009 at 11:42 am
Per CFB Stats:
Weis is 62-123 when he goes for it on fourth down. In 2006 he attempted the 3rd most 4th down conversions. In 2007, he led the league. And in 2008, he was 4th.
IMO, that type of behavior is unconventional.
September 28th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
I agree with JVH on this point. I don’t think playing the ‘percentages’ works well for Charlie ( and yes, I am aware of Maust’s awful punt and the ensuing return at Purdue that made the play a net-2 yard punt…but this is should be/is the exception, not the rule).
When there is an opportunity to either put points on the board (Navy), or if you are not a full strength and/or late in the game (Purdue) I don’t think trying to challenge the percentages is a smart call. It seems Charlie ends up on the wrong side to often. As JVH pointed out, he’s 50/50 on his fourth down calls. Football is a game of field position. I would argue the average punt should gain the punting team 25-35 yards of field position (assuming 40 yard punt and 10-15 yard return). That’s a quarter of the field you pick up by punting, no small amount.
I’d love to break down that 62-123 stat a little further (not sure how to get this info). I would categorize plays where we need 2 yards or less very differently than plays where we need 3+ yards, and I bet the success rate for the short plays is much higher. My point is, I bet the historical percentages of us achieving a 1st down with 4th and 3 or great is less than 33%, and exchange, we lose either (a) a good field goal try, or (b) 25-35 yards of field position. Give me the field position, not the bravado.
September 28th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
I do give Charlie credit for effectively putting in 3 game plans this week (Clausen’s, Crist’s, and greater use of the Wildcat…although much of that came with Crist in the game). Not sure that they are the best standard of comparison, but I vividly remember Boob and Ty trying to run the same scheme with polar-opposite quarterbacks (Eric Chappelle versus USC, for instance), and the results were always disastrous (except for the Jessie Jackson game when Dillingham hit Battle for 80).
September 28th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Whitey Blocked Well.
September 29th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
This is real whinning.
Take any top 10 team and remove three of their top 4 impact skill position players and see what you get. Oklahoma loses Bradford and they end up with a big L. SC loses Barkley and its a Big L. Given the circumstances it was a good win.
September 29th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
I’m not saying it was not a good win. It would have been a lot easier though without Weis making some bonehead calls that are typical of his time as head coach.
He needs to cut those stupid calls out.
September 29th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
I am surprised people would want Charlie to try the FG in that Navy game. At the time our FGs were anything but likely points. I don’t have stats at my fingertips, but how were we doing on FGs at the time?
I remember being completely behind him when he went for it because the last thing I wanted to see was our FG kicker coming onto the field. We couldn’t even count on the PAT!
September 29th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
I truly believe he calls those plays because he wants his team to be aggressive and go for it. When it doesn’t work out he looks like a dolt but it’s on him and not his players. After watching the dull offenses of Davie and Willingham for eight years I’m glad to have him. Somewhere (I think back in 2005) everyone was raving about how he’s an aggressive play caller and how it keeps the other team on it’s heels. The one thing I don’t like about the non-punt is that it puts pressure on your so-so defense but I like the aggressive play calling.
September 29th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Coach Weis said after the game he wishes he would have tried the field goal and not gone for it on 4th and 10 early in the game. He realizes that. Also, all I have to say is Coach Weis holds his own destiny, wouldn’t we all give whatever it took to be the head coach at Notre Dame? Wouldn’t you want to define your own success or failure?
September 30th, 2009 at 5:33 am
Matt, I don’t think anyone is questioning Weis being his own man (he pretty much put that issue to bed within 10 minutes of accepting the job). The question being debated is “are his situational decisions good?’.
Personally, I think Weis is a fantastic recruiter, is good at hiring coaches, and that he draws up very good game plans.
I am not that impressed with his ability to tweak the game plan based on what the defense is giving him (Holtz really was a master at this), his ability to motivate his players, and his public persona.
I think he is sub-par at making in-game decisions (often going with emotion rather than thinking ahead and giving his defense an opportunity to play on a longer field).
I do believe that he is capable of getting us a consistent 8-9 wins a season for the forseeable future, if that is what we want.
September 30th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Well said, Mike.
September 30th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Last time I checked were 3-1 heading into UW. Mind you no AA..MF and a gimpy Clausen for this Purdue game and we still pulled it off….. GO IRISH!
October 1st, 2009 at 2:19 pm
I like what you said, Jed. He want’s aggressiveness. Calls reflect your confidence in the team a leadership quality. Many times I have given employees leeway because I wanted to send the message that I bewlieve in them. JVH doesn’t get the real picture.
October 1st, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Ted, you make bonehead decisions that make your employees work harder for less? Punt the ball, kick the FG, get 6 instead of going for 40. It’s like Charlie wants to swing at the 3-0 pitch every time. It’s OK to take the pitch.
And I’m not just talking about the Purdue game. It goes back his entire head coaching career.
It’s like taking the ball first when you win the coin toss. Charlie did this throughout the 2007 season. We had the worst offense in the nation that year. That isn’t aggressive, that’s stupid.
October 6th, 2009 at 8:26 am
[...] Weis displayed something new this week. He showed how to be a better situational coach. [...]