bradmaynard;988627 wrote:Hell of a showing on defense today. What the hell has been wrong with Rees the past few weeks?

bradmaynard;988627 wrote:Hell of a showing on defense today. What the hell has been wrong with Rees the past few weeks?

killer_ewok;988760 wrote:Defense actually played pretty well. Can't blame them. Rees stunk. Hendrix played good all things considered. I would definitely let Hendrix get most of the reps in practice leading up to the bowl game and start him.

Crimson streak;988791 wrote:Agreed I think Rees is done as a starter. I think Kelly's plan all along was to let golston sit this year and learn and then take over for the next 4 years. It's hard to take golston play making ability off the field with this type of offense

athlete37;988792 wrote:Andrew Hendrix looked pretty darn impressive though. Wouldn't mind seeing a combo

Tobias Fünke;988798 wrote:Lost the game but gained a quarterback? I'm okay with that.

Rees was absolutely pathetic tonight. It would be a huge, huge mistake to start him in the Champs Sports Bowl against Florida State. Rees has, without a single exception, struggled mightily against athletic defenses. Florida State would eat him alive.

Hendrix is the first installment of the true Brian Kelly offense. With such few live plays against opposing teams, Hendrix looked fantastic. Almost every play you saw him do something Rees either hasn't done in over a month, or simply is physically unable to do. Throw a rope while on the run 30 yards down field to Eifert? No problem. Run the option and stretch a defense? Done. Keep a play alive and "make a play?" Definitely capable.

I liked what I saw.

karen lotz;984793 wrote:Huh? I'm a homer because I want my team to be good? I haven't said Notre Dame will be in a bcs game have I? Or that they necessarily deserve one at this point. I haven't even said I expect them to beat Stanford. All I've said is that IF they do beat them, AND a few teams ahead of them lose, they could possibly end up in a bcs game. They will need to play their best on Saturday and that might not be enough if Luck does what he does. If thinking that makes me a homer, so be it.

dlazz;988801 wrote:Lol, Notre Dame

ccrunner609;989090 wrote:boy you ND nuthuggers are quick to throw people under the bus. I guess when every player you have is that mythical 6* football player you can do that.


Man I hope ND/OSU get together in a bowl.

ccrunner609;989090 wrote:boy you ND nuthuggers are quick to throw people under the bus. I guess when every player you have is that mythical 6* football player you can do that.


Man I hope ND/OSU get together in a bowl.

bradmaynard;989255 wrote:For once I agree with what you say ccrunner, though that ends after the first sentence. I'm not sure what a 6* player is and I don't know how OSU would end up in the same bowl as ND but Tommy Rees needs to be included in this offense. I think Kelly knows what he wants going forward but whether that's a two QB system or not, I don't know. But if it comes to that we won't be seeing him implement it until spring time in my opinion. I'd like to stack Rees' numbers up against other sophomore's numbers and see how he compares. My guess is he is right up near the top.

Tobias Fünke;989532 wrote:Notre Dame would destroy Ohio State in a bowl. Yes, destroy.

Also, he was a three-star recruit, and we've been talking about his physical limitations for over a year.

Nice work though dumbass, I didn't see any glaring spelling errors this time for a change.

WebFire;989549 wrote:Yeah, they'd probably destroy them as bad as they did Boston College!

karen lotz;989563 wrote:The greatest defense in Michigan history allowed the 118th ranked passing offense to abuse it yesterday and you are talking **** about close wins?